Comments on: USB 3.0′s Ramp-up: Can’t This Happen Faster?

By: Technology Solved

Technology Solved — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:14:13 +0000

[...] external interface of the enclosure will either be the very popular USB (USB 2.0 most likely since USB 3.0 is taking its sweet time arriving ); eSATA or FireWire (FireWire 400 being the more prevalent flavor). One of the nice things about [...]

By: Intel’s Results Rocked, But It Can’t Count On the Old Guard – GigaOM

Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:23:59 +0000

[...] business practices with AMD. The company is even drawing criticism for what many people feel are exclusionary practices toward proposed industry wide-standards such as USB 3.0. The new standard is much faster than USB [...]

By: bathswana

bathswana — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:05:26 +0000

LightPeak is perhaps the reason why Intel is moving slowly on USB 3.0.

It all comes down to royalties. Why would Intel rush to USB 3.0 support when it is developing a competing technology?

By: David Robins

David Robins — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 12:28:11 +0000

As somebody who worked on USB 1.o, I am anxiously waiting the arrival of 3.0

By: Usually Named

Usually Named — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:45:52 +0000

This article sounds like a PR puff-piece coming from the USB-IF.

Not impressed.

By: Sebastian Rupley

Sebastian Rupley — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:42:49 +0000

@Macdad -- the debate over whether Intel is a holdout on USB 3 because of its own LightPeak technology does continue, and good point, but I have to wonder why the other folks who could put USB 3 on motherboards and in chipsets are also not jumping to do so. It's a standards conversation that is taking a long time. Probably good to throw LightPeak into the mix, though.

Best, Sebastian

By: macdad

macdad — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:13:10 +0000

No mention of LightPeak?