Oh for fuck’s sake. So that’s newer and has more bandwidth than USB4 gen2 and gen3, right?
At least we got away from the USB 3.x where 3.0 and 3.2 Gen 1x1 were the same thing, despite 3.0 and 3.2 having a 9 year gap between them so you kinda expected 3.2 to be faster, but it was only faster if it was an x2 flavor, so 3.2 gen 1x2 was the faster version (extra lane for data) of 3.0 and 3.2 gen 2x2 was the faster version of 3.1 I guess?
Whoever at USB-IF is in charge of this versioning needs to take a long walk off a short pier.
It wasn’t better, but it was readable. I don’t want to go back, I want them to fix what we have now to be readable.
Here’s an idea, all C cables supporting any level of PD must have the specs stamped on both plugs.
I’m down with it, but it’s a lot
Wattage/transferspeed/displayport/thunderbolt/PD
Even the current icons don’t tell you more than speed these days
Terrible news for all my USB-C cables less than 2 & 1/2 inches long!
:) yeah good point & thanks for the pic
That is a lot of space for very little info, that means nothing to anyone who doesnt already know what th codes mean. U4.2.40 would be just as useful.
This is the programmer art of graphic design.
Oh for fuck’s sake. So that’s newer and has more bandwidth than USB4 gen2 and gen3, right?
At least we got away from the USB 3.x where 3.0 and 3.2 Gen 1x1 were the same thing, despite 3.0 and 3.2 having a 9 year gap between them so you kinda expected 3.2 to be faster, but it was only faster if it was an x2 flavor, so 3.2 gen 1x2 was the faster version (extra lane for data) of 3.0 and 3.2 gen 2x2 was the faster version of 3.1 I guess?
Whoever at USB-IF is in charge of this versioning needs to take a long walk off a short pier.
I gotta say the usb versioning thing is gotta be the most confusing mess. Its hard to understand.