USB 2.0 cable versus Parallel cable
- Thread starter rty
- Start date
- Status
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?I think what adam meant was a faster transfer rate :dunno:
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.
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.
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. ;p
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.
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.
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=
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=
This is what I read from DPReview forum
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.
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.
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
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
Originally posted by ckiang
OT: It also occurs on all the above OSes when it snows in ClubSNAP.
Regards
CK
lol. :bsmilie:
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 ;p
... but those results *should* still better than ur traditional P|| cable transfer rates.
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.
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.
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/definition/0,,sid9_gci756825,00.html
and also this link for more technical detail
http://www.fapo.com/1284int.htm
ultimately, the parallel port is not a bad interface...
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?
- Status
Similar threads
