blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
just wondered why no one seemed interested
I like polls
- Thread starter blakerwry
- Start date
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
OK, I saw the items. Hard stuff to move. The print server, well, what's the use of a print server? You can hook a computer into the network and connect your printer to that just as easily. And I have lots of computers. (Well, Tannin does. I just get to play with them.) Besides, it doesn't do USB, and all the techno-heads here don't think a printer is worth having if it isn't USB. (I don't agree with them, but there you go. I always was old-fashioned in matters technical.)
(Tea waits paitently until one of the nework heavies comes in to beat her up for saying such a stupid thing. Figures the pain will be worth it if she finally gets to learn why you would bother having a print server when you can just use a computer.)
And the other item was ... er .. I forget what it was already. Ahh yes, RAM. Well, maybe one of the US people wil be interested. Tannin says I'm not allowed to spend any more money untill he pays the credit card bill for the lawn mower.
Sigh.
(Tea waits paitently until one of the nework heavies comes in to beat her up for saying such a stupid thing. Figures the pain will be worth it if she finally gets to learn why you would bother having a print server when you can just use a computer.)
And the other item was ... er .. I forget what it was already. Ahh yes, RAM. Well, maybe one of the US people wil be interested. Tannin says I'm not allowed to spend any more money untill he pays the credit card bill for the lawn mower.
Sigh.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
what is the approximate shipping from US to Oz?
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
Yes, but the print server is small, much more reliable than a computer(uptimes that will last serveral months if not years), and is faster(faster than my windows based print server)...
You can also locate it just about anywhere (where as a computer requires more space and more electrical outlets) and it isn't unsightly. It also allows you to move your printer off your desk and to somewhere that makes more sense symanticly.
It also wont bog your computer down when you print(because the printing task is off loaded to the server)
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
Hmmm, well, given that most of Tannin's office network runs OS/2, uptimes there are long things indeed. And seeing as there are already about a dozen computers and only two printers, neither of which does a great deal of work, I don't think so. But I take your point. But where are the nework heavies around here? Mark? Mercutio? Come on you guys, I want a real bollicking for my heresy!
Shipping to Oz? Certainly not worth the trouble for one pc of RAM. Indeed, I doubt that it would be worth it for anything less than, oh, about 100 pcs. It's not just the shipping cost (which is small), it's the paperwork. As soon as you go international it gets messy and time consuming. And then I'd have to account for it so far as GST goes and trust me, I don't want to go there. GST is bad enough when you just stick to the basics.
Shipping to Oz? Certainly not worth the trouble for one pc of RAM. Indeed, I doubt that it would be worth it for anything less than, oh, about 100 pcs. It's not just the shipping cost (which is small), it's the paperwork. As soon as you go international it gets messy and time consuming. And then I'd have to account for it so far as GST goes and trust me, I don't want to go there. GST is bad enough when you just stick to the basics.
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
Oh, I should have asked before. (Seeing as I have started already to drag your thread off-topic, I might as well go all the way.) What is the performance difference between:
1: A local printer
2: A dedicated print server such as the Jet Direct
3: A network printer attached to a workstation?
The way our office is set up, there are three machines that we print from, which (as it happens) are all attached directly to our two laser printers. (Yes, three local connections to two printers: the Kyocera attaches through an auto switch box to the main accounting machine and also the crap box, which is the machine I use to look at stupid proprietary-format price lists and stuff. It needs to run some form of Windows in order to read the Excel format files I have to look at sometimes and (owing to a bug in Excel) doesn't always print properly over the network. Hence the switch-box.) Anyway, it's a very rare thing to print from any of the other machines outside these three, and we only print over the network if one of the two printers is out of toner or something. So network printing is a bit of a non-issue for us. But I'm (as always) idly curious.
1: A local printer
2: A dedicated print server such as the Jet Direct
3: A network printer attached to a workstation?
The way our office is set up, there are three machines that we print from, which (as it happens) are all attached directly to our two laser printers. (Yes, three local connections to two printers: the Kyocera attaches through an auto switch box to the main accounting machine and also the crap box, which is the machine I use to look at stupid proprietary-format price lists and stuff. It needs to run some form of Windows in order to read the Excel format files I have to look at sometimes and (owing to a bug in Excel) doesn't always print properly over the network. Hence the switch-box.) Anyway, it's a very rare thing to print from any of the other machines outside these three, and we only print over the network if one of the two printers is out of toner or something. So network printing is a bit of a non-issue for us. But I'm (as always) idly curious.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
A printer with a builtin NIC, such as an HP4500N or my Phaser 850DP, can receive data at network speeds, which are at the very least faster than the 2MB/s of parallel or 1.5MB/s of USB.
A print server such as blakerwry's doesn't really offer any performance benefit at all, since you still have parallel connections to printers. The advantage of a JetDirect print server is really more freedom in where you put the printer (i.e. a network cable is long and flexible and doesn't cost much money, compared to a parallel or USB cable) and the obvious fact that it can make a non-network printer into one (for easy sharing/administration).
A print server such as blakerwry's doesn't really offer any performance benefit at all, since you still have parallel connections to printers. The advantage of a JetDirect print server is really more freedom in where you put the printer (i.e. a network cable is long and flexible and doesn't cost much money, compared to a parallel or USB cable) and the obvious fact that it can make a non-network printer into one (for easy sharing/administration).
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
Sorry to be asking yet another stupid question, but what is the difference between setting up a share on a printer attached to a workstation on a peer-to-peer LAN and setting that same printer up on a printer sharer? (If any.) (I'm not knocking BW's box here, just curious.)
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
Sorry, there was not an appropriate answer in your poll for me.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Tea, a printer connected to a dedicated print server has some additional management software available (accounting, security config, administrative alerts via SNMP), and may also have a simplified client configuration (er, for a network support-type person. Tannin probably wouldn't call it simpler). A printer connected to a 9x or OS/2 host really doesn't have all that many management options (share/don't share, basically).
Unless you need those options, or have a cabling-related need, a dedicated print server is basically a toy.
Unless you need those options, or have a cabling-related need, a dedicated print server is basically a toy.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
Well, I've found that on some computers windows shares(and printer shares) take a long time to load.... upto 45 seconds. So if you try printing you have to wait 45 seconds for the properties window to come up to print. (yes I have tried the win2k fix but it didn't work...seems to be a user setting somewhere)
also, the windows machine acting as a print server often cannot supply data to the printer fast enough... mening that the printer is sometimes waiting on information from the computer... with the print server I didnt see that.. it was lickety split and print.
so not only did the printer print faster, but the computer didn't spend more than a few seconds working on the print job.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
and pretty much everything Mercutio said I agree with. Yes, it isn't necessary if you have a dedicated computer, but it is a nice toy.
There are actually other advantages to a print server too that have not been talked about. I will agree that most of the time these are minor and that in general they are simply neat toys.
There is a certain OS independance using a print server. As long as the OS has the capability to output to a print server then one does not have to worry about the interdependance of multiple OS's needing to communicate to each other.
There is a power savings: Print servers tend to use much less power than having a computer availible at all times the printer may be needed.
The ability to bypass the parallel port for internal (card type) print servers does speed up transfer time.
Additional printer management capabilites come with a print server. Note that if one needs to one can purchase software to do similar stuff on a computer but it normally comes for free with a print server.
There is a certain improved security with a print server because the print queue is not stored on a second computer and thereby a secret document can not be as easily resurected without knowledge of the occurance.
With a print server The location of the printer can easily be moved because it is not dependant upon the a share (rather a network address)and the location of the sharing computer. Also, parallel cables have a very limited length, while network cabling can be much longer.
Print servers tend to be more reliable and have greater up-time than computers.
As a side note: I actually considered getting the used print server but rejected it on two grounds: The First is the 10Base-T limitation (I try to avoid 10base-T in favor of stuff that works with 100base-T. The second is price: You can get used 10/100 print servers on Ebay for a similar price and thus why should I pay the same for an inferior product.
There is a certain OS independance using a print server. As long as the OS has the capability to output to a print server then one does not have to worry about the interdependance of multiple OS's needing to communicate to each other.
There is a power savings: Print servers tend to use much less power than having a computer availible at all times the printer may be needed.
The ability to bypass the parallel port for internal (card type) print servers does speed up transfer time.
Additional printer management capabilites come with a print server. Note that if one needs to one can purchase software to do similar stuff on a computer but it normally comes for free with a print server.
There is a certain improved security with a print server because the print queue is not stored on a second computer and thereby a secret document can not be as easily resurected without knowledge of the occurance.
With a print server The location of the printer can easily be moved because it is not dependant upon the a share (rather a network address)and the location of the sharing computer. Also, parallel cables have a very limited length, while network cabling can be much longer.
Print servers tend to be more reliable and have greater up-time than computers.
As a side note: I actually considered getting the used print server but rejected it on two grounds: The First is the 10Base-T limitation (I try to avoid 10base-T in favor of stuff that works with 100base-T. The second is price: You can get used 10/100 print servers on Ebay for a similar price and thus why should I pay the same for an inferior product.
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
Interesting. I've always sort of wondered what they were for. Not relevant to me, but it's good to know this stuff. Thanks guys.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
really? I've seen the 100base-T model and it's somewhere about $200-$300 US when new. the largest items i print are fullscreen pictures, which only take up a few MB I believe. So for my needs 10baseT fits the bill.
It is not that the speed is needed; 10base is fine speed wise. It is compatibility with everyone striving to get rid of their 10base in favor of 100base. Mixing the two standards (i.e. 10base with 100base products) also causes issues with either speed (dropping everything to the lowest) or buffering(100->10). Thus I prefer 10/100 products that can operate at 100, failing that 100base, and as a distant third 10base.
Yes 10/100's cost much more new ($200-$300 is correct). But I'm not comparing a used to a new item pricewise. I'm comparing used 10/100 against a used 10base and finding that there isn't much price difference in the used market and then I'd always go for the 10/100's even for a nominal increase in price.
Yes 10/100's cost much more new ($200-$300 is correct). But I'm not comparing a used to a new item pricewise. I'm comparing used 10/100 against a used 10base and finding that there isn't much price difference in the used market and then I'd always go for the 10/100's even for a nominal increase in price.
blakerwry
Storage? I am Storage!
I guess I'm spoiled with my 10/100 switch... Although It would sure be nice to have a gigabit switch... not that I could really get full use of it though.
The 4port switch (surprisingly) meets my current needs.. but I also have a 24 and a 4 port hub.