Re:But do they NEED it? (Score:5, Informative)
by oe1kenobi (601951) Neutral on 07:31 PM October 4th, 2003 (#7135446)
> So then a mouse should be USB 1, not 2. If it doesn't go
> speeds, it shouldn't be called USB 2. Manufacturers are labeling USB 1
> things as USB 2 to increase sales while deliberately misleading people.
> That is clearly wrong, and should be stopped.
But is does "go at USB2 speeds": they run at the USB 2.0 "Low
802.11b runs at 1Mbps, 2Mbps, 5.5Mbps, or 11Mbps. USB 2.0 runs
1.5Mbps ("Low Speed"), 12Mbps ("Full Speed", what a stupid name), or
480Mbps ("High Speed"). People just need to understand that the name of
the standard doesn't relate to a specific transfer speed.
The real problem is if manufacturers don't list on the
actual data rate they do use. Don't support manufacturers that don't
provide you the information you want to know.
-Richard L. Owens
Re:Keyboards and Mice (Score:2, Informative)
by Schmucky The Cat (687075) Neutral on 09:52 AM October 5th, 2003
( http://lj.georgerickle.com/friends )
> Also, if you put a USB1 device on a hub with USB2
devices, ALL of
> them will run at USB1 speeds.
Nitpick, and grossly untrue. As a matter of fact USB2 hubs
have a TT
controller (transaction tuba or some crap) each port of a USB2 hub acts
as a seperate controller to 1.1 devices. That means 4 11Mpbs USB1.1
devices plugged into a USB2 hub each have the full 11Mbps of a seperate
bus. You seem to think that version numbers should be used in marketing.
The USB-IF has said multiple times that USB2 is not a marketing term.
Those are marketing terms, and those are the terms on the
approved logos. Do you ever wonder why some companies market without
logos? Maybe their devices are so broken in their implementation that
they can't get a logo. But they go to market anyways. Ouch to you, have
fun with your non-compliant devices.
Re:Unanswered questions (Score:2, Informative)
by Anonymous Coward on 07:11 PM October 4th, 2003 (#7135382)
Uh. You're confused.
When USB was new each USB port on your system was attached to
USB backplane. The bandwidth was therefore shared between all ports on
your system, exactly like a hub.
Today it is commonplace to have a seperate backplane for each
plugging in a USB 1.1 device to one USB 2.0 port will not affect other
USB 2.0 ports. That is because they're on different backplanes, not
because the USB 1.1 device isn't slowing down the USB 2.0 bus.
Now, if you were to plug in a USB 2.0 hub into your USB 2.0
dangle a USB 1.1 device off of it, it will, without a doubt, slow that
USB 2.0 bus down to 1.1 speeds.
If you have a system with a LOT of ports, and you're willing
around behind your system to plug in each device, then you're unlikely
to hit this problem. As you did not.
If you're like most people and have crammed your system into a
inaccessible spot, hubs are the order of the day for plugging in the
steady stream of USB devices that slowly creep into your system. And if
a 2.0 device really isn't a 2.0 device, that will have a serious impact.
Personally, I just use firewire. It's faster even if you
FW400 is routinely faster in the real world than USB 2.0 (due to Intel's
insistence on making the spec more CPU intensive). The downside is
price, but if the uber-geeks of the world are spending serious $$$ on
their systems, getting a FW/USB case instead of a USB case is a neglible
Unfortunately some things aren't available in Firewire form
for one, are hard to come by), so this USB-2.0-but-not-2.0 crap affects
Re:Unanswered questions (Score:1)
by robosmurf (33876) * Neutral on 05:23 AM October 5th, 2003 (#7136389)
> Now, if you were to plug in a USB 2.0 hub into your USB
2.0 port, then
> dangle a USB 1.1 device off of it, it will, without a doubt, slow that
> USB 2.0 bus down to 1.1 speeds.
The above is totally incorrect. USB 2.0 hubs are considerably
intelligent than USB 1.0 hubs, and can insert the slower USB 1.0 signals
into the USB 2.0 data.
For more on this, see the Tom's Hardware review of USB 2.0