Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:18576 alt.flame:1894 Path: utzoo!hoptoad!pacbell!lll-tis!lll-winken!gryphon!richard From: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,alt.flame Subject: serial vs. parallel, was:(Re: Amiga as workstation) Summary: get real Keywords: .bullshit Message-ID: <3896@gryphon.CTS.COM> Date: 8 May 88 06:45:12 GMT Reply-To: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) Followup-To: alt.test Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA Lines: 91 In article <1939@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <492@sas.UUCP>, bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger) writes: >> In article <1903@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: >> |Personally I'd be happy to give up my parallel port for another serial port. >> |Parallel printers are a historical dreg that has no technical justification. > >> What, huh?? I've never seen anything shove bits as fast over a serial line >> as you can over a parallel line. > >And for most printers this extra bandwidth is completely wasted: they can't >even keep up with 1200 baud. Buy a printer buffer. $49.95 ? >> Try comparing the time to download fonts >> to LaserJet II on parallel vs. serial (even at 19.2Kbaud) sometime, and see >> if you don't want to keep your parallel port around when you get a laser >> printer. > >If I could afford a laser printer I think I could afford a parallel port card. >I mean, what's another couple of hundred bucks out of a couple of grand? In >the meantime I can't: > > 1) Put two modems on my Amiga. > > 2) Put a modem and a terminal on my Amiga. > > 3) Put a cheap EPROM burner and a modem on my Amiga. > > 4) Put a Midi port and a modem on my Amiga. > > ... and any combination thereof. > >Proposition 1: the more ports your computer has, the better. Ok. >Proposition 2: the more versatile the ports on your computer, the better. ^^^^^^^^^ Oh, you mean like "some devices are serial and some are parallel" ? >Claim: Serial ports are more versatile than parallel ports, because there > is a greater variety of serial devices out there. There are more fords than ferarris too. Whatever the hell all this proves. It doesnt really matter if there are LOTS more serial than parallel devices, as long as there are any parallel devices it damn nive to have a built in paralell port. And since those "IBM-PC" (pardon the profanity) things seem to think printers should be parallel, it's "sorta convenient" to be able to exploit their volume of scale, ie cheap printers. >Side issue: If there were multiple serial ports, the whole "serial device > debate" would be a non-issue. Personally, I think it is anyway. We > already have a perfectly good namespace for devices. Agreed. >Conclusion: For me, at least, serial ports are better than parallel ports. RIGHT ! ^^ Now stop trying to convice us all that what YOU think is right is some universal tautology. >Totally unjustified flame: No no. Ludicrous, rediculous off the wall flame that even talk.bizarre would reject. >I have 4 serial ports on my Atari 800, via my 850. > I have 4 joystick ports on it as well. Why does the Amiga have less? Because, twit, you hade to pay almost as much for your 850 as you did for your 800. Poof. As for the four joysticks, how often did you use all four ? Me either. Poof zzap. Now Peter, if you want more serial ports, great, knock yourself out go buy a IBM-PC multiport card with 4 ot 8 ports on it, plug it in and you'll be one happy puppy. Having one serial port and one parallel port is just common sense given the base of peripherals out there. -- noalias went. it really wasn't negotiable richard@gryphon.CTS.COM rutgers!marque!gryphon!richard