Why no more parallel ports on Dell desktops?

Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?

-Bruno

"Bruno" wrote in message
...
Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?



Buy a USB to Parallel adapter.

--

Rob

Bruno;
Parallel is antique and on the way out.
Whether Dell is first or last, it will probably eventually be the norm.

Purchase an adapter for the antique printer.

--
Jupiter Jones
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Bruno" wrote in message
...
Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?

-Bruno

I bought a cheap parallel to USB cable for my older
printers. Turns them into USB ones.

"Bruno" wrote in message
...
Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the
Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered
by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I
should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably
not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason
to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?

-Bruno

It's an industry trend. USB and 1394 are so much faster than parallel =
(or serial) connections and the cables are easier to manage. A bloke =
needs to buy a parallel-to-USB adapter for his venerable 4L, which will =
probably still be in service when you're buying the next computer after =
this one.

Ted Zieglar

"Bruno" wrote in message =
...
Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).=20
=20
I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.=20
=20
So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?
=20
-Bruno

"Bruno" wrote in message
...
Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?

-Bruno

If you absolutely insist on keeping the quaint, antiquated parallel printer,
then buy a parallel to USB adapter. However, with a little effort, you can
find a more modern USB printer for what you will pay for the USB-parallel
adapter.

Dell lasted longer than most. Parallel has been dead for a couple of years
for now.

Bobby

In article ,
says...

Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?

It is an unfortunate (and unnecessary, IMO) trend in the industry,
and it extends to RS232 serial ports as well.

With the various chipsets available today, and the pre-assembled
connector arrays available to motherboard makers, it costs practically
nothing to continue to place serial and parallel ports in PC's. I see
the industry's trend away from such as merely another way to force
people into spending more money to "upgrade" their printers, as you've
already found out.

For my part: I will not buy any laptop, or desktop motherboard,
that does not have at least one standard serial and parallel port.

My advice would be to build your own system from scratch. That
way, you can hunt up a decent motherboard (I'm a big fan of Tyan) that
still has S & P ports.

Happy hunting.


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

Why criticize the OP's values by calling it a "quaint, antiquated parallel
printer". If it gets the job done reliably, and the OP does not need any of the
bells and whistles of a newer printer, why should he replace it?

Keep in mind that the printer manufacturers (all of them, HP, Lexmark, Epson,
Canon) have kludged their cartridges as much as possible to either eliminate or
discourage use of anything but their own brand of cartridge, not a 3rd party
cartridge or a refilled one. And then, when you buy a printer, you get
mini-cartridges with just a smidgen of ink. When the cartridges run out of ink
a couple of hundred pages later, reality sets in, in the form of cartridge
prices which approach the cost of the printer itself. I may be exaggerating
here, but not by a lot.

Against this backdrop, a quaint antiquated parallel printer with rock-bottom
operating costs sounds real good. Myself, I run an HP LaserJet 5 with parallel
port, but networked. At a cost of $20 to $50 per 5000 pages for toner, my
printing costs are hard to beat.

But you and others have said it well: "buy a parallel to USB adapter." End of
story. Sometimes, oldies really are goodies... Ben Myers

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 04:09:20 GMT, "NoNoBadDog!" wrote:


"Bruno" wrote in message
.. .
Seems that Dell has phased out parallel ports on the Desktop PCs. The
4700 is gone now, and the 5100 and 9100 are unencumbered by parallel
ports (and other things).

I called Dell today to ask and they basically told me I should just
buy a new printer too, because my printer will probably not work on XP
anyway. HP says my Laserjet 4L will work.

So what's a bloke to do? This seems a decent enough reason to buy
elsewhere. Is there a trend in the industry, or just Dell?

-Bruno

If you absolutely insist on keeping the quaint, antiquated parallel printer,
then buy a parallel to USB adapter. However, with a little effort, you can
find a more modern USB printer for what you will pay for the USB-parallel
adapter.

Dell lasted longer than most. Parallel has been dead for a couple of years
for now.

Bobby

Ben Myers wrote:

snip

Against this backdrop, a quaint antiquated parallel printer with rock-bottom
operating costs sounds real good. Myself, I run an HP LaserJet 5 with parallel
port, but networked. At a cost of $20 to $50 per 5000 pages for toner, my
printing costs are hard to beat.

My workhorse is an HP 6P. While I purchased an inkjet, years ago, strictly for
graphics, the vast majority of my printing is B/W text, and the HP fits the
bill to a tee. (I'm running it as a wireless, networked printer.)

Notan

"Notan" wrote in message
...
Ben Myers wrote:

snip

Against this backdrop, a quaint antiquated parallel printer with
rock-bottom
operating costs sounds real good. Myself, I run an HP LaserJet 5 with
parallel
port, but networked. At a cost of $20 to $50 per 5000 pages for toner,
my
printing costs are hard to beat.

My workhorse is an HP 6P. While I purchased an inkjet, years ago, strictly
for
graphics, the vast majority of my printing is B/W text, and the HP fits
the
bill to a tee. (I'm running it as a wireless, networked printer.)

I'm still working with a 4P. Slow as hell but reliable.

--

Rob