attero@discuss.tchncs.de to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 days agoNintendon'tdiscuss.tchncs.deexternal-linkmessage-square62fedilinkarrow-up1265arrow-down17file-text
arrow-up1258arrow-down1external-linkNintendon'tdiscuss.tchncs.deattero@discuss.tchncs.de to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 days agomessage-square62fedilinkfile-text
Therapist: USB3.0 Micro-B is dead, it can’t hurt you. Nintendo: Invents dual USB-C src: https://x.com/traiver_/status/1979164799393993015
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·edit-22 days agoThis is not a recent revision. TB4 is from 2020. USB4 is 2019. The real answer to this question is that Thunderbolt is an Intel standard and adds significant licensing and IP overhead to unit costs.
minus-squareSchmidtGenetics@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·2 days agoUSB 3.2 that they specified from their ai synopsis can’t handle either…
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·2 days ago…Right, the question is “why wouldn’t they just use the tech available at the time rather than this monstrosity.”
minus-squareSchmidtGenetics@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-22 days agoBecause the tech didn’t have the bandwidth capability, hence the doubling up… As addressed already higher up the thread!
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·2 days ago40gbps wasn’t enough?
minus-squareSchmidtGenetics@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-22 days agoSince when is usb 3.2 good for 40gb/s, and what is the voltage and cable length restrictions?
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·2 days agoRight. The question is “why wouldn’t they use thunderbolt?” Stop being obtuse.
minus-squareSchmidtGenetics@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-22 days agoVoltage limitations… I’m sorry, you’re calling me obtuse because you don’t know usb standards? That’s funny. There’s obviously a Reason, and as explained, bandwidth or power limitations. All previous revisions, weren’t right.
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·2 days ago…right so why didn’t they design their original embedded architecture to support the better technology?
This is not a recent revision. TB4 is from 2020. USB4 is 2019.
The real answer to this question is that Thunderbolt is an Intel standard and adds significant licensing and IP overhead to unit costs.
USB 3.2 that they specified from their ai synopsis can’t handle either…
…Right, the question is “why wouldn’t they just use the tech available at the time rather than this monstrosity.”
Because the tech didn’t have the bandwidth capability, hence the doubling up…
As addressed already higher up the thread!
40gbps wasn’t enough?
Since when is usb 3.2 good for 40gb/s, and what is the voltage and cable length restrictions?
Right. The question is “why wouldn’t they use thunderbolt?” Stop being obtuse.
Voltage limitations…
I’m sorry, you’re calling me obtuse because you don’t know usb standards? That’s funny.
There’s obviously a Reason, and as explained, bandwidth or power limitations. All previous revisions, weren’t right.
…right so why didn’t they design their original embedded architecture to support the better technology?