Skip to content

Comment on USB-C naming to somehow get worse with USB4 Version 2.0parent

Comments

Part of the reason is that USB isn’t one linear timeline of newer versions. There are so many optional features that you are really naming a branched tree of USB specs. But even then they seem to have done a particularly bad job.

Isn't this state of things a failure in the "universal" part of USB?

What we have now is a bunch of different types of serial busses that all happen to use one of a handful of different connectors. Even if we ignore everything but the USB-C connector, we have a bunch of different types of serial busses that all use the same connector.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.