Intel plays games with USB3.0
THERE IS ANOTHER power game brewing over USB3.0 and it looks like the user is going to pay the price once again.
If you remember the OHCI/UHCI mess that made USB1.0 worthless, Intel is about to provoke the same thing for USB3.0.
It is power games, user be damned.
The problem this time is that USB3.0 is basically an Intel spec, think PCIe2.0 over external cable and you are 98 per cent of the way there. Intel is the driving force here, and it did the bulk of the work, so fair enough.
If you are making the usual widgets for it, memory sticks, rocket launchers and sex toys, you can get the specs now. If you are competing with Intel, that is, you are making a chipset or anything with a CPU in it, you have to wait six months. Don't take this to just mean x86 either, ARM, MIPS or PPC and device vendors get equally shafted.
This behaviour is not what defines 'standard', it is what defines 'proprietary'. Basically if you are competing with Intel, or are perceived to be competing with it, you have to wait and suck down a six-month disadvantage. The last time this happened was USB1.0. Intel played the same games and the standard was so broken it never worked.
What happened then is that the world went around Intel and developed their own spec, and you ended up with UHCI or OHCI, neither of which were compatible. Things sucked, nothing worked, and the 'standard' stagnated from 1995 to 1998. USB1.1 fixed that problem by basically throwing it out and starting over, and USB2.0 was done as a real standard from the beginning. Shockingly it worked, confusing Hi-Speed/Fast/Chocolate-covered/Swift-ish labeling aside.
Now back to USB3.0 and Intel is pulling the same dumb tricks again. We are on the verge of people defining another USB3.0 spec so you have will have USB3.0-I and USB3.0-E for Intel and Everyone. Conveniently, they will all be simply labeled USB3.0 and half the devices just won't work on your machine.
Come off it Intel! You don't need to play these games. And they only make you look bad once they come out (See above).
We might expect such behaviour from the likes of Nvidia or MS, but not you guys. µ
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
The burning question would be; is USB3.0 backwards compatible with USB2.0 (devices and connections).

If you can't plug a USB2.0 device into a USB3.0 supporting motherboard (and vice versa), it's a useless specification.

Cheers,
John
It's great to know as a consumer I'm going to get screwed again. Case and point: Firewire (or iLink for you Sony fanboys). Firewire has been around since 1995, except Apple pulled the same s**t and licensing fees kept it from totally replacing USB 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0 now. Why bother with a theoretical 480MB/s burst rate in USB 2.0 when you have higher sustained transfer rates in Firewire400 let alone 800? Simply put, USB 3.0 will go the same way Firewire went: in the garbage.

However, it is pretty interesting considering Intel is the developer. Their choice to provide two sub-compatibilities are forcing manufacturers of periphrials to choose a side. Who do they think is going to be around longer? Intel or AMD? Fierce move to stunt the growth of AMD, but it does nothing positive for the consumer. I will not support a company that would rather earn an extra $.25 USD in royalties per part than promote an interface and release it for common use (read 100% compatibility).


But then again, is this really any different than what anyone else does?
Intel, remember Micro-Channel? How IBM made that too, proprietary? Remember the backlash. What happened. EISA. Industry standard. MCA by IBM? A footnote, to be included in bylines. Like this one!! COme off it!!! We all expect MUCH better, and BIGGER of you people! 
By the way. Ever hear of ¨spillover effect¨? THATS´S what happens when people get tired of the bully on the block. They take it out on YOU by buying THE COMPETITION. (AMD) at ALL COSTS!! To the REST of US out here. One more reason why mean-spirited INTEL is OFF my radar. INtel just DOESN´t LEARN! Wait. ..... DO WE???
There ya go again, Charlie, all passion and no street smarts.

INTC INVENTED USB, GOT THAT? They were all “basically an Intel spec” (s)!

First off, OHCI was developed by Compaq, National Semiconductor; and, hold on to your seat, Microsoft, which was a bit more software driven, read: propriortary for their specific needs and applications. Conversly, UHCI developed was by Intel, it was more hardware orintated, and it worked better.

Secondly, Intel won the day with the 2.0 which was more like the original UNCI spec. Further, I’m willing to bet new spec will be backward compatable with the previous generations.

So now that you’ve been educated about the “OCHI/UNCI mess” who, pray tell, are you going side with Microsoft or Intel? May I suggest some Paxcil as you deal with the quandry.

Besides, why don’t you write about something more interesting, like say the definition of Asset Light as apposed to Asset Smart, basically, BS v1.0 and BS v2.0, instead the industry/consumer potentally catastrophic consenquences of the Intel USB port.

You really are taken your Intel bashing to new heights of rediculous irrelevancy. 

SPARKS 
Why would we expect anything LESS than disgusting games from players like Intel? What have they ever done that wasn't for proprietary gain?
Usually I'm all for Intel using it's might to push powerful products to crush AMD but this is an instance that reminds us why we can't let any company become too powerful and stagnant...
This is the sort/type of heresy we get when don't have separation of devices of one state on one side, and the Master Knight of the Church of the JEDEC on the other!

Princess! I am your father!... Off with her head! This is a most insidious empire! I'm off to ride the Gravy Train by way of the Orient Express! or buffet, as the case may be. We ken not obide this Phenom menase! 

I propose, (yet again) a Confederacy of Independent Systems (CIS or the "Separatists")! And I do nae give a blue-bellied Dutch boy's John Cheese, who is grievous about it! 

A Royal Proprietary Colony, liker that Scottish Company, Seven Sobs of a Sorrowful Soul for Sinne, Auld Lan Syne, A Sight For Sore Eyes, or some other such rhyming dervishnufications!

USB not from around here, are yer?
Having been personally involved with the USB 1 mess, I have to hand it to Intel, they really know how to screw up an industry. They wanted to be the pig that they are and get a head start for doing nothing. USB 3 is basically PCI-X over cable which Intel didn't invest, the PCI-SIG did. They are basically withholding someone else's IP away from guys like AMD and Nvidia so they can block them from doing a decent chipset in a decent timeframe. These guys need to go off like Compaq and National did and create their own spec. Note to Intel: SHARE THE INFORMATION FOR THE SAKE OF COMPETITION. If you really are pre-competition, you will share the information.
I was on the understanding that the "U" in "USB" was to signify the word "Universal." How exactly is USB3.0, all labeled the same but functioning differently Universal?
<img alt="aaaaa">uhm
Your statements are not valid. I can take any usb 1 device and run it on an OHCI or UHCI controller. The devices do not care. What happens is the SW on the PC has two versions which is a pain for the PC folks, but not the client. I have written drivers for both of these and they each have there own issues but at the wire and protocol layer they follow the same spec. So do not lie to make a point next time...
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/01/09/ces_usb_3_revealed/
"The new spec will be compatible with older USB 1.1 and 2.0 products, cables and connectors, and you can see from the diagram of the standard connector how that's achieved..."
Other then possibility of external video cards it would be like having a super highway when the only thing anyone could buy is a Model T. What else could USB 3 be used for, seems like a waisted effort.
Even "the most" streamlined USB2 standard had a whole bunch of glitches, and driver issues, just look around the web, fresh posts keep popping up. Any takers for PCMCIA cards with NEC USB2 chipset with Orangeware drivers?
(here is an example)
http://forums12.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/bizsupport/questionanswer.do?admit=109447627+1210437651827+28353475&threadId=294788

This industry cannot get anything right the first time no matter how hard they try. The best computers to get are those with the 2-3 year technology, so the countless glitches have finally been ironed out.
Apple isn't the only company in the IEEE1394 board. You're going to have a hard time finding tech companies that DON'T want to make money. Thats what the 25¢ royalty was for. An additional $1.25 for a firewire chipset + royalties that companies like ASUS will charge an additional $30 for and throw in a couple extras? Hardly what I'd call cut throat.

USB and Firewire started out in two different market points. USB was supposed to replace Parallel, Serial, and PS/2 ports. Firewire is an implementation of SCSI that borrows from the Ethernet standard to make it easier for the end user, cheaper, etc. A SCSI controller costs a lot more than $1.25 when it's all said and done. You really don't want a Firewire Mouse, the same as you really wouldn't want a lot of simultaneous, high bandwidth I/O going on with USB since USB is dependent on the system's CPU to function.
O_O

Why....Why would you waste your time writing a comment like that, and waste everyone else's time letting us be able to read it.

That made about as much sense as a Intel fanboi....


OHCI vs UHCI had nothing to do with USB 1.0 versus USB 1.1. The former describe how the Host Controller Interface in the PC works, while the latter describe the protocol over the wire. The cables, the hubs, and the devices don't know and don't care whether the PC has OHCI or UHCI hardware.

To Paul Horn: USB 3 is PCI Express, not PCI-X. And PCI_SIG *is* a thinly-concealed branch of Intel. It and two dozen other SIGs (including USB, OCP, and the Itanium Solutions Alliance) are all run by Vital Technical Marketing under contract to Intel and Microsoft.
Intel they do not learn from the past because yesteryear's technology is lagging behind today's one. Anyway hope to see Intel fan boy get a no backward compatible USB port in their 4GHz machine lolz.....
Hi, I work for Intel. For Intel's side of the story, pls read this: http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/06/usb_30_for_the_masses_dispelli.php