Re:M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
by SAI_Peregrinus on Monday April 18, 2022 @09:28AM
(#31070250)
The xSpeed naming was even worse. Full Speed isn't actually the maximum (full) speed (that's SuperSpeed#, for some number). High Speed snuck in there at some point. I'm surprised they never did Ludicrous Speed with plaid cables.
The USB4 xx Gbps is good. The thing people care about is "which one goes faster". Numbers make that easy, vague adjectives for ever faster speeds make that hard. And it looks to improve the "not all cables work for all applications" situation that USB 3 ended up with.
As an end user, you shouldn't need to care about the generation and amount of lanes that USB provides. There's a logo on the box that has the USB shape, SS, and the speed. For textual representations, there's "SuperSpeed x gbps". If you see SS5 and your computer also had a sticker that says SS5 or SS10 or even SS20, you're good. That's how the USB guys foresaw the whole process going. Obscure use cases that may technically happen (like two gen 1 streams rather than a single gen 2 stream, aka USB 3.2 gen 1x2 rather than USB 3.2 gen 2x1) don't get a logo or a fancy name and you'll probably run into compatibility challenges for such a setup.
USB X.Y gen ZxQ isn't meant for the general public, it's a technical specification. x specifies the generation of the version y specifies which specification, z specifies the type of connection (given X.Y = 3.2 and above) with q specifying the amount of USB lanes available.
Like PCIe 4.0 1x16 vs 2x8, it's all designed as designations for domain experts. Use the SuperSpeed naming system like the USB people want you to and you'll probably be a lot less confused. They tried to simplify things (again) by dropping the SuperSpeed in USB 4, calling it simply USB 4 xx Gbps, which is probably for the best.