I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
cable.

But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923

The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5

From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".

I *think* both of these are the one:
http://sewelldirect.com/centronicstomini.asp and
http://tinyurl.com/4ejqfqc, but before I blow another twenty
bucks, I'd like to hear somebody who knows say "Yes, that's the
one."

--
PeteCresswell

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
> cable.
>
> But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
> shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923

36 pin Centronics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_1284

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...n_plughead.jpg

>
> The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
> http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5

MDR36
http://pinouts.ru/ParallelPorts/ieee1284c_pinout.shtml

25 pin D-shell (host) adapter to Mini-Centronics.
http://www.cheaphpprinters.com/image...centronics.jpg

>
> From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
> is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".
>
> I *think* both of these are the one:
> http://sewelldirect.com/centronicstomini.asp and

Looks reasonable.

> http://tinyurl.com/4ejqfqc, but before I blow another twenty
> bucks, I'd like to hear somebody who knows say "Yes, that's the
> one."
>

You could also consider getting a USB to 25 pin D-shell connector
type printer cable, and then use the cabling you already own ?
Presumably previously you were using a 25 pin D-shell to Mini-Centronics
for the cabling ?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16812196222

Paul

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
> cable.
>
> But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
> shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923
>
> The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
> http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5
>
> From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
> is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".
>
> I *think* both of these are the one:
> http://sewelldirect.com/centronicstomini.asp and
> http://tinyurl.com/4ejqfqc, but before I blow another twenty
> bucks, I'd like to hear somebody who knows say "Yes, that's the
> one."
>

Older HP printers used mini centronics.
I bought a mini centronics to db25 for mine.
It worked great with the old computer that had a parallel
port. The new comp did not have one so I tried a usb
adaptor then found out that my all-in-one office HP machine
will not work with USB because they require 2 way com.
Ended up buying a pci parallel card for the comp for $12.
It works.

Per Paul in Houston TX:
>then found out that my all-in-one office HP machine
>will not work with USB because they require 2 way com.
>Ended up buying a pci parallel card for the comp for $12.
>It works.

Thanks. That's the kind of thing I was trolling for.

The printer in this case is exactly that: all-in-one.
--
PeteCresswell

It's at all not certain that, having got the ["correct"] cable, there's
*no* guarantee that it'll work anyway!!

Just because you *can* get hold of the "right" cable that physically
connects both the old "printer" port and the new USB port, doesn't mean
they are going to automatically be compatible.

"Then why do they make such cables?" - because they may have been designed
to work with intermediate software - drivers or modified drivers created by
either the original printer manufacturer or by the manufacturer of the
cables themselves.

If I were you I would look more closely into whether it is actually
possible to do what you think can be achieved by joining your PC to your
printer using a composite cable.

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)




"(PeteCresswell)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
> cable.
>
> But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
> shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923
>
> The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
> http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5
>
> From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
> is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".
>
> I *think* both of these are the one:
> http://sewelldirect.com/centronicstomini.asp and
> http://tinyurl.com/4ejqfqc, but before I blow another twenty
> bucks, I'd like to hear somebody who knows say "Yes, that's the
> one."
>
> --
> PeteCresswell

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:16:10 -0600, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

> Older HP printers used mini centronics.

Hmmm. All the oldest HP printers I have had used the standard, 36-pin
Centronics; except for the fairly new (newer than three LaserJets, and
three, or four DeskJets,) OfficeJet, which had three connection options:

Standard Centronics
Mini-Centronics
USB

The LaserJet 5P, the second newest printer, has two connection options:

Standard Centronics
Mini-Centronics

When we turned in the OfficeJet for a Photosmart All-In-One, I kept the
parallel cable, and used it with the LaserJet 5P. I have it connected via an
old Netgear FR114P router, which I have relegated to use as a print server
and switch on my LAN.

I would say the oldest HP printers only had the standard, 36-pin Centronics
cable. The mini-centronics was used on later HP printers.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:26:22 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

> I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
> cable.
>
> But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
> shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923
>
> The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
> http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5
>
> From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
> is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".

The cable you have is the DB-25 printer cable, aka, IEEE-1284 cable. So you
need to look for a USB to IEEE-1284 cable. I have an older, USB to DB-36
(Centronics) cable, and the warning with it, and with the Netgear FR114P
Print server as well, is that bi-directional connection is may not be
supported (seems to be printer dependent).

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

Tim Meddick wrote:
> It's at all not certain that, having got the ["correct"] cable, there's
> *no* guarantee that it'll work anyway!!
>
> Just because you *can* get hold of the "right" cable that physically
> connects both the old "printer" port and the new USB port, doesn't mean
> they are going to automatically be compatible.
>
> "Then why do they make such cables?" - because they may have been
> designed to work with intermediate software - drivers or modified
> drivers created by either the original printer manufacturer or by the
> manufacturer of the cables themselves.
>
> If I were you I would look more closely into whether it is actually
> possible to do what you think can be achieved by joining your PC to your
> printer using a composite cable.
>
> ==
>
> Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)

Paul in Houston nailed it. When you use a USB to printer adapter cable
(an active device), the Microsoft protocol stack only has simple printer
driver capability. The cable doesn't support all of the traditional
parallel port operating modes. A USB to printer cable should work with
some printers, but because of the missing modes, not every function
on the end of the cable will work. Many older applications used to
"bit-bang" the parallel port directly, and that can't work via the
USB stack.

Using a PCI card to parallel port, would stand a better chance of
enabling all the traditional modes (SPP,ECP,EPP,whatever). If you have
a dongle for software authorization, you may need to buy the PCI card type,
so it will work. Or another example of things you can connect - I have
a JTAG programmer cable for the parallel port, and that would take
a "real" parallel port as well.

A USB to printer port cable is a poor substitute for this missing port
on PCs, due to the lack of functions. The USB stack getting in the
way, is part of that.

Paul

> "(PeteCresswell)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
>> cable.
>>
>> But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
>> shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923
>>
>> The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
>> http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5
>>
>> From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
>> is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".
>>
>> I *think* both of these are the one:
>> http://sewelldirect.com/centronicstomini.asp and
>> http://tinyurl.com/4ejqfqc, but before I blow another twenty
>> bucks, I'd like to hear somebody who knows say "Yes, that's the
>> one."
>>
>> --
>> PeteCresswell
>

Per Tim Meddick:
>If I were you I would look more closely into whether it is actually
>possible to do what you think can be achieved by joining your PC to your
>printer using a composite cable.

I agree.

In light of Paul-From-Houston's advice, I'm ditching the USB
cable approach and have ordered a parallel port card for the PC
in question.
--
PeteCresswell

I bow to your greater breadth of understanding, Paul.

I mealy wanted to point out, the possibility, that when you try to connect
two differing types of port, just because one may happen to find a cable
with the right ends to connect the device, doesn't mean that it's sure to
work!

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)




"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:il343s$1r9$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Tim Meddick wrote:
>> It's at all not certain that, having got the ["correct"] cable, there's
>> *no* guarantee that it'll work anyway!!
>>
>> Just because you *can* get hold of the "right" cable that physically
>> connects both the old "printer" port and the new USB port, doesn't mean
>> they are going to automatically be compatible.
>>
>> "Then why do they make such cables?" - because they may have been
>> designed to work with intermediate software - drivers or modified
>> drivers created by either the original printer manufacturer or by the
>> manufacturer of the cables themselves.
>>
>> If I were you I would look more closely into whether it is actually
>> possible to do what you think can be achieved by joining your PC to your
>> printer using a composite cable.
>>
>> ==
>>
>> Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)
>
> Paul in Houston nailed it. When you use a USB to printer adapter cable
> (an active device), the Microsoft protocol stack only has simple printer
> driver capability. The cable doesn't support all of the traditional
> parallel port operating modes. A USB to printer cable should work with
> some printers, but because of the missing modes, not every function
> on the end of the cable will work. Many older applications used to
> "bit-bang" the parallel port directly, and that can't work via the
> USB stack.
>
> Using a PCI card to parallel port, would stand a better chance of
> enabling all the traditional modes (SPP,ECP,EPP,whatever). If you have
> a dongle for software authorization, you may need to buy the PCI card
> type,
> so it will work. Or another example of things you can connect - I have
> a JTAG programmer cable for the parallel port, and that would take
> a "real" parallel port as well.
>
> A USB to printer port cable is a poor substitute for this missing port
> on PCs, due to the lack of functions. The USB stack getting in the
> way, is part of that.
>
> Paul
>
>> "(PeteCresswell)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I thought I had it nailed when I ordered a "USB to Printer"
>>> cable.
>>>
>>> But what arrived had a rather large ("Centronics"?) connector as
>>> shown in http://tinyurl.com/4gxz923
>>>
>>> The old cables interface to the printer, OTOH, looks like this:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/4mn57z5
>>>
>>> From what I can read, they are both male and the adapter I need
>>> is "Centronics Female To Mini-Centronics Male".
>>>
>>> I *think* both of these are the one:
>>> http://sewelldirect.com/centronicstomini.asp and
>>> http://tinyurl.com/4ejqfqc, but before I blow another twenty
>>> bucks, I'd like to hear somebody who knows say "Yes, that's the
>>> one."
>>>
>>> --
>>> PeteCresswell
>>