Talk:USB On-The-Go

sh /storage/emulated/0/Android/data/com.htetznaing.zfont2/files/zFont/vivo.sh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.1.223.203 (talk) 12:32, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Plugs info missing

Pictures or links to articles about the mini-A,BAB plugs is missing.

--Xerces8 08:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Products?

This article needs context. Specifically, it needs to either give some examples of specific products, if there are any, that use this specification or say when/if such products are expected. This information should probably be in the lead. Originalname37 (talk) 14:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• I agree. I can't think of a single application for this technology. I mean, the external links http://www.usb.org/developers/onthego/ contains this graphic http://www.usb.org/developers/onthego/otg-graphics.gif which depicts an iPod-like device connected to a mobile phone , as well as a printer connected to a PDA; but I don't see how this really differentiates from connecting an iPod or printer to a PC. Same thing, different interface. Now, something like an external hard drive connected to another hard drive, upon which they synchronize their files... That seems distinction-worthy. What am I missing here? --92.104.153.110 (talk) 17:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the point is that for a small device like a PDA, you might want to use it as a host sometimes (hooking devices up to it, like keyboards or USB flash drives), and a target sometimes (hooking it up to a PC to sync files). But I don't know for sure; all the info I have is what I gleaned from the article. -- Why Not A Duck 19:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I actually think usb-otg could be extremely useful. The killer ap for this may be the ipod-like device. You can put your songs on whatever usb device you want to (flash drive, cheep 500gb external hard drive, etc). Then you carry around that, your tiny usb-otg device and your ear buds and you never have to buy a higher-capacity ipod again. You just replace the memory as you see fit.

My problem with the article is that it does not make clear if any such device actually exists. I can't tell from the article whether or not this is anything more than one of about a million neat-o protocols that are not now and never will (conceivably) be in use.

To be clear, I'm not criticizing usb-otg. I just think the article needs to be a lot clearer on this point.Originalname37 (talk) 16:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

They definitely exist. Though I'm having trouble identifying them (perhaps because OTG is more of a "behind the scenes" feature; the way it's presented to the user seems to be more like "you can connect the device to your computer, or connect it to your USB flash drives") Some devices: a digital picture frame; Nokia N810 internet tablet (COI note: I work for Nokia); a disk drive that can be connected to other disk drives. Unfortunately, my search hasn't turned up any good reliable source about specific products that support USB OTG. Hopefully someone else will have better luck. -- Why Not A Duck 02:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Business case?

The model for USB OTG needs to be more clearly explained.

Firewire/IEEE 1394 already does this, so the benefit over using another high-speed interconnect should be explained.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikip rhyre (talk • contribs) 2008-12-01 16:57:38

The benefit is the same benefit you get from adding USB host capabilities to any device in a class where its competitors are already USB devices - The ability to turn its USB port into a dual-purpose jack that can manipulate a ridiculous number of peripherals. It's about cost and minimizing the number of different buses required on an embedded device. The article would certainly benefit from clear articles in the text, but devices like a Chumby, game console, or PDA, all have fairly obvious business cases. MrZaius^talk 12:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Generally; can only the factory turn a USB port into OTG dual-purpose jack? Generally a software/firmware update could not? Seems this should be emphasized in the article. I'm surprised OTG specs are so rarely given for tablets etc. One suspects from the specs/reviews that most microUSB ports are only for charging, not memory expansion etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.138.23.59 (talk) 22:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

The business case can (and should be explained in the introduction)

• USB On-The-Go (USB OTG or just OTG) is a specification first used in late 2001 that allows USB devices, such as tablets or smartphones, to act as a host, allowing other USB devices, such as USB flash drives, digital cameras, mice or keyboards, to be attached to them. Use of USB OTG allows those devices to switch back and forth between the roles of host and device. A mobile phone may read from removable media as the host device, but present itself as a USB Mass Storage Device when connected to a host computer.

I propose the following:

• USB On-The-Go (USB OTG or just OTG) is a specification introduced 2001 that allows smaller USB systems, such as tablets or smartphones, to act as both a host and a device, depending on defined situations. The capability permits the connection of smaller systems, for example tablets or smartphones, to connect to a PC or a Laptop while also allowing devices, such as USB flash drives, digital cameras, mice or keyboards, to be attached to them. USB OTG is strictly defined by components present in the smaller systems, allowing them to switch back and forth between the roles of host and device. In this way, a mobile phone may read from removable media as the host device, but present itself as a USB Mass Storage Device when connected to a host computer.

USB On-The-Go is replaced in USB 3.1, as well as later revisions, by a "Dual-Role-Device" or DRD capability that introduces an extended hierarchy of hosts.

From a historical view, OTG enabled 'devices' to act as hosts, but this is no longer relevant in a world where your phone can have higher processing capacity than the pc to which it connects. Chris9594 (talk) 06:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)chris

Products - Second round

What really needs to be more clearly defined is whether or not all devices with this functionality follow this spec. Is this used by the Nokia Internet Tablets, or is there something more to it? Seems to be, given the Duck comment above, but it warrants confirmation. It's been two weeks shy of a year, but the article still doesn't list a single concrete device that implements this specification. Cleanup still badly needed, as well - The circular and highly technical language in the lower sections could be reorganized effectively, but is dense enough that I'm reluctant to touch it without more subject knowledge expertise. MrZaius^talk 12:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

More abut cables and plugs

Is the Micro-AB plug/cable the only type supported for OTG? Is this an USB OTG cable: USB B to Mini-B cable ? --Xerces8 (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not believe that this is a valid cable from my reading of the specification, in addition there are requirements on the ID pin. MatthewJBennett (talk) 23:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Some older Nokia s40 support on the go?

See http://discussion.forum.nokia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125477 I.e. a few Series 40 feature phones. E.g. Nokia 6500 Classic , Nokia 7900, Nokia 8800? Andries (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

This article appears to mix USB OTG and USB dual role devices

There appears to be a lot of misinformation here- USB OTG (from the specification available on the USB website):

On-The-Go: An OTG product is a portable device that uses a single Micro-AB receptacle (and no other USB receptacles) to operate at times as a USB Targeted Host and at times as a USB peripheral. OTG devices must always operate as a standard peripheral when connected to a standard USB host.

I believe that all the devices mentioned in this article are actually USB Dual Role devices- which has a very different electrical and protocol specification. While there are is a variety of silicon that supports OTG, I am not aware of any true OTG devices. MatthewJBennett (talk) 23:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

A USB OTG device is in effect a "dual-role device". There is no official USB-IF specification for "dual-role devices" except for the USB OTG device specification. A list of certified USB OTG devices can be found from the USB-IF website (products tab). RjPetrie (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

USB 3.1 introduces "Dual-Role-Devices" DRD which replaces OTG specifications. Chris9594 (talk) 06:05, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Chris

The BeagleBoard uses USB-OTG

The embedded prototyping board "BeagleBoard" uses USB-OTG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.81.178 (talk) 16:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Lead section needs work

I had originally called this "Lead section too technical," but then I expanded it, mostly by copying from down below, so now it just needs work...corrections, clarifications & what not. I intentionally made the lead a bit redundant due to the topic's complexity. Yet now it may (or not) be too redundant down below. Here's my original post:

A 4-paragraph lead section should be understandable to the average person, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section). The lead section says:

USB On-The-Go, often abbreviated USB OTG or just OTG, is a specification that allows USB devices such as digital audio players or mobile phones to act as a host, allowing other USB devices like a USB flash drive, digital camera, mouse, or keyboard to be attached to them. Unlike conventional USB systems, USB OTG systems can drop the hosting role and act as normal USB devices when attached to another host. ....

Obviously one can't have a gut understanding of what OTG is and does unless one has a gut understanding of what a host is. Before I read that I thought I had a semi-workable idea what those things and relationships were.

My vague impression is that a host is rather ephemeral, subtle, and changeable. IOW, difficult to explain. I wonder if some contrasting examples in the article might help? For example, not every device with a USB connector can use a USB thumb drive? Does a camera or tablet with USB OTG need file management software to use a thumb drive? Is that software/firmware part of the OTG definition?

Example: some tablets brag that they use USB OTG, therefore a thumbdrive can expand memory, which seems to imply that regular USB connections will not. Explaining this might clarify the definition/relationships between these devices. Similarities and contrasting differences being highlighted perhaps.

Most readers never read beyond the lead section. I notice the next section is called: Architecture, which implies jargon-laden & too-technical, but it's actually written very well! Suggest giving a lay def to "bus" and renaming that section to "Overview" to encourage reading. However, because that section is so extraordinary, is not a reason for a weak Lead. I may copy 1 1/2 paragraphs to the lead to make wiki guidlines & the "Lead-onlies" more happy, but that will be incomplete, redundant, & a rewrite would be FAR better. (But some redundancy is a good communication tool.)
--71.138.23.59 (talk) 22:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Doug Bashford

Manufacturers not bragging about USB OTG ?

Quote from my above:
  "Example: some tablets brag that they use USB OTG, therefore a thumbdrive can expand memory, which seems to imply that regular USB connections will not. Explaining this might clarify the definition/relationships between these devices."

I'm still befuddled as to why that practice seems to be so extensive among sellers and manufacturers. ...Reviewers too. It seems to be like selling gold stuff, but forgetting to mention it's made of gold. My quandary is that goes against "simple economics," an impossibility. My only explanation is that USB OTG is not as valuable as this article implies. ...like perhaps the same goals can be achieved without USB OTG? ...Or some are bragging where they aught not? ...or...?
...Thoughts?
--71.133.254.31 (talk) 16:48, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Doug Bashford

...or perhaps nearly all USB is now OTG?
--71.133.254.31 (talk) 16:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)Doug Bashford

USB OTG Flash Drives

Please add a section about USB OTG Flash Drives. They seem to have two connectors. Are they backward compatible with traditional USB socket storage uses? What additional features do they have?-96.233.19.191 (talk) 16:35, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

As best I can see, these devices are slave-only on both ports, so OTG is something of an advertiser's misnomer when applied to the flash drive. It's just that they can connect to a USB-OTG port on, e.g., an Android 4+ device by a micro-USB connector, which then acts as the master to the flash drive's slave, although mobile phones usually operate in slave mode. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:18, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

That makes sense to me -- but some buyers of USB OTG flash drives are confused, and the sellers don't seem to be making this clear either...-96.233.19.191 (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on USB On-The-Go. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121011164531/http://www.heise.de/english/USB-On-the-Go-Specification-Settled--/newsticker/news/23699 to http://www.heise.de/english/USB-On-the-Go-Specification-Settled--/newsticker/news/23699

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

New to editing stuff here

I am new here but on this topic I would be considered an expert, would you like me to update this page? I work for a company that uses this type of usb for sending wireless video from a transmitter to a receiver to a phone etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.100.20.48 (talk) 07:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Well-referenced neutral contributions are always welcome, but you might wish to first read wp:COI, which has sound advice. Please also consider wp:Why register. LeadSongDog come howl! 19:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Introduction of Type-C

This article needs to be updated to reflect the universal introduction of USB Type-C, as well as other ports like Lightning which are technically also OTG. It is very heavily reliant of micro-B right now. I've done some work, but there's still a few sections that only mention micro-B and USB-A. JaredTamana (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

About probably out of spec OTG cables

This article only specified two types of OTG cable: male mini-A to male mini-B, and make micro-A to male micro-B. However, I think the more well-known kind of OTG cable is the male micro-B to female USB-A one, which is probably out of spec, though I'm not sure. Maybe this article should be updated with information related to such kind of cable. --Wzx1996 (talk) 15:45, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary use of Master/Slave

The USB specification never calls its nodes master or slave, it always talks about Hosts and Devices - which can be further divided into Hubs and Functions. Using the terms master and slave may therefore be unnecessary here. Oskar456 (talk) 07:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

AGREE. There is general consensus that the electronics industry is moving away from 'master'/'slave' terminology. For example, see https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/news/how-master-slave-terminology-reexamined-in-electrical-engineering/ and Master/slave_(technology). I definitely don't have the background to do a proper job of updating the article but under WP:BOLD I will have a try. Please feel free to correct my mistakes. RedTomato (talk) 11:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I have now done an extensive rewrite of the article to remove all master / slave terminology. Changes made:

• All usage of the word 'host' capitalised to 'Host' to reflect that it is a formal capitalised role in the USB specifications. (apart from in the introduction where 'Host' is explained.)
• All usage of the word 'Master' changed to 'Host'.
• All usage of the word 'Slave' renamed. This was tricky as 'Device' is not always a suitable substitution. Sometimes I used 'Device', sometimes 'Device/follower', sometimes 'Device/peripheral' as appropriate to maintain clarity.
• Before I rewrote the article, it used the word 'device' in multiple conflicting ways. Sometimes 'device' meant any USB appliance in general, sometimes 'device' meant the role of 'Device/follower'. I have changed all occurrences of 'USB device' to 'USB appliance'. (I am not sure if 'USB appliance' is the right word here, but it is better than 'USB gadget' or 'USB tool' or 'USB apparatus'.)

RedTomato (talk) 12:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's due to the original terminology change edit or a later one, but the current version of the article now includes the meaningless and confusing term "device device" four times. I'm not sure which term would be best so just bringing it to attention here rather than just editing. — Hippietrail (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2023 (UTC)