USB 3.1 And Its Disruptive USB Type-C Connector

Status
Not open for further replies.

jdlobb

Honorable
May 16, 2013
47
0
10,530
0
So does the 100W power spec mean that it will be able to feed data AND power to a monitor so that the monitor itself won't need any additional cable, simply the USB 3.1 connection to the desktop, because if so that is a HUGE deal.
 

anro15

Distinguished
Feb 2, 2012
3
0
18,510
0
The 100W is theoretical. But that assumes you have the spare power overhead in the device you wish to draw it from.

It seems unlikely that manufacturers would automatically build in such an overhead given increased costs and power supply sizes. Though I can see certain products making it a selling point, i.e. a docking monitor for business laptops.
 
The 100W is theoretical. But that assumes you have the spare power overhead in the device you wish to draw it from.

It seems unlikely that manufacturers would automatically build in such an overhead given increased costs and power supply sizes. Though I can see certain products making it a selling point, i.e. a docking monitor for business laptops.
I believe once the ports and cables become commonplace, manufacturers will build in the overhead (at least on certain ports). The advantage of powering the device via the USB port isn't just the convenience. It means you can use the computer's PSU to act as the AC/DC converter, instead of needing a separate AC adapter power brick for each peripheral.
 

beayn

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
947
0
18,990
1
After 20+ years of being a tehnician, I suddenly realized recently that current USB ports are actually standard on 99% of computers. The hollow part of the connector is always facing up on the motherboard, even on laptops. Now that I know this, I always get it right! It's handy when reaching in the back of a computer under a desk and trying to blindly hook up a usb cable. I have no idea why I didn't notice this sooner.
 

Exovane

Reputable
Oct 1, 2014
1
0
4,510
0
@Zanny

Actually Gigabit is equal to 1,000,000,000 bits (~954 MB/s), when a Gigabyte is proclaimed it is actually 1,073,741,824 bits. (8 bits per byte, 1024 bytes per kilobyte, 1024 kilobytes per megabyte etc) so yes, 10 Gb/s < 1GB/s.
 

coloradoleo76

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2007
23
0
18,510
0
We're all pitchforks and torches when ISPs say that we don't want/there is no use for faster internet speed, but when they say that?

I understand that there might not be product available to take advantage, but doesn't making available cutting edge technology foster a use for it?
 

Achoo22

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2011
350
2
18,780
0
Exovane said:
Actually Gigabit is equal to 1,000,000,000 bits (~954 MB/s), when a Gigabyte is proclaimed it is actually 1,073,741,824 bits...so yes, 10 Gb/s < 1GB/s.
Cute, but false. Bytes are defined as being collections of 8-bits. This is true whether you believe the Giga prefix means 10^9 or 2^30.
 

Christopher1

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2006
663
2
19,015
5
How would anyone plug in the connector the wrong way on USB devices? The thing have it blazoned right on the cables which way is up and which is down, by putting a symbol on the top of the cable.
 

nitrium

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2009
1,487
30
19,690
195
@Christopher1 When your PC is against the wall, under a desk. Or how about at night, when your're charging your tablet/phone and you don't want to blind yourself turning the lights on.
 
As for this taking over, I think its great. Europe has already set a date for a standard of ALL Phones to have the same connector by 2017. It looks like, every phone in Europe will be using this.

@Christopher1 Every computer inserts the USB Socket up one way or down the other, so you don't know which one they are using. The cable doesn't matter its the non-standard socket that is the problem!
 

herrwizo

Illustrious
My chance of plugging the USB cables were always more like 30% (especially in case of rear USB ports in tight spaces or darkness). First you guess the orientation right, but fail to perfectly align it and give up, switching sides. Then you realise the first one was right after all...
 

slamattoms

Distinguished
Nov 17, 2005
26
0
18,530
0
1 GB/s is slower than 10Gb/s
10 Gb/s is equal to 1.25 GB/s

Theoretically, the USB-IF told us, USB SuperSpeed could actually hit speeds in excess of 1 GB/s (that's with a capital "B," mind you), but Ravencraft said that blazing-fast speeds aren't necessary or even practical for most everyday uses. For general consumer products out there today, he said, "SuperSpeed 10 Gb/s is more than enough performance for the everyday user."
 

Pherule

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2010
591
0
19,010
8
Was I the only person who learned to glance at the flash drive before plugging in, pointing it the right way up, and plugging in without a hitch? People are so stupid sometimes.
 

scolaner

Reputable
Jul 30, 2014
1,282
0
5,290
2
speeds in excess of 1 GB/s (that's with a capital "B," mind you), but Ravencraft said that blazing-fast speeds aren't necessary
"SuperSpeed 10 Gb/s is more than enough performance for the everyday user."
10Gb/s == 1.25GB/s. 1.25 > 1.
Good catch. (You, and others.) There was a misunderstanding when I spoke with the USB-IF, and then I got my wires crossed on the speeds. I checked in with them again to get the correct information, and I've updated the article accordingly.
 

MondoTV

Reputable
May 17, 2014
6
0
4,510
0
Why not a latching connector? I hate these cables that offer an insecure connection for portable applications. This was an ideal opportunity to incorporate something more robust.
 

Slesreth

Honorable
May 16, 2014
28
1
10,535
0
It would appear to this one that enough has been changed in this version from the previous one to call it USB 4.0.
 

scolaner

Reputable
Jul 30, 2014
1,282
0
5,290
2


I think a lot of people would agree with you there. But the powers-that-be decided against it, for whatever reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS