2019

>why does hardware cost money why dont the latest and greatest technologies just fall from the sky into my lap now i am irritated and angry because i am a toddler

Attached: 1477500690651.jpg (151x233, 11K)

Who gives a shit how much throughput you have to an external device that isn't for internet? Do you buy external drives that can read/write more than 400 mbps?

Actually yes, thats literally the main reason most cases still have a couple of 2.0 instead of all 3.0/3.1/USB C. It costs more to solder the wires to the plug, more time as well, not actually a lot, but with orange man tarffis every penny counts.

Shit tier HDD's from 2012 can output around 60MBps, which is 480Mbps, the peak spead of USB 2.0. Imagine what a not fucked HDD or a external SSD would use.

>libertarian
>strong central govt

Attached: tUHsw8Cq.jpg (244x244, 11K)

>External SSD

Why on earth would someone want that? Why would someone want a really fast external drive when usually the whole point is the storage and/or transportation of data, if anything you want 5400 rpm drives.

But let's say you have one for when you're really on the go, you still showed us a picture with 2 3.0's right on the front of the case. How many fast external drives do you think the average user needs?

If you're a power user, your solution is probably going to use your network/ethernet.

A student might have a 4k camera and a quick external drive and maybe a phone with a ton of storage, that can even briefly make use of the throughput difference between 3 and 2.0.

So if I'm a board maker and i need to pay duties to license USB3 and whatever other costs are related certifying it when i can save a shekel and use some USB 3's which still cover most thumb sticks and external drives maximum throughput, mice, keyboards, printers, scanners, gamepads, and whatever bullshit the user is charging with his ports.

It's pretty nice actually. Smaller than even a 1.8" external HDD and way faster. I used to use one as my boot drive and didn't even notice it was over USB

Did you use, like, 6 of them at a time?

Why would I do that?

use some USB 2.0's*

My point was that you don't need all like 8+ of your USB's to be usb 3.0 when there's so few things even fully using usb 2.0.

I'm not arguing that all USB ports should be USB 3 ports, just answering the why would you want a USB SSD question. This is also me

Ah cool, fair point.

Would be a neat easy raid setup too to have a couple or a few, theoretically.

You *DO* realize what the downsides of USB 3.0 (and newer) and and why you shouldn't want to use it when you don't specifically need the speed benefit? A USB 3.0 port for USB 2.0 (or a USB 3.0 controller wired up at 2.0) is beneficial over forcing USB 3.0 for everything.

Cost?

I personally can't see other advantages, low bw usb 3 devices would still share the same controller better than with usb 2. But I guess most of the world still prefers cheaper shit.

Are you retarded. The point of libertarianism is to grant greater freedom to corporations and individual, since the free market will fix it.

USB 3 is not fully backwards-compatible with USB 2.
Also there's BIOSes which don't have USB 3 support built in, meaning that your keyboard or flash boot device wouldn't be detected by such BIOS if connected to a USB 3 port.

>Who the fuck still uses usb 2.0?
I do.
USB3.0 has high frequency shit that can fuck with sound devices in particular.

calling the left us party libertarian is crazy they are a lot further left than that

i don't own any usb3 devices

Swing and a big miss.

I use 2.0 since my DAC cracks on 3.0

In which case it was one example and every other plug runs with an extra cable to, enjoy your dead ports because someone inserted a bad cable and in blew up a small transistor.

arent the types of mobo preventing this? iirc the newest x570's can support up to 6 USB 3.1s

For old OS compatibility. I sometimes use FreeDOS