According to the PDF it has Mutiple USB ports based on how I read it, but I then noticed it is serial not parallel even though it came up in a google search using the word parallel
Rex: Why would I need to find an NT Driver for the printserver? I don’t have NT drivers for anything else on the network, I don’t see why a printserver would be different.
As for my marriage to NT, I think it has to do with a number of factors, ranging from the importance of the workstation (its mission-critial for 18 hrs a day if not more) to the slow speed of the processor (it could run xp, but certainly not as well as it handles NT, its a 500 megahertz box).
Now that the weekend is over its time to place a call to HP and see what they can tell me…cstamets’ list sounds good.
The print server just negates the need to have the printer attached to a computer. If you’re running NT, you’ll still need NT drivers for the printer to be able to print to it. My worry is that poorly written drivers (after all, this is HP right?) might freak out and not let you install the printer in NT (because of its lack of USB support), even if you plan on printing via IP.
Looks like HP has pretty good support for their network printers…NT drivers do exist for many of their latest models…yay.
If this is really a “mission critical” system, it’s time to upgrade to a system that supports modern standards. It’ll have to be done eventually. By uttering the phrase “mission critical” or “around the clock” you have pushed my button to deliver the following lecture…
Whenever someone insists on keeping these old Frankenstein systems on life support, it always ends in tears. You might save $1,000 on hardware this year, but later lose $10,000 in lost data/productivity/customers when the system is down due to failure or upgrade during a very important time.
I have seen this too many times with small business proprietors. They try to cut corners by running their business on outdated equipment, or run the entire office on a dialup internet connection. When it fails, as it eventually must, they fall upon customer support shrieking “business critical! losing a thousand dollars a day! need help now!” I shrug and do the best I can, but there is a kind of natural selection at work against business owners who put themselves in this position.
In the long run, computer hardware is among the cheaper items in the modern small business. The cost of proper hardware is trivial compared to the cost of time to maintain old hardware, or worse, to lose customers or data when the old hardare fails.
Can anyone confirm that USB doesn’t work with NT4? The computers in the lab here used to run NT4, and I’m pretty sure that they had functional USB ports at the time.
That failing, you don’t need to upgrade all the way to XP, only to Windows 2000 (which was actually in the NT line, not the 95/98 line as the name would suggest). I’m absolutely certain that 2000 supports USB, and it should run just fine on a 500 MHz box.
It may be unwelcome, but here’s another vote for (at least) Win2k. It’s just about the most stable thing Microsoft ever came out with, and is supported by many things made this century. It is, as Chronos mentions, built on NT, so I expect your apps to work ok.
I admit to using Win2k on outdated hardware, but I know how to make it run, and I have a fair amount of failover. I work for a company that makes niche software for the oil industry, and even the small time players won’t blink at what our software and hardware costs, 'cause trying to save a little money here is a great way to have to spend a lot of money later.
Windows NT absolutely, positively DOES NOT have USB support. MS Cite
At one time, a third-party software company called BSquare offered a USB driver for NT; AFAIK, no one even touched it for testing computers, much less production ones. Link to USB for NT. Seriously, I wouldn’t touch this with a 10-foot pole!
I think you’d be surprised how well Windows XP runs on those boxes, depending on the amount of memory they have.
In my benchmarking at work, using PC Magazine’s Business Winstone 2002 on Compaq desktops ranging from 400MHz to 1GHz with 128 MB RAM, Windows XP ran as well as or better than Windows 98, Windows NT, and Windows 2000.
My wife’s computer is an AMD K62-550 with 384 MB RAM. Upgraded her from Win98 to XP and she hasn’t complained. The extra memory helps her out, of course.
None of those computers are anything I’d want to run graphics intensive apps or anything like that, but for typical business functions, they work fine with XP.
Still, I would agree with the others who have said that trying to save a few bucks now will cost them more later. Chances are, you can’t even easily find memory for their computers now. What happens if their computers are down for days while you’re scrambling to either find replacement or set up a brand new system. If they don’t want to buy all new computers, they should at least be trying to replace one machine at a time as they can afford it.
(blinking in noncomprehension) Break easily? LASERJETS?!?!? (looking at the LJ IIIp on my desk and thinking of my fifteen-year-old IIp at home) If I own anything that will outlive me it is my Laserjets.
Ahh, but not all printers are IIIps. Those old HP printers are tanks - you can’t kill 'em with a baseball bat and 5 gallons of gasoline. Sadly, no “personal” printers are made as well as those these days. Some of those huge “workgroup” or “small business” printers are, but then you’re looking in the $1500+ range.