Why no more parallel ports on Dell desktops?

bruno

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2001
83
0
18,630
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

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

"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

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" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com>,
myName@myISP.net 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?"
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

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" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

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!" <no_@spam_verizon.net> wrote:

>
>"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
>news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
>> 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
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Notan" <notan@ddress.com> wrote in message
news:4328FD1A.70FB1850@ddress.com...
> 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
 

Fixer

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2004
261
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Ted Zieglar" <teddyz@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:rIadnVMvu8ribbXeRVn-hw@comcast.com...
<snip> It's an industry trend. USB and 1394 are so much faster than parallel
(or serial) connections
Ted Zieglar not true actually serial is very fast and getting faster thats
why we have Sata disks (serial ATA) and and PCI express is serial as well

"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Your point is well taken. We are referring to different things.

Ted Zieglar

"Fixer" <the.hedonist@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:rT8We.6477$st1.791@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Ted Zieglar" <teddyz@notmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rIadnVMvu8ribbXeRVn-hw@comcast.com...
> <snip> It's an industry trend. USB and 1394 are so much faster than parallel
> (or serial) connections
> Ted Zieglar not true actually serial is very fast and getting faster thats
> why we have Sata disks (serial ATA) and and PCI express is serial as well
>
> "Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
> news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
>> 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
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

I did refer to the OP's printer as "venerable". I'm still using the 6L I bought in 1997 (for $400!). It's slow and kind of noisy, but otherwise solid as a rock.

Ted Zieglar

"Notan" <notan@ddress.com> wrote in message news:4328FD1A.70FB1850@ddress.com...
> 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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <4328f9ab.58487003@nntp.charter.net>, ben_myers_spam_me_not @
charter.net (Ben Myers) says...
> 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?

I agree, with USB being so dang problematic it's a total PITA for
support people.

Yesterday we had a young lass call because her new HP printer would not
install properly, she worked with HP for 2 hours and still could not get
it to work... She had front and rear USB ports on her computer...
Symptom, installing the printer cable on the rear USB ports does not
cause the New Device service to see it.... Found that the rear USB ports
would not see anything with a USB mouse connected to it (nice HP
computer problem). Connected printer (USB) to front USB ports and it
worked fine.

I've seen Sony Vaio 12" LCD laptops that ONLY have USB for devices, we
make more in support charges in 6 months than the laptop cost the
clients due to the USB issues.

If USB only supported 1 device per port and each port was on it's own
controller, it might be OK, but it's been a PITA since the day it came
out.

While many don't see the need for Parallel, I've got several Wax Thermal
printers (Phasers) and none of the USB Print Servers I've tried work
properly with them, the Parallel ones do just fine.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <GP2dncXfMKK1zrTeRVn-pw@comcast.com>, teddyz@notmail.com
says...
> I did refer to the OP's printer as "venerable". I'm still using the 6L I bought in 1997 (for $400!). It's slow and kind of noisy, but otherwise solid as a rock.

I have one client that has a working HP LJ-II, another with a LJ-III and
several with LJ4M printers. Not to mention all the ones with Lexmark
Optra-L series printers (on of the first true 1200 DPI lasers) ....

The newer printers are nice, but only after you get above the $400
range.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 06:53:11 GMT, in
<rT8We.6477$st1.791@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, "Fixer"
<the.hedonist@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>
>"Ted Zieglar" <teddyz@notmail.com> wrote in message
>news:rIadnVMvu8ribbXeRVn-hw@comcast.com...
><snip> It's an industry trend. USB and 1394 are so much faster than parallel
>(or serial) connections
>Ted Zieglar not true actually serial is very fast and getting faster thats
>why we have Sata disks (serial ATA) and and PCI express is serial as well

As long as you're looking at it that way, USB is serial also.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote in news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@
4ax.com:

> 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.


I wouldn't necessarily take Dell's word that the printer "will probably not
work on XP anyway".

If there's a rhyme or reason to what printers are or aren't supported under
XP, I haven't been able to figure it out. I've seen ancient '80s-era
printers supported while some late-'90s or early '00s printers aren't.

For instance, can anyone tell me with a straight face that they're actually
using an ancient Canon LBP-8 or IBM Personal Pageprinter or IBM Quietwriter
III with XP ? Yet they're all in the XP printer drivers list whilst some of
their newer printers aren't.


- FM -
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Absence of parallel and serial ports is all part of an industry-wide push to
"legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which date back
to the early-1980's IBM XT. These include parallel, serial, keyboard, mouse,
and floppy diskette. The alternative instead is to connect all low-speed
devices up to USB, which is now pretty mature in its 2.0 revision. The idea
here is to support fewer physical interfaces and drive down production costs.
The silicon needed to do a legacy interface costs pennies, but the circuit board
traces and connectors are where the major costs lie.

Fortunately, there are still alternatives available for people who need the
legacy devices. For parallel, you have the choice of a USB-parallel cable or a
PCI parallel card. Same with serial. If you have a favorite keyboard like my
old clicky-clack IBM 101, there are USB-keyboard adapters. Same with mice.
And, of course, there are USB floppy diskette drives... Ben Myers

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 03:38:21 GMT, Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote:

>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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"..."legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which
date back to the early-1980's IBM XT."

Sounds like the results of a Silicon Valley divorce.

--
Ted Zieglar
"You can do it if you try."

<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:4329700f.1098911@nntp.charter.net...
> Absence of parallel and serial ports is all part of an industry-wide push
to
> "legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which date
back
> to the early-1980's IBM XT. These include parallel, serial, keyboard,
mouse,
> and floppy diskette. The alternative instead is to connect all low-speed
> devices up to USB, which is now pretty mature in its 2.0 revision. The
idea
> here is to support fewer physical interfaces and drive down production
costs.
> The silicon needed to do a legacy interface costs pennies, but the circuit
board
> traces and connectors are where the major costs lie.
>
> Fortunately, there are still alternatives available for people who need
the
> legacy devices. For parallel, you have the choice of a USB-parallel cable
or a
> PCI parallel card. Same with serial. If you have a favorite keyboard
like my
> old clicky-clack IBM 101, there are USB-keyboard adapters. Same with
mice.
> And, of course, there are USB floppy diskette drives... Ben Myers
>
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 03:38:21 GMT, Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote:
>
> >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
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Though a serial port, SATA, and PCI Express "serial" have a word in common, they
are entirely different technologies. One should not confuse them, despite the
presence of the same word... Ben Myers

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 06:53:11 GMT, "Fixer" <the.hedonist@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>
>"Ted Zieglar" <teddyz@notmail.com> wrote in message
>news:rIadnVMvu8ribbXeRVn-hw@comcast.com...
><snip> It's an industry trend. USB and 1394 are so much faster than parallel
>(or serial) connections
>Ted Zieglar not true actually serial is very fast and getting faster thats
>why we have Sata disks (serial ATA) and and PCI express is serial as well
>
>"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
>news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@4ax.com...
>> 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
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Fred Mau" <fred-dot-mau@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96D26FA1971Ffreddotmaucomcastnet@216.196.97.131...
> Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote in news:nuqhi1hpk551v15jnq913819g87lqcgr3b@
> 4ax.com:
>
> > 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.
>
>
> I wouldn't necessarily take Dell's word that the printer "will probably
not
> work on XP anyway".
>
> If there's a rhyme or reason to what printers are or aren't supported
under
> XP, I haven't been able to figure it out. I've seen ancient '80s-era
> printers supported while some late-'90s or early '00s printers aren't.
>
> For instance, can anyone tell me with a straight face that they're
actually
> using an ancient Canon LBP-8 or IBM Personal Pageprinter or IBM
Quietwriter
> III with XP ? Yet they're all in the XP printer drivers list whilst some
of
> their newer printers aren't.
>
>
> - FM -

And the answer is, "Who submitted their driver software to MS for
testing and approval as XP compatible". With XP, MS was much less friendly
towards third party software developers than in the past. Many small
companies and no longer supported hardware was simply left out.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Yes, and Steve Ballmer was the presiding judge in the divorce court. Microsoft
IS a prime mover behind all this. Having all legacy-free systems would
undoubtedly remove 5MB of code from what promises to be the incredibly bloated
(???? GB) Vista... Ben Myers

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:29:54 -0400, "Ted Zieglar" <teddyz@notmail.com> wrote:

>"..."legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which
>date back to the early-1980's IBM XT."
>
>Sounds like the results of a Silicon Valley divorce.
>
>--
>Ted Zieglar
>"You can do it if you try."
>
><ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
>news:4329700f.1098911@nntp.charter.net...
>> Absence of parallel and serial ports is all part of an industry-wide push
>to
>> "legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which date
>back
>> to the early-1980's IBM XT. These include parallel, serial, keyboard,
>mouse,
>> and floppy diskette. The alternative instead is to connect all low-speed
>> devices up to USB, which is now pretty mature in its 2.0 revision. The
>idea
>> here is to support fewer physical interfaces and drive down production
>costs.
>> The silicon needed to do a legacy interface costs pennies, but the circuit
>board
>> traces and connectors are where the major costs lie.
>>
>> Fortunately, there are still alternatives available for people who need
>the
>> legacy devices. For parallel, you have the choice of a USB-parallel cable
>or a
>> PCI parallel card. Same with serial. If you have a favorite keyboard
>like my
>> old clicky-clack IBM 101, there are USB-keyboard adapters. Same with
>mice.
>> And, of course, there are USB floppy diskette drives... Ben Myers
>>
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 03:38:21 GMT, Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote:
>>
>> >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
>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Relax, relax...I was just making a joke. Nothing against you.

--
Ted Zieglar
"You can do it if you try."

<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:43299900.11581357@nntp.charter.net...
> Yes, and Steve Ballmer was the presiding judge in the divorce court.
Microsoft
> IS a prime mover behind all this. Having all legacy-free systems would
> undoubtedly remove 5MB of code from what promises to be the incredibly
bloated
> (???? GB) Vista... Ben Myers
>
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:29:54 -0400, "Ted Zieglar" <teddyz@notmail.com>
wrote:
>
> >"..."legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which
> >date back to the early-1980's IBM XT."
> >
> >Sounds like the results of a Silicon Valley divorce.
> >
> >--
> >Ted Zieglar
> >"You can do it if you try."
> >
> ><ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
> >news:4329700f.1098911@nntp.charter.net...
> >> Absence of parallel and serial ports is all part of an industry-wide
push
> >to
> >> "legacy-free" systems, i.e. systems unencumbered by interfaces which
date
> >back
> >> to the early-1980's IBM XT. These include parallel, serial, keyboard,
> >mouse,
> >> and floppy diskette. The alternative instead is to connect all
low-speed
> >> devices up to USB, which is now pretty mature in its 2.0 revision. The
> >idea
> >> here is to support fewer physical interfaces and drive down production
> >costs.
> >> The silicon needed to do a legacy interface costs pennies, but the
circuit
> >board
> >> traces and connectors are where the major costs lie.
> >>
> >> Fortunately, there are still alternatives available for people who need
> >the
> >> legacy devices. For parallel, you have the choice of a USB-parallel
cable
> >or a
> >> PCI parallel card. Same with serial. If you have a favorite keyboard
> >like my
> >> old clicky-clack IBM 101, there are USB-keyboard adapters. Same with
> >mice.
> >> And, of course, there are USB floppy diskette drives... Ben Myers
> >>
> >> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 03:38:21 GMT, Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >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

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2001
83
0
18,630
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

When I posted this message, I knew what my options were...

1. Buy a Parallel to USB cable -- another 30-few bucks to spend, and
bit of Googlin tells me that there have been some compatibility
issues. Whether or not that would happen with my HP 4L, I don't know.

2. Buy another printer -- but my printer works just fine and I don't
want to buy another printer just because there's a faster interface
out there. It's low usage, but I still want to use it.

3. Buy a parallel port card -- gotta be sure to get a machine that'll
take one.

4. Keep my old machine for a printer server -- waste of power to keep
it running all the time, just for one printer with low usage, not to
mention the space.

5. Buy a non-Dell machine with a parallel port -- probably the best
option.

Apparently the concept of backwards compatibility has escaped Dell, as
well as a number of the posters. The fact that there are faster
interfaces is irrelevant as long as there are tons of existing
parallel printers out there still doing their jobs. The elimination of
parallel ports must certainly have very minimal cost impact, and I
don't see any compelling environmental or social benefit to be gained
by their elimination at this time. As a matter of fact, I see just the
opposite -- a need to dispose of tens of thousands of parallel port
printers before their time.

Fortunately, my old computer is still working (knocking on wood now)
so maybe it'll hang on until the printer dies too.

-Bruno

Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote:

>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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

You would eschew an otherwise capable and desirable computer merely because
it doesn't accomodate your printer through the parallel port?

--
Ted Zieglar
"You can do it if you try."

"Bruno" <myName@myISP.net> wrote in message
news:7j5ji1509gmp48ubjcm2tia07c5jomokt4@4ax.com...
> When I posted this message, I knew what my options were...
>
> 1. Buy a Parallel to USB cable -- another 30-few bucks to spend, and
> bit of Googlin tells me that there have been some compatibility
> issues. Whether or not that would happen with my HP 4L, I don't know.
>
> 2. Buy another printer -- but my printer works just fine and I don't
> want to buy another printer just because there's a faster interface
> out there. It's low usage, but I still want to use it.
>
> 3. Buy a parallel port card -- gotta be sure to get a machine that'll
> take one.
>
> 4. Keep my old machine for a printer server -- waste of power to keep
> it running all the time, just for one printer with low usage, not to
> mention the space.
>
> 5. Buy a non-Dell machine with a parallel port -- probably the best
> option.
>
> Apparently the concept of backwards compatibility has escaped Dell, as
> well as a number of the posters. The fact that there are faster
> interfaces is irrelevant as long as there are tons of existing
> parallel printers out there still doing their jobs. The elimination of
> parallel ports must certainly have very minimal cost impact, and I
> don't see any compelling environmental or social benefit to be gained
> by their elimination at this time. As a matter of fact, I see just the
> opposite -- a need to dispose of tens of thousands of parallel port
> printers before their time.
>
> Fortunately, my old computer is still working (knocking on wood now)
> so maybe it'll hang on until the printer dies too.
>
> -Bruno
>
> Bruno <myName@myISP.net> wrote:
>
> >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
>
 

TRENDING THREADS