----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff DeMaagd" To: Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 5:32 AM Subject: Re: [PIC]:USB Vendor Id > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dale Botkin > > > > No, I was not Microsoft-bashing (honest!!). Just pointing out that all of > > the developers of USB are/were large, for-profit enterprises. > > Considering the players, you can expect the mentality that a $2500 > > registration fee is negligible. > > That still sucks particularly when considering that there's a push toward > dropping the COM ports on PCs. And the Parallel Port, And the PS/2 Ports. The latest PC's we have on pre-production testing have 5 sockets. Power In, Video Out, and 4 USB. > > Sure, USB may be more flexible for end users of commodity products, stuff > like this and the extra complexity of the protocol simply doesn't help the > development of limited-run devices, particularly for niche industries, such > as what I've seen with the moves to kill the ISA bus. The ISA Bus was killed of a year ago and no longer is a requirement in the latest PC Specification. > > Will USB to RS-232 devices also be forced off the face of the market too? > Has anyone been successfull in using custom RS-232 projects through such a > USB adaptor? Yes, but you must use the drivers which does place a lot of restrictions on what you can do. But then you shouldn't be directly addressing hardware anyway unless you are doing it in a Micro$oft approved fashion. Oh, and when Windows XP is released your software will have to be approved by Micro$oft as well. Now let me see, apart from Intel who is a major supporter of USB surely not Micro$oft. Will Micro$oft do the approvals for free? Will they do it free but insist on having the Source Code as part of the approvals process ??? From my experiences to date, It is easier and cheaper to use a USB/Parallel Port adapter to interface your products. Regards Chris Carr -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu