2 ms·
They've done some stupid things in USB3 but the first 2 versions were an absolute success. Consider my 386, the last PC I owned without USB. There were separa
by hyperman1 5y ago
They've done some stupid things in USB3 but the first 2 versions were an absolute success.
Consider my 386, the last PC I owned without USB. There were separate ports for:
* Keyboard (big DIN, not ps/2)
* Mouse (serial)
* Joystick (On sound card)
* Printer (LPT1)
* Scanner (SCSI)
* Zip drive (Also LPT1, passtrough, sometimes unstable)
All of these have been replaced by USB1. Maybe changing the floppys for USB sticks should be added to this list.
The main problem was it was designed for slow small peripherals. Its a miracle they managed to add this much speed and power while being completely backwards compatible.
I bought a desk lamp. It turns out to reuse an USB charger as transformer. Using a standard this far ouside its original intended domain, is the ultimate kind of succesfull.
- ciupicri 5y agoZip drives and other storage devices could have been connected using SCSI. Heck, even printers like Xerox Phaser 740 [1]. [1]: http://www.office.xerox.com/userdoc/P740/P740man/740.45.html http://www.office.xerox.com/userdoc/P740/P740man/740.45.html