| Revision as of 20:15, 30 September 2021 editMartin0499 (talk | contribs)172 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:03, 1 October 2021 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,379 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:USB/Archive 8) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
| {{reflist-talk}} | {{reflist-talk}} | ||
| --] (]) 14:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC) | --] (]) 14:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC) | ||
| == Serial or Parallel? == | |||
| The infobox lists USB "Universal Serial Bus" as a '''serial''' connection. However when I look at the ] I can count no less than 3 data "differential pairs". This "serial bus" has 6 wires to transmit data! Doesn't that make it a parallel bus? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :First, each pair is used for ], so each pair is two wires sending one bit. One pair is for backward compatibility with 2.0. The other two pairs send in different directions, to enable ] communication. A parallel bus would allow all the wires to be used for any purpose - that isn't the case for USB, where everything has a predefined role. - ] (]) 18:14, 31 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :It's serial. The pinout for A/B can show up to three differential pairs: one in half-duplex for low/full/high speed (USB 1.x/2.0) and two in dual-simplex for SuperSpeed (USB 3.x). USB-C adds a second half-duplex low/full/high speed link and two in dual-simplex for the additional lane for SuperSpeed 20G. It's not a bus though, at least not electrically, just logically. --] (]) 18:20, 31 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == USB-A, USB-B == | |||
| USB-A and USB-B redirect here, but are not mentioned in the article. A and B need to be explained here, or need their own articles, which would probably be unnecessary (USB-C has its own article.) ] (]) 21:14, 4 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
| : See https://en.wikipedia.org/USB#Receptacle_(socket)_identification ] (]) 02:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Its not complete == | == Its not complete == | ||
Revision as of 06:03, 1 October 2021
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the USB article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | On 28 May 2015, USB was linked from Slashdot, a high-traffic website. (Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
 | The contents of the Device Firmware Upgrade page were merged into USB on September 8, 2014. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
 Archives | |||||||||
Index
|
|||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
deprecated?
the table implies that the only slot and plug left since 2017 is USB-C. This makes no sense as USB-C cables come with type A on the other end.Gendalv (talk) 21:50, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- First, deprecated does not mean removed, second, as you can see with latest galaxy tab S6, galaxy note 10, etc., all functions (in particular USB Power delivery 3.0 with PPS) are only available with USB-C to USB-C with e marker cables. Also Thunderbolt 3 (and thus USB4 main alternate mode) will only (obviously) work with USB-C to USB-C COMPATIBLE with thunderbolt 3 (and PCI express) cables. ZBalling (talk) 20:51, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- Alternate mode is in the USB-C spec but not in the USB4 spec. USB4 is based on Thunderbolt 3 (but is not the same) and includes backward compatibility with Thunderbolt 3 as well as USB 3.2 and 2.0. USB-C is just a spec for cable and connection which allows the other end to have whatever other connector is available. The table here simply states that USB-C is the only cable/connector that is used for the given USB version thus both ends need to be USB-C. Whenever you connect a USB-C with USB-A on the other end it will simply use a different (read: older) USB version (in most cases that would be USB 2.0 or 3.0 since these are the most used ones). The reason for that is that the USB protocol has backwards compatibility with some of its older versions. 85.144.6.21 (talk) 15:22, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Remember that USB-C is not only a USB4 plug -Muonium777
Muonium777 (talk) 18:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Should the term "USB 3.0" be used instead of "USB 3.1 Gen 1" or "USB 3.2 Gen 1"?
This concerns the caption for the image at the right.
The terms "USB 3.1 Gen 1" and "USB 3.2 Gen 1" can be very confusing for people who aren't part of the technology industry. I'm not sure whether this would be a good idea, but would it be better to use the older term "USB 3.0", one that is more familiar with the average reader, or use the newer terms (such as USB 3.2 Gen 1), which can be more confusing to the average reader, but is more up to date?
References
- "USB 3.2's Naming Convention Is a Hot Mess".
- "USB 3.2 standard gets new, even more confusing names ahead of its mainstream debu". The Verge.
Kevindongyt (talk) 23:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, the terms are confusing – but those are the official names. We'd confuse the readers even more if we came up with our own naming scheme (albeit a more logical one). --Zac67 (talk) 06:20, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- SuperSpeed is also an official name. It would be much less confusing to simply call them USB Type A ports capable of SuperSpeed. The naming series such as USB 3.2 Gen 1 refers to a data transmission mode, and a picture of this hub is not a picture of a data transmission mode. 2600:8800:3709:CD00:FDB3:68DA:5063:3C14 (talk) 15:25, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- It is true, But might be slightly confusing -Muonium777
Muonium777 (talk) 18:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
- Cited from USB-IF 2019 presentation by Jeff Ravencraft, President & COO (slide 16):
USB 3.2 Gen1, USB 3.2 Gen2, USB 3.2 Gen2x2, SuperSpeed Plus, Enhanced SuperSpeed and SuperSpeed+ are defined in the USB specifications however these terms are not intended to be used in product names, messaging, packaging or any other consumer-facing content
USB 3.2 identifies three transfer rates, USB 3.2 Gen1 (5Gbps), USB 3.2 Gen2 (10Gbps) and USB 3.2 Gen2x2 (20Gbps). These specification references should only be used when addressing a technical audience
- It clearly states that, in order to reduce consumer confusion, the marketing terms (″SuperSpeed USB 5Gbps″, ″SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps″, ″SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps″) should be instead used with lay audiences.
References
- Ravencraft, Jeff (November 19, 2019). "USB DevDays 2019 – Branding Session" (PDF) (Presentation). USB Implementers Forum. p. 16. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-03-22. Retrieved 2020-03-22.
{{cite web}}: Unknown parameter|lay-date=ignored (help); Unknown parameter|lay-source=ignored (help); Unknown parameter|lay-url=ignored (help)
--176.44.197.40 (talk) 14:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Its not complete
I have heard and even seen a Micro-USB A; But its not here. Why? -Muonium777
Muonium777 (talk) 18:09, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Another user has added this to the table recently. Felipe lorenzzon (talk) 15:15, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
USB Mini AB incorrect depreciation date
On a time where I was researching on USB types I noticed there was a discrepancy between different Articles relating to USB, on this article, in the "Receptacle (socket) identification" Table, Micro AB was listed as introduced in the USB 2.0 Revised version, and deprecated in the next version, in 2011. However, on other pages and on an official document, It was deprecated in 2007, so it did not make it to the Revised 2.0. Mini AB were most likely added in the original 2.0 version of USB, but I could not find an exact source, in fact I downloaded the original 2.0 specification and could not find the word "Mini" inside of it at all. I would edit the article myself, but due to my inexperience with editing tables, and the missing beginning date, I decided to bring it to the talk board instead. Hopefully this is useful.
--RanidSpace (talk) 00:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
References
Overview table inconsistency with Type-C
In the table in the overview section, USB Type-C is written as being introduced with USB 2.0. However, that seems impossible, since the Misplaced Pages page for Type-C says it was introduced in August 2014. Shouldn't it instead be changed to be available with 3.1 and up (2014 and after), and N/A before that?
--Martin0499 (talk) 20:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Categories: