I see that some of the new printers are comming out with a USB only conection to save cost. Is USB really any faster than a parallel port? I know of only one MB that has no legecy ports so I'm really not thrilled about this latest budget tightening move.
Is USB really faster than a parallel printer port?
- Thread starter videobruce
- Start date
Yeah, but how many computers have no USB port? I think USB has been standard on motherboards for the last 5 years or so
Also, this pushes people away from those damn legacy ports so that eventually we can get rid of them on the majority of desktops. Do you use your legacy ports for anything else but printing? The only legacy port I use is a PS2 port for my keyboard, and that's only because I'm using a relatively old keyboard
I don't have a problem of having BOTH on the printer, but I just don't want a USB only printer. Why tie up a USB port when you have a decicated printer port going unused?
USB is faster, depend on what u print. For text there is negligible difference. If you are printing multi-megabyte graphics or high resolution photo, u will see the speed difference.
Even my dad's old pentium pro 180 workstation he brought home from the office had a pair of usb ports, and its just about 6 years old. There is no reason not to get a usb printer, its faster, easier, and any new computer comes with at least 4 ports, and many new keyboards and monitors have internal hubs for even more ports.
ECP printer ports are faster than USB. If you have any intention to use a print server, they all have printer ports on them, not USB. If you have a printer port you really should use it instead of USB.
I have been wondering about this legacy stuff. Can someone explain what they mean?
I noticed on one of the hardisk reviews at www.storagereview.com, one of the test/benchmark is called legacy benchmark or something. Any idea what that means?
Another thing, recently on one of the post someone was saying something about the MS Wireless Desktop(bluetooth keyboard and ms optical mouse) which uses USB connection for the bluetooth transceiver only recognised once you are in Windows or something. What does this mean? Say if you want to enter bios or even install the OS from scrath, does it mean you have to use a PS/2 keyboard first? And then once you have set up the bios and installed windows only then you'll be able to use the bluetooth keyboard?
Just wondering.
I noticed on one of the hardisk reviews at www.storagereview.com, one of the test/benchmark is called legacy benchmark or something. Any idea what that means?
Another thing, recently on one of the post someone was saying something about the MS Wireless Desktop(bluetooth keyboard and ms optical mouse) which uses USB connection for the bluetooth transceiver only recognised once you are in Windows or something. What does this mean? Say if you want to enter bios or even install the OS from scrath, does it mean you have to use a PS/2 keyboard first? And then once you have set up the bios and installed windows only then you'll be able to use the bluetooth keyboard?
Just wondering.
Where does it say this? Or are you assuming it is faster just because it is newer? USB can/is a pain. It's not what it's cracked up to be all the time.
BigFatCow
Diamond Member
- Aug 11, 2001
- 3,373
- 1
- 0
usb is much faster, I have a canon s800 which has both usb and parellel connectors, i did a little test to see which was faster and the usb was much faster than the parellel connector. I dont remember how much faster and I dont really feel like going behind my desk to switch the cables...
USB is theoretically slower than EPP/ECP parallel ports, but significantly faster than a standard parallel port. However USB has other advantages like multiple device access, and it's been pushed into the mainstream and is being pushed to replace legacy ports. For use as JUST a printer connection, there's not really an advantage or disadvantage, except that some people have problems with USB connections in general. Differing speeds between parallel and USB on a single printer are more likely either due to chipset design on the printer (optimization for the USB connection) or due to misconfiguration of the printer port; most motherboards default to a standard uni-directional parallel port setting, and I'll bet that most OEM systems aren't changed from that.
Parallel connections aren't changing, USB is getting faster and more reliable. Most consumer printers don't carry a whole lot of onboard memory, so the computer is going to have to slowly send data to the printer as the pages are printed, rather than being able to burst large amounts of data or entire print jobs like with high-end printers; USB is completely sufficient for that task.
USB cables are easier to work with. Many printers won't work without Windows driver software either, so they can't be used with a separate print server box so the parallel connection is useless sometimes. Also the USB root hubs are already taking up an IRQ, why bother keeping the parallel port enabled for one device to use an IRQ? Yes Windows shares IRQ's well enough, but things are still more stable without sharing and running out of IRQs because your printer connection is using one is annoying. (APIC BIOSes and proper setup of Windows to use the extra IRQs from APIC aren't common yet.)
Parallel connections aren't changing, USB is getting faster and more reliable. Most consumer printers don't carry a whole lot of onboard memory, so the computer is going to have to slowly send data to the printer as the pages are printed, rather than being able to burst large amounts of data or entire print jobs like with high-end printers; USB is completely sufficient for that task.
USB cables are easier to work with. Many printers won't work without Windows driver software either, so they can't be used with a separate print server box so the parallel connection is useless sometimes. Also the USB root hubs are already taking up an IRQ, why bother keeping the parallel port enabled for one device to use an IRQ? Yes Windows shares IRQ's well enough, but things are still more stable without sharing and running out of IRQs because your printer connection is using one is annoying. (APIC BIOSes and proper setup of Windows to use the extra IRQs from APIC aren't common yet.)
It is a very common misconception that USB is faster than parallel. In reality, parallel is faster AND in the vast majority of cases the limiting factor is the engine speed of the printer and not the interface.
Ever noticed that only low end printers come with USB ports?
Real printers use 10/100 ethernet interfaces, with parallel as a backup.
USB printing is a nightmare compared to parallel or network printing.
Viper GTS
Ever noticed that only low end printers come with USB ports?
Real printers use 10/100 ethernet interfaces, with parallel as a backup.
USB printing is a nightmare compared to parallel or network printing.
Viper GTS
I dunno about a "nightmare" in all cases. USB works perfectly well with my Epson 760, whereas my roommate's father's parallel connected printer was a huge hassle to get set up (even I had trouble with it), while my roommate's Lexmark all-in-one scanner/copier/printer never would work with USB, and would only work with parallel on his laptop. As long as the drivers are good and your USB system works, USB printing should work fine (unless of course you use a USB hub that gets turned off).
Eug is right. Why complain about a low-cost printer you bought that only has a USB port, which was able to be low-cost because it only has a USB port? USB = serial, one line of data to deal with. Parallel is a more complex system to have to implement. Get the device that has what you need and want, but don't complain that manufacturers are able to make a cheaper kind that doesn't have what you want.
Oh, and as for "tying up a USB port", most OEM machines come with 2 ports on the back and at least 2 on the front, and a lot of boards come with FOUR ports on the back now and headers for 2 front ports or ports in an expansion slot, and USB hubs are relatively cheap. Keyboards usually have a USB hub built-in too. It's hard to find enough devices to fill up all the ports you can have.
Oh, and as for "tying up a USB port", most OEM machines come with 2 ports on the back and at least 2 on the front, and a lot of boards come with FOUR ports on the back now and headers for 2 front ports or ports in an expansion slot, and USB hubs are relatively cheap. Keyboards usually have a USB hub built-in too. It's hard to find enough devices to fill up all the ports you can have.
My P1 - 166 mhz from back in 1996 has one or two USB ports.
My HP 10ps (Professional printer) has USB, Parallel, and can be upgraded to Ethernet.
Also the big deal with USB printers these days is that they are better at plug-and-play than parallel. The average consumer just wants to plug it in and it automagically works, which USB somewhat does better than parallel.
My HP 10ps (Professional printer) has USB, Parallel, and can be upgraded to Ethernet.
Also the big deal with USB printers these days is that they are better at plug-and-play than parallel. The average consumer just wants to plug it in and it automagically works, which USB somewhat does better than parallel.
USB 1.2 (what your old machines from 1996-1998 or so would have) is slower than EPP or ECP parallel ports.
USB 2.0 is faster.
But make no mistake, the move to serial interfaces has everything to do with cost reduction and absolutely nothing to do with performance (I'm not talking about just USB, SATA and other modern serial standards fall in this category also). The standard parallel port on the print **IS** still useful, for things like my router which acts as a print server, which has a parallel port but no USB ports.
USB 2.0 is faster.
But make no mistake, the move to serial interfaces has everything to do with cost reduction and absolutely nothing to do with performance (I'm not talking about just USB, SATA and other modern serial standards fall in this category also). The standard parallel port on the print **IS** still useful, for things like my router which acts as a print server, which has a parallel port but no USB ports.
Yep exactly.
My Asante router w/ Print Server is quite convienant sharing 1 printer between several computers
My Asante router w/ Print Server is quite convienant sharing 1 printer between several computers
SerialATA is about performance increases as much as it is about cost reduction (as well as other features). A wide bus is harder to ramp up to higher speeds; that's why RDRAM is able to run at 400MHz speeds on the low end, but SDRAM struggles to reach 400MHz with hand-picked chips.
Yes the parallel port is useful in some situations, but in those situations you buy the device that has the ports you need. The manufacturers will still make them available, but if they can make lower-end printers cheaper and sell more of them by removing the parallel port, you can't really blame them for that. If they can make cheaper devices that use an interface that's just as fast and in some ways better, why would they not? You expect them to keep putting money into trying to make a parallel interface better?
USB1.1 is the previous USB standard, not USB1.2. Really old machines probably have USB1.0 but back then they didn't specify what version of USB it was and it hardly worked anyway.
Yes the parallel port is useful in some situations, but in those situations you buy the device that has the ports you need. The manufacturers will still make them available, but if they can make lower-end printers cheaper and sell more of them by removing the parallel port, you can't really blame them for that. If they can make cheaper devices that use an interface that's just as fast and in some ways better, why would they not? You expect them to keep putting money into trying to make a parallel interface better?
USB1.1 is the previous USB standard, not USB1.2. Really old machines probably have USB1.0 but back then they didn't specify what version of USB it was and it hardly worked anyway.
[/quote]Then buy a printer with both ports and don't worry about it.
I bought one with both ports simply so that I could use parallel for my desktop and USB for my laptop.[/quote]Problem seems to be that the manufactures are switching over to USB only, so there won't be a choice soon!
This started a good debate!
Viper GTS; 23,000 posts???? Do you fingers ever get tired?
I bought one with both ports simply so that I could use parallel for my desktop and USB for my laptop.[/quote]Problem seems to be that the manufactures are switching over to USB only, so there won't be a choice soon!
This started a good debate!
Viper GTS; 23,000 posts???? Do you fingers ever get tired?
Thats not really true. It is the job of the OS to handle the connection to the printer. The drivers handle the printer information (memory - for spooling, color/b&w modes, resolutions, security/billing info, etc), and they do not handle the interface to that printer (although they sometimes have management software included, this is rarely needed IMO). As long as the OS print manager can find the printer on the network, it will allow you to associate drivers with that printer.
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,596
- 19
- 81
Then buy a printer with both ports and don't worry about it.
I bought one with both ports simply so that I could use parallel for my desktop and USB for my laptop.[/quote]Problem seems to be that the manufactures are switching over to USB only, so there won't be a choice soon!
This started a good debate!
Viper GTS; 23,000 posts???? Do you fingers ever get tired?[/quote]
Parallel ports are going away. It's old technology; USB is the way things are going to be, so you're going to have to get used to it; same thing happened to the ISA bus on the motherboard. Old and slow. It's been phased out.
Now, USB 1.1 is a little slower than a parallel port's absolute maximum speed; USB 1.1 can do 1.5MB/sec; I think a parallel port can do 2.5MB in ECP mode. However, USB 2.0 can do a theoretical max of 60MB/sec. That, and you can do the daisy chain with USB, it's hot swap, fully plug and play compatible, and the cables are much easier to work with. They're considerably thinner, and they don't have those screw on ends.
It's also true that keeping old technology (parallel ports) integrated with the new printers is also an extra cost. That's another reason that they got rid of ISA; it was just another cost, having to drag along an ancient bus; yes, people might have to upgrade, but that's the way it has to be. If you want the latest and greatest, it can't always mix with old technology. Let's let parallel, serial, and PS/2 die; USB 2.0 or even Firewire are here to stay.
I don't have a problem loosing ISA slots. I guess I could live without a decaticated pronter port, BUT I really can't see doing away with PS 2 ports for the mouse and keyboard! Both are needed, not optional as a printer/scanner/web cam etc. are! I really feel that they SHOULD stay because of the importance of each and each should have it's own port! What happens when the USB port goes down or chip dies (not that that happens often if ever, but could)? It does provide power which means it could burn out from too many devices or something shorting out just like any power supply can!
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,596
- 19
- 81
Even PS/2 ports can go away; new keyboards are USB, plus there are little adapters that go between PS/2 and USB; my mouse was like that - a USB connector, but it had an adapter that let it go into a PS/2 port. I imagine that there'd be connectors to hook a PS/2 device to a USB port, but I might be wrong.
If the USB port goes down, it'd be no different than if a PS/2 port died, which is easier to do - hot-plugging PS/2 devices can kill the device, the port, or both. I've done it already - killed a mouse PS/2 port by plugging it in while the system was on. Oops. USB was hot swap from the start.
As for burning out, I doubt that will happen; more likely, the extra device just won't have enough power and won't do anything. There are also powered USB hubs, which use a wall adapter to provide extra juice to all the devices that need it. Or, the device itself can also have a supplemental power source should it need it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter