USB2.0 Peer to Peer network- viable solution?

[Konig]

I'm going to build a second system and want to network it to my existing box. I was thinking of trying a USB 2.0 connection. Here's my proposed setup.

Main Box (workstation):
-monitor, KB, Mouse
-CD RW
-USB2 on board
-GF4 Ti4200
-PCI modem
-winXP Pro

Second Box (Home Theatre PC):
-NO monitor, KB, Mouse
-S-Video connection to HDTV
-DVD drive
-USB2 card
-winXP Pro

What I what to do is control the second system from the main system using remote desktop in winxp. That way I don't need a second monitor/KB/mouse in my already cramped livingroom. I also intend to use internet connection sharing to keep the second pc updated.

I've never used remote desktop or internet connection sharing. Are they going to do a decent job? Are they relatively easy to set up? I have the option of using NICs to get 100mbps, but the 480mbps of USB2.0 is definately attractive...

What say you?

Thanks in advance,
Konig

 

[JackMDS]

I did not dwell into USB2 yet. In the old USB there was no relation between KVM, or USB Hub, and Ethernet Network.

The only thing you could do with USB as far as network concern is to connected two computers (and only two computer) thought a special USB module that allow Ethernet connection.

Like this: 6FT USB FILE TRANSFER AND NETWORKING CABLE.

Do you have info indicating that Networking with USB2 works differently?

 

[Konig]

In the old USB there was no relation between KVM, or USB Hub, and Ethernet Network.

Actually I was hoping that I could use the USB2 peer network to accomplish everything I could with an NIC including remote desktop and internet connection sharing. I haven't tried a KVM switch but the IT guy at work confirms that remote desktop will be a superior solution to a KVM.

I found this page that shows the same kind of cable you linked to. Apparently a USB hub can be used to connect more than one computer. This is a nice link that has a mini tutorial on USB networking.

The only thing is that I couldn't find any USB2.0 devices, so for the moment I'm better off with the banwidth of a 100mbps NIC than messing a with USB peer network.

 

[JackMDS]

The link that you found covers the device that I mentioned in my post above.

You can not create "USB Network"; you can only connect two computers using this device.

The device yield only 10% of the speed of 100Mb/sec. Ethernet and it is more expensive then to buy 2 NICs and CAT5.

In next few months similar devices that can do USB2 will come out. However they will be even more expensive then the above device.

To sum up, only two computers, slow, and more money. Triple DUH!

 

[bex0rs]

The cable Jack linked to would allow for a connection over USB[1], which would be more than sufficient for just controlling another computer directly linked to your main box.

Another option you may explore, since both machines are running XP, would be to create a firewire peer to peer network. This would obviously require a firewire card ($15 for a TI chipset card online) in both computers, but the advantage would be that you could connect both machines with a regular 6-pin firewire cable. Should you need to expand your firewire network in the future, all you would need are a firewire hub and additional cables, in effect creating a 400mbit network (real world is closer to 150mbit throughput, however). USB[1 or 2] would not able to do this since it wasn't designed like firewire to be a peer-to-peer technology.

~bex0rs

 

[Konig]

JackMDS:

If you go to the link I posted earlier you will find that you CAN connect more than one computer using a USB hub and several of the cables in question. See the picture here. The lack of USB2 devices was a problem agreed with in my last post. As far as the money is concerned, I would have been willing to pay a little more for 4x the banwidth of a 100mbps NIC. Triple DUH back at ya!

bex0rs:

I never thought of firewire. I have an Audigy card, so I will only have to get one firewire card for the other box. I'll check that out. Thanks.

 

[Konig]

Well. I found an article about firewire networking here. It mentions this:

Also remember, native firewire networking is only for IP, not NetBEUI IPX or any other protocol.

Will remote desktop work with only IP or does it need the other protocols? If it will work, then this looks promising...

Here is an article on WindowsXP and firewire.

 

[bex0rs]

Yeah, remote desktop will work fine over the firewire connection. XP will treat the firewire adapter as another network adapter, so you should also be able to enable internet connection sharing or bridging - whichever will fit your network layout better.

Regardless of which option (firewire or usb) you choose, you probably won't notice any speed difference unless you transfer large files between the computers.

~bex0rs

 

[Woodchuck2000]

Though I hate to say it, what you're proposing won't work.
Remote Desktop Connection runs a terminal session on the Remote Host. Simply put, you won't see what you're doing on the TV - only on the machine you're connecting from. The only way to do what you want to do is to use third party software such as VNC to literally "Remote Control" The PC. That would do exactly what you describe and it's free. I would suggest going for two NICs and a patch cable - USB networking is flaky at best and far more expensive.

 

[Konig]

bex0rs:
Thanks. That's what I needed to know.

Woodchuck2000:
The only thing I'll use the second system (HTPC) for is to play DVDs/DIVX movies, and CDs/MP3s. I won't be trying to use the TV as a desktop. If it proves inconvenient to use Remote Desktop, then I'll get an ATI 8500 and remote control.