That's exactly what they do.
-
-
And if you're a hardware vendor trying to make your old gear more appealing, why wouldn't you? It is a 3.1 port! Just only capable of generation 1 speeds...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
But they could already do this with 2.0... it's literally the same exact situation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
No it couldn't. A 2.0 port is not any generation of 3.0.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
A 2.0 device might only support full speed or low speed (introduced in 1.1), which is what I've been trying to explain all along. Just like a 3.2 device might only support 10Gbps (introduced in 3.1) or 5Gbps (introduced in 3.0).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That didn't happen. Nobody labelled their 1.1 ports 2.0.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
So what you're saying is implementors found a new way to mislead users. How is that USB-IF's fault?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Because USB-IF is the one saying that 3.0 is in fact 3.1. And 3.2.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Just like they said 2.0 low speed was 1.1 low speed. Seriously, this is the. Exact. Same. Situation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Nah. There is no "2.0 gen 1" that means in fact "1.1". Every 2.0 port can operate at 480Mb/s.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You still haven't shown me an example of a host port labeled 3.1 that only does Gen1, and I've shown you examples of USB2.0 devices that only do 1.5mbps.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.