# Will USB 2.0 handle older USB devices without problems? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 23, 2002, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565 "2002-06-23T15:11:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/1 "2002-06-23T15:11:30Z")
Once again, just checking. I’d guess that there would be full backwards compatibility, but I just want to be sure… ---
**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/2 "2002-06-23T15:23:24Z")
from [http://www.intel.com/update/archive/issue23/stories/top3.htm](http://www.intel.com/update/archive/issue23/stories/top3.htm) : > [@](#): > > It’s important to understand that USB 2.0 is an evolutionary advance that retains all the existing benefits of USB 1.1, including plug-and-play, dynamic attach and detach, power distribution to devices, and support for power management. USB 2.0 provides backward compatibility with USB 1.1 and will be transparent to end users. In fact, all existing USB 1.1 devices will have full compatibility with a USB 2.0 system. In addition, today’s USB cables and connectors are expected to support USB 2.0 without modification. ---
**Author:** ![handy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@handy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handy)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/3 "2002-06-23T16:04:14Z")
I wonder how operating systems handle it if it wasn’t around when they made the OS? ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/4 "2002-06-23T16:09:11Z")
Note that if you have a USB chain with both USB 1 and USB 2 devices, the entire bus will drop down to USB 1 speeds to maintain compatability. So to address **handy’s** question, using a USB 2 device on a computer that only supports USB 1 would probably mean the device downgrades to USB 1 speeds. USB 2 exists only because Intel wants more royalties, anyway. For high-bandwidth transfer needs, Firewire/IEEE 1394 offers the same speed, more functionality, and is already widespread. ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/5 "2002-06-23T16:25:03Z")
rjung, please explain this a bit further; does this also mean that using a USB 1 device on a computer that supports USB 2 would bring down all the other USB 2 devices to USB 1 speed? I’m quessing it won’t, but I’m not that technically savvy, so I want to be sure… ---
**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/6 "2002-06-23T17:33:15Z")
from [http://www.intel.com/technology/usb/faq.htm#Q16](http://www.intel.com/technology/usb/faq.htm#Q16) > [@](#): > > \*\*Will my PC today work with a Hi-Speed USB 2.0 peripheral product? \*\* > Assuming you have a PC that has USB 1.1 (which is most likely), if you plug your Hi-Speed USB 2.0 peripheral into the USB 1.1 system, your system will perform at the USB 1.1 speed. You will need to update your PC either by adding in a PCI add-in card or purchasing a new MB with a discrete host controller that supports Hi-Speed USB 2.0 and installing Hi-Speed USB 2.0 drivers. and > [@](#): > > \*\*I have a PC that runs Windows 98, can I still use Hi-Speed USB 2.0 products? \*\* > Yes, assuming first that you install a Hi-Speed USB 2.0 add-in card and you install a Hi-Speed USB 2.0 driver. Since Microsoft is only developing drivers for Windows XP and 2000, you will have to use a 3rd party vendor’s drivers. In most cases, if you upgrade your PC with an add-in card, it will come with a Hi-Speed USB 2.0 driver install CD, that covers 98, 98SE, and ME. so, to answer **handy** , OS’es that were developed without support for USB 2.0 can support USB 2.0 provided the correct hardware (add-in card or new m/b) and software drivers are installed. ---
**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/7 "2002-06-23T17:50:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rjung \* > \*\*Note that if you have a USB chain with both USB 1 and USB 2 devices, the entire bus will drop down to USB 1 speeds to maintain compatability. So to address **handy’s** question, using a USB 2 device on a computer that only supports USB 1 would probably mean the device downgrades to USB 1 speeds. > > USB 2 exists only because Intel wants more royalties, anyway. For high-bandwidth transfer needs, Firewire/IEEE 1394 offers the same speed, more functionality, and is already widespread. \*\* from [http://www.pctechguide.com/26interface2.htm](http://www.pctechguide.com/26interface2.htm) : > [@](#): > > At these levels of performance the danger that USB would be marginalised by the rival IEEE 1394 bus would appear to have been finally banished forever. Indeed, proponents of USB maintain that the two standards address differing requirements, the aim of USB 2.0 being to provide support for the full range of popular PC peripherals - current and future - while IEEE 1394 targets connection to audio visual consumer electronic devices such as digital camcorders, digital VCRs, DVDs and digital televisions. and from [http://www.iogear.com/press/pdf/10thingsusb2.pdf](http://www.iogear.com/press/pdf/10thingsusb2.pdf) > [@](#): > > **7. How does USB 2.0 compare in speed to FireWire®?** > It’s faster. USB 2.0 offers transfers rates up to 480Mbps, while FireWire® has speeds up > to 400Mbps. i’m not supporting one over the other, but i’m saying that there will always be supporters for one standard over another. Once you understand the design philosophies of the different standards you would figure out which is better for which purposes. also from [http://www.pctechguide.com/26interface2.htm](http://www.pctechguide.com/26interface2.htm) : > [@](#): > > Existing USB peripherals will operate with no change in a USB 2.0 system. Devices, such as mice, keyboards and game pads, will not require the additional performance that USB 2.0 offers and will operate as USB 1.1 devices. All USB devices are expected to co-exist in a USB 2.0 system. The higher speed of USB 2.0 will greatly broaden the range of peripherals that may be attached to the PC. This increased performance will also allow a greater number of USB devices to share the available bus bandwidth, up to the architectural limits of USB. Given USB’s already wide installed base, USB 2.0’s backward compatibility could prove a key benefit in the battle with IEEE 1394 to be the consumer interface of the future. so it seems that on a USB 2.0 system, USB 1.1 devices will continue to work at USB 1.1 speeds while USB 2.0 devices will work at USB 2.0 speeds. here’s an excellent short and clear faq of USB 2.0: [http://www.iogear.com/press/pdf/10thingsusb2.pdf](http://www.iogear.com/press/pdf/10thingsusb2.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/8 "2002-06-23T18:02:13Z")
from [http://www.activewin.com/faq/usb2.shtml](http://www.activewin.com/faq/usb2.shtml) > [@](#): > > Q: Will I have to get a new USB hub? > A: Yes. You may use a USB 1.1 device in a USB 2.0 hub, but not the other way around. If you plug a USB 1.1 into a USB 2.0 chain, all USB 2.0 devices will operate at 1.1 speeds. so, while USB 2.0 devices will work at USB 2.0 speeds, if you plug a USB 1.1 device into the chain, the USB 2.0 devices will work at 1.1 speeds… so **rjung** was correct on this point. but a USB 2.0 device will not work on a USB 1.1 system. ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2002, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/9 "2002-06-23T21:29:00Z")
I’m sure that I’ll seem like a dense idiot for asking for further clarification, but some of the statements that were quoted seem ambiguous to me, so here goes: Are they saying that the problem of USB 2 devices operating at USB 1 speeds _only_ happens if you’re using a USB 1 hub plugged into a USB 2 port (or a similar daisychain setup)? That’s what it seems like it’s saying…if, on the other hand, you have a system that has 4 USB 2 ports built into the motherboard, , you shouldn’t experience a slowdown in ports 1-3 if you happen to plug a USB 1 device into port 4. Correct? ---
**Author:** ![handy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@handy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handy)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/10 "2002-06-24T14:47:10Z")
Cuckoorex, you should be able to get a cheap USB2.0 card to put in a slot on your PC. It’s pretty easy. Then you automatically have usb2.0. Haven’t tried it myself but have seen the cards for sale. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/11 "2002-06-24T18:59:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cuckoorex \* > Are they saying that the problem of USB 2 devices operating at USB 1 speeds _only_ happens if you’re using a USB 1 hub plugged into a USB 2 port (or a similar daisychain setup)? That’s what it seems like it’s saying…if, on the other hand, you have a system that has 4 USB 2 ports built into the motherboard, , you shouldn’t experience a slowdown in ports 1-3 if you happen to plug a USB 1 device into port 4. Correct? I believe so – my understanding is that if you’ve got a chain from your PC to your farthest device, and there’s a USB 1.1 device somewhere along the chain, then the entire bus drops down to USB 1.1 speeds to accomodate it. To get USB 2.0 speeds, your entire chain must be USB 2.0. That’s my understanding, anyway. And **xash,** remember that USB was originally conceived simply as a replacement for local desktop buses, like for keyboards and mice and low-bandwidth devices. The USB 2.0 standard was invented by Intel only in response to IEEE 1394/Firewire reaping big money in the high-bandwidth arena; it was never _originally_ intended to handle such loads. That’s why Firewire continues to offer various advantages over USB, including a powered bus (no separate adaptor needed) and support for peer-to-peer transfers (no computer needed). While USB 2.0 is faster than Firewire 1.0, this speed advantage will disappear once the Firewire 2.0 standard is approved, which will double Firewire’s existing speeds to 800 Mbits/sec (vs. 480 Mbits/sec for USB 2.0). ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/12 "2002-06-24T19:54:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rjung \* > And **xash,** remember that USB was originally conceived simply as a replacement for local desktop buses, like for keyboards and mice and low-bandwidth devices. The USB 2.0 standard was invented by Intel only in response to IEEE 1394/Firewire reaping big money in the high-bandwidth arena; it was never _originally_ intended to handle such loads. That’s why Firewire continues to offer various advantages over USB, including a powered bus (no separate adaptor needed) and support for peer-to-peer transfers (no computer needed). While USB 2.0 is faster than Firewire 1.0, this speed advantage will disappear once the Firewire 2.0 standard is approved, which will double Firewire’s existing speeds to 800 Mbits/sec (vs. 480 Mbits/sec for USB 2.0). \*\* USB has power on the bus. 5V upto 500ma. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/13 "2002-06-24T21:31:04Z")
> [@](#): > > USB 2 exists only because Intel wants more royalties, anyway. For high-bandwidth transfer needs, Firewire/IEEE 1394 offers the same speed, more functionality, and is already widespread. I like these conspiricy theories as much as the next guy but I must disagree on this one. USB is becoming the standard ports on a computer - firewire is just a niche market for certain devices and requires a add on card. The increase in speed it due to the overwhelming popularity of USB and increases preformance of devices like scanners and the like. The common consumer does not want to install a firewire card just to scan a page 10 seconds quicker. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/14 "2002-06-24T22:21:58Z")
I missed this one > [@](#): > > USB 2 exists only because Intel wants more royalties, anyway. For high-bandwidth transfer needs, Firewire/IEEE 1394 offers the same speed, more functionality, and is already widespread. Intel will not get royalties from USB. > [@](#): > > USB 2.0 Adopters Agreement - The purpose of the Adopters Agreement is to facilitate the development of products that can interoperate, interconnect and/or communicate with one another in the manner defined in the USB 2.0 interface specification. Companies that sign an Adopters Agreement: (i) are obligated to license on a royalty-free and non-discriminatory basis, certain IP that would be necessarily infringed by products compliant with the final USB 2.0 interface specification; and (ii) will receive a license of the same scope from the USB 2.0 Promoters and other companies that have signed Adopters Agreements. This IP licensing obligation does not cover technologies your company may use to design or manufacture USB 2.0 products, which are not expressly set forth in the final USB 2.0 interface specification (e.g. manufacturing technology). You should carefully review the specific terms of the Adopters Agreement before signing. They may not want to pay Apple for firewire but they don’t get royalties from USB. They do however sell USB chips I believe. [http://www.usb.org/members\_landing.html](http://www.usb.org/members_landing.html) ---
**Author:** ![xash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/c6cbf5/32.png) [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/15 "2002-06-24T22:56:18Z")
here’s an excellent, comprehensive, and seemingly unbiased, article on the USB vs FireWire issue: > **[HowStuffWorks - Learn How Everything Works!](https://www.howstuffworks.com?parent=usb.htm&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mackido.com%2FHardware%2FUSB20.html)** > > HowStuffWorks explains thousands of topics, ranging from the flu to black holes to conspiracy theories, with video and illustrations so you can learn how everything works. " Did USB’s designers think high-speed peripherals weren’t important? Not at all, but there was already a technology to handle those: IEEE-1394, better known as FireWire. A note in Apple’s USB Developer Documentation summarizes the concept: “High-speed in the case of USB is not comparable to high-speed devices on a FireWire bus. USB is a complementary technology to FireWire, not a competing technology. USB enables the use of affordable higher-speed consumer grade peripherals on Macintosh computers.” " " The “Application space taxonomy” in Chapter 3 of the specification describes “high-speed” devices as those that need high bandwidth, guaranteed latency, and ease of use, citing “video” and “disk” as examples. Those devices are specifically and deliberately excluded from USB’s design goals (section 3.2, page 12). " ---
**Author:** ![Baron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9de0a6/32.png) [@Baron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2002, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/16 "2002-06-24T22:58:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by k2dave \* > \*\* > > I like these conspiricy theories as much as the next guy but I must disagree on this one. > > USB is becoming the standard ports on a computer - firewire is just a niche market for certain devices and requires a add on card. The increase in speed it due to the overwhelming popularity of USB and increases preformance of devices like scanners and the like. The common consumer does not want to install a firewire card just to scan a page 10 seconds quicker. \*\* Firewire is much more prevalent these days, and is now standard equipment on most PCs above bargain-level. I think Intel is probably just trying to compete. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2002, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/17 "2002-06-25T06:48:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by gazpacho \* > USB has power on the bus. 5V upto 500ma. …which isn’t much to work with. By comparison, Firewire carries 8 to 40v, up to 1.5a, which is actually enough to power an external burner or drive. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by k2dave_ > USB is becoming the standard ports on a computer - firewire is just a niche market for certain devices I didn’t know digital video is a “niche market.” 😉 > [@](#): > > and requires a add on card. Only if your PC vendor is using generic motherboards that don’t include IEEE 1394 as standard. > [@](#): > > The common consumer does not want to install a firewire card just to scan a page 10 seconds quicker. With the projected growth in consumer video and other high-bandwidth applications, there’s definitely a market for faster devices on the horizon. But while USB 2.0 is already reaching its peak performance, Firewire still has room to grow – the latest word is that there’s a proposal to piggyback IEEE 1394 on Wi-Fi networks, to give you _wireless_ Firewire… just imagine piping your HDTV signal from the living room to your computer in the den, then capturing it to a home movie and burning it on a DVD. :eek: 😃 ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2002, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/18 "2002-06-25T12:27:05Z")
> [@](#): > > Firewire is much more prevalent these days, and is now standard equipment on most PCs above bargain-level. I just bought a new P4 2.4 Dell and it did not come standard with firewire. It was an option that I could get dell to add a card though. I would think most consumers would bypass this option unless then knew they had a need for it. It did have USB though. I highly doubt it is standard equipment on most but would agree it is an option on most. > [@](#): > > I didn’t know digital video is a “niche market.” Really, how many users actually use DV? I’m not talking about playing a DVD or something off the harddrive here as that has nothing to do with firewire/usb (assuming no external drive). Yes there is a core user group but that’s why we call it a niche. ---
**Author:** ![SirRay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@SirRay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirRay)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2002, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/19 "2002-06-25T12:52:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Baron \* > \*\*Firewire is much more prevalent these days, and is now standard equipment on most PCs above bargain-level. \*\* Seems like just the opposite is true: > [@](#): > > Dell, for one, will make USB 2.0 High-Speed its standard method for connecting devices to its desktops PCs. Over time, it plans to eliminate a number of specialized ports–such as those used specifically to connect a PC’s keyboard, mouse and printer–replacing them with six or so USB 2.0 ports, Zucker said. > > Gateway plans to move over completely by the end of the year, a representative said. Emachines, a major player in retail sales, particularly at the lower end, has begun selling USB 2.0 models. > > “By the end of this year, 80 percent to 90 percent of Intel desktop platforms shipping will have integrated USB 2.0,” said Jason Ziller, chairman of the USB Implementer’s Forum and Intel’s technology initiatives manager. “We are also expecting to see a pretty good ramp in laptops this year.” [ZDNet Link](http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-938006.html) ---
**Author:** ![Running\_with\_Scissors](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Running\_with\_Scissors](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Running_with_Scissors)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2002, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565/20 "2002-06-25T14:03:09Z")
So, can someone tell me: If USB was originally not designed to handle high-speed devices, because IEEE-1394 was already around and working well, why did they change their mind and design USB 2.0? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-usb-2-0-handle-older-usb-devices-without-problems/115565.md?page=2)