Slashdot Mirror
Intel Releases USB 3.0 Controller Interface Spec
hardsky submitted thrilling news about everyone's favorite interconnect cable by saying "USB 3.0 is set to deliver data-transfer speeds of up to 5Gb/s, initially over tweaked connectors and wiring and, later, over optical links."
Does USB 3.0 assist in the more rapid delivery of porn to my PC?
If the answer is "Yes", then please continue with your announcement.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Still the same symmetrical plug design....stupid, stupid move. Would have been that hard to add a ridge on one side or something, so you don't have to stare at the end??
TODO: Something witty here...
Will we ever see a storage medium that can move data that fast?
What?
My humping USB dog will be a blur!
Task Mangler
I for one, welcome our new dongle overlords.
I just like to say dongle.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Yes, the USB connector is blind accessible. The "top" of the A plug's plastic part is supposed to be embossed with a USB logo, and the "bottom" isn't supposed to be embossed. So if you know which way is "up" on your PC's connector, or if you are using a hub (in which case up is more obvious), you can more easily plug them in blind.
"hardsky submitted thrilling news about everyone's favorite interconnect cable..."
Don't know about anyone else, but my favorite interconnect cable is something very, very, different.
Vincent J. Murphy
Spandex Justice
Damn it.
Three edits later, and it still makes no sense. I obviously meant to say "If not even the editor posting a stroy is interested".
[Goes to hide in a corner until he's able to type again.]
Hvae you seen taht rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy taht syas it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/~mattd/Cmabrigde/
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
While that is true, I showed that to my GF who is from Hong Kong and knows English as a second language, cannot do it at all, but she can read perfectly and a bit faster than me
And how are you supposed to work out which way is "up" with a socket that is on a tower case or PCI bracket?
Will this really be faster or will it just be bigger chunks? Also, will this spec require more cpu overhead? My interest is not for SLR and video cams, but for live audio and instruments where speed, or latency is an issue. USB usually requires more cpu, is prone to more contention and overall offers lower quality for realtime audio processing. And why do people say its faster or higher speed? Maybe your transfers don't take as long, but I am willing to bet that small chunks won't see any benefit.
Intel has provided chipset makers with a draft specification for a USB 3.0 eXtensible Host Controller Interface (XHCI), making good a promise it made a couple of months ago.
I thought we had a standards body that would release such a spec to developers. This development in my opinion, might have other chip makers release a "renegade USB 4.0" promising new features and the like.
Question is; is it up to manufacturers to think of ideas, name them and release these to the general public? What's up with IEEE Standards group, whose global standards include Biomedical and Healthcare, Nanotechnology, Information Technology and Information Assurance among others?
It's all well and good to quote the new speed but what will be get int the real world? USB2 never meets expectations due ot the huge (compared to fire wire) host CPU requirements.
Will Intel be integrating the Larabee core into it's USB 3 host chips?
I am personally waiting for USB 3.11 for Workgroups to come out before upgrading.
I believe that firewire is peer to peer, while USB is master/slave. In theory that means that you can connect any two firewire-capable devices and have them talk to each other, which is not possible with USB (you need a hub). I've never actually tried that though, and so cannot personally confirm it.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
it might be because the characters aren't normal for her, since english is my second language and it's not a problem at all, but I use the same set of letters.
I think it's a well-known law of the universe that one cannot simultaneously read digg and Slashdot. Maybe it's just me.
Its = possessive. It's = "it is"
That's a lie and you know it. Nobody on slashdot has a girlfriend.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
It will be interesting to see if USB 3.0 relies on the processor as much as the USB 2.0. This has led to firewire (400mbps) outperforming USB 2.0 (480mbps) in real world tests. In todays multicore world this may be non-issue on most machines by the time it ships. In a way I hope USB 3.0 does perform well. I would be OK with firewire going away if Firewire 3200 is outperformed by USB 3.0 without hogging to many clock cycles.
I'm certain that USB3 will be "supposed to be" backward with USB 1; 1.1; 2, but will likely only be backwards compatible with 2. Right now, a Hard disk cannot keep up with eSATA at 1.5 Gb/s, nevermind eSATA at 3Gb/s. For the past year or so, many of us have been buying $15 eSATA cards for our old computers, and new computers with eSATA built in. Considering that external HD cases with eSATA connectors cost only about $16 (something with 4 eggs, at Newegg) what is the benefit?
Possible benefits would be increased transfer speed to peripheral devices, but can we reasonably expect devices that fast by then? Personally, I would hope that 10Gb/s ethernet would come down in price by then. The only real benefit I see with the proposed USB3 is something for a processor core to do....
$.02
PS: I will give a possible something to do mention to Hard Disk (Solid-State) video recorders... but they could use eSATA as well & still be saturated..
You know firefox has a build in spell check these days, you might want to look into that.
Oh the irony...
*sigh*. mod parent up.
Yup. I have seen the research, and I clearly needed to step away from the keyboard.
Although I think my point stands, when the entire discussion on this article is on my crappy spelling and grammar, rather then the oh-so-exciting USB 3.0
I am a girlfriend, you insensitive clod!
In theory, you could take two SATA 3GB drives and put them in a dedicated box that treated them as a software-driven RAID-0. That would give you peak theoretical data transfer of 6Gb/sec, but that's likely to happen only if you hit the drives' on-board caches. Connect that to your box using USB 3.0.
Of course, I'd probably prefer 1Gb/sec Ethernet, so I could see the data from my network not just one machine.
Seriously though, widespread use of the full bandwidth will probably not show up until 6-12 months after this hits the market. But it will come. It will be a competitor to eSATA.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Why do we need USB 3? The reason for my question is e-SATA. Why not pump more into development of devices that run on that interface instead of USB?
The game.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Don't laugh. I've seen power plugs glued to drives.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Yes but the point is, no one on Slashdot HAS a girlfriend ...
Or ... err ... are you a girlfriend with a girlfriend on slashdot ... because that would be like ... whoa!
It's not a huge limitation for USB since devices just include a USB host controller as well. This allows, for example, a USB camera to print to a USB printer. The main win for FireWire is the lower protocol overhead (meaning that it gets closer to the rated wire speed) and the lower CPU usage.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The problem is that build and built are both words and so a computer spell checker can't tell if you get them mixed up.
Actually, I can't tell if someone else gets them mixed up unless I force myself - the bizarre thing about reading is that if you're reading for meaning rather than spelling, errors like this get 'error corrected' away at some level beneath the conscious one, particularly if you're reading stuff on the internet where most people are pretty sloppy.
I suppose 'Grammar Nazis' just never learn this skill.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
It is not just the dependance on the processor that makes the "slower" FireWire 400 beat out USB 2.0 (the fast one... whatever they are calling that today). A rough outline:
1) FireWire allows devices to allocate a specific slice of time to their needs for a period of time. This slice of time can then be used exclusivly by the device to transmit that round of data. This keeps devices from interupting the flow durring those periods. USB has a part-way analog to this, but it is not nearly as efficent.
2) FireWire allows any device to talk to any other without requiring a CPU's intervention. So if you are transfering from on HD to another connected via FireWire the data never has to flow thorugh the CPU (unlike on USB).
3) FireWire has explicit support for DMA (direct memory access), so when transfering data to and from an internal HD the CPU only has to grant access to the bits on disk and the FireWire support chips can handle streaming the data from one storage device to the other (like #2, but lightly different).
4) Latency can be gaurenteeded through a mechanism in the time-slice arbitration system. So audio devices can have the guaranteed chanels. On USB it is a constant fight... that does not work for music devices if you start loading up the USB system. This works well with the DMA thing, so even if your CPU is busy at the moment it does not have to make the context switch before accepting the data.
Most of these differences are inherint in the basic design of the two protocols. And they cause the FireWire bridge chips to be significaly more expensive (still we are talking a mater of a dollar or two). I have not heard any good analasis of USB 3 yet (since the spec just came out), but I suspect that USB 3.0 will still be saddled with the legacy of USB 1.0 (which was designed with mice an keyboards in mind... everything else seems to have been showhorned in).
I once dated a Chinese girl in the UK who'd arrived from China and learned English very quickly, in two years. I found out that just after she woke up she had great difficulty speaking English. But once she was awake she spoke it very fluently, though it was clear that it wasn't her native language because she never used chavisms like slightly thuggish English people I knew then would pepper their sentences with. It's like her English translator software was an application rather than part of her 'OS' and thus booted a bit late.
I've read that there's some strange process where you go from thinking in your native language and translating it to thinking in a foreign language. Personally, I've never got past the stage where I can buy stuff in shops in (Swedish, used to be able to do it in French at school). I doubt I'll ever get to the point where I'm properly bilingual. Let alone in a language like Chinese.
Mind you if your native language is not English you're exposed to English from a very early age, so I think non English speakers have an advantage. Certainly if I were Swedish or Chinese I would have made sure I learned English.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Picture this, 8 pins in a row.
1 VCC
2 GND
3 D-
4 D+
5 D+
6 D-
7 GND
8 VCC
No matter which way you plug it in, the pinout would've worked fine. The additional cost to manufacture an 8-pin USB cabling system versus the current 4-pin scheme would've been negligible.
I believe that firewire is peer to peer, while USB is master/slave. In theory that means that you can connect any two firewire-capable devices and have them talk to each other, which is not possible with USB (you need a hub). I've never actually tried that though, and so cannot personally confirm it.
The iPod was originally designed to be able to share files by simply connecting two iPods. Once the iTunes possibility presented itself, it was one of the first things to be disabled to satisfy record label interests, along with the ability to record audio.
War as we knew it was obsolete
Nothing could beat complete denial
- Emily Haines
You only speak 1 language? That's embarrassing.
878659 - yep its prime.
You know firefox has a build in spell check these days, you might want to look into that
Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.
Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.
English is my third language, and I can read it with no problem. My first two languages are Dutch and German, FWIW. :-)
I think this is pretty interesting. I'm going to write a little program to randomize text in this manner, and then I'll feed some ebooks through it. I wonder how readable chemistry texts will be after this kind of treatment.
"you're reading for meaning" ... "where most people are pretty sloppy"
That's fine if people are trying to express "standard" or "normal" aka boring stuff.
If you are trying to communicate unusual meanings to somebody else, it doesn't work so well if you are sloppy.
On Slashdot I'm expecting the discourse to be on a higher level than "Me hungry. Want food", and that at least some people here will post stuff that is out of the ordinary and hopefully interesting.
In such a case, in addition to figuring out whether the writer made a mistake in spelling, grammer, you also have to figure out whether the writer made a mistake in reasoning, or is trying to be funny, or is saying something really _different_, or is saying multiple things at the same time, or is just plain crazy, or whatever.
It's all very easy to parse if you only have to expect people to say boring stuff.