attero@discuss.tchncs.de to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 1 day agoNintendon'tdiscuss.tchncs.deexternal-linkmessage-square60fedilinkarrow-up1239arrow-down17file-text
arrow-up1232arrow-down1external-linkNintendon'tdiscuss.tchncs.deattero@discuss.tchncs.de to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 1 day agomessage-square60fedilinkfile-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-220 hours 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-up2·19 hours agoUSB 3.2 that they specified from their ai synopsis can’t handle either…
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·18 hours 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-218 hours 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-down1·16 hours ago40gbps wasn’t enough?
minus-squareSchmidtGenetics@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-216 hours agoSince when is usb 3.2 good for 40gb/s, and what is the voltage and cable length restrictions?
minus-squaresocsa@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·15 hours agoRight. The question is “why wouldn’t they use thunderbolt?” Stop being obtuse.
minus-squareSchmidtGenetics@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-215 hours 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-down1·15 hours 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?