snowfalldreamland, 10 months ago Yes it was never intended that any consumer hears about something like “USB 3.2 Gen 2” that was strictly internal naming for people developing USB devices. In fact the naming guidelines we’re simplified even further than in the older version you linked: cdn.arstechnica.net/…/USB-IF-language-usage-guide… But yea borderline fraudulent manufacturers and uninformed tech journalists are to blame for all this confusion
Yes it was never intended that any consumer hears about something like “USB 3.2 Gen 2” that was strictly internal naming for people developing USB devices.
In fact the naming guidelines we’re simplified even further than in the older version you linked: cdn.arstechnica.net/…/USB-IF-language-usage-guide…
But yea borderline fraudulent manufacturers and uninformed tech journalists are to blame for all this confusion