by BogdanPetre on 3/4/19, 8:09 PM with 271 comments
by WhitneyLand on 3/4/19, 9:53 PM
That's the most important thing to know is what's optional in the spec.
That could make it great or a major pain. I'm referring to how many features the specification defines as "optional" for manufactures and that the USB organization requires for logos.
This is why even USB-C is a nightmare. Consider a USB-C cable or device port. It could be charge only, data only, monitor support. There are even more permutations and sub-features. Oh, you wanted charging and found one that has it? Know how much power it enough or overkill? It could provide 15 watts, 100 watt, etc. Think you'll just google the specs page? Sure, they never miss providing any of these details or make any mistakes.
Whether USB4 means one thing with nothing optional (or at least a very small number of combinations), will probably determine how much you like it or get annoyed by it.
HP even made it worse with a laptop USB-C port that could technically be used for certain docking functionality but tried to fud-deny allowing it for marketing reasons.
by sp332 on 3/4/19, 8:21 PM
by davnicwil on 3/4/19, 8:32 PM
At the physical layer, is it the materials in the cables are getting better? Or new ways of using the same materials?
At the protocol layer, is it newly developed computer science theory being applied or is it just old fashioned pragmatic engineering iteration, looking at usage and making the existing protocols more efficient with tricks and shortcuts etc?
by gumby on 3/4/19, 9:03 PM
I don't understand how this isn't simply ratifying/renaming current TB3-on-Type-C-connectors and this cryptic sentence in the page doesn't help. Anybody know?
This isn't to say that such a renaming might not be a good idea! But it would be nice to know if my current Type C ports with TB and DB support were in fact already "USB 4.0."
Also: speaking of nomenclature: notice that according to the press kit slide show, USB 3.1 Gen 2, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, and USB4 all have the same "Alternative Branding": "Super Speed+". Madness!
by penagwin on 3/4/19, 8:36 PM
Oh wait that's the issue USB was supposed to solve in the first place....
by matthewmacleod on 3/4/19, 9:22 PM
Edit: Ah, I missed "it will not be exactly Thunderbolt 3 as its functionality will likely be different". That's a clear as mud, then.
by bits on 3/5/19, 12:54 AM
Doesn't this open up every USB system (all systems?) to arbitrary, uncontrolled memory access including silently flashing new firmware/microcode to system components?
by chkaloon on 3/4/19, 8:27 PM
by zapzupnz on 3/5/19, 12:03 AM
by cm2187 on 3/4/19, 9:24 PM
by gigatexal on 3/4/19, 8:45 PM
by artiscode on 3/4/19, 9:02 PM
by MichailP on 3/4/19, 8:36 PM
by koala_man on 3/4/19, 8:48 PM
I had to look up what the point of 40Gbps was, and the industry evangelization site https://thunderbolttechnology.net/ explains that it will allow driving one 5k display or two 4k displays, which is not possible with the 20Gbps offered by USB 3.2 or Thunderbolt 2.
This also helps external GPUs, where TB2/USB3.2 is the equivalent of 2.5 PCI-e 3.0 lanes, while TB3/USB3 is 5.
With that, it seems the goal is to be a viable alternative to PCI-e and HDMI, rather than just improve on today's USB3 speeds for existing device classes.
by walterbell on 3/4/19, 8:19 PM
by alacombe on 3/4/19, 8:54 PM
by aboutruby on 3/4/19, 10:46 PM
by modeless on 3/4/19, 9:14 PM
by Budabellly on 3/4/19, 10:12 PM
by nintendo1889 on 3/4/19, 8:51 PM
by goalieca on 3/4/19, 8:30 PM
by snazzycalynx on 3/5/19, 7:45 AM
I had to add a few things to manage expectations and more accurately reflect reality, but I think we've got it now.
by Halluxfboy009 on 3/5/19, 10:11 AM