r
rtrembley
Aug 11, 2011

USB 3.0 gains 100w/power. Why not call it USB 4.0?

There's a plan to change the USB 3.0 specification to provide up to 100 watts of power to connected devices.  I can see why the USB consortium would want to compete with Thunderbolt, Intel & Apple's new spec for connecting external devices to computers. But Thunderbolt only supplies 10W of power, and is only available on a handful of devices by Apple and possibly one or two peripheral manufacturers - that's hardly something to get worried about. Why would they call this USB 3 and not USB 4? Won't it be confusing if some USB 3 ports can power devices, and other USB 3 ports can't?

a
ablake
08/11/2011

You make a good point. Since USB 1.0 ports and USB 2.0 ports have different colored jacks (black vs. blue), I'm not sure what USB 3.0 would do to differentiate itself. I don't have any USB 3.0 compatible peripherals, or built-in support on any of my pc's. So it's not like I've lost anything if they decide to change the standard. I would assume most people are like me and only have 1.0 and 2.0 support on their computers, so it's not like much is lost by improving their standard.

Answer this
ASK a question
250