Any reason to continue using my parallel printer cable?

[zzyzzx]

I was cleaning off my computer desk the other day, when I happened to notice that my printer did have a USB port on it. For some reason I've never tried to use it, probably because my last PC didn't have USB and when I built my current PC, I merely moved the plug on the computer end to my new PC, and simply assumed that the printer didn't have USB. Anyway, is there any reason why I shouldn't remove my parallel cable and turn off the LPT port and use the USB cable instead? If it matters, I don't print much and do have extra USB ports.

[jameshgross]

there is really no good reason to change something that is working.
remember the addage "If it aint broke dont fix it"

[TBoneit]

I get computers in for repair everyday that were fine until someone decided to fix something that wasn't broke. My take on this is that It may not be as simple to change as changing a setting. You won't see any speed improvement so why bother.

[edsmith77]

zzyzzx,
I usually adhere to the "if it ain't broke" mentality but in this case, I can not see any harm. The only side effect is that you may see an increase in throughput by going to USB. But then depending on the age of the printer and computer, it might only be USB V1 compliant it which case, it probably will not make any difference, speed wise. However, if it is USB2 compliant (both the printer and pc) then see what happens..

Ed

[zzyzzx]

there is really no good reason to change something that is working.
remember the addage "If it aint broke dont fix it"

Yeah, but won't I save a IRQ?

[dcsos]

No you'll gain a potential conflict with other USB items (if you own any)
If you have Parallel Port printer, use it
Irq's are virtual and less important in xp. If you are running 98 IRQ's matter

[DarrellS]

I was wondering why motherboard manufacturers were still putting parallel ports on motherboards when they could put something usefull that everyone could use like firewire ports or e-SATA or more USB2 ports but I guess some people still have parallel printers.

[redwudz]

I have a couple of newer motherboards that don't have parallel or serial ports, so they are apparently being phased out. But the MBs do have FireWire and HDMI, so no loss. I wouldn't have noticed, but my old GPS unit uses the serial port and I had to fire up my older laptop to be able to use it.

I would agree about continuing to use the parallel port if it works correctly at present. Probably the main advantage with USB is more choice in cables as just about everyone has a spare USB cable lying about.

[dphirschler]

One side-effect of useing the USB for the printer instead of parallel is you will have one less USB port available.


Darryl

[Ai Haibara]

Are they still including Firewire ports on most new (OEM) systems? Most of the towers I've been looking at haven't included them - but then again, they're mostly Compaq/HP systems/

[MOVIEGEEK]

Parallel is still ok for printers,very few new printers have a parallel port though.

[usually_quiet]

I don't think there's anything to loose by trying to connect the printer via a USB port under Windows XP.

I guess not enough devices use firewire to connect to a computer. I have been looking at motherboards and cases with the idea of building my own. About half of what I've seen don't include firewire ports, so I wouldn't be surprised if many OEM PC's are lacking them as well. One can always buy a pci card to add some in the back, though it's less convenient to get at them. What is odd is that some of the less expensive cases have a punch-out for a firewire port in the front of the case that has been left intact.

I wonder if firewire is going to be phased out? I think a few weeks ago sombody here mentioned that there is a new, faster type of USB coming out in a few months.

[MOVIEGEEK]

I wonder if firewire is going to be phased out? I think a few weeks ago sombody here mentioned that there is a new, faster type of USB coming out in a few months.

Don't know about faster USB but Firewire 800 is available: http://www.firewire-1394.com/pyro-1394b-pci-card.htm
Firewire will be the standard for DV until something better comes along.

[AlanHK]

is there any reason why I shouldn't remove my parallel cable and turn off the LPT port and use the USB cable instead?

There is no advantage. You'll lose a USB port, and it won't print any faster, the bottleneck is in the printer, not the cable.
And if you happen to use elderly software it will always be able to use parallel where sometimes USB support is a bit flaky.

Try it just for future reference -- maybe you'll get a new PC or laptop without a parallel port, useful to know if it will work. And you could plug in a laptop by USB while leaving the desktop on the parallel. (You could just swap the plugs or use a hub, but this is simpler.)

[dcsos]

yeah lissen to Alan, not Usually_Quiet who reiterates the incorrect claim
"I don't think there's anything to loose by trying to connect the printer via a USB port under Windows XP"

Wrong as
you'll gain a potential conflict with other USB items (if you own any)
and lose a usb port.

[usually_quiet]

Whats the big deal? I said to try it. The OP can change back, if by some off chance there are any problems.

That would have to be some really old software. Software that would probably need to be run using DOS or an earlier version of Windows, not Windows XP. Under those circumstances, maybe, but that situation doesn't apply to most people.

When I first bought my current PC, I had no USB cables, only the parallel cable that I had been using with my old PC, which had no USB connections. After a while, I changed over. I needed the single parallel port for my old scanner, which had no USB port. No problems. My computer was built in 2001, and has 4 USB-1 ports, two of which have never been used. The OP hasn't said there is any shortage of USB ports for him to use.

There's are other reason to use USB other than speed. USB cables are more flexible, less obvious, and easier to deal with if you must disconnect cables and move equipment to clean.

[ViRaL1]

You may 'gain' an IRQ but without forcing them, not many devices will pick IRQ 7, open or not because it generally IS reserved for LPT1. If it's working parallel, stick with it. It's not like you're using the port for anything else, and you're decreasing your available USB bandwidth everytime you print. As far as disconnecting cables go, most USB printers don't take too well to being replugged into a different port if you unplug them. Not that it won't work at all, but it will usually create another virtual port and another printer, while your old port / printer won't work when you print to it. Not all USB printers do this, but many do.

[AlanHK]

Whats the big deal? I said to try it. The OP can change back, if by some off chance there are any problems.

That would have to be some really old software. Software that would probably need to be run using DOS or an earlier version of Windows, not Windows XP. Under those circumstances, maybe, but that situation doesn't apply to most people.

Actually, I run several DOS applications (1980s vintage) under WinXP. They work fine, and use my parallel laser printer. Though there are tricks you can use to access USB printers from DOS.
I don't expect that to be a factor for most people though.
Leaving the USB port in the printer free makes it easy to share the printer with a laptop or other PC.

Anyway, I can't think of a single advantage to changing.
"USB cables are more flexible". If having thin cables is important to you, well go ahead.

[Donny661]

I had an inkjet printer (Canon i550) set up on my parent's computer that was using the parallel port. I figured, why waste a $10-$20 USB cable on it, when I doubted that USB would be faster? I only moved it recently to USB because I got a cheap(free) laserjet that only worked with parallel. I kept the inkjet for color and because it wasn't a hassle to switch to USB with a spare cable around that I didn't have before.

If you need to to buy a USB cable to hook up your printer that way instead of parallel, don't do it, unless it is "fun" enough for you.

[usually_quiet]

Obviously, this change is optional, but the problems that are being pointed out don’t affect the majority of people who connect their printer via a USB port. If the OP wants to do this, chances are it will be painless. If he needs to buy a USB cable, it will likely still be useful later, since most new peripherals use them, though many don’t include one in the box, or if they do, it’s too short.

If you route cables behind, under, or through furniture, thin, flexible cables with small connectors are easier to work with than heavy ones with large connectors. I don’t think it’s unusual to want to hide cables as much as possible or keep them out of your way, plus sometimes you need to do that just to go from point A to point B.

As for connecting the printer USB cable to the right port, yes you need to remember which USB port you use for the printer, but Windows XP will let you know if you have switched ports. (I ought to know, having done it a few times.) It's not difficult to correct the problem by changing the printer cable to the correct port. I now mark the printer cable with a piece of tape so there is less chance of confusion.

How many USB ports does one need to save for a rainy day? Eventually his current printer will be replaced, and many new ones can only use a USB cable. Most people employ a network or a hub if they need to share a printer. If it's just a temporary situation, you unplug the USB cable from the printer and plug in your laptop. Easily done, since there are no screws or clamps. That's what my brother-in-law did when he visited me.

If the OP acquires so many USB devices that he runs out of ports, USB-2 PCI cards are not expensive and most do their job well. I just installed one for my new USB-2 printer. Now it performs a bit better than it did when connected to a USB-1 port, plus Windows XP doesn’t nag me about using a high-speed USB connection every time I turn it on.

[creakndale]

Switch to USB if you want to save some energy; i.e. you don't use the printer very often.

With my PC/parallel printer, as the PC boots the printer must be on (or simultaneously powering on) in order for the parallel port to activate. If I leave the parallel printer powered off, boot the PC and later power on the printer, the PC will not recognize the parallel printer, thus the PC needs a reboot.

One nice thing about USB is you can turn your printer off when you're not using it and only power it on when you need it. Only takes a few seconds for the PC to recognize or drop a USB device.

[AlanHK]

Switch to USB if you want to save some energy; i.e. you don't use the printer very often.

With my PC/parallel printer, as the PC boots the printer must be on (or simultaneously powering on) in order for the parallel port to activate. If I leave the parallel printer powered off, boot the PC and later power on the printer, the PC will not recognize the parallel printer, thus the PC needs a reboot.

One nice thing about USB is you can turn your printer off when you're not using it and only power it on when you need it. Only takes a few seconds for the PC to recognize or drop a USB device.

Strange.
That's not so for any of several PCs and printers I've used over the last 20 years.
Perhaps you have an unusual BIOS setting?

I had an old parallel laserjet that drew a lot of power and didn't have a sleep mode, I only turned it on when I needed to print. No need to reboot. I even ran a dot matrix for a while, just powered it on when I needed it.

Conversely, sometimes a USB printer isn't detected. Though most printers now do have a low power mode when idle, so don't need to be actually turned off.
USB support is much better now than when Bill Gates famously bluescreened in a demo when he plugged in a scanner; still it is not as reliable as the stone age Centronics parallel port.

[zzyzzx]

Switch to USB if you want to save some energy; i.e. you don't use the printer very often.

With my PC/parallel printer, as the PC boots the printer must be on (or simultaneously powering on) in order for the parallel port to activate. If I leave the parallel printer powered off, boot the PC and later power on the printer, the PC will not recognize the parallel printer, thus the PC needs a reboot.

One nice thing about USB is you can turn your printer off when you're not using it and only power it on when you need it. Only takes a few seconds for the PC to recognize or drop a USB device.

I am not having this problem either. I can leave my printer off and turn it on whenever I need it even if my computer has been on for a while.

And yes I do have spare USB cables laying around.

[ron spencer]

wow....parallel....is that like another universe????

[dcsos]

Anyway, is there any reason why I shouldn't remove my parallel cable and turn off the LPT port and use the USB cable instead?

Once again yes
Implementation under windows of USB drivers is poor compared to a dedicated parallel interface.
You may find that if you don't use the printer often, using it under USB risks it uninstalling itself mysteriously

[Xylob the Destroyer]

Indeed, I have this problem occaisionally.
We have a USB printer shared through a USB "splitter".
I rarely use it and sometimes have to re-install it.
The ol' lady uses it regularly and never has any problems, despite the splitter always defaulting to my PC.