Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: PC Printer Cables

This is topic PC Printer Cables in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002651

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 10-30-2003, 06:14 AM:

Pretty Basic question.

I need to buy a cable to hook my new printer up to my new computer.

Which is best: A parallel cable or a USB? (printer is compatible with both)

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 10-30-2003, 06:37 AM:

What operating system are you running?

If it's something that supports USB, then I'd go that way, but if you're running something like Windows NT4, which doesn't, then you'll have to go parallel. I haven't tried with XP, but Windows 2000 generally works ok with printers on parallel ports, but many other parallel devices, disks, tape drives etc., often have problems.

Some versions of Windows 95 had support for USB, but it had problems, and is best avoided; 98, Me, 2000 and XP all work fine with USB, as do all recent wersions of the Mac system. Drivers are available for Linux as well.

Generally, forget the parallel port if you can.

Posted by Jason Burroughs (Member # 68) on 10-30-2003, 09:14 AM:

It's really a matter of personal preference and also what operating system you have. You won't really notice much of a difference in performance with USB vs Parallel.

Annother factor however could be how far away you're wanting to place the printer away from your computer. With parallel the max leghnth would be approx 15ft. With USB its considerably longer, but I don't have the exacth legnth.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-30-2003, 05:38 PM:

USB printing is okay, but not really any better in terms of performance over a normal parallel port.

The thing I want most to see in new inkjet printers and low cost laser printers is built in memory. My HP Deskjet 1220C cost around $450 when the model was first introduced, but it has no internal memory. So when you want to print something it really saps your computer's resources big time. If the printer had 64MB or 128MB of built in memory it could quickly spool jobs and not act like a parasite on the computer to which it is attached.

As cheap as memory has become I see little excuse for most printers to be sold without internal memory. It seems like you have to spend upwards into the $1000 price level to find laser printers and high end color inkjet printers that have any built in memory (and typically the amount of memory included is pathetically low).

Posted by German Marin (Member # 918) on 10-30-2003, 06:14 PM:

Parallel ports used to be for printers. I'd prefer use parallel for printer and let USB free for other devices.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-31-2003, 08:27 AM:

I would put forth that USB isn't popular, necessarily because of it's speed, (it is relatively fast) but for it's "Plug & Play" aspects.

When you plug the device in, the computer recognizes it almost instantly. It's hot-pluggable and it's expandable to 254 devices on each port. It's also not limited to a specific use. It can be used for printers, disk drives, scanners, audio devices and other stuff.

With parallel and regular serial ports you have to power down the machine(s) whenever you plug or unplug a device. You often have to activate the port when you want to use it.

Way back, several years ago, me and some friends were drinking and talking about how many different kinds of plugs there are on the back of computers. (This was in the 80's.) We postulated that there should be one or two different kinds of ports on the back of a computer and that it would be pretty easy to have devices be automatically recognized by the computer when they are plugged in or unplugged. It seems like that theory is quickly becomming a reality!

I guess you could say that my friends and I invented USB way back then! I still haven't seen any royalty checks, yet! [Big Grin]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-31-2003, 09:11 AM:

quote:
I guess you could say that my friends and I invented USB way back then! I still haven't seen any royalty checks, yet!

Those royalty checks keep food on Al Gore's table! [Wink]

Posted by Jason Burroughs (Member # 68) on 10-31-2003, 10:17 AM:

Annother issue is with the way that the USB Ports work. Not all devices communicate with the USB at the same speed, when mixed with high speed devices, not to be confused with USB 2.0 (scanners, printers etc) and low speed devices (such as mice) the bus will set on the lowest common speed.

With the newer buses this problem is supposed to have been resolved, but could still be a problem.

Annother problem with printing though USB is that extra drivers are needed, even for the newer devices.