30ft USB cable for HP LaserJet 3600

Hi all, am I right in thinking 30ft for a USB printer is too long and it
won't work in any case? I bought a 30ft 2.0 cable for a USB printer and XP
fails to recognise it when it's plugged in, I switched to a short cable and
it instantly did. So am I to assume the length of the cable is the problem,
or is the 30ft cable I bought not working correctly? I seem to recall seeing
somewhere that USB cables are limited to 15ft max for stable performance,
that seems stupid considering parallel cables can go way more than that...
and that's old technology...

Please enlighten...

Thanks,

Julius

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:51:53 +0800, "Supra"
wrote:

Hi all, am I right in thinking 30ft for a USB printer is too long and it
won't work in any case? I bought a 30ft 2.0 cable for a USB printer and XP
fails to recognise it when it's plugged in, I switched to a short cable and
it instantly did. So am I to assume the length of the cable is the problem,
or is the 30ft cable I bought not working correctly? I seem to recall seeing
somewhere that USB cables are limited to 15ft max for stable performance,
that seems stupid considering parallel cables can go way more than that...
and that's old technology...

Please enlighten...

Thanks,

Julius

Yes, USB cables will not work past 16 feet, and won't work 'well' past
about 10 feet. You can get 'active' USB cables, which are basically a
powered hub and cable all in one, or you can just get a regular hub to
extend it. The problem is power loss. I don't know the specifics, but
parallel cables are thicker and have more pins than a USB cable, thus
probably allowing more power through it.

---

http://www.FenrirOnline.com

Computer services, custom metal etching,
arts, crafts, and much more.

"Supra" wrote in :

Hi all, am I right in thinking 30ft for a USB printer is too long and
it won't work in any case? I bought a 30ft 2.0 cable for a USB printer
and XP fails to recognise it when it's plugged in, I switched to a
short cable and it instantly did. So am I to assume the length of the
cable is the problem, or is the 30ft cable I bought not working
correctly? I seem to recall seeing somewhere that USB cables are
limited to 15ft max for stable performance, that seems stupid
considering parallel cables can go way more than that... and that's
old technology...

Please enlighten...

Thanks,

Julius



Feet is outdated and I can;t quote in it...
but 5M is the specifications limit of USB and USB2 (low speed USB was
3M), at a guess 30ft is about 10M or a bit less, *shrugs* eitherway,
thats definately way too long.

Parallel (IEEE1284) was 10 Meters at 2Mhz, the older ones (SPP) was only
5M, not that much difference.

You can buy Active Extenders (hubs, repeaters) which are powered from the
USB port that can (claimed) link up together to create about a 25M (5
hubs/repeaters max, 5M between them).
This is a manufactures claim, and is not always possible. Just be aware
of this.

Parallel was low speed, and used many lines for the transfer, a VERY
inefficient design, hence why it got dumped, but for the time in
technology, it was way faster then serial, technology has increased in
speed so much the benefit of having several lines is deminished from the
flaws int he systema nd the more eficcient serial system has overtaken it
in terms of data transfer.

The reason 5M is max is due to several reasons.
All serial data is a square wave. now.. electricity flows, and at the
speed of light, but the electrons barely move at all, but (remember this
is crude analogy) ignoring other aspects, just tackle this one for now,
when the wave starts, the power flows, then it goes to 0, and power
stops, this is sudden change takes time.. think of it like at the
traffic lights, go green, front starts moving, slowly stretched out and
then stops atthe next one, compressing, this is very crude, but an
example of how a square wave gets distorted into a sin wave, before after
going too far, becomes constant. this is the capacitance in the wire
smoothning it out, the other technical aspect is the resistance, limiting
it. If its a slow waveform, it will be "high" for longer, and "low" for
longer, giving the receiving end more time to see the data reliably even
tho its being smoothed out. so the faster the data, the more quickly it
loses definition, also being low voltage (5v) the resistance comes into
play very quick. Now, along with all of this, we have the timing issues
involved aswell. Put them all together, and we have a 5M limit.

And as always, theoretical distances are disproven on a daily basis die
to many other factors, cable condition, cable build, temperature,
humidity, the host, the client, so on.

Hope this rough crude analogy explained all your questions.

Cheers.

cvt wrote:

"Supra" wrote in :



Hi all, am I right in thinking 30ft for a USB printer is too long and
it won't work in any case? I bought a 30ft 2.0 cable for a USB printer
and XP fails to recognise it when it's plugged in, I switched to a
short cable and it instantly did. So am I to assume the length of the
cable is the problem, or is the 30ft cable I bought not working
correctly? I seem to recall seeing somewhere that USB cables are
limited to 15ft max for stable performance, that seems stupid
considering parallel cables can go way more than that... and that's
old technology...

Please enlighten...

Thanks,

Julius





Feet is outdated

NOPE WE USE IT ALL OF THE TIME

and I can;t quote in it...
but 5M is the specifications limit of USB and USB2 (low speed USB was
3M), at a guess 30ft is about 10M or a bit less, *shrugs* eitherway,
thats definately way too long.

Parallel (IEEE1284) was 10 Meters at 2Mhz, the older ones (SPP) was only
5M, not that much difference.

You can buy Active Extenders (hubs, repeaters) which are powered from the
USB port that can (claimed) link up together to create about a 25M (5
hubs/repeaters max, 5M between them).
This is a manufactures claim, and is not always possible. Just be aware
of this.

Parallel was low speed, and used many lines for the transfer, a VERY
inefficient design, hence why it got dumped, but for the time in
technology, it was way faster then serial, technology has increased in
speed so much the benefit of having several lines is deminished from the
flaws int he systema nd the more eficcient serial system has overtaken it
in terms of data transfer.

The reason 5M is max is due to several reasons.
All serial data is a square wave. now.. electricity flows, and at the
speed of light, but the electrons barely move at all, but (remember this
is crude analogy) ignoring other aspects, just tackle this one for now,
when the wave starts, the power flows, then it goes to 0, and power
stops, this is sudden change takes time.. think of it like at the
traffic lights, go green, front starts moving, slowly stretched out and
then stops atthe next one, compressing, this is very crude, but an
example of how a square wave gets distorted into a sin wave, before after
going too far, becomes constant. this is the capacitance in the wire
smoothning it out, the other technical aspect is the resistance, limiting
it. If its a slow waveform, it will be "high" for longer, and "low" for
longer, giving the receiving end more time to see the data reliably even
tho its being smoothed out. so the faster the data, the more quickly it
loses definition, also being low voltage (5v) the resistance comes into
play very quick. Now, along with all of this, we have the timing issues
involved aswell. Put them all together, and we have a 5M limit.

And as always, theoretical distances are disproven on a daily basis die
to many other factors, cable condition, cable build, temperature,
humidity, the host, the client, so on.

Hope this rough crude analogy explained all your questions.

Cheers.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:51:53 +0800, "Supra"
wrote:

Hi all, am I right in thinking 30ft for a USB printer is too long and it
won't work in any case? I bought a 30ft 2.0 cable for a USB printer and XP
fails to recognise it when it's plugged in, I switched to a short cable and
it instantly did. So am I to assume the length of the cable is the problem,
or is the 30ft cable I bought not working correctly? I seem to recall seeing
somewhere that USB cables are limited to 15ft max for stable performance,
that seems stupid considering parallel cables can go way more than that...
and that's old technology...

Please enlighten...

Thanks,

Julius

Having thought about this for a day, a better suggestion would be to
either get a USB Print Server, and either a switch or a direct connect
to it, and use ethernet for the 30 feet. I'm not sure if you can use
a crossover cable to connect a computer directly to a print server,
I've never tried it before, or if you would need to have a
router/switch/hub of some sort in order to create a 'network' for it
to be on. Wired routers are cheap enough these days that it would
probably cost you less to do it that way than to buy multiple USB hubs
which may or may not work. If you have a second computer, then you
could definitely use a crossover cable to link the computers together,
put one near the printer, and just 'share' the printer that way.

---

http://www.FenrirOnline.com

Computer services, custom metal etching,
arts, crafts, and much more.

"Supra" wrote in message ...
I seem to recall seeing
somewhere that USB cables are limited to 15ft max for stable performance,
that seems stupid considering parallel cables can go way more than that...
and that's old technology...

Yeah but how many devices can you hang on a parallel port at once?

Use wireless thats even newer.

measekite wrote in
news


NOPE WE USE IT ALL OF THE TIME


I know you do,
Theres not 1 part of the imperial system that is logical.
Its just arrogent my daddy used it, and so did his daddy, and so did his
daddy, so, so will I attitude.

SI units exist for a reason.

--
---------------------
God created humans.
Humans created computers.
This made god mad, so he created measekite.
---------------------

Fenrir Enterprises wrote:

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:51:53 +0800, "Supra"
wrote:



Hi all, am I right in thinking 30ft for a USB printer is too long and it
won't work in any case? I bought a 30ft 2.0 cable for a USB printer and XP
fails to recognise it when it's plugged in, I switched to a short cable and
it instantly did. So am I to assume the length of the cable is the problem,
or is the 30ft cable I bought not working correctly? I seem to recall seeing
somewhere that USB cables are limited to 15ft max for stable performance,
that seems stupid considering parallel cables can go way more than that...
and that's old technology...

Please enlighten...

Thanks,

Julius



Having thought about this for a day, a better suggestion would be to
either get a USB Print Server, and either a switch or a direct connect
to it, and use ethernet for the 30 feet. I'm not sure if you can use
a crossover cable to connect a computer directly to a print server,
I've never tried it before, or if you would need to have a
router/switch/hub of some sort in order to create a 'network' for it
to be on. Wired routers are cheap enough these days that it would
probably cost you less to do it that way than to buy multiple USB hubs
which may or may not work. If you have a second computer, then you
could definitely use a crossover cable to link the computers together,
put one near the printer, and just 'share' the printer that way.

---

http://www.FenrirOnline.com

Computer services, custom metal etching,
arts, crafts, and much more.


IN DA BUSINESS SPAMMER

Theres not 1 part of the imperial system that is logical.
Its just arrogent my daddy used it, and so did his daddy, and so did his
daddy, so, so will I attitude.

SI units exist for a reason.

Actually I think the major issue is the simple fact that the rest of
the world at "some point" had issues with people running around and
shooting one another, and factories having to be retooled as a result.
Conversion during the rebuild was no problem. However the States
didn't really have the same issue in the 20th century, it being far
enough away from anyone ****ed off at it. It would take an act of god
to get US to switch, as an act of congress didn't seem to work.

"zakezuke" wrote in news:1143665193.058133.64860
@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Theres not 1 part of the imperial system that is logical.
Its just arrogent my daddy used it, and so did his daddy, and so did
his
daddy, so, so will I attitude.

SI units exist for a reason.

Actually I think the major issue is the simple fact that the rest of
the world at "some point" had issues with people running around and
shooting one another, and factories having to be retooled as a result.
Conversion during the rebuild was no problem. However the States
didn't really have the same issue in the 20th century, it being far
enough away from anyone ****ed off at it. It would take an act of god
to get US to switch, as an act of congress didn't seem to work.



Even though you still use it in science and physics, I really don't see
the point in double conversions..
Convert to Metric, Do calculations, Convert back. Just doesn't make
sence.
And if you do the work in imperial, your formulars are twice or more as
complex.

The changeover met resistance, but as most people are educated the
benefits are seen greater than the major hassles involved in changing
over.
And it is well and truly worth it, I feel sorry for those growing up with
imperial, and specially those during the conversion, and am left ****ed
off at those places too stupid to have changed.

Its a sore point, because 1 in 5 projects we do, theres 1 component not
available in metric, and results in nothing but a complete pain in the
arse. Which is weird, when easily 1/4 the sensors we get are US made.
When almost everythign we get from US is available in metric only, or
metric and imperial, and the odd one in imperial, arn;t you making it
harder on yourselves aswell?



--
---------------------
God created humans.
Humans created computers.
This made god mad, so he created measekite.
---------------------