Author Topic: USB 1.0 optimizing?  (Read 4483 times)

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
USB 1.0 optimizing?
« on: Thursday, October 18, 2007, 06:55:56 PM »
As you know from my rabid rants, I lost a PC to a cheap PSU frying itself (and possibly other parts).  While I lazily take my time tackling the problem, I moved my biggest external drive over to this PC I'm using now.  The big problem, which I've known about all along, is that it has USB 1.0 ports.  That means 12 megabits max bandwidth, where I'm used to 60 megabytes of it through 2.0.  I'm surprised it works as well as it does, but one thing I noticed in the device manager is that bandwidth is allocated and limited per USB controller.  Does anyone know if this can be reassigned?  I made sure the 360 game controller is not on the same USB controller for starters.

Upgrading this system to 2.0 is not a simple matter.  For one thing, it's impossible to do without XP SP1 (or 2), which this, um, special version of XP won't readily accept.  So, yeah, I know I'm not necessarily stuck with 1.0.  It just may be harder to fix than it's worth.  (For instance, a reformat is out of the question without a previous catastrophe.)

I can play videos fine, up to 4.35GB (compressed) versions of DVDs.  Full-sized (dual-layer) dumps of movie DVDs get very stuttery on action scenes.  Theoretically, I should be able to play these, since the spec calls for 10 megabits of bandwidth max, including audio.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,180
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #1 on: Thursday, October 18, 2007, 11:20:28 PM »
You know, I don't think there's any reason you can't get your 'special' version of XP to work with SP1 or SP2. 

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #2 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 01:04:07 AM »
Hmmm . . .  Thanks.

Edit:  Here is the runaround I've gotten in the past, and which I'm circling once again as we speak:

Quote
NEC

Certified USB 2.0 / 5 Port PCI Card
. . .
 NOTE:  Do NOT use the included drivers for Win XP or Win 2000.  Download and use the newest certified Microsoft USB 2.0 Drivers [<--URL] for Windows XP and Windows 2000.
http://www.usbwholesale.com/pci%20usb2%20card.htm

Quote
Thank you for your interest in obtaining updates from our site.
. . .
http://www.update.microsoft.com/windowsupdate/v6/thanks.aspx?ln=en&&thankspage=5

Windows update?  NOOO!!

Follow alternate path . . .

Quote
USB 2.0 Support in Windows XP: High Speed at Last
. . .
You can also manually download the driver by following the steps in Universal Serial Bus 2.0 Support in Windows XP [<--URL].
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/learnmore/jones_02august05.mspx

Quote
Universal Serial Bus 2.0 support in Windows XP
. . .
To resolve this problem, obtain the latest service pack for Windows XP.
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb;en-us;312370

 :(
« Last Edit: Friday, October 19, 2007, 02:21:43 AM by Cobra951 »

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #3 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 02:43:44 AM »
One thing I noticed in the device manager is that bandwidth is allocated and limited per USB controller.  Does anyone know if this can be reassigned?
I'm not sure I know what you're asking, but in any case the answer is no.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #4 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 02:51:50 AM »
What's your answer to gpw's post?  I can't find a positive one, so far.

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #5 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 03:03:12 AM »
Go here, scroll down and look in the lower left right [edit - wow I am retarded], and click, "Download and deploy SP2 to multiple computers." This is an offline version of SP2, that can be installed without using Windows Update.

SP2 might get mad if it notices your "special" CD key. Make sure you have a new one handy.
« Last Edit: Friday, October 19, 2007, 10:25:49 AM by WindAndConfusion »

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #6 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 12:16:59 PM »
Haha!  No, that's one thing you definitely are not.  I figured it out, and thanks.  I'm leery of installing this, but I do have it now.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #7 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 12:35:35 PM »
Cobra, I have SP2 installed. I am also a special person.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #8 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 01:00:54 PM »
Are you going to be on IRC tonight?

Offline ren

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,672
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #9 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 01:08:02 PM »
I used to be special. Get the verson of sp2 for admins (C-Sharp posted it), and then use nLite to slipstream it.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #10 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 02:25:52 PM »
Yeah, I should be on IRC. The IGN PC board is going to hold a TF2 game on a private server that I'm going to attempt to join so I might be in later than usual.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,180
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #11 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 04:10:01 PM »
I have a terrible confession to make:  I'm also special.  I also run XP with SP2 and have spent time tracking down ways to get Windows Update to not even notice that I'm special.  I haven't done it in a while, but I'm sure most of the same ways around Genuine Advantage or whatever still work.  I have to boot up my other pc in order to track this stuff down, but we'll be in contact soon.

BTW, can you do file transfers through IRC?

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #12 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 06:40:43 PM »
yeah, you can transfer files in IRC

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #13 on: Friday, October 19, 2007, 07:23:56 PM »
Any help for us special cases is welcome.   :)

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #14 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 10:22:00 AM »
Sorry, I'm legit.  I would never run a OS I don't have some sort of ownership over.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,180
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #15 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 10:47:42 AM »
DON'T JUDGE ME

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #16 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 11:04:12 AM »
lol not a judgement.  I just wouldn't want to put myself in a position where I couldn't update my OS against known security threats and possibly have other bad stuff happen.

I got XP free, but in looking back paying for it would have been acceptable.  I mean I've been using it since like 2001.  The cost spread over six years isn't really all that great.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #17 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 11:23:17 AM »
I'm happy to see you put your money where your mouth is.  ;)

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #18 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 11:53:59 AM »
I have a normal copy of XP.  Might get a special copy of Vista if it comes down to being forced to use it, though.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #19 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 12:28:01 PM »
I'm happy to see you put your money where your mouth is.  ;)
Haha, I know, I know.  I did buy Office 2007 Ultimate.  It was at discount ($80), but I could have just as easily pirated it, but I didn't.  So there you go...

I also bought Vista Ultimate for $14.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #20 on: Saturday, October 20, 2007, 12:38:45 PM »
You know, Ant might not be too happy about the candor of this conversation, now I'm thinking about it.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #21 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 02:36:04 PM »
I used to be special. Get the verson of sp2 for admins (C-Sharp posted it), and then use nLite to slipstream it.
Uh, I'm not #C any more. Apparently there is/was a hentai pervert who also called himself that, and I would prefer not to be confused with him.
I did buy Office 2007 Ultimate. 
I was forced to buy Office 2003 TWICE.

Not because I wanted to, but because my school forced me to (supposedly because the BSA forced them to).

Note: I have never used Office 2003. Not even once.

Other note: If Microsoft wants any more money from me, they'll have to send Steve Ballmer over to suck my cock. In the mean time, I feel perfectly entitled to pirate any Microsoft product I might need.

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #22 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 02:41:35 PM »
The Boy Scouts of America?  Who is the BSA?  And what was the reasoning?

Our student licensing says if you aren't a student anymore you have to uninstall the product, but I doubt that happens to often and it certainly isn't enforced from what I can tell.

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #23 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 02:48:14 PM »
The Boy Scouts of America?  Who is the BSA?  And what was the reasoning?
Business Software Alliance.
Quote
Our student licensing says if you aren't a student anymore you have to uninstall the product, but I doubt that happens to often and it certainly isn't enforced from what I can tell.
Mine was quite clear that I own the license in perpetuity.

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #24 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 03:41:01 PM »
So what stopped you from using the original Office 2003?

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #25 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 04:36:17 PM »
First of all, oops. It was Office 2004 (which is a Mac version), not Office 2003 (which is a Windows version). (If I ever fucking used Office, I would probably know these things.)
So what stopped you from using the original Office 2003?
Second of all, I've never used Office. I've tried to use it a few times, but it just doesn't do what I need it to. (For example: edit a PDF; format a complicated equation properly; or graph datapoints from a very large Excel spreadsheet, using an exclusion rule and complicated formatting.)

Third of all, my school forced me to buy Office in 2004, when I wanted to register a laptop on the campus network, and again in 2006 when I got a new laptop. I understand this was because of threats made by the BSA in 2003.

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #26 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 04:53:21 PM »
Can you go into details please?  I just don't understand how any of this could have happened.

Offline ren

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,672
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #27 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 07:12:04 PM »
Uh, I'm not #C any more. Apparently there is/was a hentai pervert who also called himself that, and I would prefer not to be confused with him. I was forced to buy Office 2003 TWICE.

Not because I wanted to, but because my school forced me to (supposedly because the BSA forced them to).

Note: I have never used Office 2003. Not even once.

Other note: If Microsoft wants any more money from me, they'll have to send Steve Ballmer over to suck my cock. In the mean time, I feel perfectly entitled to pirate any Microsoft product I might need.

My bad. I just look at avatars and forgot about your name change.

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #28 on: Sunday, October 21, 2007, 08:05:25 PM »
I was forced to buy Office 2003 TWICE.
Can you go into details please?  I just don't understand how any of this could have happened.
My school had a policy to deal with software piracy. Part of this policy was that, in order to register a computer on the campus network, you had to prove you owned a copy of Microsoft Office (because they know everyone uses Office). Furthermore, any computer sold through the school included a license, and any computer purchased with a loan from the school had to include a license.

I actually asked about this policy, and told Computer Services that it required me to buy the exact same product twice. They responded by telling me that they had reached an agreement with the BSA, that software piracy was "contrary to the principles of this institution,"* and accusing me of being a filthy pirate (which is quite frankly true, but not for the reasons they thought). (*Paraphrase, I don't have the original email.)

I responded by sending Computer Services a picture of me holding up two copies of Office 2004, with a caption reading, "I didn't even need one of these, you asshats." They responded by sending my name to the disciplinary committee, who responded by calling Computer Services a bunch of asshats (no, really!).

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #29 on: Monday, October 29, 2007, 01:21:41 PM »


I'll be damned.  It works!  (The picture is not quite it, but very close, down to the 4 external + 1 internal ports.)  Still XP with no service packs.  Installed the driver that came with it, and that was that.  The Casino Royale full DVD dump plays flawlessly, but that's not nearly a test of USB 2.0 speed.  So I dragged a 6.28GB DVD folder from the USB drive to a firewire drive, and it took 9 minutes to copy.  It was taking about 140 minutes before.  Yays!

I've read that some hardware may have trouble with USB OEM drivers before SP1 standardized the whole thing, like an Epson photo printer.  If I ever pull mine out of the closet, I can always hook it up to the old USB 1.1 ports.  It's not like the thing needs that kind of bandwidth, and now I do have 8 USB ports total (+1 fairly useless one inside the case).

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #30 on: Monday, October 29, 2007, 06:28:50 PM »
Good to see that you bought a card with the NEC chipset.  NEC and Intel are the only two companies that make a USB chipset worth anything.

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #31 on: Monday, October 29, 2007, 09:01:37 PM »
Just out of curiosity, how many USB controllers are on that card?

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #32 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 06:02:07 AM »
According to Device Manager, 3, I think, if I'm reading it right. 



One of the ports is internal, though.  I guess that's for running a cable to the front panel?

Scott, I got the NEC instead of the VIA exactly becase of what you posted about it before.  I ran into a couple of VIA-chipset cards before this one, so, thanks!

Edit:  As I said, that's not a picture of the card I got.  I found something very similar locally at Microcenter, from ADS Tech.  The driver disc is full of different chipset folders, including VIA, so I guess that means ordering a "USB Turbo 2.0" card from them is a bad idea, since you don't know what you're going to get.  Windows identified my chipset as NEC uPD720101.  There are 3 listed in the NEC folder, all within one digit of each other (00, 01, 02) so I imagine anything you get in this configuration with an NEC chip it is going to be pretty close to the same thing.
« Last Edit: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 06:33:48 AM by Cobra951 »

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #33 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 07:44:32 AM »
One of the ports is internal, though.  I guess that's for running a cable to the front panel?
I have a Belkin USB expansion card (w/ the NEC chipset) and it has an internal USB port too.  I don't know what it is for.  I've never seen an internal USB device and the connections from the front panel are always connections that are looking for a series of pins to plug into.  I'm very surprised these sorts of cards don't have those pins instead of or in addition to the internal connection.  That would have helped me when I put my old motherboard in a new case that had front USB.  My motherboard doesn't have pins for a USB front panel and it would have been useful if the card did.

Scott, I got the NEC instead of the VIA exactly becase of what you posted about it before.  I ran into a couple of VIA-chipset cards before this one, so, thanks!
Yeah, VIA USB chipset-based cards are ubiquitous and cheap, but crap.  Good to know the info I dug up way back when went to some use.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #34 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 11:03:21 AM »
Aha.  Here's one application.


Now I'm thinking there's only really one USB controller in this thing, the one labeled "USB Enhanced Host Controller" in that DM pic I posted.  The 2 "Open Host Controller" ones never show anything connected to them.  I tried 2 of the other 3 ports with my key-style SD-card reader.  It branches off of the Enhanced Host Controller in DM in both cases.  I don't really know anything about the architecture here.  Maybe "Open Host" means there's nothing really there.  I had assumed it meant that there was nothing plugged into them yet.  That's what I get for assuming.

Oh, and the ports are upside down.  LOL!  They had a 50/50 chance if they paid no attention, and they got it wrong.  It's no big deal usually, but I'd need a mirror to see the LED on the card reader now (since it faces the floor).

Edit:  Problem solved.


Hahaha!  I had forgotten I have one of those.  It swivels 360 deg on one axis and about 90 on the other.
« Last Edit: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 11:25:36 AM by Cobra951 »

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #35 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 11:46:49 AM »
As far as the ports being upside-down, I've always hated how there is no real way to tell which way a USB device is supposed to be plugged in.  Sure, if you have easy visual access to the port you can see which way it goes, but I've always thought they should make it easier to plug in by touch.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #36 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 12:13:46 PM »
I agree, but nothing beats S-Video for stupidity in ergonomics.  Get out your magnifying glass and tungsten flashlight to rotate to the correct angle.  At least USB is a try, fail, flip & try again worst case.

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #37 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 12:31:53 PM »
Very true. S-Video is pretty horrible to connect, especially since those connectors are always in places difficult to see.

Offline WindAndConfusion

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,336
Re: USB 1.0 optimizing?
« Reply #38 on: Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 05:18:57 PM »
One of the ports is internal, though.  I guess that's for running a cable to the front panel?
They use them for all kinds of stuff. The Acer desktop I bought a few months ago has a flash card reader in one of the 3.5" external bays - it's connected to a USB controller on the motherboard (using pins, rather than a proper type A connector). Laptops take this to an extreme - mine has an integrated keyboard/mouse, bluetooth, and camera all connected to their own internal USB controllers.