Re: Capture card Vs parallel port

Andrew Vander Molen (vdmolen@nscl.msu.edu)
Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:20:17 -0400


>>On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, Phil wrote:
>>> I did this for a while, and it worked great when it worked. When it
>didn't
>>> work, it was generally because the Connectix driver was looking at the
>wrong
>>> port.
>>
>>I've never had this happen..but I remember hearing somewhere that sticking
>>the cam on LPT1 fixes it.
>
>You can't altogether go by my experience with the quickcam because mine was
>starting to die.
>
>
>>> What do you think of the parallel Quickcam VC? It's sure cheap enough,
>and
>>> claims to be faster than the Quickcam II.
>>
>>I've never used them..I've just heard of lots of problems with them. Some
>>people say they work great..others don't.. I never figured out if the
>>problems were with the parallel port version or the USB version.
>>
>I'd be willing to bet you a beer that most of the problems are with Win95
>users attempting to run the USB version. USB users either swear by the cam
>or swear at it. I haven't heard from many people running the parallel
>version.
>
>
>
I've had a brief experience with two of them; one on a desk top and the other on a laptop.
They both worked fine. I can't comment on the quality as I didn't do a side by side but if money is a problem you can get a color camera for $100. The parallel version also has the advantage that if you move the camera to other machines its quick and easy.
amv