4 ms·

I think this article explains pretty well why we don't need a parallel port anymore. Rather than outfitting every computer with a complicated and slow port we c

by kirrent 10y ago

I think this article explains pretty well why we don't need a parallel port anymore. Rather than outfitting every computer with a complicated and slow port we can have faster, smaller, and more flexible solutions using extra processors in our devices. While I appreciate the ability to control so many IO lines directly I just don't really see the use case anymore and this comes from someone who went down the whole design a new CNC controller because the old one used parallel. No-one ever designs new hardware anymore and bemoans the lack of parallel port that would make their job easier. The void is only legacy hardware that is difficult to use these days.

iheartmemcache 10y ago
>> No-one ever designs new hardware anymore and bemoans the lack of parallel port that would make their job easier. Did you even skim the article? Not only did he identify a painpoint (whether or not you feel it, he did), but he wrote a solution, took the PCB to production, and open sourced the whole thing. That's the exact opposite of most of the tech articles which sit around and complain about the lack of solution. Hey OP, way to go man. Setup a Patreon, and I'll throw a tenner your way just to see what you come up with next. Like AvE, mikeselectricstuff, SpritesMods, you're a "do-er" and I'm sure whatever you do will be mighty interesting.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  Kirrent said "new hardware", the one in the article is 20-ish years old.
- kirrent 10y ago
  Like I said, I understand the pain of interfacing with legacy hardware but I thought his solution demonstrated perfectly why we don't need a parallel port any more. I didn't mean to imply that OP was complaining about the lack of a parallel port and I enjoyed his post very much.
  - qb45 10y ago
    Two issues you are completely ignoring are "barrier to entry" and "PITA factor". I can control a bunch of LPT-attached LEDs with two lines of shell script or bitbang SPI/1W/whatever with a screenful of C. No reason to design one-off PCBs and make those external devices "smarter" than they need to be.

by kirrent 10y ago

iheartmemcache 10y ago

>> No-one ever designs new hardware anymore and bemoans the lack of parallel port that would make their job easier. Did you even skim the article? Not only did he identify a painpoint (whether or not you feel it, he did), but he wrote a solution, took the PCB to production, and open sourced the whole thing. That's the exact opposite of most of the tech articles which sit around and complain about the lack of solution. Hey OP, way to go man. Setup a Patreon, and I'll throw a tenner your way just to see what you come up with next. Like AvE, mikeselectricstuff, SpritesMods, you're a "do-er" and I'm sure whatever you do will be mighty interesting.

GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
Kirrent said "new hardware", the one in the article is 20-ish years old.
kirrent 10y ago
Like I said, I understand the pain of interfacing with legacy hardware but I thought his solution demonstrated perfectly why we don't need a parallel port any more. I didn't mean to imply that OP was complaining about the lack of a parallel port and I enjoyed his post very much.
- qb45 10y ago
  Two issues you are completely ignoring are "barrier to entry" and "PITA factor". I can control a bunch of LPT-attached LEDs with two lines of shell script or bitbang SPI/1W/whatever with a screenful of C. No reason to design one-off PCBs and make those external devices "smarter" than they need to be.