If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
USB or parallel port, which should the printer use?
My printer is an HP DeskJet 970Cse. HP's article at
http://snurl.com/36mv notes the ideal bandwidth of the various connection types used for printers which a serial at 53 Kbps, parallel at 360 Kbps, USB at 12 Mbps (for v1.1, xxx for v2.2), Ethernet at 10 Mbps (although it could be 10/100/1000 Mbps). However, that's only the speed for that connection medium. It doesn't say what is the max data rate at which the printer itself will accept data. If, say, the printer only accepts data at 100 kbps then the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic load. How fast can the HP 970Cse accept data? HP's article a http://snurl.com/36mx doesn't specify the max input data rate. If the printer can accept at a faster rate then I would move it to the USB port. But there's no point in polluting the USB with printer traffic if the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic. -- __________________________________________________ __________ *** Post replies to newsgroup. E-mail is not accepted. *** __________________________________________________ __________ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
*Vanguard* wrote:
But there's no point in polluting the USB with printer traffic if the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic. You'll see no difference in performance. I don't use USB at all unless I must. -- Stacey |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I had an Epson printer that would not work with USB so I went with parallel
port and it worked fine. "stacey" wrote in message ... *Vanguard* wrote: But there's no point in polluting the USB with printer traffic if the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic. You'll see no difference in performance. I don't use USB at all unless I must. -- Stacey |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I use USB for my HP and find that when I get
printer errors they are easier to fix, just restart the printer, versus the parallel hookup, requires a reboot. Other than that, no difference. "striker" wrote in message link.net... I had an Epson printer that would not work with USB so I went with parallel port and it worked fine. "stacey" wrote in message ... *Vanguard* wrote: But there's no point in polluting the USB with printer traffic if the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic. You'll see no difference in performance. I don't use USB at all unless I must. -- Stacey |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
It really won't make any difference. Regardless of how fast the data
transfer happens, the printer still has to move the print head and move the paper. The time it takes for that mechanical movement will pretty much wipe out any speed advantage in terms of parallel vs. USB. In either case, the port is basically waiting for the printer to do its mechanical thing. What about the OS difference in accessing a slow legacy device? I have both serial and parallel ports disabled in bios and ONLY use USB. Of course we're splitting hairs here. If there is any speed gained it's only a blink or two...;-) -- "I don't cheat to survive. I cheat to LIVE!!" - Alceryes "ChrisJ9876" wrote in message It really won't make any difference. Regardless of how fast the data transfer happens, the printer still has to move the print head and move the paper. The time it takes for that mechanical movement will pretty much wipe out any speed advantage in terms of parallel vs. USB. In either case, the port is basically waiting for the printer to do its mechanical ... From: "*Vanguard*" Date: 11/28/2003 8:28 PM Eastern Standard Time Message-id: LCSxb.345437$Fm2.349489@attbi_s04 My printer is an HP DeskJet 970Cse. HP's article at http://snurl.com/36mv notes the ideal bandwidth of the various connection types used for printers which a serial at 53 Kbps, parallel at 360 Kbps, USB at 12 Mbps (for v1.1, xxx for v2.2), Ethernet at 10 Mbps (although it could be 10/100/1000 Mbps). However, that's only the speed for that connection medium. It doesn't say what is the max data rate at which the printer itself will accept data. If, say, the printer only accepts data at 100 kbps then the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic load. How fast can the HP 970Cse accept data? HP's article a http://snurl.com/36mx doesn't specify the max input data rate. If the printer can accept at a faster rate then I would move it to the USB port. But there's no point in polluting the USB with printer traffic if the parallel port is more than sufficient to handle the printer traffic. -- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Alceryes wrote:
What about the OS difference in accessing a slow legacy device? I have both serial and parallel ports disabled in bios and ONLY use USB. Of course we're splitting hairs here. If there is any speed gained it's only a blink or two...;-) Those "legacy" subsystems have a LOT less overhead than USB. -- Stacey |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
USB Printer to Parallel Port on PC | Randall R. Zimmerman | General | 2 | October 22nd 03 10:57 PM |
Firewall/router suggestions? | Phrederik | General | 3 | September 28th 03 04:00 AM |
Parallel port to USB printer adapter? | Phrederik | General | 4 | August 28th 03 06:09 PM |
PCI Parallel port doesn't work under DOS 6.22 | Per Holm | General | 4 | August 23rd 03 08:51 AM |
serial to parallel adapter | Old guy | General | 2 | July 30th 03 11:11 PM |