Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: USB 2.0 cable versus Parallel cable

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,165

    Default USB 2.0 cable versus Parallel cable

    Anyone know what the advantages are of connecting a photo-printer with USB 2.0 cable versus a parallel cable?

  2. #2
    ClubSNAP Idol Adam Goi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    5,682

    Default Re: USB 2.0 cable versus Parallel cable

    Originally posted by rty
    Anyone know what the advantages are of connecting a photo-printer with USB 2.0 cable versus a parallel cable?
    Faster connectivity?

  3. #3
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,165

    Default Re: Re: USB 2.0 cable versus Parallel cable

    Originally posted by AdamGoi


    Faster connectivity?
    Are you sure, Adam? With parallel port, I can just re-use my old cable and it takes only 30 seconds but with USB 2.0, I have to go buy PCI USB 2.0 card and the USB 2.0 cable, then I have to install and set it up. It got to have something more convincing for me to switch to USB 2.0. Anyone?

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,741

    Default

    I think what adam meant was a faster transfer rate

    In fact, I also think that the key (and perhaps only) advantage of USB 2.0 over parallel is a faster transfer rate. But usually, the bottleneck is at the printer's end. I think it'll be a better idea to just stick with your old cable.

    Juz my 2 cents.

  5. #5

    Default

    Well, USB's connector is smaller, you can connect multiple devices, it is more high tech and thus cooler instead of boring old usb, and oh - You can't use parellel ports in some mobos like the Abit -MAX series cos they don't have the physical ports.

    Seriously, the USB port will speed up printing. Not the raw print speed (may affect but seriously, minor effect), but more onn the responsiveness, faster deleting of print jobs, faster start printing, etc.

  6. #6

    Default

    With USB 2.0 you can transfer 480 mbps of data in a zif
    with Paralel I think you can only transfer around 115200 bps of data [ that is 0.1 mbps ]

    But for a Soho photo printer, I think USB 2.0 and Paralel will not make any difference as the photo printer memory is less than 4 mbps anyway ?

    But if you are talking like HP Laserjet Laser colour printer or even the Hi-capacity laser printer with 160 megs of RAM [ the VERY big sized printers ] , USB 2.0 will make a difference

    As they are not connected using a Paralel cable anymore but a 10/100 Mbps network card

    =bob=
    Nikon 4 & lots of hollow chunky glass

  7. #7

    Default

    This is what I read from DPReview forum

    You can pretty much determine if a faster computer will give you faster print speeds by noticing if the printer pauses or stops as the print head goes from side to side as it prints.

    If it pauses or if there is any hint of slow down that means it is waiting for data to be sent to it by the pc. But most likely this means that the connectivity method is too slow or that the pc cannot process the data fast enough. Parallel and USB 1.? may not be fast enough if you are sending a very dense picture to the printer. Thatís the reason for USB 2.0 and firewire on the 2200. If the print head just goes from side to side without any delay then you cannot get any faster than that.
    Another note to add is if you are using parallel port under a Win2k environment, you are likely to get 100% CPU usage until the print job is completed. In some cases, this may cause other programs to slow down enough that they seem completely unresponsive.

    I am not too sure about other OS but this is a true fact acknowledged by MS.

  8. #8

    Default

    I forget to mention that the above mentioned "100% CPU usage" problem applies to the following Win OSes

    Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP1
    Microsoft Windows XP Professional
    Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP1
    Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional SP1
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional SP2
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional SP3

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Jason Ho
    I forget to mention that the above mentioned "100% CPU usage" problem applies to the following Win OSes

    Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP1
    Microsoft Windows XP Professional
    Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP1
    Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional SP1
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional SP2
    Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional SP3
    OT: It also occurs on all the above OSes when it snows in ClubSNAP.

    Regards
    CK

  10. #10

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    OT: It also occurs on all the above OSes when it snows in ClubSNAP.

    Regards
    CK
    lol.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Down-Below, Babylon 5
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Originally posted by b18
    With USB 2.0 you can transfer 480 mbps of data in a zif
    with Paralel I think you can only transfer around 115200 bps of data [ that is 0.1 mbps ]
    480 Mbps is when u take the blue pill.



    red pills give different results

    ... but those results *should* still better than ur traditional P|| cable transfer rates.

  12. #12
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,165

    Default

    Thanks guys for the enlightment. Now I see there's no overwhelming reason for me to go through the troubles of utilizing the USB 2.0 port.

    I am still using the good old Win 98 and my printer is a SOHO class printer so I am sure it is still a bottle-neck in itself. So far I haven't noticed any pause when printing A4 size color photos even when I play MP3 at the same time. I think I'll keep using the ancient Parallel port.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    258

    Default

    Originally posted by b18
    With USB 2.0 you can transfer 480 mbps of data in a zif
    with Paralel I think you can only transfer around 115200 bps of data [ that is 0.1 mbps ]

    =bob=
    the parallel interface with the ECP can go upto 4MB/s or about 32Mbps (taking 1byte = 8bits) and the ECP has the compression capability for images... please refer to this link...
    http://whatis.techtarget.com/definit...756825,00.html

    and also this link for more technical detail
    http://www.fapo.com/1284int.htm

    ultimately, the parallel port is not a bad interface...

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Bukit Batok
    Posts
    999

    Default

    just a question on the same topic...say if i were to purchase an external casing to fit a 2.5" hard drive to be used on a laptop, would a firewire or USB2 connection draw more battery power from the laptop in order for the hard drive to operate? What would be a more recommended connection for faster transfer speeds, power saving..etc?

  15. #15

    Default

    Check this Microsoft page about the Parallel port issue.

  16. #16

    Default

    Originally posted by Jason Ho
    Check this Microsoft page about the Parallel port issue.
    Quote from Microsoft Page :

    STATUS
    This behavior is by design.

    WORKAROUND
    To work around this behavior, print to a Universal Serial Bus (USB) printer port. If the printer does not have this capability, use a parallel-USB cable.
    Nikon 4 & lots of hollow chunky glass

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Western SG
    Posts
    1,537

    Default

    Originally posted by Minimalis
    just a question on the same topic...say if i were to purchase an external casing to fit a 2.5" hard drive to be used on a laptop, would a firewire or USB2 connection draw more battery power from the laptop in order for the hard drive to operate? What would be a more recommended connection for faster transfer speeds, power saving..etc?
    I wondering on this too, just upgraded my HDD and now looking for a external hardcase.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •