Parallel device <NOT printer> to USB?...

[gortmertl0]

Hello, all.

I've got a non-soundcard question I hope someone might be able to help me out with...

I've got an old parallel port scanner that I'd like to use as a USB device.   I've been looking for months, but the problem is that aside from some rather expensive USB 2.0 hubs (serial / parallel / ethernet / etc) that may or may not work [and some explicity state they only work for printers], there are NO parallel-to-USB cables for devices other than those for lowly printer connections.

There are low-cost cables for serial-to-USB (for PDAs, camera, etc), but no USB cables for parallel devices like scanners -- only for Printers.  

Not knowing much about USBs other than the basics, can someone explain why no one has one of these cables?

Is it too difficult or impossible, engineering-wise?  That USB and Parallel architecture/connectivity are just too different for proper conversion between the two methods of data transfer?  This would seem odd, since there are printer-to-USB cables abounds...

Is it simply cost prohibitive (ie, no real demand, no one would buy them, so why make them)?

Just looking for any reason why they don't already exist, in light of the  proliferation of other <item>-to-USB cables that already exist out there.  Thanks for any help or explanations you can give.

Gary

[jbltecnicspro]

I don't believe this is limited to printers only.  After all, both Parallel and USB devices are just bus types... I'll reread your post as I'm not sure I understand the question... hold on.

Ok, after rereading:  I don't think you would have a problem, because scanners would not use a parallel port if they did not access some feature of the bus - so I would expect that you would have no problems.  The only way to know for sure is to actually purchase a cable and give it a shot - if it doesn't work, then oh well.

I'm at the same point as you are, but with a different situation.  I'm deciding on whether or not to purchase a completely hardware controlled modem for like $50 so I can play some games - I know that it won't be like DSL (which I can't get), but it will be better than my winmodem.  Problem is, it's not guaranteed, so if it doesn' work - there goes $50... but there's no way to know unless I take the plunge - and if it does work, great!  I'm sorry that I couldn't resolve it for you, but I would assume it would work just fine?  Usually, companies assume their users are ignorant, and most people associate parallel cables with printers only - so they could be playing to people's ignorance.  That's why most computer brands disable functions in the bios - because they don't want to get support calls from people because they screwed their bus speeds by setting it too high and such.

[Fancia]

I'm guessing that they're cost-prohibitive, mainly. They seem to be fairly complex to build, since I know parallel devices can be fairly eccentric. Unlike most modern devices, parallel ports allow a fairly kludgy form of direct hardware access, even on current versions of Windows. Since it's fairly ugly to deal with at all, or simulate, on modern ports, I can imagine it should require a fair bit of engineering and electronics to have a working, general-purpose solution.

The closest to what you want that I've seen is an IBM/Lenovo adaptor that seems to only work with ThinkPads; it costs 70$ USD. At prices like that (and probably higher, for more compatible devices), there can't be much of a market; a native USB scanner, and most other devices people would want a device like this for, would cost less than the adaptor.

[gortmertl0]

Thank you both for the information. I also saw the Thinkpad Adapter for ~$70, but I don't have a Thinkpad...

I should have clarified myself.  When I said the only parallel-to-USB cables out there were for printers, I should have said that they only had IEEE-1284/36pin Centronic male-to-USB cable.  The IEEE-1284/Centronic connector doesn't fit the DB25 Male connection on my scanner.

There are some DB25 Female-to-USB cables for $50 to $70, but again, they explicitly state they are ONLY for standard [NOT multifunction] printers.  One website simply says that it doesn't configure as a LPT port.

I think I finally found an explanation, from the Manhattan-Support.com website concerning their own DB25 Female-to-USB cable:

"The product indeed does not install as a LPT port, but as a virtual USB Printer Port. Therefore you can only use this device with printers."

So I guess that's why it won't work with non-printer devices, but doesn't explain why there's no LPT-to-USB for non-printer devices. It would appear that perhaps it's a combination of both -- difficulty and cost...  

[Laust]

Are you sure the scanner is parallel (as in connected to a PC parallel port)? because some SCSI scanners (from HP at least) used a 25 pin connector/cable as well and came with an ultra-cheap and simple SCSI controller (on an ISA card) that would look just like a parallel port unless you knew what it was

These scanners should hook up to any SCSI controller with an appropriate converter cable, even USB ones, and be recognized as "TWAIN" devices by Windows.

[gortmertl0]

Are you sure the scanner is parallel (as in connected to a PC parallel port)? because some SCSI scanners (from HP at least) used a 25 pin connector/cable as well and came with an ultra-cheap and simple SCSI controller (on an ISA card) that would look just like a parallel port unless you knew what it was

These scanners should hook up to any SCSI controller with an appropriate converter cable, even USB ones, and be recognized as "TWAIN" devices by Windows.

No, unfortunately there is only a parallel/LPT connection with a second pass-through connection for the printer.  It's a HP ScanJet 5100C that I bought in August 1998, and -- much to my delight -- the only scanner at my current job just happens to be the same model -- quite a coincidence.

Both scanners are hooked up to the parallel port, with printers connected to the scanners.  When I forget and try to print & scan at the same time, both devices go haywire for a little bit...

It's similar to my old Iomega Zip 100 drive; it, too, was a parallel connect and had a pass-through for the printer.  At one point, I had all three parallel devices in connected in series.  (Isn't that an oxymoron?)  

Again, thanks for the interest on this topic.  I appreciate more learn-ed opinions from those more learn-ed than I.

Gary