Breaking News
Design How-To

Viewpoint--USB 3.0: Not just for wired apps

9/20/2012 02:36 PM EDT
3 comments
NO RATINGS
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
I_B_GREEN
User Rank
Rookie
re: Viewpoint--USB 3.0: Not just for wired apps
I_B_GREEN   9/28/2012 5:58:00 PM
NO RATINGS
Stephen What if slew rate and clock speed could be controlled and only run at max when the speed is really needed and no interference issues are present? Only run as fast and steep as needed for device service needded. Also can a better USB cable help this?

Stephen.
User Rank
Rookie
re: Viewpoint--USB 3.0: Not just for wired apps
Stephen.   9/28/2012 3:36:55 AM
NO RATINGS
Careful of USB3.0 RF noise. Intel released a white paper in April this year titled USB 3.0* Radio Frequency Interference Impact on 2.4 GHz Wireless Devices. This outlines the problems that can be created for WiFi through the use of USB3.0. These warnings also apply to other wireless (Cellular) frequencies. If we are not careful we will kill the radio pipe in the name of widening the wired one

WW Thinker
User Rank
Rookie
re: Viewpoint--USB 3.0: Not just for wired apps
WW Thinker   9/22/2012 3:46:17 AM
NO RATINGS
In terms of bandwidth, USB3.0 is limited when compared to the PCIe and its upcoming mobile version(s). In terms of power consumption, USB3.0 is not as capable as MIPI-HSI. In terms of protocol overhead, USB3.0 is heavier than PCIe3.0 and beyond. For any SoC or platform to include the various flavors of 802.11, going through USB3.0 simply adds another layer of latency and dies size for NO gain at all. In particular, the argument of LTE is wrong because, as a network function, IP packetization is intrinsic, what a waste if protocol translation like IP-USB--connection--USB-IP is added! USB1.x met its objective, for all low cost peripherals. USB2.0 serves certain applications well but add the unnecessary cost. USB3.0 adds yet another cost burden and now also makes it difficult for further integration. The latter is because nobody dares to take the route to implement the pure LVDS electrical and drop the backward compatibility. Wake up, don't keep on putting bandage on a tired interface because this aligns with the business line of the corporates as well as personal performance within the company. There are other serial interfaces which have headrooms, protocol benefit than USB3.0 for the intended applications!

Most Recent Comments
Mariomalo
 
Mariomalo
 
Mariomalo
 
slg12345
 
anddy11
 
Max The Magnificent
 
Max The Magnificent
 
RGARVIN640
 
prabhakar_deosthali
Most Recent Messages
8/23/2014
3:46:26 PM
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
EE Times editor Junko Yoshida grills two executives --Rick Walker, senior product marketing manager for IoT and home automation for CSR, and Jim Reich, CTO and co-founder at Palatehome.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week