Re:USB4 Specification
by AceJohnny2 on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @05:06PM
(#20871174)
That's also because the RasPi 4 failed to implement their connector according to the standard. [1]
Now, why that passed muster is a valid question.
[1] https://medium.com/@leung.benson/how-to-design-a-proper-usb-...
Re:USB4 Specification
by jay_kyburz on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @06:05PM
(#20871709)
Standards bodies need to sue to protect their standard. If a device does not adhere to the full standard, they should not be able to call it USB or use any of logos or imagery.
Raspberry pi foundation being too cheap to buy two resistors in place of one is not a problem with standard.
I'm not qualified to say anything about the Pi OR USB, but I've definitely gotten the impression that USB has a standardization problem (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20443765 for some convincing-to-me material)
If that's wrong, can you clarify?
My comment was specific to the problem raspberry pi 4 has.
Re:USB4 Specification
by imtringued on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @06:32PM
(#20871935)
Just buy the official power supply. It's probably better than whatever cheap junk you've intended to abuse your Raspberry Pi with.
Actually cheap junk will work, but any quality charger(eg. Apple) with emarked cable won't.
This is such a funny post since USB-C cables which support more then the basics are actually destroying the PI.
How do you suggest they fix it? With a new standard?
Next revision of the pi will fix it.
It was an example of "layman has no idea which side is up"...but yes the rasp is the culprit here...for not following a rather complicated standard.
Re:USB4 Specification
by throwaway156503 on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @06:20PM
(#20871831)
If I remember correctly though, the fault was in them not following the reference layout for a particular circuit diagram.
You are correct!
https://medium.com/@leung.benson/how-to-design-a-proper-usb-...
Sorry, what I meant was how should they fix the pains of using USB in practice? Not specifically the raspberry pi issue.
Less accomodating everyone & everything.
It needs more simplicity.
Like the rasp issue - the cables marked active work while the ones not don't. Or vice versa? I don't recall. Never seen any such markings - but apparently there is a distinction there that some how interacts with raspberry not having enough capacitors.
^^ See that paragraph of confusion? That's what standardization chaos looks like. Neither I nor apparently raspberry foundation know whats going on.
So then what should they have accommodated and what should they have left out? Should they have dropped backwards compatibility? Should they have made different connectors for every use case? Those are the exact problems which caused USB to become popular in the first place!
A standard that is actually standardized in practice.
To this day I still don't know exactly how to buy a cable for my raspberry pi 4s. (Yes more a USB c than USB 3 issue but you get my point - a standard that isn't standardized fails at it's raison d'etre)