USB 3.2 specification arrives this year with confusing new naming structure

This is arguably worse than..."Wifi 6".

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Charrick1

That IS convoluted...

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Strolic Furlan

So there will be even more USB cables on my drawer, jeez...

Mar 1, 2019permalink

wasTF

As i understand it they have the same plug, so you can just swap out the old ones... HOPEFULLY ....

Mar 1, 2019permalink

syberman7

Does anyone trust the Verge after that "How to build a PC" video?

Mar 1, 2019*permalink

David Chien

I'm not sure why almost every news outlet this week says the same thing about the USB 3.2 naming standard when you've got even more complex standards like MicroSD SDXC UHS-3 A1 out there.

Seriously?

Are we all that dumb?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

OrpheusXx

Why complicate things further? It was simple, now it's not.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Charrick1

We are not dumb. Those who think such names are good seem to be, though. Why not just keep USB 3.0 and USB 3.1, and add USB 3.2, instead of making them all USB 3.2, with more numbers after that? It's like putting out the OM-D E-M10 III after the I and II, and then going back and renaming all versions, so that they are now the OM-D E-M10 III Ver. 1, OM-D E-M10 III Ver. 2, and OM-D E-M10 III Ver. 2.2. I CAN understand that, but why name them that?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

ArtAlt

Is the physical connector changing?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

CaPi

Will the initial batch of cables wreck our devices again?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

miggylicious

everybody would have been more than happy with this naming convention:
USB3 5Gbps
USB3 10Gbps
USB3 20Gbps

Mar 1, 2019permalink

But that just makes far too much sense, otherwise why would we be paying our marketing department?! -USB consortium

Mar 1, 2019*permalink

That literally is what they did tho. Ignore the .2 since .1 and .0 no longer exist.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

i really hope EU lawmakers and regulators step in and force easily understandable, clear naming conventions for any product sold to "consumers".

industry will never learn or do things sensibly voluntarily. from environmental issues to employment/labour issues all the way to treating their paying customers and users with respect. . they need to be forced. by law. unfortunately. market forces alone not sufficient.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

dccdp

@xepellin So, socialist state control, then?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

no. Not at all. Just very tight consumer protection laws. EXTREMELY tight.

they can sell whatever sh*t they want B2B, but if they want to sell products B2C, then extremely strict rules, regulations and standards shall apply. With massive sanctions, if violated.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

wasTF

It would be too easy, they sell more if customers are confused...

Mar 1, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

I don't think they sell more that way. All they get is *more disgruntled buyers* wishing them to hell and won't buy anything else any time soon.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

I'm good with 3.0, 3.1, 3.2.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

me not. Because each of those can mean all different things. None of those 3 denominations clearly denotes a specific (maximum) bandwidth.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

dccdp

@xeppelin So, if they don't sell more that way, what do you think their purpose is? Are they aiming to antagonize their customers? Just for fun? Who therefore somehow need extreme measures to be protected from these fierce capitalists that apparently are dumb enough to act again their own best interest? ;) It doesn't make sense.

I believe we give this odd naming scheme too much attention.

Mar 1, 2019*permalink

(unknown member)

well, some scumbags may sell more, if they can hide behind a "wall of confusing monkers", that in reality they are putting antiquated, inferior specs i/o interfaces in their expensive devices just to save a few cents in component cost. i'd like to see those scumbags schemes exposed, so the buying public can beware.

Mar 2, 2019permalink

wasTF

@xeppelin

if that was true what you said about the customers not buying anymore, USB would have never survived two decades.

To this day there is problems with playing tetris on how to plug the usb ports on the back of the pc. And its not only my pc's, eberybody knows it

Mar 4, 2019*permalink

(unknown member)

i hate non USB-C connectors as well.

And I am convinced the artificially created confusion between the various USB protocols, denominations and all the different connector types has NOT contributed to sales but only to disgruntled customers.

And I would definitely like lawmakers to "regulate those issues down to zero" as far as products are concerned that companies want to sell B2C, to consumers. Clear protocols and standards, clear, non-confusing naming, 1 universal connector type.

Mar 4, 2019permalink

Marcelobtp

I wonder if it's the same old problem of Asiatic Countrys and the number 4 which relates to death.
This is pretty ridiculous, really how can a bunch of smart guys, scientists, engineers, make a imbecile nomeclature like this? It must have some mystical reason, this is just too dumb.
And as we see all major manufacturers do this, they want to make money on products that are really half-assed and make you pay absurds money for what should be the next step in tech.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

PhotoPhart

It's a dam good thing I read thru ever comment down here. Now I might stand a chance on remembering the standard when I buy something.

Mar 1, 2019*permalink

This is the same horsesh!t that they pulled when moving from USB 1 to USB 2. Why is it so difficult to come up with unique unambiguous names? And how about REQUIRING that all manufacturers specify on the packaging what the maximum data transfer rate is?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

bakanecko

this is when engineer naming things

Mar 1, 2019permalink

I can only imagine the arguments that will break out over this.

Just go Thunderbolt 3 and you can avoid this mess.

Why in the world did they not do what the standards organization did for Wifi (Wifi5, Wifi6, etc.)? Is it too much to ask that they don't make it easier for vendors to cheat people with vague descriptions? Or is that the point?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

I do believe it is their intent to deceive the buying public and to make it easier for manufacturers to sell inferior products. They pulled this same trick at the move from USB 1 to USB 2.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

I hate what they've done to Wifi, the original naming had some character, made some sense, and was sustainable for many generations to come, now this numeric starting halfway is treating people like imbeciles.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

No, it's letting people know that they are getting faster WIFI if the number is higher. Who wants to explain to mom what 802.11ac is vs 802.11ax?

And Intel just announced USB 4. Seems things are going that way too. Won't be out until at least 2020, and AMD seems to being shut out of including it. We'll see how that goes.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

Mom won't even notice a difference beyond 802.11n.

Mar 7, 2019permalink

photographytragic

This is the interface/operability spec, but no mention of cable compatibility.
When USB 3.1 Gen2 came in it was stated that all types of cables for USB 3 were suitable for Gen 2 as the cable spec already had enough headroom etc.
Well.... that was true, but the cable makers had built to the lower end of most tolerances, and that worked for Gen1 but many cables failed when running Gen2 devices on Gen2 ports.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Agreed. I have been trying to find a USB-c to USB-C cable for real time data acquisition, and so far EVERY cable I have bought has failed. The only cable that works is the one supplied with the device.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

photographytragic

Yes, one of the accreditation labs issued a public warning that cable manufacturers were skating on thin ice, and offered to sample-test to demo the issue!
I have a cottage industry in helping 4K enthusiasts fix the issues as they tend to buy or assemble these Gen 2 external storage devices!
I bought several cables (A's and C's) from many suppliers and filtered out the ones that work (usually shorter ones, or any marked with a "10"). I'm running low at the moment though.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

You want reliable cables? Buy them from the big guys, Apple for their devices. But I buy Anker whenever possible. They do cables right.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

photographytragic

Unfortunately it's not a quality issue, as the good brands such as Belkin fail as much as the "also-rans". It's enough headroom for 10Gbps that we need.
By word of mouth I've solved 7 different peoples issues with USB 3.1 Gen 2 just by replacing their supplied cables from my collection of proven ones.
In most cases their storage peripherals are famous brands (Samsung, Akitio, Sandisk, Volans etc), yet the supplied cables failed them.
I have many Belkins, both A style and C style and only one C cable has the headroom required.
Any cable with 10 marked on it (a recent thing) will work, and fortunately they are slowly coming onstream. e.g. the latest Akitio dual-bracket enclosure ships with one.
Will try again to get some Ankers though, as so far could not actually buy any.

Mar 7, 2019permalink

LiangMing

I am worry about it in 5 years.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

KrAnd

Uhh... and to add to this - what is then USB C ?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

That's easy. The symmetrical port that allows you to plug it in without having to check orientation.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

USB-C is the connector design.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

USB-C is a simplifying of the port situation because it's stupid to have cables with different plugs on each end for no good reason. And as others say, it's easier to plug in without looking.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

or...
USB 3.0 SuperSpeed
USB 3.1 SuperDuperSpeed
USB 3.2 UltraSuperDuperSpeed
USB 3.3 UltraSuperDuperSpeed+
USB 4.0 QuantumUltraSuperDuperSpeed4x4CarnivalStyle
etc

Feb 28, 2019*permalink

Zippity DooDah!!

Mar 1, 2019permalink

redhed17

Do all tech company/organisations purposefully go out with the intent to confuse! HD TV formats, the many SD card sub divisions etc. Talking of formats after the one that is not even on the market yet!

I had to buy a replacement power supply for my laptop a few months ago, good luck to anyone trying to find out which power connection is on the laptop so you know which to buy. I ended up buying a universal supply that came with 9 different connections.

Does the confusion help sales! It must do, because they all seem to do it. :-/

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Artem Sarafanov

That's a side effect of diversity in the free world. In North Korea, things are much more standard and simple, I guess.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

redhed17

I'm all for competition and the free market, after all, it is how things advance so quickly, but label things properly to aid people in buying and upgrading the things they want. Confusion helps no one imho, it just pi**es people off.

Mar 2, 2019permalink

Henrik Herranen

This naming very much reminds me of Frank Zappa's aptly named guitar solo album trilogy from 1981:
- Shut Up 'n Play Yer Guitar
- Shut Up 'n Play Yer Guitar Some More
- Return of the Son of Shut Up 'n Play Yer Guitar

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Jura S

... with a completely different intend.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

sosh

haha, Frank Zappa is first here (like it sometimes)lol, and me agreed with that damn USB names

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Now I want to change my user name to Mountain Billy.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

munn1

It would be nice if they just color coded them, (with bright colors).

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Imprinting the max speed onto the connector would also be a very good idea, as well as the color coding.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

entoman

How about..

USB 5 (5 Gbps)
USB 10 (10 Gbps)
USB 20 (20 Gbps)

or is that just too logical?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Still broken

USB 1: 0.012 Gbps
USB2: 0.48 Gbps

Feb 28, 2019permalink

santamonica812

(to avoid confusion about usb versions 1 and 2, as Blackjack noted)

USB 3-5
USB 3-10
USB 3-20

Feb 28, 2019*permalink

That's literally what the current system is tho.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

USB 4 is going to be 40.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

4sofnature

Why confusing? iPhone still uses the lighting cable.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Is Liightning the same as Thunderbolt?

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Adam Maas

No, Thunderbolt is now a USB 3 variant (the old version was basically a merger of PCIe and Mini Displayport).

Mar 5, 2019permalink

No, Thunderbolt 3 is a completely different specification than USB 3. It can carry USB 3 simultaneously to the Thunderbolt 3 signal, which is twice as fast, and not hobbled by the USB specification.

Lightning is a brand for a proprietary connector used to connect to Apple devices that serves the same purpose as USB-C, a symmetrical connector that doesn't have to be oriented one way to plug in.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

It makes sense (still not good but anyways) when you think of it as there only being 1 USB 3. Ignore 3.0 3.1 and 3.2 just think in terms of USB3. Then there is:

USB 3 Gen 1
USB3 Gen 2
USB3 Gen 2x2

nvm its still bad.... but significantly easier than first.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

sosh

still a total bs for consumers, me not counting geeks)

Mar 1, 2019permalink

WT21

USB-C is a train wreck.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Nope, best thing to happen to connectivity ever. I would never go back.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

trungtran

For me it doesn't matter. USB for me is just a charging port.
I do everything through wireless.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Ribbit74

The next one would be:

USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 mark ii: 'SuperDuperSpeed USB 40Gbps'

And let's not forget that USB-C physical port is also shared by Thunderbolt 3, which is a different protocol entirely. All Thunderbolt 3 ports accept USB-C, but not all USB-C ports accept Thunderbolt.

Feb 28, 2019*permalink

I would have preferred Son of USB 3.1.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

stepalex

What are they smoking with names like that?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Ribbit74

"design by committee"

Feb 28, 2019permalink

fatdeeman

Have they learned nothing from micro sdxc 10 uhs3 A1 V30?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

zzzxtreme

Yikes

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Different committees. And no committee talks to any other committee.

This is your typical "Design by Committee" Cluster F**k.

Mar 1, 2019*permalink

And then they tell us how the government messes up when designing things by committee :-D

Mar 1, 2019permalink

artnaz

I could understand that the underlying technology is has not evolved significantly to start naming them USB 4, USB 5, etc. But changing names...? Changing the name of a single protocol twice (3.0 --> 3.1 gen1 --> 3.2 gen1)?!

Most logical would have been for me just 3.0 (original name), 3.1 (also original name, but without the "gen" stuff) and 3.2 (new original name).

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Louis_S

Agree, and I read somewhere that (up to now I guess) the names were USB 3.0 for the 5Gbps, 3.1 for 10Gbps and 3.2 for 3.2Gbps. Sounded pretty straight forward, but that all changed...

Feb 28, 2019permalink

The USB 4 specification was just announced by Intel. It is going to incorporate Thunderbolt 3 in the specification, so all USB 4 devices can do USB and Thunderbolt. It will all go 40Gbps through either protocol. And it uses the USB-C port. And Intel is giving it to the USB committee, so no more licensing issues.

Mar 5, 2019permalink

artnaz

The USB 4 sounds like good news. And since it's probably meant to be used by most people, I guess the price will be acceptable too. The same cannot be said about the current Thunderbolt cables.

Mar 6, 2019permalink

The Thunderbolt cable issues are going away, but I will welcome USB 4 which will guarantee if it's T3 compatible, it will carry USB 3 of any type.

Mar 14, 2019permalink

desertsp

W TF?

Why not just call them USB 1, USB 2, USB 3, USB 4, USB 5, etc.?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Probably because some new versions denote changes in speed, others denote changes permitted (or required) in the physical connection, and others denote both.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

sirhawkeye64

And also because It would confuse people between the older USB 1 and USB 2.0, which I assume the 3.2 spec will be backwards compatible (or at least through adapters) with the older specs. They should have just done a 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 numbering. PLus what happens when USB 4.0 comes out that's, say, 40GB/s... So yeah it would screw up the numbering a little if they went USB 1, USB 2, ....

Or what they should have done is 3.1 for the current actual 3.1 spec, then 3.1a, and then just 3.2 for the 2x20Gbp/s spec.

Feb 28, 2019*permalink

gaul

Too simple and straightforward.. marketers..

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Marcelobtp

Maybe because Asia would not like USB 4 because it means death for them.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

redhed17

Because they would probably be in high double digits now. And then it could be;
USB 18 is compatible with USB 10-17, USB 14 is compatible with USB 9-13, USB 10 is compatible with USB 5-9. Before that USB 1- 4 had a different connection, but will be compatible with cables with USB 5 - 13 on one end, and USB 1- 4 on the other. USB 14 or higher are not compatible in any way with USB 1 - 4 sockets. Oh, and USB 7-12 added to a smaller plug fitting to the original USB 1- 6 plug that could transfer data 100 times faster than USB 1 - 6, but only if both devices where USB 7 or higher. And USB 13 - 18 added an even smaller plug that could be inserted either way, and was 100 times faster than USB 7 - 12, but again, only if both devices where USB 13 and above. OK then, that's nice and clear.
Btw, which cable is this in my hand, because no where does it say what USB it is! :-/ lol

Mar 2, 2019permalink

desertsp

How about:

<physical shape>.<optional letter modifier for special dorm factors>.<speed rating>?

So the standard rectangular USB plug everyone knows is USB1. The original speed is USB1.1. What I believe is called USB 2 would become USB1.2 (or 1.3+) because it uses the original plug.

A "mini" would be USB 1M.x....and so on.

Mar 2, 2019permalink

sirhawkeye64

They're not likely to rename the entire line-up of USB specs.... I think what they have is fine, but instead of USB 3.2 Gen 2, then need to call that one USB 3.2 Gen 1a, and then rename the USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 to either USB 3.2 Gen 2, or USB 3.2 Gen 1c.

Mar 2, 2019permalink

It is going to be USB 4 starting with the specification being released later this year, and devices sowing up in 2020 most likely.

Mar 5, 2019*permalink

Greg Lovern

Confusing nomenclature. Just call them USB 5Gbps, USB 10Gbps, USB 20Gbps, etc.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

mosc

They purposely don't want to do that.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

But then the cable would have to be designed to that spec. I believe that is what they are trying to avoid.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Mutovkin

How does power capabilities get reflected in the naming convention? How many amps can cable A vs B transfer? How many amps does port A vs B provide?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Now you're just trying to confuse the issue. Oh, wait....

Mar 1, 2019permalink

Dragonrider

This looks like Thunderbolt 2 renamed. What is not clear is if there is really any more bandwidth as there is no mention of new cables (required for Thunderbolt 3). If this is the case, the 2X2 moniker is just a weird way of saying the system can operate with 2 PCIE lanes in simplex (20 MB/s) or in full duplex (10 MB/s each way) just like Thunderbolt 2. Thunderbolt 3 has 4 PCIE lanes, but requires new cables to utilize the extra lanes.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

cosinaphile

when marketing ideas attacks historical naming reality and common sense.... well this is the kind of nonsense you get

Feb 28, 2019permalink

otto k

Just slap the speed at the end - 5G, 10G, 20G and when the time comes 40G and 100G. It works for ethernet.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

landscaper1

That kind of thinking is utterly alien to engineers who need to complicate things so they feel superior to the rest of us.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

I mean... that's what they actually do tho

Feb 28, 2019permalink

It's NOT the engineers. It's the marketing and naming committees.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

fluppeteer

So the speeds are low (USB1 1.5Mb), full (USB1 12Mb), high (USB2 480Mb), super (5Gb) and super+(10/20GB). This is like the old QVGA(320x240)/VGA(640x480)/SVGA(800x600)/XGA(1024x768)/SXGA(1280x1024)/UXGA(1600x1200)... widescreen nonsense...QWUXGA(3840x2160)/UHD16K stuff. Marketing people should step away from standards before we have another wsxga+ on our hands and let the engineers just make things by the meaningful number(s).

Feb 28, 2019permalink

As the saying goes, "The great thing about standards is that there are so many."

Feb 28, 2019permalink

On the contrary I think they need MORE or at least MORE COMPETENT marketing people. This numbering system and the Resolution names scream engineer trying to sound marketing.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

chaimav

https://xkcd.com/927/

Feb 28, 2019permalink

teddoman

Utterly bizarre. It's like renaming your 2017 and 2018 car models and calling them 2019 Gen 1 and 2019 Gen 2 and the actual 2019 car gets named 2019 Gen 2x2.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

araudan

Your explanation is actually more clear.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Brian P Smith

Need to stop with this silly stuff and just start going with USB 4, USB 5, USB 6 etc...

Feb 28, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

All should do a simple manner.

Call the standard with single name when backward compatible, like "USB". And then you write on it the year.

USB 1998
USB 2001
USB 2009
USB 2015
USB 2019

Same thing should be with all the cameras, forget all the stupid "mark XIV" as they do not do anything good for any user than just confuse them. The name would stay as is, and then the year is carved to bottom of the product.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

24Peter

Can't tell from the photo - is it a type-c connector or back to the original USB dongle?

Feb 28, 2019permalink

PLShutterbug

That is an original type A connector. However, be careful about assuming that is a connector standard for or supported by this new standard. The picture may be just to illustrate that this is an article about USB and have no meaning WRT the new standard.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Gannon Burgett

Apologies for the confusing image, I have swapped it to highlight a USB Type-C cable. USB 3.2 Gen 2x2: 'SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps' will be able to use USB Type-C cables, according to the data available.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

Need to remind that USB-C cables are not single standard, but there are multiple different kind USB-C cables and ports that are not fully compatible. Usually those are color coded with black, red, green and yellow, but not always. And that makes a trouble that you might use a incompatible cable for charging, data etc.

Feb 28, 2019permalink

winkalman

They must've gotten the same people that were involved in developing the SCSI standards to help them name it.

SCSI-1
Fast SCSI
Fast-Wide SCSI
Ultra SCSI
Ultra Wide SCSI
Ultra2 SCSI
Ultra2 Wide SCSI
Ultra3 SCSI
Ultra-320 SCSI
Ultra-640 SCSI

Feb 28, 2019permalink

Joakim Edsjö

Don't say that, then we will soon need terminators as in the old SCSI days... :)

Feb 28, 2019permalink