3 May
2012
3 May
'12
6:19 p.m.
On 03/05/12 2:39 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
Because it's clearly simpler to have a single bus and lose the
specialised connectors. Which PCs eventually did (long after Apple did).
Additionally, isn't USB more electrically forgiving than PS/2?
--Toby
On Wed, 2 May 2012, Tony Duell wrote:
So, it's not 'universal' by any reasonable definition. It _is_ serial. It
is mopt definitely not a bus. I guess one word right out of 3 is OK these
days :-(
As I've said before, I don't the point of a 'one size fits all'
interface. Differnt peripherals have different requirement,s itdoesnt'
seem unreasonable that you plug them into different conenctors (in the
same way that on an audio amplifier there are differnet input sockets for
line-level signals (output of a radio tuner, tape recorder or CD player),
microphone signals, pickup cartirdge signals, and so on.
The thibg I reall find pointless, ocme to think of it are USB keyboards
and mice. I think it is reasonable to assume that a modern PC is going to
be connected to a keyboard and a mouse -- just one of each. So having a
speciifc conenctor for each of them doesn't seem to be a big problem. Why
over-complicate things? Firstly, USB _requires- a microcontroller really.
It is a "micorcontroller to microcontroller" interface?
Certainly NOT "universal"
-tony