Thursday, February 28th 2019
USB-IF Rebrands USB 3.0 and 3.1 With New USB 3.2 20Gbps Standard
You would have thought that the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) would have learned their lesson the first time around with the rebranding of USB standards; however, that doesn't seem to be the case. At MWC 2019, they announced that the USB 3.2 standard would include the previous USB 3.0 and 3.1 specifications, but with a twist. USB 3.0, which has a data rate of 5Gbps, had already been rebranded as USB 3.1 Gen 1, will now once again be rebranded as USB 3.2 Gen 1. Meanwhile, USB 3.1 Gen 2 with a data rate of 10Gbps will be renamed USB 3.2 Gen 2. Finally, the new kid on the block which has a data rate of 20Gbps will be officially named USB 3.2 Gen 2x2.
While there is a reason for these names, the fact remains that it doesn't do consumers any favors. USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 gets its name from the two high-speed 10Gbps channels it uses to achieve the new data rate. Keep in mind that previous USB standards only allowed for one channel, and only USB Type-C connectors allow for dual channels. This, as you may have guessed by now, means USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 is only usable via USB Type-C connectors. To try and reduce confusion, USB-IF has suggested that vendors use marketing terms on top of the current naming scheme to help consumers understand what is what in the world of USB. <s>USB 3.0</s> <s>USB 3.1 Gen 1</s> USB 3.2 Gen 1 will be marketed as SuperSpeed USB, and USB 3.2 Gen 2 will be marketed as SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps as per our sources. Finally, the newest standard will use SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps as its marketing term, not that it will do much if implementation of the new standard will take as long as it took for USB 3.2 Gen 2 and the Type-C connector.
Sources:
Computer Base, via Toms Hardware
While there is a reason for these names, the fact remains that it doesn't do consumers any favors. USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 gets its name from the two high-speed 10Gbps channels it uses to achieve the new data rate. Keep in mind that previous USB standards only allowed for one channel, and only USB Type-C connectors allow for dual channels. This, as you may have guessed by now, means USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 is only usable via USB Type-C connectors. To try and reduce confusion, USB-IF has suggested that vendors use marketing terms on top of the current naming scheme to help consumers understand what is what in the world of USB. <s>USB 3.0</s> <s>USB 3.1 Gen 1</s> USB 3.2 Gen 1 will be marketed as SuperSpeed USB, and USB 3.2 Gen 2 will be marketed as SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps as per our sources. Finally, the newest standard will use SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps as its marketing term, not that it will do much if implementation of the new standard will take as long as it took for USB 3.2 Gen 2 and the Type-C connector.
42 Comments on USB-IF Rebrands USB 3.0 and 3.1 With New USB 3.2 20Gbps Standard
Just call it USB 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and stop confusing the tech illiterate
Thats what they should have done IMO but hey
They must be Dutch...
But I do like the 20gbps idea, it would make external NVMe SSD's pretty common, and might also serve as display connection for VR headsets with no lag and work just fine with 2x2.5K screens (20gbps is more than enough for that !)
I wonder if upcoming chipsets (Ryzen 3000) series will contain USB-20 as default ?
Seems like those marketing guys out there are retarded to say the least....
USB 1.1 and USB 2.0 were fantastic because of their simplicity. USB 3.# is a disaster like HDMI and DisplayPort where simply connecting the device in no way means it will work as intended. At least DisplayPort separated bandwidth from main versioning by way of HBR, HBR2, and HBR3.
But I do agree, they seemed to have screwed up with the USB 3.x gen
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
So they tried to fix the confusion that their initial stupid naming caused... by introducing an even more stupid naming scheme.
It's taken a couple of random people in this thread a few minutes to come up with alternatives that all make more sense than what the USB-IF has chosen. Just what the f**k, seriously?
Personally, I'd go with USB 3.0 for the single-channel 5Gbps version; USB 3.1 for the single-channel 10Gbps version; and USB 3.2 for the dual-channel 20Gbps version, then append the connector type as necessary. So USB 3.0C = 5Gbps over a type-C connector, USB 3.1A = 10Gbps over a type-A.
Similarly for consumers, abbreviate the names to "SS-5", "SS-10", and "SS-20" - which immediately tells you it's SuperSpeed of X Gbps - and again append the connector type. So SS-5-C would be 5 Gbps via type-C, SS-10-A would be 10Gbps via type-A.
The USB-IF simply needs to stop coming up with stupid naming schemes and maybe do some forward planning with the naming schemes.
Even I would struggle with knowing if "SuperSpeed" or "Hi speed" or "full speed" are the best. What will they do next version? "super duper mega speed"? Surely having English names also makes it harder for non-English speakers to determine which is the best? Or do they translate it in every language?
3.1v1, v2, and 2x2 - holy hell they can't even get simple consistency with these. I get that they're trying to contain some semblance of technical information with the 2x2 moniker but anyone who cares would be fine in understanding if they called it USB 5 that it meant a 2x2 implementation based on a 3.x protocol and pinout. Keeping it as a 3.x version I also assume is meant to convey some of the protocol versions used, I just don't get why they think they should include technical information as part of the naming scheme, and use marketing names which make it near impossible for people to know what is the latest version.
Between the USB IF and the wireless consortium's wifi naming schemes they're showing that they lack a significant amount of common sense and understanding of consumer knowledge with these things, although the wifi standards people seem to now understand this and are trying to improve things for consumers.
Simply put, what people have been doing with the USB-C standard is just insane (not in a good way.)
SS = SuperSpeed
They are smart enough to design new complex standard, but 10000% failed on naming anything.........
o_O:roll:
And at this point, does anyone even WANT type-C plugs?
A standard is useless if it's not open. Gotta love the irony of Apple idiots paying for TB when they had 1394 and killed it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#USB_3.2
One other thing worth pointing out is that USB 3.2 Gen 1×2 and USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 supposedly only supports USB-C type connectors.
Perhaps this will shed some light onto what's going on here...