Wile this sounds great, all my devices are 2.0 and most gadgets still come with the old boring 2.0 port. Only high spec phones have adopted the better tech, everything else we have to look carefully to buy the right stuff.

Such speeds are only needed by stuff which involves data storage or communication - Mobile computers (phone/tablet/etc.) - USB sticks - External HDD/SSD enclosures - Flash Card readers - Wireless/Network adapters for USB (And it just happense that those are migrating to newer standards first) I don't really see anything else that would require these huge bandwidths. Why would you need 2 GB/s for a mouse, keyboard or even printers/scanners (which are limited by their mechanical parts, can't "work faster"). Even USB 2.0 is TOO MUCH for them.

^^VR could use that extra bandwidth, would be great if it mean't the number of USB ports required at present could be consolidated into say just the one.

Much like PCIe, USB seems to be evolving faster than anyone is demanding. There's hardly anything out there that take advantage of USB 3.1 (gen2). I don't really understand why the specs keep getting pushed, because all this does is alienate lower-end devices that may not be able to keep up (like ARM devices, for example). It's nice that they're all backward compatible, but I would MUCH rather them focus on efficiency. In another perspective, the more complicated you make USB hosts, the fewer host controllers you get. For example, I would take 4x USB 3.0 host controllers over 2x USB 3.1 hosts hubbed into 4 ports any day. But if USB keeps getting more complicated, chipsets are going to involve fewer host controllers, which means worse latency and potential bandwidth issues.

^^VR could use that extra bandwidth, would be great if it mean't the number of USB ports required at present could be consolidated into say just the one.

VR inputs don't need more bandwidth; USB 3.0 is definitely enough. What VR needs is better latency.

^^I mean more cutting down on the USB ports required, would love to see this all done in one port, i am at three sensors on 3.0 with the rift at present for 360 tracking. 😉

usb just became more awesome then awesome. wish mini-usb would die though.

because it was needed?!

Much like PCIe, USB seems to be evolving faster than anyone is demanding. There's hardly anything out there that take advantage of USB 3.1 (gen2). I don't really understand why the specs keep getting pushed, because all this does is alienate lower-end devices that may not be able to keep up (like ARM devices, for example). It's nice that they're all backward compatible, but I would MUCH rather them focus on efficiency.

I think, though i could be wrong, that USB is trying to become the "end all" device. By that i mean: Keyboard/mouse/usb drive/etc.? Already USB, but: Video cable? Why not USB (if bandwidth keeps evolving) 3.5mm connection? Why not USB. 5.1/7.1 speakers? Why not USB. Microphone? Why not USB. Power connections for devices (such as monitors even?)? Why not USB? I'm not saying i necessarily agree with all of this, but it does seem to be the way USB is going, many of those items already have USB versions of them, but they aren't controlling 100% of the market. But imagine a world where the only ports on your PC were USB, and that's the world i think USB wants. It would be kinda cool if a USB cable could send a GOOD video signal to my monitor and power it at the same time....lol

I think, though i could be wrong, that USB is trying to become the "end all" device. By that i mean: Keyboard/mouse/usb drive/etc.? Already USB, but: Video cable? Why not USB (if bandwidth keeps evolving) 3.5mm connection? Why not USB. 5.1/7.1 speakers? Why not USB. Microphone? Why not USB. Power connections for devices (such as monitors even?)? Why not USB? I'm not saying i necessarily agree with all of this, but it does seem to be the way USB is going, many of those items already have USB versions of them, but they aren't controlling 100% of the market. But imagine a world where the only ports on your PC were USB, and that's the world i think USB wants. It would be kinda cool if a USB cable could send a GOOD video signal to my monitor and power it at the same time....lol

USB is limited to 5V currently, no? I'm not sure you could operate monitors on that voltage. However the rest of your statement I'm all for. A unified port that can do everything sounds great. Though it has a way to go to match DP and HDMI on bandwidth.

USB is limited to 5V currently, no? I'm not sure you could operate monitors on that voltage. However the rest of your statement I'm all for. A unified port that can do everything sounds great. Though it has a way to go to match DP and HDMI on bandwidth.

Currently it's 5 volts, i believe, but i wouldn't be surprised if they try and change that at some point. However, there are currently monitors that do what i suggest: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236598&cm_re=usb_powered_monitor-_-24-236-598-_-Product Just, you know, no monitors we generally would want for a desktop...lol Technically, i believe USB has a 20v max, but that's for power delivery devices.

USB is limited to 5V currently, no? I'm not sure you could operate monitors on that voltage. However the rest of your statement I'm all for. A unified port that can do everything sounds great. Though it has a way to go to match DP and HDMI on bandwidth.

Part of the new USB spec is to allow it to go up to 100W which I personally am extremely opposed to, particularly because one of the ways it can reach that wattage is by outputting 20V.

I think, though i could be wrong, that USB is trying to become the "end all" device. ... I'm not saying i necessarily agree with all of this, but it does seem to be the way USB is going, many of those items already have USB versions of them, but they aren't controlling 100% of the market. But imagine a world where the only ports on your PC were USB, and that's the world i think USB wants. It would be kinda cool if a USB cable could send a GOOD video signal to my monitor and power it at the same time....lol

You are completely correct: USB is trying to become literally universal. But it's like communism - it's a nice thought, but it isn't practical and it won't work. When you have something so diverse and so dynamic, quality control and development becomes a complete nightmare. USB 2.0 was great because it was extremely simple. It was limited to 5v, 500mA, and it would down-scale its bandwidth among simple devices like mice and keyboards, in order for high-demand devices (like flash drives and webcams) to get the speed they need. Sometimes you might be lucky and get a 1A port, but otherwise USB 2.0 was consistent. What this means is whether you bought the cheapest or the most expensive part on the market, it would suit your needs and it worked on EVERYTHING. USB 3.0 came out as a necessary and natural upgrade. It gave a reasonable increase in amperage, it became bi-directional, and it had a healthy amount of bandwidth to suit the needs of most people, while not being so fast that it became a luxury. USB 3.1 though, that's where things got out of hand. Cheap and/or low-power devices can't keep up with the bandwidth. The Type C connector is nice, but even many USB 3.1-compatible devices don't have it. As stated earlier, the spec allows for up to 100W. All of this makes USB less universal. There are too many caveats Here's a solid example of how bad things could get: Let's say you have a USB 3.1 Gen2 operated 2K monitor. If you try using that on a USB 3.1 Gen 1 port, you might see a loss in refresh rate, or stuttering. Its advertised as 3.1, but there's not enough bandwidth. That's confusing for those who don't know the small details. Thanks to the 100W USB could offer, the monitor could be powered and operated via just one single USB cord. But wait - you plug it into a laptop, which doesn't offer enough amps. So, now the user needs to buy a separate wall adapter. How inconvenient. What's the point of offering 100W if it can't be guaranteed? Surely, this will result in frustrated customers who claim "false advertising". But let's say the user was using this monitor on a desktop PC that could supply enough power. Surely, any USB type C cord will work, right? They all fit. But no - the user might have some cheap data cable (that is perfectly fine for charging phones), but pumping 100W through that could be a fire hazard. Even if the USB cord wasn't a fire hazard, one of the devices could still be damaged. There has to be logic chips involved in order for the USB port to supply enough power. If anything goes wrong with this logic, the device might not receive enough power. Or in some cases, a device could receive too much power, and it gets burnt up. The probability of this happening is way too high. I have seen "smart" USB 3.0 ports that had power-saving features and could fail to supply enough power to even USB 2.0 devices. After turning the feature off, the USB ports worked fine. This was an Intel-specific problem. If not even Intel can get a simple power feature to work properly, how can we trust some no-name Chinese brand to do the same?