“SB 3.2 confusion: If the “S”
“SB 3.2 confusion: If the “S” continues to mean Serial, then the “2×2” variant should drop the “S” and replace it with a “P” i.e. UPB = Universal Parallel Bus.”

I disagree. Serial doesn’t forbid to widen the bus with more channels. It only means that any channel transmit data sequentially.

To reflect this fact it could be more concise to call it simply “USB 2x” similarly to “PCI-E 2x”, though this could expose the profound lack of technical innovation from the USB-IF.

I’d be up for USB-5G, 10G,
I’d be up for USB-5G, 10G, 20G etc. – then all they need as a letter designation for the type of port.

USB-A-5G. USB-C-10G. It’s not exactly “elegant” but it sure is crystal clear.

“It’s a pretty bad interface”
“It’s a pretty bad interface” – that’s a pretty useless statement.

USB is less like Communism that it is like every other interface on the modern computer. HDMI 2.0b, DisplayPort 1.2a, everything gets stupid little version numbers and compatibility issues.

1 of 2:
Re: USB 3.2 confusion: If the “S” continues to mean Serial, then the “2×2” variant should drop the “S” and replace it with a “P” i.e. UPB = Universal Parallel Bus. That nomenclature would be a whole lot more honest than “2×2”. Secondly, if a separate feature is the clock rate, then the different clock rates should become part of the nomenclature e.g. USB-5G, USB-10G, UPB-20G. Just my 2 cents, OK? Bottom Line: I reacted with the very same confusion when I read about this the first time. And, you guys are absolutely correct to wonder why the USB “implementers” would retain the “USB” label even when 2 serial channels operate in parallel. Serial/Parallel is one “orthogonal” dimension; clock speed is a different “orthogonal” dimension.

2 of 2:
And, there is another “orthogonal” dimension which is rarely discussed i.e. the frame layout: either 8b/10b “legacy” frame, or 128b/132b “jumbo” frame. Honestly, the choice of which frame to use really ought to be a decision that is negotiated mutually by the host and the device at startup or plug-in time; and, this should NOT be a decision that the end user should even know about. One of the really great engineering decisions that were made for NVMe storage devices was the adoption of 4 parallel channels that “synced” with the chipset, specifically by oscillating at the same rate as PCIe 3.0, and using the same 128b/130b “jumbo” frame as PCIe 3.0. If future USB standards anticipate an increase in the sheer number of permutations, at the very least those future standards should also mandate auto-detection/auto-negotiation at startup/plug-in time. Similar bad choices were made for SATA-Express, chiefly because the SATA standards group ignored published recommendations to “sync” future SATA standards with future PCIe chipsets. As such, NVMe just trounced SATA-Express, rendering the latter DOA (dead on arrival). Josh is RIGHT ON: go with USB4, USB5 etc. KISS (keep it simple, Sally!) Translation: if the future requires compatibility with a larger number of permutations, make those additional permutations transparent to the end user.

I was just gonna ask who is
I was just gonna ask who is “the people making decisions about what to call these standards” in the article. Thanks for this.

“Seriously, what nutjob
“Seriously, what nutjob thought USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 was a winning product? Fire that person immediately.”

Look at USB-IF and SATA-IO members then guess who from Intel promoted USB 3.2 Gen 2×2, Wireless USB, SATA Express and probably some other technical craps…

I don’t believe it is only some bad luck!

sources:

https://www.usb.org/about
http://www.drdobbs.com/wireless-usb/184405888
https://sata-io.org/membership/about-sata-io/board-members

Um no. It is critical for the USB-IF to get off their collective arse and sort out this mess.

I stopped buying USB products at USB 3.0. There is no way I’m going to spend time researching which one is most appropriate for me or assuming the manufacturer has labelled it right.

Let’s just drop the whole .x and instead go with USB1, USB2, USB3, USB-C, USB4. That’s it. One specification for each and drop all the rest of them. And preferably a single colour for each (USB3 = blue, USB4 = green, etc).

Seriously, what nutjob thought USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 was a winning product? Fire that person immediately.

USB like PCI-E interfaces are
USB like PCI-E interfaces are broken by design, since they provide power generating EMI.

Graphic card manufacturers nowadays supply the power through specific power lines in order to improve the interface speed.

USB never was simple considering bad drivers and practical limited speed.

Similarly to reconfigurable logic devices (e.g. FPGA), generic interfaces are way inefficients and their only advantage is cost to easily build crappy devices (i.e. gadgets).

“USB is like communism, it
“USB is like communism, it shares the misery!”

Tell that to all the big corporations that created the USB-IF in the first place and the USB-IF is even a tax exempt non profit that managed and run by the very same corporate members.

The US is a Corporate State just like the Other “Western” countries and the Corporate Commissars control the Democrats and the Republicans.

Communism and Capitalism have the same end goals and that’s to subvert Demorcracy in the name of power or profit.

The misery in the world is force multiplied by the uneducated masses that are fooled by both their Communist and Capitalist overloards. The uneducated masses like chipman are the fulcrum that provides the leverage that enables the Communist and Capitalist overloards to foist that misery worldwide on all of the educated believers in Democracy!

So that was in the time that the USB-IF’s Type-C plug form factor/pinout and electrical standard was announced alongside their other announcment of the New USB 3.1 controller’s protocal/bandwidth standard that became Known as USB 3.1 Gen 2(10 Gb/s) and USB 3.1 Gen 1(5Gb/s, that was previously named USB 3.0)!

And now a new set of Branding that the PC/Laptop OEMs will begin using even if their products only supporrt for the most part that OLD USB 3.0/5Gbs that was rebranded to USB 3.1 Gen 1, and now will be branded USB 3.2 Gen 1. And laptop OEMs will in their marketing copy so very nefariously neglect to include any USB 3.2(Proper variant) but will instead just include the USB 3.2 without any qualifying generational information(Gen 1, Gen 2, and now Gen 2×2)!

Wikipedia(1) list the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) as not-for-profit organization and at the bottom of the Wikipedia paget they are catagorized under “501(c)(6) nonprofit organizations”. So Maybe some Letters to elected officials and the FTC concering this constant rebranding for nefarious marketing obfuscation are in order.

These Industry Standards Trade Groups need to be regulated in how they Brand/label their technology standards with respect to some required product Labeling/Branding requirements for all the Device OEMs that use their standards based hardware in consumer products. The USB-IF and the OEMs need product labeling requlations that require their marketng departments follow to the exact letter the full and complete USB-IF naming conventions be followed.

All these Industry Standards Organizations need to be required to submit their Naming/Marketing Branding guidlines to the FTC for approval. And after the FTC reviews and aproves the Branding/Labeling that approved labeling guidelines should be posted in the Federal Register by the FTC and become the regulated required labeling for all device OEMs/OEMs’ marketing departments to follow.

So any OEMs’ Marketing Departments getting cought not using the full and complete FTC Approved USB-IF labeling/Branding on thier products will be subject to fines and product recalls that require OEM’s to recall and properly re-label the Products’ Boxes and Documentation to conform to the proper full and complete(Non Obfuscated) USB-IF’s labeling. Ditto for the Other Standards Groups(HDMI, VESA, Etc.) and their labeling that has to be approved by the FTC before the Branding/Labeling can be used by OEM’s.

From Wikipedia:

“The USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) is a not-for-profit organization created to promote and support the Universal Serial Bus. Its main activities are the promotion and marketing of USB, Wireless USB, USB On-The-Go, and the maintenance of the specifications, as well as a compliance program.

It was formed in 1995[1] by the group of companies that developed USB. Notable members include Hewlett-Packard, NEC, Microsoft, Apple Inc., Intel, and Agere Systems.

The working committees within USB-IF are:
Device Working Group
Compliance Committee
Marketing Committee
On-The-Go Working Group

The USB-IF web caters for developers who can freely sign up to the developer web-forums and access documentation, however to join a working group one has to work for a member company or register as a member. The developer forums cover USB hardware and software development and is not an end-user forum.

In 2014, they announced a USB connection called “USB Type-C”. It transfers data with rates up to 10 Gbit/s and charges devices with up to 100 Watts.[4]” (1)

(1)

“USB Implementers Forum”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_Implementers_Forum

USB was a pretty good
USB was a pretty good interface. After all, USB has to be credited with ending the era of when every PC was equipped with half a dozen different ports for different purposes and devices. Ironically, modern USB probably would also have to be credited with ending the era of USB’s simplicity…

I guess they hope that this
I guess they hope that this confusion would lead people to buy twice, or thrice, or 2x twice, or something along those lines…

It’s a pretty bad interface.

Whoever used an USB xDSL modem will never forget the so many bad device drivers in the 2000 era.

The user doesn’t deserve to waste his lifetime with USB devices.

USB is like communism, it shares the misery!

Gersebermps?
Gersebermps?

USB 4 or something new.

We call that one

We call that one ERGDFW$%TGGDF.

We’ve got four different signalling configurations with only three resulting bit rates:
5×1 (5Gb/s, 5Gsignals/s)
5×2 (10Gb/s, 5Gsignals/s)
10×1 (10Gb/s, 10Gsignals/s)
10×2 (20Gb/s, 10Gsignals/s)

You would think the USB-IF would be concerned that this confusion would lead people to buying less