🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5237@rosie.NeXT.COM> John_Graves@next.com (John Graves) writes:
> In article <1992Sep28.183056.20440@crash> coconut@crash.cts.com (Brian Dear)  
> writes:
> > NeXT tells me any lengthening of the cable would result in
> > loss of signal or degraded signal.  I say a properly shielded cable
> > should be able to go another say 15 feet, no?
> >
> > Brian Dear /// Coconut Computing, Inc. /// brian@coconut.com
> The problem with extending the printer cable is the added propagation delay  
of  
> the additional length of cable.  Signals have to travel from the computer, to  
> the printer, & back, so the propagation delay is related to twice the length  
of  
> the cable.  
> 
> The system was designed to work reliably with the standard printer cable over  
> all combinations of computers, printers, and specified temperatures.   
Extending  
> the cable will remove margin from the design, increasing the chance that you  
> will get errors while printing.
> John Graves
> NeXT Computer, Inc

Not that I have done it, but I have a bit of Urban Legend that
a somehow got into my mbox concerning lengthing NeXTprinter cable.  

The bottom line is you need a lot of coax (one cable for each signal
pin) with a propagation delay of 0.8 c, in lengths cut to 80feet.  This will  
effectively offset the signals by 1 data handshake time slice. 

I can send the original tech notes if you want.

-geoff
--
"The only thing obsoleted by Windows 3.1 is poking myself in the
eye with a pointed stick." - Gene Lee
---------------------------------------------------------------
Geoffrey Brunkhorst, RCF                    brunkhorst@Mayo.edu
Guggenheim 10                                    (507) 284-1805
Mayo Foundation, Rochester MN, 55905 USA     fax (507) 284-5231