First Computer Store

Chuck Guzis cclist at
Sun Jul 26 14:15:12 CDT 2015

On 07/26/2015 06:12 AM, tony duell wrote:
>> Remember when USB was referred to as the Useless Serial Bus after
>> it was introduced? I think it was a solid 1-2 years after it was
>> introduced that I began to notice peripherals designed for it.
> I still call it 'Useless Serial Botch' most of the time. It's not a
> bus, after all.

The first USB devices were utterly terrible--I've got a few that work 
only with certain controllers--modern controllers are absolutely blind 
to the things.

It seems to me (and I'll defer to more experienced hands) that USB is 
not wonderful for single- or low-count byte transfers; that the 
negotiation overhead makes short transfers rather problematic, 
particularly where the topology involves multiple hubs.  In other words, 
USB is well-suited to block transfers.

Is this a fair assessment?

And the proliferation of unofficial VID and PIDs seems to be an issue, 
particularly with Chinese-origin devices. "Squatting" seems to be a 
practice also:  VID 0001 = Fry's Electronics;  0004 = Nebraska Furniture 
Mart--really?  I've found Chinese USB devices squatting on the Linksys 
VID, with a non-Linksys PID.

Really, it's a mess.


More information about the cctalk mailing list