<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_27_208213</id>
	<title>Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1267281660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>simpz writes <i>"Will the serial port as a console connection ever be displaced &mdash; especially for devices such as switches, routers, SAN boxes, etc.? In one sense it's a simple connection. But it is the only current port that, in order to use, you need to know about wiring / baud rates / parity, etc. It has non-standard pinouts. And it is becoming too slow to upload firmware to dead devices, as the firmware updates get larger. Also, the serial port is rapidly disappearing from new laptops &mdash; which is where you often really need it, in data centers. Centronics, PS/2, and current loop are mostly defunct. Is there any sign on the horizon of a USB console connection?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>simpz writes " Will the serial port as a console connection ever be displaced    especially for devices such as switches , routers , SAN boxes , etc. ?
In one sense it 's a simple connection .
But it is the only current port that , in order to use , you need to know about wiring / baud rates / parity , etc .
It has non-standard pinouts .
And it is becoming too slow to upload firmware to dead devices , as the firmware updates get larger .
Also , the serial port is rapidly disappearing from new laptops    which is where you often really need it , in data centers .
Centronics , PS/2 , and current loop are mostly defunct .
Is there any sign on the horizon of a USB console connection ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>simpz writes "Will the serial port as a console connection ever be displaced — especially for devices such as switches, routers, SAN boxes, etc.?
In one sense it's a simple connection.
But it is the only current port that, in order to use, you need to know about wiring / baud rates / parity, etc.
It has non-standard pinouts.
And it is becoming too slow to upload firmware to dead devices, as the firmware updates get larger.
Also, the serial port is rapidly disappearing from new laptops — which is where you often really need it, in data centers.
Centronics, PS/2, and current loop are mostly defunct.
Is there any sign on the horizon of a USB console connection?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302444</id>
	<title>Serial port will not die anytime soon</title>
	<author>Necroman</author>
	<datestamp>1267290540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a company that does medium to large business SAN boxes (dedicated block level RAID storage).  We've had serial ports on our storage for a very long time and it will continue that way.  It is extremely easy to get a serial port up and running from the firmware/bios for a machine that we can start outputting information to it very early in a boot process.  Trying to output this type of boot data to ethernet or USB relies on too many other devices and chips coming online first.</p><p>Serial is ease to start up with little overhead and is reliable.  There is no real tech out there that can do what serial ports can do for low-level board/firmware interaction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a company that does medium to large business SAN boxes ( dedicated block level RAID storage ) .
We 've had serial ports on our storage for a very long time and it will continue that way .
It is extremely easy to get a serial port up and running from the firmware/bios for a machine that we can start outputting information to it very early in a boot process .
Trying to output this type of boot data to ethernet or USB relies on too many other devices and chips coming online first.Serial is ease to start up with little overhead and is reliable .
There is no real tech out there that can do what serial ports can do for low-level board/firmware interaction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a company that does medium to large business SAN boxes (dedicated block level RAID storage).
We've had serial ports on our storage for a very long time and it will continue that way.
It is extremely easy to get a serial port up and running from the firmware/bios for a machine that we can start outputting information to it very early in a boot process.
Trying to output this type of boot data to ethernet or USB relies on too many other devices and chips coming online first.Serial is ease to start up with little overhead and is reliable.
There is no real tech out there that can do what serial ports can do for low-level board/firmware interaction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302232</id>
	<title>Pry my DB9 RS232 cables from my cold dead hands</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267288980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I designed a serial to USB/Ethernet adapter so  legacy serial ports can upconvert to either standard.  Underneath all these other technologies, is and will always be a serial port.</p><p><a href="http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2022767&amp;id=1462922757" title="facebook.com" rel="nofollow">Check it out</a> [facebook.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I designed a serial to USB/Ethernet adapter so legacy serial ports can upconvert to either standard .
Underneath all these other technologies , is and will always be a serial port.Check it out [ facebook.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I designed a serial to USB/Ethernet adapter so  legacy serial ports can upconvert to either standard.
Underneath all these other technologies, is and will always be a serial port.Check it out [facebook.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307100</id>
	<title>Cisco needs to add USB console</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1267381980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cisco (and other router/switch/telecom manufacturers) need to add a USB gadget (so it can plug directly to the USB port on a PC/laptop/netbook) console port.  FYI, I am NOT saying to get rid of the serial console port that typically has an 8P8C (commonly misunderstood as RJ-45) connector.  Just have both.  The USB console should work as a serial console (using a widely compatible chip like FTDI).  But they can also add additional features such as presenting flash storage on the equipment as a hard drive to the PC (ready to make backups of, or reload firmware and configurations onto, at full USB speeds), and even create a network interface for that PC/laptop to use (ethernet/IP over USB and ethernet/IP over PPP over a 2nd emulated serial port).</p><p>My cheap $90 point and shoot camera has a USB gadget port (although with no need for a serial port emulation).  Why can't Cisco add that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cisco ( and other router/switch/telecom manufacturers ) need to add a USB gadget ( so it can plug directly to the USB port on a PC/laptop/netbook ) console port .
FYI , I am NOT saying to get rid of the serial console port that typically has an 8P8C ( commonly misunderstood as RJ-45 ) connector .
Just have both .
The USB console should work as a serial console ( using a widely compatible chip like FTDI ) .
But they can also add additional features such as presenting flash storage on the equipment as a hard drive to the PC ( ready to make backups of , or reload firmware and configurations onto , at full USB speeds ) , and even create a network interface for that PC/laptop to use ( ethernet/IP over USB and ethernet/IP over PPP over a 2nd emulated serial port ) .My cheap $ 90 point and shoot camera has a USB gadget port ( although with no need for a serial port emulation ) .
Why ca n't Cisco add that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cisco (and other router/switch/telecom manufacturers) need to add a USB gadget (so it can plug directly to the USB port on a PC/laptop/netbook) console port.
FYI, I am NOT saying to get rid of the serial console port that typically has an 8P8C (commonly misunderstood as RJ-45) connector.
Just have both.
The USB console should work as a serial console (using a widely compatible chip like FTDI).
But they can also add additional features such as presenting flash storage on the equipment as a hard drive to the PC (ready to make backups of, or reload firmware and configurations onto, at full USB speeds), and even create a network interface for that PC/laptop to use (ethernet/IP over USB and ethernet/IP over PPP over a 2nd emulated serial port).My cheap $90 point and shoot camera has a USB gadget port (although with no need for a serial port emulation).
Why can't Cisco add that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302738</id>
	<title>Already Going Away</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267293240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The new Cisco 2900 and 3900 series routers, while still sporting the traditional console port, have a mini-USB port as their primary console connection now. In fact, they don't ship those classic blue rollover cables anymore with the routers.</p><p>The times are a changin', my friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The new Cisco 2900 and 3900 series routers , while still sporting the traditional console port , have a mini-USB port as their primary console connection now .
In fact , they do n't ship those classic blue rollover cables anymore with the routers.The times are a changin ' , my friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new Cisco 2900 and 3900 series routers, while still sporting the traditional console port, have a mini-USB port as their primary console connection now.
In fact, they don't ship those classic blue rollover cables anymore with the routers.The times are a changin', my friends.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303258</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267298280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are many unusual hurdles in my experience.
<p>
The drivers are, in my experience, extremely low quality, and throw bluescreens from the USB/serial port on an otherwise well behaved machine.
</p><p>
Keyspan devices also have no package/drivers for Ubuntu last I checked, with Google reporting on needing to recompile the kernel or some such things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many unusual hurdles in my experience .
The drivers are , in my experience , extremely low quality , and throw bluescreens from the USB/serial port on an otherwise well behaved machine .
Keyspan devices also have no package/drivers for Ubuntu last I checked , with Google reporting on needing to recompile the kernel or some such things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many unusual hurdles in my experience.
The drivers are, in my experience, extremely low quality, and throw bluescreens from the USB/serial port on an otherwise well behaved machine.
Keyspan devices also have no package/drivers for Ubuntu last I checked, with Google reporting on needing to recompile the kernel or some such things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31308494</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>Dice</author>
	<datestamp>1267349160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking as someone who spends a lot of time in data centers: A serial adapter is pretty much mandatory.  Why don't you have one?  Worst case scenario you can buy a USB one and keep it in your laptop bag.  Best case scenario you should have an entire serial console server and just plug your device into that.  Serial is the lowest common denominator: works on servers, switches, firewalls, load balancers, PDUs, and damn near everything else.  Serial is awesome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking as someone who spends a lot of time in data centers : A serial adapter is pretty much mandatory .
Why do n't you have one ?
Worst case scenario you can buy a USB one and keep it in your laptop bag .
Best case scenario you should have an entire serial console server and just plug your device into that .
Serial is the lowest common denominator : works on servers , switches , firewalls , load balancers , PDUs , and damn near everything else .
Serial is awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking as someone who spends a lot of time in data centers: A serial adapter is pretty much mandatory.
Why don't you have one?
Worst case scenario you can buy a USB one and keep it in your laptop bag.
Best case scenario you should have an entire serial console server and just plug your device into that.
Serial is the lowest common denominator: works on servers, switches, firewalls, load balancers, PDUs, and damn near everything else.
Serial is awesome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31310684</id>
	<title>USB is not . . .</title>
	<author>NicknamesAreStupid</author>
	<datestamp>1267365960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>a bus.  It is actually a hub and requires that one end-system be a controller (Intel's euphemism for a PC), a non trivial piece of silicon when compared to the slave.  Other alternatives like Ethernet and Firewire (IEEE1394)  never became popular enough for peripheral devices.  So, the economies of scale are not there.  Ethernet (i.e., 100BASE-T) might work.  However, the specification requirements to drive the signal 100 meters make the interface too expensive, power-wise, for battery operated devices, and POE makes the power side more expensive.  There is also the cabling issue.  Firewire is truly a bus, but the silicon is still pricey when compared to USB 2.0, and there still may be a 25 cent royalty (per device) from Apple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>a bus .
It is actually a hub and requires that one end-system be a controller ( Intel 's euphemism for a PC ) , a non trivial piece of silicon when compared to the slave .
Other alternatives like Ethernet and Firewire ( IEEE1394 ) never became popular enough for peripheral devices .
So , the economies of scale are not there .
Ethernet ( i.e. , 100BASE-T ) might work .
However , the specification requirements to drive the signal 100 meters make the interface too expensive , power-wise , for battery operated devices , and POE makes the power side more expensive .
There is also the cabling issue .
Firewire is truly a bus , but the silicon is still pricey when compared to USB 2.0 , and there still may be a 25 cent royalty ( per device ) from Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a bus.
It is actually a hub and requires that one end-system be a controller (Intel's euphemism for a PC), a non trivial piece of silicon when compared to the slave.
Other alternatives like Ethernet and Firewire (IEEE1394)  never became popular enough for peripheral devices.
So, the economies of scale are not there.
Ethernet (i.e., 100BASE-T) might work.
However, the specification requirements to drive the signal 100 meters make the interface too expensive, power-wise, for battery operated devices, and POE makes the power side more expensive.
There is also the cabling issue.
Firewire is truly a bus, but the silicon is still pricey when compared to USB 2.0, and there still may be a 25 cent royalty (per device) from Apple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304888</id>
	<title>Would be nice to change the physical port spec</title>
	<author>Comen</author>
	<datestamp>1267365780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the DB-9 connector is a little big for what its doing though, I mean even a DB-15 monitor type connector is duplo size for 15 pins.<br>Maybe I just like Cisco to much, but it would be nice to have everyone just use the Cisco RJ-45 spec for serial connections, I hate when other router/switch vendors use RJ45 but the pins-outs are totally different so you have to find that special DB9 to RJ45 adapter for that 1 piece of gear, instead of using 1 of the Cisco adapters that you have laying everywhere.<br>Even if on the back of laptops they used RJ45 for serial and marked they would keep it around longer? the DB9 connector seems to big realistate wise to me I guess.<br>Then you could just use a regular RJ45 cable to connect between the 2, no need for some non-standard cable.</p><p>Also for those of you that use console servers allot, I still think the older Cisco access servers that many use for console servers now a days are better than any of the Linux server type solutions I have tried. The Cisco access devices supports telnet to each port, a real routing table that supports multiple gateways via static or even routing protocols like OSPF etc... also Tacacs+ auth if you need that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the DB-9 connector is a little big for what its doing though , I mean even a DB-15 monitor type connector is duplo size for 15 pins.Maybe I just like Cisco to much , but it would be nice to have everyone just use the Cisco RJ-45 spec for serial connections , I hate when other router/switch vendors use RJ45 but the pins-outs are totally different so you have to find that special DB9 to RJ45 adapter for that 1 piece of gear , instead of using 1 of the Cisco adapters that you have laying everywhere.Even if on the back of laptops they used RJ45 for serial and marked they would keep it around longer ?
the DB9 connector seems to big realistate wise to me I guess.Then you could just use a regular RJ45 cable to connect between the 2 , no need for some non-standard cable.Also for those of you that use console servers allot , I still think the older Cisco access servers that many use for console servers now a days are better than any of the Linux server type solutions I have tried .
The Cisco access devices supports telnet to each port , a real routing table that supports multiple gateways via static or even routing protocols like OSPF etc... also Tacacs + auth if you need that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the DB-9 connector is a little big for what its doing though, I mean even a DB-15 monitor type connector is duplo size for 15 pins.Maybe I just like Cisco to much, but it would be nice to have everyone just use the Cisco RJ-45 spec for serial connections, I hate when other router/switch vendors use RJ45 but the pins-outs are totally different so you have to find that special DB9 to RJ45 adapter for that 1 piece of gear, instead of using 1 of the Cisco adapters that you have laying everywhere.Even if on the back of laptops they used RJ45 for serial and marked they would keep it around longer?
the DB9 connector seems to big realistate wise to me I guess.Then you could just use a regular RJ45 cable to connect between the 2, no need for some non-standard cable.Also for those of you that use console servers allot, I still think the older Cisco access servers that many use for console servers now a days are better than any of the Linux server type solutions I have tried.
The Cisco access devices supports telnet to each port, a real routing table that supports multiple gateways via static or even routing protocols like OSPF etc... also Tacacs+ auth if you need that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304090</id>
	<title>Re:You young whippersnappers and your newfangled..</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1267352100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Back when men were men, this is what a manly console looked like; <a href="http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg" title="columbia.edu">http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg</a> [columbia.edu] </i></p><p>The younguns should note the suit and tie.  It was how we got things done.  That's right.  Getting things done required a Real Man wearing a Real Suit And Tie.  Or labcoat and tie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back when men were men , this is what a manly console looked like ; http : //www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg [ columbia.edu ] The younguns should note the suit and tie .
It was how we got things done .
That 's right .
Getting things done required a Real Man wearing a Real Suit And Tie .
Or labcoat and tie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back when men were men, this is what a manly console looked like; http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg [columbia.edu] The younguns should note the suit and tie.
It was how we got things done.
That's right.
Getting things done required a Real Man wearing a Real Suit And Tie.
Or labcoat and tie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307364</id>
	<title>RS232 and serial mean different things</title>
	<author>somethinsfishy</author>
	<datestamp>1267383840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of what's being called serial here is asynchronous serial, meaning there's no external clock line. Each end of the connection has a clock that determines the baud rate, and so they must match in frequency within a couple of percent. There's a TX transmit line and an RX receive line and a ground wire in the minimal configuration. In a pc or an MCU there's a chip or an emulated version of same called a UART Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter that takes care of buffering the serial bits as they come in (or go out of) the data wires One Bit At A Time. Many microcontrollers have built-in UART's. It used to be that the signal from a UART was universally converted to RS232 voltage levels. The spec says -12 volts is a 1 and +12volts is a 0. This is a really old standard that was invented to connect dumb terminals to mainframes through a modem. Several other wires are in the spec have to do with flow control and interacting with the modem. To get from 5 volt (or whatever) logic levels, a special line driver is used. A popular one is the MAX232 series of chips. These days the other lines in the RS232 cable are rarely used for their original purpose. The Arduino uses a flow control line to start the flash burner through a bootloader for instance. Async serial is very much still around because there are a large number of periperal chips and board-level modules that use a UART to communicate with an MCU or each other (sparkfun.com). In these applications, the voltage is at logic level. It is not shifted to RS232 levels, although you could do this if you needed to.<br>The serial port on the original PC is a DB9 connector. The UART's interface to the CPU is interrupt driven, so you can do pretty good real-time stuff. Since the async serial port us pretty much gone on PC's, a lot of devices like most cell phone cables use an emulated UART port running over USB. There are a couple of companies that make USB to 5 or 3.3 volt UART converter chips that implement the USB protocol. Rather than having to put the USB protocol it in the target processor, you buy the functionality. Of course there are MCUs that know the USB stuff, but they're a bit uncommon. Also there's the whole licensing problem if you roll your own USB device. So as strange as it is, designing with an 8-bt MCU, you'll use a chip with a lot more horsepower than the target to handle the USB interface. This is a very, very common thing to do. The other half of the problem is the host device drivers. FTDI make chips with no-cost drivers that are routinely used alongside a lot of 8-bit MCUs.  There are drivers in the linux kernel for a handful of converter chips, and FTDI's are the best known.<br>The PITA for embedded designers is that the serial port emulated by the FTDI chip has buffering constraints and timing limitations (16ms latency) that basically ruin the real-time capability of the port. This really sucks. The alternative is to write your own drivers for Win, Mac, and Linux, and program your mcu to use one of the faster modes in the USB protocol than the one offered by the USB device class that includes async serial. For most people this doesn't matter. The host app on the PC uses its driver package that comes with, and you never have to know that your cell phone is using a 50 year old data link to talk to the pc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of what 's being called serial here is asynchronous serial , meaning there 's no external clock line .
Each end of the connection has a clock that determines the baud rate , and so they must match in frequency within a couple of percent .
There 's a TX transmit line and an RX receive line and a ground wire in the minimal configuration .
In a pc or an MCU there 's a chip or an emulated version of same called a UART Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter that takes care of buffering the serial bits as they come in ( or go out of ) the data wires One Bit At A Time .
Many microcontrollers have built-in UART 's .
It used to be that the signal from a UART was universally converted to RS232 voltage levels .
The spec says -12 volts is a 1 and + 12volts is a 0 .
This is a really old standard that was invented to connect dumb terminals to mainframes through a modem .
Several other wires are in the spec have to do with flow control and interacting with the modem .
To get from 5 volt ( or whatever ) logic levels , a special line driver is used .
A popular one is the MAX232 series of chips .
These days the other lines in the RS232 cable are rarely used for their original purpose .
The Arduino uses a flow control line to start the flash burner through a bootloader for instance .
Async serial is very much still around because there are a large number of periperal chips and board-level modules that use a UART to communicate with an MCU or each other ( sparkfun.com ) .
In these applications , the voltage is at logic level .
It is not shifted to RS232 levels , although you could do this if you needed to.The serial port on the original PC is a DB9 connector .
The UART 's interface to the CPU is interrupt driven , so you can do pretty good real-time stuff .
Since the async serial port us pretty much gone on PC 's , a lot of devices like most cell phone cables use an emulated UART port running over USB .
There are a couple of companies that make USB to 5 or 3.3 volt UART converter chips that implement the USB protocol .
Rather than having to put the USB protocol it in the target processor , you buy the functionality .
Of course there are MCUs that know the USB stuff , but they 're a bit uncommon .
Also there 's the whole licensing problem if you roll your own USB device .
So as strange as it is , designing with an 8-bt MCU , you 'll use a chip with a lot more horsepower than the target to handle the USB interface .
This is a very , very common thing to do .
The other half of the problem is the host device drivers .
FTDI make chips with no-cost drivers that are routinely used alongside a lot of 8-bit MCUs .
There are drivers in the linux kernel for a handful of converter chips , and FTDI 's are the best known.The PITA for embedded designers is that the serial port emulated by the FTDI chip has buffering constraints and timing limitations ( 16ms latency ) that basically ruin the real-time capability of the port .
This really sucks .
The alternative is to write your own drivers for Win , Mac , and Linux , and program your mcu to use one of the faster modes in the USB protocol than the one offered by the USB device class that includes async serial .
For most people this does n't matter .
The host app on the PC uses its driver package that comes with , and you never have to know that your cell phone is using a 50 year old data link to talk to the pc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of what's being called serial here is asynchronous serial, meaning there's no external clock line.
Each end of the connection has a clock that determines the baud rate, and so they must match in frequency within a couple of percent.
There's a TX transmit line and an RX receive line and a ground wire in the minimal configuration.
In a pc or an MCU there's a chip or an emulated version of same called a UART Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter that takes care of buffering the serial bits as they come in (or go out of) the data wires One Bit At A Time.
Many microcontrollers have built-in UART's.
It used to be that the signal from a UART was universally converted to RS232 voltage levels.
The spec says -12 volts is a 1 and +12volts is a 0.
This is a really old standard that was invented to connect dumb terminals to mainframes through a modem.
Several other wires are in the spec have to do with flow control and interacting with the modem.
To get from 5 volt (or whatever) logic levels, a special line driver is used.
A popular one is the MAX232 series of chips.
These days the other lines in the RS232 cable are rarely used for their original purpose.
The Arduino uses a flow control line to start the flash burner through a bootloader for instance.
Async serial is very much still around because there are a large number of periperal chips and board-level modules that use a UART to communicate with an MCU or each other (sparkfun.com).
In these applications, the voltage is at logic level.
It is not shifted to RS232 levels, although you could do this if you needed to.The serial port on the original PC is a DB9 connector.
The UART's interface to the CPU is interrupt driven, so you can do pretty good real-time stuff.
Since the async serial port us pretty much gone on PC's, a lot of devices like most cell phone cables use an emulated UART port running over USB.
There are a couple of companies that make USB to 5 or 3.3 volt UART converter chips that implement the USB protocol.
Rather than having to put the USB protocol it in the target processor, you buy the functionality.
Of course there are MCUs that know the USB stuff, but they're a bit uncommon.
Also there's the whole licensing problem if you roll your own USB device.
So as strange as it is, designing with an 8-bt MCU, you'll use a chip with a lot more horsepower than the target to handle the USB interface.
This is a very, very common thing to do.
The other half of the problem is the host device drivers.
FTDI make chips with no-cost drivers that are routinely used alongside a lot of 8-bit MCUs.
There are drivers in the linux kernel for a handful of converter chips, and FTDI's are the best known.The PITA for embedded designers is that the serial port emulated by the FTDI chip has buffering constraints and timing limitations (16ms latency) that basically ruin the real-time capability of the port.
This really sucks.
The alternative is to write your own drivers for Win, Mac, and Linux, and program your mcu to use one of the faster modes in the USB protocol than the one offered by the USB device class that includes async serial.
For most people this doesn't matter.
The host app on the PC uses its driver package that comes with, and you never have to know that your cell phone is using a 50 year old data link to talk to the pc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844</id>
	<title>Web Interface</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most of the newer switches, routers, multiplexers and any other device with a serial port for a terminal interface I've had the pleasure of configuring had a web interface. I'd say that's the direction manufacturers are headed and is the next logical step.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the newer switches , routers , multiplexers and any other device with a serial port for a terminal interface I 've had the pleasure of configuring had a web interface .
I 'd say that 's the direction manufacturers are headed and is the next logical step .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the newer switches, routers, multiplexers and any other device with a serial port for a terminal interface I've had the pleasure of configuring had a web interface.
I'd say that's the direction manufacturers are headed and is the next logical step.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302508</id>
	<title>Cisco ISR G2 has a USB connector for the console</title>
	<author>dkok</author>
	<datestamp>1267291140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10538/data\_sheet\_c78\_556319.html" title="cisco.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10538/data\_sheet\_c78\_556319.html</a> [cisco.com]
says:
" A new, innovative, mini-B USB console port supports management connectivity when traditional serial ports are not available.
 The traditional console and auxiliary ports are also available. Either the USB-based console or the RJ-45-based console port can be used to configure the router."</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10538/data \ _sheet \ _c78 \ _556319.html [ cisco.com ] says : " A new , innovative , mini-B USB console port supports management connectivity when traditional serial ports are not available .
The traditional console and auxiliary ports are also available .
Either the USB-based console or the RJ-45-based console port can be used to configure the router .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10538/data\_sheet\_c78\_556319.html [cisco.com]
says:
" A new, innovative, mini-B USB console port supports management connectivity when traditional serial ports are not available.
The traditional console and auxiliary ports are also available.
Either the USB-based console or the RJ-45-based console port can be used to configure the router.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830</id>
	<title>It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... about a decade ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... about a decade ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... about a decade ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302656</id>
	<title>I'm Still Waiting for Them to be IMPLEMENTED...</title>
	<author>xquercus</author>
	<datestamp>1267292400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While console access via serial port has long been a given on commercial Unix and network hardware, it never caught on in the PC world.  Sure, there are specific manufacturers and replacement BIOS options available to allow low level configuration of a PC via the serial port but this should have been standard from the '80s.  I truly don't understand why PC manufacturers never saw the value in being able to view boot messages and configure BIOS options via the good ol' serial port.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While console access via serial port has long been a given on commercial Unix and network hardware , it never caught on in the PC world .
Sure , there are specific manufacturers and replacement BIOS options available to allow low level configuration of a PC via the serial port but this should have been standard from the '80s .
I truly do n't understand why PC manufacturers never saw the value in being able to view boot messages and configure BIOS options via the good ol ' serial port .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While console access via serial port has long been a given on commercial Unix and network hardware, it never caught on in the PC world.
Sure, there are specific manufacturers and replacement BIOS options available to allow low level configuration of a PC via the serial port but this should have been standard from the '80s.
I truly don't understand why PC manufacturers never saw the value in being able to view boot messages and configure BIOS options via the good ol' serial port.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304226</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267354380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about that. To 2015 EE graduates, this <a href="http://www.buy.com/prod/serial-to-idc-header-slot-plate-adapter-9-02/q/loc/101/211997648.html" title="buy.com" rel="nofollow">Serial to IDC Header Slot Plate Adapter</a> [buy.com] might look like something dug out from an iron age excavation site, or at least like something that one might attach to dad's ancient computer box from 2003 in order to give it even more ancient functionality.</p><p>In short: we need better USB adapters. And any software that doesn't work with a really good USB adapter will have to be rewritten. I wonder what we will do when USB finally gets phased out...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about that .
To 2015 EE graduates , this Serial to IDC Header Slot Plate Adapter [ buy.com ] might look like something dug out from an iron age excavation site , or at least like something that one might attach to dad 's ancient computer box from 2003 in order to give it even more ancient functionality.In short : we need better USB adapters .
And any software that does n't work with a really good USB adapter will have to be rewritten .
I wonder what we will do when USB finally gets phased out.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about that.
To 2015 EE graduates, this Serial to IDC Header Slot Plate Adapter [buy.com] might look like something dug out from an iron age excavation site, or at least like something that one might attach to dad's ancient computer box from 2003 in order to give it even more ancient functionality.In short: we need better USB adapters.
And any software that doesn't work with a really good USB adapter will have to be rewritten.
I wonder what we will do when USB finally gets phased out...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306008</id>
	<title>Re:You young whippersnappers and your newfangled..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267374720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meh - too true...and can you do some basic, loop-back debugging on a USB port with just a bent paper clip? I think not!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh - too true...and can you do some basic , loop-back debugging on a USB port with just a bent paper clip ?
I think not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh - too true...and can you do some basic, loop-back debugging on a USB port with just a bent paper clip?
I think not!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307130</id>
	<title>erik</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267382280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so you want to be a serial killer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so you want to be a serial killer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so you want to be a serial killer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301878</id>
	<title>New Cisco devices are going to USB console</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The latest-generation Cisco devices are switching to USB for console communications. So it's starting to happen...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest-generation Cisco devices are switching to USB for console communications .
So it 's starting to happen.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest-generation Cisco devices are switching to USB for console communications.
So it's starting to happen...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305056</id>
	<title>I'm biased</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267367400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to say it right up front.  I love serial ports.  They are simple to implement in hardware and software.  The are simple to use.  They are easy to understand.  While I'd say that the Maxim chips have made RS232 easier to implement, you can still wire your own without it.  Of course, it's possible to do the same with USB, but it would take quite a bit more work and it wouldn't be a "legal" USB port without joining the association.</p><p>There's no denying that USB has a faster transfer rate than any RS232 implementations that I've seen.  But, that's not always necessary and any time that I see where you have to join a group to implement something (hardware, software, etc.) I automatically think that the group is trying corner the market on something.  (Maybe I'm cynical?)  USB really is contrary to the freedoms that we've come to enjoy in open source software and I sometimes find that distasteful.  It's also made it easier for the large corporations to implement (properly) than the smaller companies.  Is it a necessary evil at this point?  Maybe.  Is it the right solution for some things?  At this point, certainly.  That doesn't mean that I should have to use it for everything.  And... given the choice, I'd rather see a simple serial port with USB speed that you don't have to spend 100s of man hours and/or sell (a part of) your soul to implement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say it right up front .
I love serial ports .
They are simple to implement in hardware and software .
The are simple to use .
They are easy to understand .
While I 'd say that the Maxim chips have made RS232 easier to implement , you can still wire your own without it .
Of course , it 's possible to do the same with USB , but it would take quite a bit more work and it would n't be a " legal " USB port without joining the association.There 's no denying that USB has a faster transfer rate than any RS232 implementations that I 've seen .
But , that 's not always necessary and any time that I see where you have to join a group to implement something ( hardware , software , etc .
) I automatically think that the group is trying corner the market on something .
( Maybe I 'm cynical ?
) USB really is contrary to the freedoms that we 've come to enjoy in open source software and I sometimes find that distasteful .
It 's also made it easier for the large corporations to implement ( properly ) than the smaller companies .
Is it a necessary evil at this point ?
Maybe. Is it the right solution for some things ?
At this point , certainly .
That does n't mean that I should have to use it for everything .
And... given the choice , I 'd rather see a simple serial port with USB speed that you do n't have to spend 100s of man hours and/or sell ( a part of ) your soul to implement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say it right up front.
I love serial ports.
They are simple to implement in hardware and software.
The are simple to use.
They are easy to understand.
While I'd say that the Maxim chips have made RS232 easier to implement, you can still wire your own without it.
Of course, it's possible to do the same with USB, but it would take quite a bit more work and it wouldn't be a "legal" USB port without joining the association.There's no denying that USB has a faster transfer rate than any RS232 implementations that I've seen.
But, that's not always necessary and any time that I see where you have to join a group to implement something (hardware, software, etc.
) I automatically think that the group is trying corner the market on something.
(Maybe I'm cynical?
)  USB really is contrary to the freedoms that we've come to enjoy in open source software and I sometimes find that distasteful.
It's also made it easier for the large corporations to implement (properly) than the smaller companies.
Is it a necessary evil at this point?
Maybe.  Is it the right solution for some things?
At this point, certainly.
That doesn't mean that I should have to use it for everything.
And... given the choice, I'd rather see a simple serial port with USB speed that you don't have to spend 100s of man hours and/or sell (a part of) your soul to implement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307140</id>
	<title>Re:You young whippersnappers and your newfangled..</title>
	<author>Big Jojo</author>
	<datestamp>1267382340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nah<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... a Real Man's console looks like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IMSAI8080.jpg" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IMSAI8080.jpg</a> [wikipedia.org]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...

One difference:  you can use an IMSAI console with just your OWN fingers and toes.  You don't need to color your own "Twister" game onto the console and throw a party.  "Left nose Blue!" never worked well unless Alice the Alien could join in (at which point we're clearly talking non-Men).

One thing both those machines do illustrate is the serious deficiency, in modern computers, of blinkenlights.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah ... a Real Man 's console looks like http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File : IMSAI8080.jpg [ wikipedia.org ] .. . One difference : you can use an IMSAI console with just your OWN fingers and toes .
You do n't need to color your own " Twister " game onto the console and throw a party .
" Left nose Blue !
" never worked well unless Alice the Alien could join in ( at which point we 're clearly talking non-Men ) .
One thing both those machines do illustrate is the serious deficiency , in modern computers , of blinkenlights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah ... a Real Man's console looks like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IMSAI8080.jpg [wikipedia.org] ...

One difference:  you can use an IMSAI console with just your OWN fingers and toes.
You don't need to color your own "Twister" game onto the console and throw a party.
"Left nose Blue!
" never worked well unless Alice the Alien could join in (at which point we're clearly talking non-Men).
One thing both those machines do illustrate is the serious deficiency, in modern computers, of blinkenlights.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302238</id>
	<title>Ever tried programming USB?</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1267289040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RS232 is easy to program. If it's a switch without OS or some other embedded device, RS232 is the easiest and fastest way.<br>Sure on the PC side there are the problems of baud, parity and so on. Thing is on the device side you can get a working bidi buffered transmission within 30 lines of assembler (100-200 if you have no UART and need to push each bit yourself). Writing equivalent of "hello world" over USB becomes kilobytes. And if you go into a web interface, you quickly lose enthusiasm as you realize on top of CGI you need to write the web server, the TCP stack, the IP stack, and if you're unlucky, the Ethernet protocol stack (in VHDL) as well.</p><p>On top of that, a thousand things can go wrong in writing USB or Ethernet or whatever. RS232 is rugged, fault-proof, it works from moment zero. You will be able to communicate with bootloader which has no idea what ethernet is, you will be able to diagnose faults when 90\% of essential peripherials are fried, and if the cable goes loose, just move it around a bit and the connection will be back, no timeouts, no disconnects, no "intelligence" to get in your way.</p><p>And if you open various devices that use USB instead of serial, you will find a neat little FDDI, Profilic or such chip connected to the USB interface. The devices really connect over RS232. They just have the "RS232 over USB dongle" built in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RS232 is easy to program .
If it 's a switch without OS or some other embedded device , RS232 is the easiest and fastest way.Sure on the PC side there are the problems of baud , parity and so on .
Thing is on the device side you can get a working bidi buffered transmission within 30 lines of assembler ( 100-200 if you have no UART and need to push each bit yourself ) .
Writing equivalent of " hello world " over USB becomes kilobytes .
And if you go into a web interface , you quickly lose enthusiasm as you realize on top of CGI you need to write the web server , the TCP stack , the IP stack , and if you 're unlucky , the Ethernet protocol stack ( in VHDL ) as well.On top of that , a thousand things can go wrong in writing USB or Ethernet or whatever .
RS232 is rugged , fault-proof , it works from moment zero .
You will be able to communicate with bootloader which has no idea what ethernet is , you will be able to diagnose faults when 90 \ % of essential peripherials are fried , and if the cable goes loose , just move it around a bit and the connection will be back , no timeouts , no disconnects , no " intelligence " to get in your way.And if you open various devices that use USB instead of serial , you will find a neat little FDDI , Profilic or such chip connected to the USB interface .
The devices really connect over RS232 .
They just have the " RS232 over USB dongle " built in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RS232 is easy to program.
If it's a switch without OS or some other embedded device, RS232 is the easiest and fastest way.Sure on the PC side there are the problems of baud, parity and so on.
Thing is on the device side you can get a working bidi buffered transmission within 30 lines of assembler (100-200 if you have no UART and need to push each bit yourself).
Writing equivalent of "hello world" over USB becomes kilobytes.
And if you go into a web interface, you quickly lose enthusiasm as you realize on top of CGI you need to write the web server, the TCP stack, the IP stack, and if you're unlucky, the Ethernet protocol stack (in VHDL) as well.On top of that, a thousand things can go wrong in writing USB or Ethernet or whatever.
RS232 is rugged, fault-proof, it works from moment zero.
You will be able to communicate with bootloader which has no idea what ethernet is, you will be able to diagnose faults when 90\% of essential peripherials are fried, and if the cable goes loose, just move it around a bit and the connection will be back, no timeouts, no disconnects, no "intelligence" to get in your way.And if you open various devices that use USB instead of serial, you will find a neat little FDDI, Profilic or such chip connected to the USB interface.
The devices really connect over RS232.
They just have the "RS232 over USB dongle" built in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302212</id>
	<title>Probably not...</title>
	<author>bbourqu</author>
	<datestamp>1267288740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably not. Serial is s$#t simple and utterly reliable in dire circumstances. I'm a network engineer at a large university and have spent the last 3 years setting up an "out-of-band" network that includes serial access to all of our network devices. The bit rates can be increased to upload firmware when necessary. Cabling is straightforward and follows the old DTE/DCE standards. The new devices that have USB Type A physical interfaces that I have come across still RS-232 signaling, requiring special cables. We recently had to make a batch of these custom cables to accommodate access to serial ports on new blade chassis SAN equipment. Like it or not, RS-232 serial ports will be around for a good, long while.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably not .
Serial is s $ # t simple and utterly reliable in dire circumstances .
I 'm a network engineer at a large university and have spent the last 3 years setting up an " out-of-band " network that includes serial access to all of our network devices .
The bit rates can be increased to upload firmware when necessary .
Cabling is straightforward and follows the old DTE/DCE standards .
The new devices that have USB Type A physical interfaces that I have come across still RS-232 signaling , requiring special cables .
We recently had to make a batch of these custom cables to accommodate access to serial ports on new blade chassis SAN equipment .
Like it or not , RS-232 serial ports will be around for a good , long while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably not.
Serial is s$#t simple and utterly reliable in dire circumstances.
I'm a network engineer at a large university and have spent the last 3 years setting up an "out-of-band" network that includes serial access to all of our network devices.
The bit rates can be increased to upload firmware when necessary.
Cabling is straightforward and follows the old DTE/DCE standards.
The new devices that have USB Type A physical interfaces that I have come across still RS-232 signaling, requiring special cables.
We recently had to make a batch of these custom cables to accommodate access to serial ports on new blade chassis SAN equipment.
Like it or not, RS-232 serial ports will be around for a good, long while.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303148</id>
	<title>Re:What will we do with all the US Robotics Courie</title>
	<author>spinkham</author>
	<datestamp>1267296780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still have my Courier V.everything modem from the 90's.. Was upgradeable for every change up until the v.92 standard, and was the best modem available through v.90.</p><p>I don't even have a landline at home anymore, but still can't bring my self to get rid such a long-lived piece of tech...</p><p>Also, security tip: Wardialing isn't dead, it's just <a href="http://warvox.org/index.html" title="warvox.org">gotten better</a> [warvox.org]..  Modems are an oft overlooked piece of a security strategy, and it's still fun to get to p0wn a company through some old 33.6K modem on an audit..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have my Courier V.everything modem from the 90 's.. Was upgradeable for every change up until the v.92 standard , and was the best modem available through v.90.I do n't even have a landline at home anymore , but still ca n't bring my self to get rid such a long-lived piece of tech...Also , security tip : Wardialing is n't dead , it 's just gotten better [ warvox.org ] .. Modems are an oft overlooked piece of a security strategy , and it 's still fun to get to p0wn a company through some old 33.6K modem on an audit. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still have my Courier V.everything modem from the 90's.. Was upgradeable for every change up until the v.92 standard, and was the best modem available through v.90.I don't even have a landline at home anymore, but still can't bring my self to get rid such a long-lived piece of tech...Also, security tip: Wardialing isn't dead, it's just gotten better [warvox.org]..  Modems are an oft overlooked piece of a security strategy, and it's still fun to get to p0wn a company through some old 33.6K modem on an audit..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304604</id>
	<title>Eprom burners, XY-Plotters, MCU Devboards...</title>
	<author>MindPrison</author>
	<datestamp>1267362180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...all use SERIAL, even today.</p><p>Unfortunately all my new PC's only come with USB, so I'm using older computers to be compatible with both the SOFTWARE (that wasn't made for seriously fast computers) and the RS232.<br>I'm using a 3 dollar USB-to-Serial on my newer pc's though. (China, yay!)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>I have a whole bunch of RS232 based stuff, my two Eprom burners all use RS232, my 8x52 series MCU devboards (purchased recently!) use RS232...My Roland compatible XY flatbed plotter (used to plot PCBs) uses it...<br>My Radio-Amateur modem (Multi modem), connected to my radio-amateur gear...also uses it...and the list is virtually ENDLESS<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...so no - it ain't going anytime soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...all use SERIAL , even today.Unfortunately all my new PC 's only come with USB , so I 'm using older computers to be compatible with both the SOFTWARE ( that was n't made for seriously fast computers ) and the RS232.I 'm using a 3 dollar USB-to-Serial on my newer pc 's though .
( China , yay !
) ; ) I have a whole bunch of RS232 based stuff , my two Eprom burners all use RS232 , my 8x52 series MCU devboards ( purchased recently !
) use RS232...My Roland compatible XY flatbed plotter ( used to plot PCBs ) uses it...My Radio-Amateur modem ( Multi modem ) , connected to my radio-amateur gear...also uses it...and the list is virtually ENDLESS ...so no - it ai n't going anytime soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...all use SERIAL, even today.Unfortunately all my new PC's only come with USB, so I'm using older computers to be compatible with both the SOFTWARE (that wasn't made for seriously fast computers) and the RS232.I'm using a 3 dollar USB-to-Serial on my newer pc's though.
(China, yay!
) ;)I have a whole bunch of RS232 based stuff, my two Eprom burners all use RS232, my 8x52 series MCU devboards (purchased recently!
) use RS232...My Roland compatible XY flatbed plotter (used to plot PCBs) uses it...My Radio-Amateur modem (Multi modem), connected to my radio-amateur gear...also uses it...and the list is virtually ENDLESS ...so no - it ain't going anytime soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302704</id>
	<title>Re:No</title>
	<author>dindi</author>
	<datestamp>1267292880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny you mention it. Sometimes I wish we just had a really fast serial port on every device (think even appliances, alarms) - and a well documented command set for them (think AT for modems), but then I wish they just all had an ethernet port.....</p><p>I mean for terminal applications and simple control (think X10) the speed is sufficient, but the 1-1 nature of the connection would be just the same with a faster or USB port. On the other hand a network adapter with a simple tcp/udp stack would give you a faster, easily usable way to communicate with multiple devices, minimizing cost on the host where the devices are connected (in most aspects). And yeah, you can also make 1-1 with it (xlink cable)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny you mention it .
Sometimes I wish we just had a really fast serial port on every device ( think even appliances , alarms ) - and a well documented command set for them ( think AT for modems ) , but then I wish they just all had an ethernet port.....I mean for terminal applications and simple control ( think X10 ) the speed is sufficient , but the 1-1 nature of the connection would be just the same with a faster or USB port .
On the other hand a network adapter with a simple tcp/udp stack would give you a faster , easily usable way to communicate with multiple devices , minimizing cost on the host where the devices are connected ( in most aspects ) .
And yeah , you can also make 1-1 with it ( xlink cable )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny you mention it.
Sometimes I wish we just had a really fast serial port on every device (think even appliances, alarms) - and a well documented command set for them (think AT for modems), but then I wish they just all had an ethernet port.....I mean for terminal applications and simple control (think X10) the speed is sufficient, but the 1-1 nature of the connection would be just the same with a faster or USB port.
On the other hand a network adapter with a simple tcp/udp stack would give you a faster, easily usable way to communicate with multiple devices, minimizing cost on the host where the devices are connected (in most aspects).
And yeah, you can also make 1-1 with it (xlink cable)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304778</id>
	<title>Derivation of "common ground"</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1267364400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Even your "three wire description" has left something important out, that I've seen mis-wired: the third wire is \_signal ground\_, not "common ground". "Common ground" is when we share something interesting to talk about: it's an unfortunate choice of words for wiring.</p></div><p>What's a better term for the "signal ground" that is "common" to all signals?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even your " three wire description " has left something important out , that I 've seen mis-wired : the third wire is \ _signal ground \ _ , not " common ground " .
" Common ground " is when we share something interesting to talk about : it 's an unfortunate choice of words for wiring.What 's a better term for the " signal ground " that is " common " to all signals ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even your "three wire description" has left something important out, that I've seen mis-wired: the third wire is \_signal ground\_, not "common ground".
"Common ground" is when we share something interesting to talk about: it's an unfortunate choice of words for wiring.What's a better term for the "signal ground" that is "common" to all signals?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303212</id>
	<title>Two things here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267297680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; 1.  RS-232 hardware connectivity.</p><p>
&nbsp; 2.  VT-52 or more command line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  1 .
RS-232 hardware connectivity .
  2 .
VT-52 or more command line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  1.
RS-232 hardware connectivity.
  2.
VT-52 or more command line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302592</id>
	<title>Nope.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267291860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They all need to be connected to terminal servers so people can REALLY provide remote support, instead of thinking you can do everything with Telnet...Or RSH...Or SSH...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They all need to be connected to terminal servers so people can REALLY provide remote support , instead of thinking you can do everything with Telnet...Or RSH...Or SSH.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They all need to be connected to terminal servers so people can REALLY provide remote support, instead of thinking you can do everything with Telnet...Or RSH...Or SSH...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302050</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>deniable</author>
	<datestamp>1267287180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've never seen an IDE floppy. There are still IDE optical drives around and a lot of surplus IDE hard drives, but floppies were always their own special interface. Hint: vendors now refer to IDE as PATA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never seen an IDE floppy .
There are still IDE optical drives around and a lot of surplus IDE hard drives , but floppies were always their own special interface .
Hint : vendors now refer to IDE as PATA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never seen an IDE floppy.
There are still IDE optical drives around and a lot of surplus IDE hard drives, but floppies were always their own special interface.
Hint: vendors now refer to IDE as PATA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302152</id>
	<title>RS232 still very cool...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267288140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RS232 rocks,and will always rock.</p><p>I actually designed a converter that turns an 9-pin serial port into 6 USB ports plus an ethernet port. Check it out:</p><p>http://www.facebook.com/#!/album.php?aid=2022767&amp;id=1462922757</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RS232 rocks,and will always rock.I actually designed a converter that turns an 9-pin serial port into 6 USB ports plus an ethernet port .
Check it out : http : //www.facebook.com/ # ! /album.php ? aid = 2022767&amp;id = 1462922757</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RS232 rocks,and will always rock.I actually designed a converter that turns an 9-pin serial port into 6 USB ports plus an ethernet port.
Check it out:http://www.facebook.com/#!/album.php?aid=2022767&amp;id=1462922757</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305858</id>
	<title>It has non-standard pinouts...!?!</title>
	<author>NoOnesMessiah</author>
	<datestamp>1267373700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously!?!  Non-standard pinouts.  I've been using non-standard pinouts for, what?, 25 plus years!?!</p><p>Are you a consultant for the USB lobby, or are you just mildly retarded?</p><p>What?, are you expecting some pretty little GUI to configure your fibre channel switches or something?</p><p>Or were you just trolling for flames?...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ! ? !
Non-standard pinouts .
I 've been using non-standard pinouts for , what ? , 25 plus years ! ?
! Are you a consultant for the USB lobby , or are you just mildly retarded ? What ? , are you expecting some pretty little GUI to configure your fibre channel switches or something ? Or were you just trolling for flames ? .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously!?!
Non-standard pinouts.
I've been using non-standard pinouts for, what?, 25 plus years!?
!Are you a consultant for the USB lobby, or are you just mildly retarded?What?, are you expecting some pretty little GUI to configure your fibre channel switches or something?Or were you just trolling for flames?...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303236</id>
	<title>Re:Serial Ports..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267297920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plug the console cable of the dead device into an aux port of a nearby Cisco router/firewall/vpn device?</p><p>A little different situation but at our offices, we have separate rj45 jacks and cat5 runs as "ties" from the MDF to every IDF in the building.  At the IDF end, it is plugged into the switches console port (mostly older 4500's but others are there as well).  Someone in the MDF can take a console cable plugged into a laptop or a nearby Cisco device aux port and plug it into that IDF's jack and can get a serial connection to that switch directly from the MDF.  I thought this tie jack thing was an industry standard concept that everyone used?  I don't know the spec for max distance but I've used it reliably on a cat5 run to an IDF that was over 450 ft in length.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plug the console cable of the dead device into an aux port of a nearby Cisco router/firewall/vpn device ? A little different situation but at our offices , we have separate rj45 jacks and cat5 runs as " ties " from the MDF to every IDF in the building .
At the IDF end , it is plugged into the switches console port ( mostly older 4500 's but others are there as well ) .
Someone in the MDF can take a console cable plugged into a laptop or a nearby Cisco device aux port and plug it into that IDF 's jack and can get a serial connection to that switch directly from the MDF .
I thought this tie jack thing was an industry standard concept that everyone used ?
I do n't know the spec for max distance but I 've used it reliably on a cat5 run to an IDF that was over 450 ft in length .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plug the console cable of the dead device into an aux port of a nearby Cisco router/firewall/vpn device?A little different situation but at our offices, we have separate rj45 jacks and cat5 runs as "ties" from the MDF to every IDF in the building.
At the IDF end, it is plugged into the switches console port (mostly older 4500's but others are there as well).
Someone in the MDF can take a console cable plugged into a laptop or a nearby Cisco device aux port and plug it into that IDF's jack and can get a serial connection to that switch directly from the MDF.
I thought this tie jack thing was an industry standard concept that everyone used?
I don't know the spec for max distance but I've used it reliably on a cat5 run to an IDF that was over 450 ft in length.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930</id>
	<title>RS232 is fee-free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267294680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From a device manufacturer's point of view, RS232 is free to implement. No special drivers are required on the host.</p><p>Now, for USB, you have to either pony up $2000 PER YEAR to the USB implementers forum to get your own VID/PID and distribute a driver to your customers (and deal with the resulting customer service issues) or add a chip from FTDI (or similar) and piggyback on their VID/PID but then ask your customers to download and install a generic driver that does not specifically identify your hardware.</p><p>Gimme RS232 any day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From a device manufacturer 's point of view , RS232 is free to implement .
No special drivers are required on the host.Now , for USB , you have to either pony up $ 2000 PER YEAR to the USB implementers forum to get your own VID/PID and distribute a driver to your customers ( and deal with the resulting customer service issues ) or add a chip from FTDI ( or similar ) and piggyback on their VID/PID but then ask your customers to download and install a generic driver that does not specifically identify your hardware.Gim me RS232 any day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a device manufacturer's point of view, RS232 is free to implement.
No special drivers are required on the host.Now, for USB, you have to either pony up $2000 PER YEAR to the USB implementers forum to get your own VID/PID and distribute a driver to your customers (and deal with the resulting customer service issues) or add a chip from FTDI (or similar) and piggyback on their VID/PID but then ask your customers to download and install a generic driver that does not specifically identify your hardware.Gimme RS232 any day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305392</id>
	<title>Why developers like serial ports more than USB</title>
	<author>Peter Simpson</author>
	<datestamp>1267370340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Serial ports are cheap and easy to interface to, both from hardware and firmware perspectives.<br>- a simple MAX3232 chip, four 0.1uF caps and you're done<br>- read/write a byte every interrupt<br>- messed up pinout doesn't harm the driver, just try again<br>- three wire interface, symmetric</p><p>USB requires more hardware, and a protocol stack (which you might have to pay for)<br>- not all micros have room (or MIPS) for a USB stack<br>- impedance control needed on the pair<br>- host or device - you must choose or use OTG if supported on the micro</p><p>I'll admit USB is faster and has more capability, but a small, low power embedded system might not be able to support USB, while it can handle serial just fine.<br>*That's* why serial will never go away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Serial ports are cheap and easy to interface to , both from hardware and firmware perspectives.- a simple MAX3232 chip , four 0.1uF caps and you 're done- read/write a byte every interrupt- messed up pinout does n't harm the driver , just try again- three wire interface , symmetricUSB requires more hardware , and a protocol stack ( which you might have to pay for ) - not all micros have room ( or MIPS ) for a USB stack- impedance control needed on the pair- host or device - you must choose or use OTG if supported on the microI 'll admit USB is faster and has more capability , but a small , low power embedded system might not be able to support USB , while it can handle serial just fine .
* That 's * why serial will never go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serial ports are cheap and easy to interface to, both from hardware and firmware perspectives.- a simple MAX3232 chip, four 0.1uF caps and you're done- read/write a byte every interrupt- messed up pinout doesn't harm the driver, just try again- three wire interface, symmetricUSB requires more hardware, and a protocol stack (which you might have to pay for)- not all micros have room (or MIPS) for a USB stack- impedance control needed on the pair- host or device - you must choose or use OTG if supported on the microI'll admit USB is faster and has more capability, but a small, low power embedded system might not be able to support USB, while it can handle serial just fine.
*That's* why serial will never go away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304388</id>
	<title>U-Boot and Embedded Systems Work</title>
	<author>highways</author>
	<datestamp>1267357920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try getting U-Boot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das\_U-Boot) to work without one.</p><p>Or early Linux embedded board bring-up.</p><p>Or virtually any microcontroller work, where all but the simplest of devices have one or more UARTs.</p><p>Go on, prise my serial port from my cold dead fingers...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try getting U-Boot ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das \ _U-Boot ) to work without one.Or early Linux embedded board bring-up.Or virtually any microcontroller work , where all but the simplest of devices have one or more UARTs.Go on , prise my serial port from my cold dead fingers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try getting U-Boot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das\_U-Boot) to work without one.Or early Linux embedded board bring-up.Or virtually any microcontroller work, where all but the simplest of devices have one or more UARTs.Go on, prise my serial port from my cold dead fingers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302176</id>
	<title>Re:Only one use left</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267288320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I disagree about that being the only place.  Serial ports are absolutely huge in the embedded world.  A large number of consumer devices also use serial internally, and maybe convert to USB right at the edge of the box.</p><p>Networking brings up an interesting point.  I actually prefer to add Ethernet to an embedded design over USB.  It's actually easier, if you can believe that bull****.  It's also massively more flexible and quite a bit faster.</p><p>Many TCP/IP stacks can be ported to a new platform by simply implementing a read, a write, and a status function to talk to your specific MAC.</p><p>USB is usually a horrible kludge taking some vendor's usb-to-serial or mass-storage example code and hacking the crap out of it until it works.  The USB module registers are so different from vendor to vendor, etc.</p><p>At the PC level, it's different.  There are some standards there.  Even there, it usually takes custom device driver work to get a new device working...  something that Microsoft should be totally ashamed about.  They really should have provided something like libusb on Linux.</p><p>To summarize, USB is a horrible horrible bus for the thousands of smaller embeddded shops out there.  It requires dealing with incredibly poor quality vendor example code, and worst of all you have to find someone who can write you a Windows device driver.  Well...  unless you're lucky enough to know how to do that yourself.   I can, but it's such a pain in the ass that I'd much rather use Ethernet... which doesn't require a stupid driver on every OS you want to use it with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I disagree about that being the only place .
Serial ports are absolutely huge in the embedded world .
A large number of consumer devices also use serial internally , and maybe convert to USB right at the edge of the box.Networking brings up an interesting point .
I actually prefer to add Ethernet to an embedded design over USB .
It 's actually easier , if you can believe that bull * * * * .
It 's also massively more flexible and quite a bit faster.Many TCP/IP stacks can be ported to a new platform by simply implementing a read , a write , and a status function to talk to your specific MAC.USB is usually a horrible kludge taking some vendor 's usb-to-serial or mass-storage example code and hacking the crap out of it until it works .
The USB module registers are so different from vendor to vendor , etc.At the PC level , it 's different .
There are some standards there .
Even there , it usually takes custom device driver work to get a new device working... something that Microsoft should be totally ashamed about .
They really should have provided something like libusb on Linux.To summarize , USB is a horrible horrible bus for the thousands of smaller embeddded shops out there .
It requires dealing with incredibly poor quality vendor example code , and worst of all you have to find someone who can write you a Windows device driver .
Well... unless you 're lucky enough to know how to do that yourself .
I can , but it 's such a pain in the ass that I 'd much rather use Ethernet... which does n't require a stupid driver on every OS you want to use it with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I disagree about that being the only place.
Serial ports are absolutely huge in the embedded world.
A large number of consumer devices also use serial internally, and maybe convert to USB right at the edge of the box.Networking brings up an interesting point.
I actually prefer to add Ethernet to an embedded design over USB.
It's actually easier, if you can believe that bull****.
It's also massively more flexible and quite a bit faster.Many TCP/IP stacks can be ported to a new platform by simply implementing a read, a write, and a status function to talk to your specific MAC.USB is usually a horrible kludge taking some vendor's usb-to-serial or mass-storage example code and hacking the crap out of it until it works.
The USB module registers are so different from vendor to vendor, etc.At the PC level, it's different.
There are some standards there.
Even there, it usually takes custom device driver work to get a new device working...  something that Microsoft should be totally ashamed about.
They really should have provided something like libusb on Linux.To summarize, USB is a horrible horrible bus for the thousands of smaller embeddded shops out there.
It requires dealing with incredibly poor quality vendor example code, and worst of all you have to find someone who can write you a Windows device driver.
Well...  unless you're lucky enough to know how to do that yourself.
I can, but it's such a pain in the ass that I'd much rather use Ethernet... which doesn't require a stupid driver on every OS you want to use it with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303408</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1267299840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, I've seen a variety of equipment with USB ports for access that really turns out to be a USB-&gt;serial FTDI chip.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I 've seen a variety of equipment with USB ports for access that really turns out to be a USB- &gt; serial FTDI chip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I've seen a variety of equipment with USB ports for access that really turns out to be a USB-&gt;serial FTDI chip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306022</id>
	<title>Re:RS232 is fee-free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267374780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;"or add a chip from FTDI (or similar) and piggyback on their VID/PID but then ask your customers to download and install a generic driver that does not specifically identify your hardware."</p><p>The nightmare morass of conflicting drivers that is FTDI and their customer-driven provisioning system is actually far, far worse than you have described it there.  Try getting a Quartet programming dongle *and* a bunch of usb-serial converters *and* an Aardvark analyzer to all co-exist on your machine at the same time...  I made it work in the end, by renaming clashing driver files and hand-editing the INFs to install them under their new names, but somehow FTDI and their customers have managed to collectively get it very very wrong indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " or add a chip from FTDI ( or similar ) and piggyback on their VID/PID but then ask your customers to download and install a generic driver that does not specifically identify your hardware .
" The nightmare morass of conflicting drivers that is FTDI and their customer-driven provisioning system is actually far , far worse than you have described it there .
Try getting a Quartet programming dongle * and * a bunch of usb-serial converters * and * an Aardvark analyzer to all co-exist on your machine at the same time... I made it work in the end , by renaming clashing driver files and hand-editing the INFs to install them under their new names , but somehow FTDI and their customers have managed to collectively get it very very wrong indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;"or add a chip from FTDI (or similar) and piggyback on their VID/PID but then ask your customers to download and install a generic driver that does not specifically identify your hardware.
"The nightmare morass of conflicting drivers that is FTDI and their customer-driven provisioning system is actually far, far worse than you have described it there.
Try getting a Quartet programming dongle *and* a bunch of usb-serial converters *and* an Aardvark analyzer to all co-exist on your machine at the same time...  I made it work in the end, by renaming clashing driver files and hand-editing the INFs to install them under their new names, but somehow FTDI and their customers have managed to collectively get it very very wrong indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302350</id>
	<title>Newer Cisco gear...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267289820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...has standard serial console ports, along with a USB port that acts as a built-in USB-to-serial adapter. No serial port on your laptop required. And since most Cisco routers now keep the IOS on a CompactFlash card, you can stick the card in a CF reader on your PC to copy an IOS image to it (the days of doing an IOS upgrade over xmodem on serial are loooooooong gone).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...has standard serial console ports , along with a USB port that acts as a built-in USB-to-serial adapter .
No serial port on your laptop required .
And since most Cisco routers now keep the IOS on a CompactFlash card , you can stick the card in a CF reader on your PC to copy an IOS image to it ( the days of doing an IOS upgrade over xmodem on serial are loooooooong gone ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...has standard serial console ports, along with a USB port that acts as a built-in USB-to-serial adapter.
No serial port on your laptop required.
And since most Cisco routers now keep the IOS on a CompactFlash card, you can stick the card in a CF reader on your PC to copy an IOS image to it (the days of doing an IOS upgrade over xmodem on serial are loooooooong gone).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267287240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Screw that. I do programming for embedded systems and serial is absolutely essential. Even the simplest bootloader supports standard serial. Hell, you can write an implementation of rs232 in an fpga in about 20 minutes. Its ubiquitous because requires no real software to make it work...and when you have barely any software working on a system, that uart can be the difference between hours and weeks of debugging.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Screw that .
I do programming for embedded systems and serial is absolutely essential .
Even the simplest bootloader supports standard serial .
Hell , you can write an implementation of rs232 in an fpga in about 20 minutes .
Its ubiquitous because requires no real software to make it work...and when you have barely any software working on a system , that uart can be the difference between hours and weeks of debugging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screw that.
I do programming for embedded systems and serial is absolutely essential.
Even the simplest bootloader supports standard serial.
Hell, you can write an implementation of rs232 in an fpga in about 20 minutes.
Its ubiquitous because requires no real software to make it work...and when you have barely any software working on a system, that uart can be the difference between hours and weeks of debugging.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302624</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267292040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can get floppy drives with usb connectors, you know.  It's not like you're going to fill up the bandwidth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can get floppy drives with usb connectors , you know .
It 's not like you 're going to fill up the bandwidth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can get floppy drives with usb connectors, you know.
It's not like you're going to fill up the bandwidth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</id>
	<title>RE: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would think so... It's a good question to ask.  Same way with IDE ports on motherboards... I mean does ANYONE ever use a floppy disk anymore?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would think so... It 's a good question to ask .
Same way with IDE ports on motherboards... I mean does ANYONE ever use a floppy disk anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would think so... It's a good question to ask.
Same way with IDE ports on motherboards... I mean does ANYONE ever use a floppy disk anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302018</id>
	<title>Serial is still alive and kicking...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267286940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not so much in the standard computer world, but in broadcasting for example, many of the automation systems rely on plain old serial connections to fire off various components. How much bandwidth do you really need to send a simple command or two? If you are sending small short packets with byte sizes you can count on your fingers... is USB or TCP really any faster?</p><p>Put another way, where space isn't the primary concern, serial is dirt cheap, simple to use and configure, has fewer restrictions on cable length, and wire grade, and is more than adequate for many purposes... If it ain't broke, don't fix it.</p><p>That said... once a certain level of complexity is reached, ethernet, USB etc. become much more attractive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not so much in the standard computer world , but in broadcasting for example , many of the automation systems rely on plain old serial connections to fire off various components .
How much bandwidth do you really need to send a simple command or two ?
If you are sending small short packets with byte sizes you can count on your fingers... is USB or TCP really any faster ? Put another way , where space is n't the primary concern , serial is dirt cheap , simple to use and configure , has fewer restrictions on cable length , and wire grade , and is more than adequate for many purposes... If it ai n't broke , do n't fix it.That said... once a certain level of complexity is reached , ethernet , USB etc .
become much more attractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not so much in the standard computer world, but in broadcasting for example, many of the automation systems rely on plain old serial connections to fire off various components.
How much bandwidth do you really need to send a simple command or two?
If you are sending small short packets with byte sizes you can count on your fingers... is USB or TCP really any faster?Put another way, where space isn't the primary concern, serial is dirt cheap, simple to use and configure, has fewer restrictions on cable length, and wire grade, and is more than adequate for many purposes... If it ain't broke, don't fix it.That said... once a certain level of complexity is reached, ethernet, USB etc.
become much more attractive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31312860</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Jack Greenbaum</author>
	<datestamp>1267475760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even with "real serial ports", which USB-to-serial devices are, you often need a <a href="http://www.bb-elec.com/product.asp?sku=232BOB1E" title="bb-elec.com">"breakout box"</a> [bb-elec.com] to get a piece of equipment to talk to you. There's the whole DTE/DCE thing that may require you to reverse TX and RX (e.g. null modem). Then one side might want DTS/CTS pulled active, while the other doesn't care. Then even when you get them to talk you might have no flow control and loose characters.
<p>
Come to think of it USB ports that adequately present themselves as a <a href="http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass\_docs/usbcdc11.pdf" title="usb.org">CDC ACM device</a> [usb.org] might just be a better idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even with " real serial ports " , which USB-to-serial devices are , you often need a " breakout box " [ bb-elec.com ] to get a piece of equipment to talk to you .
There 's the whole DTE/DCE thing that may require you to reverse TX and RX ( e.g .
null modem ) .
Then one side might want DTS/CTS pulled active , while the other does n't care .
Then even when you get them to talk you might have no flow control and loose characters .
Come to think of it USB ports that adequately present themselves as a CDC ACM device [ usb.org ] might just be a better idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even with "real serial ports", which USB-to-serial devices are, you often need a "breakout box" [bb-elec.com] to get a piece of equipment to talk to you.
There's the whole DTE/DCE thing that may require you to reverse TX and RX (e.g.
null modem).
Then one side might want DTS/CTS pulled active, while the other doesn't care.
Then even when you get them to talk you might have no flow control and loose characters.
Come to think of it USB ports that adequately present themselves as a CDC ACM device [usb.org] might just be a better idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304112</id>
	<title>Re:USB is a poor choice - Ethernet works pretty we</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267352400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"For example, most (all?) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port. "</p><p>I strongly disagree with that! EVERY processor used in wireless routers do have serial or at least JTAG port. Thankfully, because when you brick them, that is the only way out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" For example , most ( all ?
) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port .
" I strongly disagree with that !
EVERY processor used in wireless routers do have serial or at least JTAG port .
Thankfully , because when you brick them , that is the only way out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"For example, most (all?
) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port.
"I strongly disagree with that!
EVERY processor used in wireless routers do have serial or at least JTAG port.
Thankfully, because when you brick them, that is the only way out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302454</id>
	<title>Current loop?</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1267290540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, I haven't heard that term in a couple decades. I remember (somewhat fuzzily) having to rewire an old PC card that was capable of handling a current loop connection (think it was just a somewhat flexible RS232 card from IBM), back in the 8086 days when the pins on a lot of chips were still far enough apart so you could use a soldering pencil on them without trouble. We had an old mass spectrometer that used a current loop interface, except against spec it expected all the voltage/current/whatever to be supplied from the other end for both the transmit and receive loops. We had been using an HP 1000 to control the mass spec for at least a decade, but with the maintenance running about $500/month we really wanted to switch over to a PC. So I ran a wire from the 5V (I think; hey it's been a while) pin on the PC backplane and fed that over an unused line in the serial cable, then at the other end modified the circuit in a way that certainly worked but would probably make any first year EE student either laugh or cry.</p><p>Funny thing is, even back then current loop was considered to be dying, and I had a dickens of a time finding any info about it (versus "standard" serial) - but I guess Netcraft hasn't confirmed its death yet so it still hangs on, lingering...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , I have n't heard that term in a couple decades .
I remember ( somewhat fuzzily ) having to rewire an old PC card that was capable of handling a current loop connection ( think it was just a somewhat flexible RS232 card from IBM ) , back in the 8086 days when the pins on a lot of chips were still far enough apart so you could use a soldering pencil on them without trouble .
We had an old mass spectrometer that used a current loop interface , except against spec it expected all the voltage/current/whatever to be supplied from the other end for both the transmit and receive loops .
We had been using an HP 1000 to control the mass spec for at least a decade , but with the maintenance running about $ 500/month we really wanted to switch over to a PC .
So I ran a wire from the 5V ( I think ; hey it 's been a while ) pin on the PC backplane and fed that over an unused line in the serial cable , then at the other end modified the circuit in a way that certainly worked but would probably make any first year EE student either laugh or cry.Funny thing is , even back then current loop was considered to be dying , and I had a dickens of a time finding any info about it ( versus " standard " serial ) - but I guess Netcraft has n't confirmed its death yet so it still hangs on , lingering.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, I haven't heard that term in a couple decades.
I remember (somewhat fuzzily) having to rewire an old PC card that was capable of handling a current loop connection (think it was just a somewhat flexible RS232 card from IBM), back in the 8086 days when the pins on a lot of chips were still far enough apart so you could use a soldering pencil on them without trouble.
We had an old mass spectrometer that used a current loop interface, except against spec it expected all the voltage/current/whatever to be supplied from the other end for both the transmit and receive loops.
We had been using an HP 1000 to control the mass spec for at least a decade, but with the maintenance running about $500/month we really wanted to switch over to a PC.
So I ran a wire from the 5V (I think; hey it's been a while) pin on the PC backplane and fed that over an unused line in the serial cable, then at the other end modified the circuit in a way that certainly worked but would probably make any first year EE student either laugh or cry.Funny thing is, even back then current loop was considered to be dying, and I had a dickens of a time finding any info about it (versus "standard" serial) - but I guess Netcraft hasn't confirmed its death yet so it still hangs on, lingering...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304738</id>
	<title>Re:No</title>
	<author>simpz</author>
	<datestamp>1267363920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are totally correct. Serial is nice and simple and would be perfect IF everyone used the same wiring on  the connectors, there was a standard plug (preferably not R-J45, there's a recipe for confusion),there was a standard speed/parity (or a simple negotiation mechanism), people only used simple RX-TX for signalling (which they sadly don't), standardized/simplified flow control (really needed for xyzmodem, some devices insist on HW flow control), I didn't have to have tons of cables (one per device practically). TFTP/HTTP is no use when a device is so dead that the network doesn't work.</p><p>I'd settle for a more standardised rs-232 if the world could get there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are totally correct .
Serial is nice and simple and would be perfect IF everyone used the same wiring on the connectors , there was a standard plug ( preferably not R-J45 , there 's a recipe for confusion ) ,there was a standard speed/parity ( or a simple negotiation mechanism ) , people only used simple RX-TX for signalling ( which they sadly do n't ) , standardized/simplified flow control ( really needed for xyzmodem , some devices insist on HW flow control ) , I did n't have to have tons of cables ( one per device practically ) .
TFTP/HTTP is no use when a device is so dead that the network does n't work.I 'd settle for a more standardised rs-232 if the world could get there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are totally correct.
Serial is nice and simple and would be perfect IF everyone used the same wiring on  the connectors, there was a standard plug (preferably not R-J45, there's a recipe for confusion),there was a standard speed/parity (or a simple negotiation mechanism), people only used simple RX-TX for signalling (which they sadly don't), standardized/simplified flow control (really needed for xyzmodem, some devices insist on HW flow control), I didn't have to have tons of cables (one per device practically).
TFTP/HTTP is no use when a device is so dead that the network doesn't work.I'd settle for a more standardised rs-232 if the world could get there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302864</id>
	<title>Re:USB is a poor choice - Ethernet works pretty we</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267294200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>First, it has been ubiquitous for 20 to 30 years.</p></div><p>Hell, longer than that.  Not all that long ago I had to interface to a piece of gear made in the late 1960's (a big industrial-strength plotter, basically)  Wasn't a problem since it had good ol' rs-232.  IIRC, it had a pretty weird parity/stop-bit combo (it used something like 150 7E2) but nothing that a modern UART couldn't handle.</p><p>The first teletypes using RS-232 appeared almost 50 (!) years ago now and it was pretty ubiquitous by 40 years ago.  Its longevity is incredible.  I hope it keeps its niche, it's still very handy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First , it has been ubiquitous for 20 to 30 years.Hell , longer than that .
Not all that long ago I had to interface to a piece of gear made in the late 1960 's ( a big industrial-strength plotter , basically ) Was n't a problem since it had good ol ' rs-232 .
IIRC , it had a pretty weird parity/stop-bit combo ( it used something like 150 7E2 ) but nothing that a modern UART could n't handle.The first teletypes using RS-232 appeared almost 50 ( !
) years ago now and it was pretty ubiquitous by 40 years ago .
Its longevity is incredible .
I hope it keeps its niche , it 's still very handy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, it has been ubiquitous for 20 to 30 years.Hell, longer than that.
Not all that long ago I had to interface to a piece of gear made in the late 1960's (a big industrial-strength plotter, basically)  Wasn't a problem since it had good ol' rs-232.
IIRC, it had a pretty weird parity/stop-bit combo (it used something like 150 7E2) but nothing that a modern UART couldn't handle.The first teletypes using RS-232 appeared almost 50 (!
) years ago now and it was pretty ubiquitous by 40 years ago.
Its longevity is incredible.
I hope it keeps its niche, it's still very handy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302710</id>
	<title>Re:Web Interface</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267292940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most of the newer switches, routers, multiplexers and any other device with a serial port for a terminal interface I've had the pleasure of configuring had a web interface.</p></div><p>I doubt very much you'll find any network engineers that have had 'pleasure' in using a web interface to configure enterprise grade networking equipment. There is few things more tedious and inefficient than trying to configure a switch - and I mean properly, not just configuring a management IP and plugging things in -  via a web interface compared to command line.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the newer switches , routers , multiplexers and any other device with a serial port for a terminal interface I 've had the pleasure of configuring had a web interface.I doubt very much you 'll find any network engineers that have had 'pleasure ' in using a web interface to configure enterprise grade networking equipment .
There is few things more tedious and inefficient than trying to configure a switch - and I mean properly , not just configuring a management IP and plugging things in - via a web interface compared to command line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the newer switches, routers, multiplexers and any other device with a serial port for a terminal interface I've had the pleasure of configuring had a web interface.I doubt very much you'll find any network engineers that have had 'pleasure' in using a web interface to configure enterprise grade networking equipment.
There is few things more tedious and inefficient than trying to configure a switch - and I mean properly, not just configuring a management IP and plugging things in -  via a web interface compared to command line.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302370</id>
	<title>serial on iPods</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267289940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not widely known but iPods/iPhone have a serial port on their docking connector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not widely known but iPods/iPhone have a serial port on their docking connector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not widely known but iPods/iPhone have a serial port on their docking connector.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307202</id>
	<title>Re:You young whippersnappers and your newfangled..</title>
	<author>omglolbah</author>
	<datestamp>1267382700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the offshore industry you still have those panels....</p><p>They are called "CAP" or "Critical Action Panel" and are connected directly to the low level controllers in the process and safety system bypassing all HMI.</p><p>Sometimes you want a hardwired connection to the device responsible for releasing a deluge valve. Gas-producing rigs in the north sea would be one such place *grin*</p><p>While an amusing joke, they still exist to some degree!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the offshore industry you still have those panels....They are called " CAP " or " Critical Action Panel " and are connected directly to the low level controllers in the process and safety system bypassing all HMI.Sometimes you want a hardwired connection to the device responsible for releasing a deluge valve .
Gas-producing rigs in the north sea would be one such place * grin * While an amusing joke , they still exist to some degree !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the offshore industry you still have those panels....They are called "CAP" or "Critical Action Panel" and are connected directly to the low level controllers in the process and safety system bypassing all HMI.Sometimes you want a hardwired connection to the device responsible for releasing a deluge valve.
Gas-producing rigs in the north sea would be one such place *grin*While an amusing joke, they still exist to some degree!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992</id>
	<title>No</title>
	<author>dindi</author>
	<datestamp>1267286700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Serial is cheap, simple, works really well, and you can hook up 15+ year old equipment to it with no problem.</p><p>Is it slow? Not really, but firmware updates should be through TFTP or HTTP by now anyways for larger files.</p><p>Complicated wiring?  RX-TX TX-RX, common ground.</p><p>Also RS-232 has many brothers and sisters like:<br>RS-422 (a high-speed system similar to RS-232 but with differential signaling)<br>RS-423 (a high-speed system similar to RS-422 but with unbalanced signaling)<br>RS-449 (a functional and mechanical interface that used RS-422 and RS-423 signals - it never caught on like RS-232 and was withdrawn by the EIA)<br>RS-485 (a descendant of RS-422 that can be used as a bus in multidrop configurations)</p><p>On the USB console:  yeah, you can have a USB console. Most like there will be a FTDI chip, which will make your USB into a serial connection. Want an example? Arduino.....</p><p>By the way, the post is kinda mis-worded....   USB is a serial bus, so a USB console is technically a SERIAL console<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Serial is cheap , simple , works really well , and you can hook up 15 + year old equipment to it with no problem.Is it slow ?
Not really , but firmware updates should be through TFTP or HTTP by now anyways for larger files.Complicated wiring ?
RX-TX TX-RX , common ground.Also RS-232 has many brothers and sisters like : RS-422 ( a high-speed system similar to RS-232 but with differential signaling ) RS-423 ( a high-speed system similar to RS-422 but with unbalanced signaling ) RS-449 ( a functional and mechanical interface that used RS-422 and RS-423 signals - it never caught on like RS-232 and was withdrawn by the EIA ) RS-485 ( a descendant of RS-422 that can be used as a bus in multidrop configurations ) On the USB console : yeah , you can have a USB console .
Most like there will be a FTDI chip , which will make your USB into a serial connection .
Want an example ?
Arduino.....By the way , the post is kinda mis-worded.... USB is a serial bus , so a USB console is technically a SERIAL console : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serial is cheap, simple, works really well, and you can hook up 15+ year old equipment to it with no problem.Is it slow?
Not really, but firmware updates should be through TFTP or HTTP by now anyways for larger files.Complicated wiring?
RX-TX TX-RX, common ground.Also RS-232 has many brothers and sisters like:RS-422 (a high-speed system similar to RS-232 but with differential signaling)RS-423 (a high-speed system similar to RS-422 but with unbalanced signaling)RS-449 (a functional and mechanical interface that used RS-422 and RS-423 signals - it never caught on like RS-232 and was withdrawn by the EIA)RS-485 (a descendant of RS-422 that can be used as a bus in multidrop configurations)On the USB console:  yeah, you can have a USB console.
Most like there will be a FTDI chip, which will make your USB into a serial connection.
Want an example?
Arduino.....By the way, the post is kinda mis-worded....   USB is a serial bus, so a USB console is technically a SERIAL console :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303518</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267387500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SuperDisk... same foot print as a floppy, also read floppys, and was IDE</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperDisk</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SuperDisk... same foot print as a floppy , also read floppys , and was IDEhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperDisk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SuperDisk... same foot print as a floppy, also read floppys, and was IDEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperDisk</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303930</id>
	<title>USB console? Serial console?</title>
	<author>VincenzoRomano</author>
	<datestamp>1267349580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why all this stone age stuff when you can have TCP/IP over ethernet with technologies like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated\_Lights-Out" title="wikipedia.org">iLO</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lights\_out\_management" title="wikipedia.org">LOM</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPMI" title="wikipedia.org">the likes</a> [wikipedia.org] running on separate integrated hardware?<br>
Stop thinking in terms of interfaces, please, and start worrying about services!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why all this stone age stuff when you can have TCP/IP over ethernet with technologies like iLO [ wikipedia.org ] , LOM [ wikipedia.org ] and the likes [ wikipedia.org ] running on separate integrated hardware ?
Stop thinking in terms of interfaces , please , and start worrying about services !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why all this stone age stuff when you can have TCP/IP over ethernet with technologies like iLO [wikipedia.org], LOM [wikipedia.org] and the likes [wikipedia.org] running on separate integrated hardware?
Stop thinking in terms of interfaces, please, and start worrying about services!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302734</id>
	<title>Depends on what you mean by "serial"...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1267293240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Outside of Real Serious Stuff(if your job involves oil rigs, SCADA, legacy devices that Google has never heard of this probably means you), I strongly suspect that "serial" in the sense of "DE-9 or DB-25 connector that won't freak out when exposed to the full +/- 12(or even a touch more in some cases) volts that serial used when men were men and cable runs were long" is not so long for this world, outside of a few legacy niches. <br> <br>

On the other hand, "serial" in the sense of "a few pins carrying something that looks like rs-232 at whatever voltage this device's logic runs at" or "device has a USB connector; but that just means that they slapped an FTDI or Prolific chip on a serial design" will be more or less immortal. Even in high volume consumer devices, where it isn't supposed to be user accessible, you can generally find a logic-level serial connection somewhere, though it may not be labeled or have any sort of connector soldered in. It costs almost nothing and can save you from having to JTAG your way out of (most) of your mistakes. When designed to be accessible, it is ideal for dealing with initial configuration for devices that communicate primarily over ethernet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Outside of Real Serious Stuff ( if your job involves oil rigs , SCADA , legacy devices that Google has never heard of this probably means you ) , I strongly suspect that " serial " in the sense of " DE-9 or DB-25 connector that wo n't freak out when exposed to the full + /- 12 ( or even a touch more in some cases ) volts that serial used when men were men and cable runs were long " is not so long for this world , outside of a few legacy niches .
On the other hand , " serial " in the sense of " a few pins carrying something that looks like rs-232 at whatever voltage this device 's logic runs at " or " device has a USB connector ; but that just means that they slapped an FTDI or Prolific chip on a serial design " will be more or less immortal .
Even in high volume consumer devices , where it is n't supposed to be user accessible , you can generally find a logic-level serial connection somewhere , though it may not be labeled or have any sort of connector soldered in .
It costs almost nothing and can save you from having to JTAG your way out of ( most ) of your mistakes .
When designed to be accessible , it is ideal for dealing with initial configuration for devices that communicate primarily over ethernet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Outside of Real Serious Stuff(if your job involves oil rigs, SCADA, legacy devices that Google has never heard of this probably means you), I strongly suspect that "serial" in the sense of "DE-9 or DB-25 connector that won't freak out when exposed to the full +/- 12(or even a touch more in some cases) volts that serial used when men were men and cable runs were long" is not so long for this world, outside of a few legacy niches.
On the other hand, "serial" in the sense of "a few pins carrying something that looks like rs-232 at whatever voltage this device's logic runs at" or "device has a USB connector; but that just means that they slapped an FTDI or Prolific chip on a serial design" will be more or less immortal.
Even in high volume consumer devices, where it isn't supposed to be user accessible, you can generally find a logic-level serial connection somewhere, though it may not be labeled or have any sort of connector soldered in.
It costs almost nothing and can save you from having to JTAG your way out of (most) of your mistakes.
When designed to be accessible, it is ideal for dealing with initial configuration for devices that communicate primarily over ethernet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267286220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like to point out that, while converters work just fine for almost everything, they do not work for everything. I've personally ran into equipment that would not read with a serial to USB converter. I've worked a little in SCADA, and you just about had to special order a laptop with a real serial port on it, or you just couldn't read all the equipment in the field.</p><p>But if you know what you are wanting to use with a converter works, then they usually work just fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like to point out that , while converters work just fine for almost everything , they do not work for everything .
I 've personally ran into equipment that would not read with a serial to USB converter .
I 've worked a little in SCADA , and you just about had to special order a laptop with a real serial port on it , or you just could n't read all the equipment in the field.But if you know what you are wanting to use with a converter works , then they usually work just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like to point out that, while converters work just fine for almost everything, they do not work for everything.
I've personally ran into equipment that would not read with a serial to USB converter.
I've worked a little in SCADA, and you just about had to special order a laptop with a real serial port on it, or you just couldn't read all the equipment in the field.But if you know what you are wanting to use with a converter works, then they usually work just fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302564</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267291500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>^^^ Amen. For anyone into embedded electronics (including robots), real honest-to-god non-USB-bridged serial ports are pretty much the only port left on a modern PC (or at least a decent thirdparty motherboard in the form of an IDC header) that neither Windows nor Java can fuck up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>^ ^ ^ Amen .
For anyone into embedded electronics ( including robots ) , real honest-to-god non-USB-bridged serial ports are pretty much the only port left on a modern PC ( or at least a decent thirdparty motherboard in the form of an IDC header ) that neither Windows nor Java can fuck up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>^^^ Amen.
For anyone into embedded electronics (including robots), real honest-to-god non-USB-bridged serial ports are pretty much the only port left on a modern PC (or at least a decent thirdparty motherboard in the form of an IDC header) that neither Windows nor Java can fuck up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302974</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Blademan007</author>
	<datestamp>1267295040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't work with Cisco CSS load balancers. They need a real serial port, not USB-serial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't work with Cisco CSS load balancers .
They need a real serial port , not USB-serial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't work with Cisco CSS load balancers.
They need a real serial port, not USB-serial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304792</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267364460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, quite recently in fact.  There's still plenty of hardware around that needs a floppy for firmware upgrades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , quite recently in fact .
There 's still plenty of hardware around that needs a floppy for firmware upgrades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, quite recently in fact.
There's still plenty of hardware around that needs a floppy for firmware upgrades.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272</id>
	<title>What will we do with all the US Robotics Couriers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267289340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Telus - local ILEC - is installing ~$100k worth of hardware in all the local SAC boxes to allow them to run TV over the local loop at 15Mbps.
<p>
Guess what every SAC box has strapped to the back of the equipment rack - a US Robotics full-size (about 12"x7"x1") Courier modem!
</p><p>
Damned if I know where they're getting them from - but there they are...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Telus - local ILEC - is installing ~ $ 100k worth of hardware in all the local SAC boxes to allow them to run TV over the local loop at 15Mbps .
Guess what every SAC box has strapped to the back of the equipment rack - a US Robotics full-size ( about 12 " x7 " x1 " ) Courier modem !
Damned if I know where they 're getting them from - but there they are.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Telus - local ILEC - is installing ~$100k worth of hardware in all the local SAC boxes to allow them to run TV over the local loop at 15Mbps.
Guess what every SAC box has strapped to the back of the equipment rack - a US Robotics full-size (about 12"x7"x1") Courier modem!
Damned if I know where they're getting them from - but there they are...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303978</id>
	<title>Re:New Cisco devices are going to USB console</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1267350240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, and when you plug that USB cable into your computer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it detects as a generic USB to serial converter, and you use a standard comm program to talk to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , and when you plug that USB cable into your computer ... it detects as a generic USB to serial converter , and you use a standard comm program to talk to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, and when you plug that USB cable into your computer ... it detects as a generic USB to serial converter, and you use a standard comm program to talk to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305600</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>inicom</author>
	<datestamp>1267371840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said.  RS232 is an important, effective, and reliable system for interconnects. Proven, time-tested, yada yada yada. Yes, sometimes theres confusion over baud rate,, word and bits, and parity, but those are minor compared to the pain in the ass that is USB with drivers, conflicts, length, etc.   The biggest problem with RS232 is the confusion over DCE and DTE so one always has to have null modem adapters handy.</p><p>At least you youngsters don't have to deal with 25-pin RS232 or secondary channel communications.  Hell, it's rare to see even hardware flow control anymore of either type, or bizarre comm settings like 7E2.  Pretty much everyone defaults to 8N1, 9600, and no flow control with the option to up the speed in the device config.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
RS232 is an important , effective , and reliable system for interconnects .
Proven , time-tested , yada yada yada .
Yes , sometimes theres confusion over baud rate, , word and bits , and parity , but those are minor compared to the pain in the ass that is USB with drivers , conflicts , length , etc .
The biggest problem with RS232 is the confusion over DCE and DTE so one always has to have null modem adapters handy.At least you youngsters do n't have to deal with 25-pin RS232 or secondary channel communications .
Hell , it 's rare to see even hardware flow control anymore of either type , or bizarre comm settings like 7E2 .
Pretty much everyone defaults to 8N1 , 9600 , and no flow control with the option to up the speed in the device config .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
RS232 is an important, effective, and reliable system for interconnects.
Proven, time-tested, yada yada yada.
Yes, sometimes theres confusion over baud rate,, word and bits, and parity, but those are minor compared to the pain in the ass that is USB with drivers, conflicts, length, etc.
The biggest problem with RS232 is the confusion over DCE and DTE so one always has to have null modem adapters handy.At least you youngsters don't have to deal with 25-pin RS232 or secondary channel communications.
Hell, it's rare to see even hardware flow control anymore of either type, or bizarre comm settings like 7E2.
Pretty much everyone defaults to 8N1, 9600, and no flow control with the option to up the speed in the device config.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305546</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1267371420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, we just replaced a serial terminal for the scintillation counter in our lab.  The backlight had gone out.  I scrounged around for an old CRT terminal, plugged it in and away we went.</p><p>Couple days later the service technician came by, and installed a new serial terminal with a separate monitor. Took him 2 separate mornings to get the thing configured.  What do we see on bootup?  A windows logo.  All that overhead for a simple serial terminal. It's ridiculous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , we just replaced a serial terminal for the scintillation counter in our lab .
The backlight had gone out .
I scrounged around for an old CRT terminal , plugged it in and away we went.Couple days later the service technician came by , and installed a new serial terminal with a separate monitor .
Took him 2 separate mornings to get the thing configured .
What do we see on bootup ?
A windows logo .
All that overhead for a simple serial terminal .
It 's ridiculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, we just replaced a serial terminal for the scintillation counter in our lab.
The backlight had gone out.
I scrounged around for an old CRT terminal, plugged it in and away we went.Couple days later the service technician came by, and installed a new serial terminal with a separate monitor.
Took him 2 separate mornings to get the thing configured.
What do we see on bootup?
A windows logo.
All that overhead for a simple serial terminal.
It's ridiculous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302916</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>phillipsjk256</author>
	<datestamp>1267294620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Servers probably still use floppy drives because there is still no viable floppy replacement.
</p><ul>
<li>USB keys don't have write-protect tabs, so you have to be careful plugging into a compromised box.</li>
<li>SD Cards use a form of DRM called <a href="http://www.sdcard.org/developers/tech/" title="sdcard.org" rel="nofollow">Copy Protection for Recordable Media</a> [sdcard.org]. This means that you can not create a "kown good" filesystem image because your Card may refuse to talk to the card reader (you filthy pirate!).</li>
<li>CD-ROM disks are either Write-once or not write-protected. This makes making small changes to the boot image difficult (requiring a new disk).</li>
</ul><p>Yes, I do use a floppy: my home router is running from a <a href="http://www.freesco.info/" title="freesco.info" rel="nofollow">write-protected floppy disk</a> [freesco.info]. I am not sure if I can keep using a floppy disk in the transition to IPv6. The 2.6.x Linux kernel doesn't really fit on a floppy disk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Servers probably still use floppy drives because there is still no viable floppy replacement .
USB keys do n't have write-protect tabs , so you have to be careful plugging into a compromised box .
SD Cards use a form of DRM called Copy Protection for Recordable Media [ sdcard.org ] .
This means that you can not create a " kown good " filesystem image because your Card may refuse to talk to the card reader ( you filthy pirate ! ) .
CD-ROM disks are either Write-once or not write-protected .
This makes making small changes to the boot image difficult ( requiring a new disk ) .
Yes , I do use a floppy : my home router is running from a write-protected floppy disk [ freesco.info ] .
I am not sure if I can keep using a floppy disk in the transition to IPv6 .
The 2.6.x Linux kernel does n't really fit on a floppy disk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Servers probably still use floppy drives because there is still no viable floppy replacement.
USB keys don't have write-protect tabs, so you have to be careful plugging into a compromised box.
SD Cards use a form of DRM called Copy Protection for Recordable Media [sdcard.org].
This means that you can not create a "kown good" filesystem image because your Card may refuse to talk to the card reader (you filthy pirate!).
CD-ROM disks are either Write-once or not write-protected.
This makes making small changes to the boot image difficult (requiring a new disk).
Yes, I do use a floppy: my home router is running from a write-protected floppy disk [freesco.info].
I am not sure if I can keep using a floppy disk in the transition to IPv6.
The 2.6.x Linux kernel doesn't really fit on a floppy disk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303776</id>
	<title>Re:RS232 is fee-free</title>
	<author>timonak</author>
	<datestamp>1267390740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats not 100\% true. You can get a 16 PIDs from FTDI for free and use their programmer tool to replace their PID with yours. I did this for a biomedical device manufacturer we purchase equipment from. You still have to use their VID, and it takes a tiny bit of work to make the FTDI serial driver work with the new PID but its entirely doable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats not 100 \ % true .
You can get a 16 PIDs from FTDI for free and use their programmer tool to replace their PID with yours .
I did this for a biomedical device manufacturer we purchase equipment from .
You still have to use their VID , and it takes a tiny bit of work to make the FTDI serial driver work with the new PID but its entirely doable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats not 100\% true.
You can get a 16 PIDs from FTDI for free and use their programmer tool to replace their PID with yours.
I did this for a biomedical device manufacturer we purchase equipment from.
You still have to use their VID, and it takes a tiny bit of work to make the FTDI serial driver work with the new PID but its entirely doable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302652</id>
	<title>Other industrial devices</title>
	<author>FRiC</author>
	<datestamp>1267292400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Serial may be dead on the PC. But besides routers and switches, there are thousands of other industrial devices that still use the serial port. At my work place, we have weigh scale indicators that use the serial port, and we even have motor controllers that still use ISA bus cards. We looked into replacing those motor controllers, and the replacements use the *parallel port*, another dead port.</p><p>I have a ThinkPad with the Ultrabay serial/parallel port adapter. No one's gonna care to pry it from my hands, but I'm keeping it anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Serial may be dead on the PC .
But besides routers and switches , there are thousands of other industrial devices that still use the serial port .
At my work place , we have weigh scale indicators that use the serial port , and we even have motor controllers that still use ISA bus cards .
We looked into replacing those motor controllers , and the replacements use the * parallel port * , another dead port.I have a ThinkPad with the Ultrabay serial/parallel port adapter .
No one 's gon na care to pry it from my hands , but I 'm keeping it anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serial may be dead on the PC.
But besides routers and switches, there are thousands of other industrial devices that still use the serial port.
At my work place, we have weigh scale indicators that use the serial port, and we even have motor controllers that still use ISA bus cards.
We looked into replacing those motor controllers, and the replacements use the *parallel port*, another dead port.I have a ThinkPad with the Ultrabay serial/parallel port adapter.
No one's gonna care to pry it from my hands, but I'm keeping it anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302304</id>
	<title>I hope not!</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1267289580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The great thing about a serial port is it's simplicity from a programming standpoint. Since console access is needed for diagnostics (that is, something is already wrong), the less it depends on, the better.</p><p>Most of the problems can be fixed by having vendors not all use different and OH-SO-SPECIAL pinouts for the serial connection and a dirt cheap USB Serial port for the laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The great thing about a serial port is it 's simplicity from a programming standpoint .
Since console access is needed for diagnostics ( that is , something is already wrong ) , the less it depends on , the better.Most of the problems can be fixed by having vendors not all use different and OH-SO-SPECIAL pinouts for the serial connection and a dirt cheap USB Serial port for the laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The great thing about a serial port is it's simplicity from a programming standpoint.
Since console access is needed for diagnostics (that is, something is already wrong), the less it depends on, the better.Most of the problems can be fixed by having vendors not all use different and OH-SO-SPECIAL pinouts for the serial connection and a dirt cheap USB Serial port for the laptop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302912</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>tconnors</author>
	<datestamp>1267294620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The great thing about a serial console is that it doesn't take long to figure it out. And you only need 3 wires to get there.<br>Another nice thing about it is that it's point-to-point, so you don't have to worry about your signals getting lost.</i></p><p><i>Heck, you can create a serial interface from discrete components if you're really into fun.</i></p><p>Wow.  Miss the point completely.  In the datacentre, trying to configure my SAN, I don't give a flying rats about whether my cable only needs 3 conductors and I can build a device using only discrete components.  I'm not building devices and the cable came in the box with the device.  I want to plug my special magical cable somewhere into a special magical and standard port somewhere on my laptop (ie, not a serial port), and have it talk to a special magical port somewhere on my device.  I'd rather it be error detected and corrected just so that when partitioning my device, it didn't interpret "create new partition" as "wipe all partitions".</p><p>I strongly suspect a pl2302 or similar usb-serial chip that has linux drivers only costs a few cents, and the USB communications are error corrected (and the signal lines from the converter chip to the internals are all done within the metal enclosure of the device I'm configuring, so should be fairly resistant to errors).  So if these devices were built included as standard instead, I'd have a much better chance of getting my data onto the device error free for some time in to the future until USB has been superseded.  I've got devices at work that were advertised as containing "USB interface", which instead came with USB serial converters.  They work fine.  Just add udev rules to match the device and create a symlink somewhere in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev, then configure minicom to talk to that location.</p><p>Of course, I'd be equally happy with ethernet (unencrypted telnet talking on some random private IP would be fine, this port need not be plugged into the network) - I'd configure my laptop to send all private subnet ranges to the ethernet port that was plugged directly into my device (if the laptop needed network access, have a second port or wireless).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The great thing about a serial console is that it does n't take long to figure it out .
And you only need 3 wires to get there.Another nice thing about it is that it 's point-to-point , so you do n't have to worry about your signals getting lost.Heck , you can create a serial interface from discrete components if you 're really into fun.Wow .
Miss the point completely .
In the datacentre , trying to configure my SAN , I do n't give a flying rats about whether my cable only needs 3 conductors and I can build a device using only discrete components .
I 'm not building devices and the cable came in the box with the device .
I want to plug my special magical cable somewhere into a special magical and standard port somewhere on my laptop ( ie , not a serial port ) , and have it talk to a special magical port somewhere on my device .
I 'd rather it be error detected and corrected just so that when partitioning my device , it did n't interpret " create new partition " as " wipe all partitions " .I strongly suspect a pl2302 or similar usb-serial chip that has linux drivers only costs a few cents , and the USB communications are error corrected ( and the signal lines from the converter chip to the internals are all done within the metal enclosure of the device I 'm configuring , so should be fairly resistant to errors ) .
So if these devices were built included as standard instead , I 'd have a much better chance of getting my data onto the device error free for some time in to the future until USB has been superseded .
I 've got devices at work that were advertised as containing " USB interface " , which instead came with USB serial converters .
They work fine .
Just add udev rules to match the device and create a symlink somewhere in /dev , then configure minicom to talk to that location.Of course , I 'd be equally happy with ethernet ( unencrypted telnet talking on some random private IP would be fine , this port need not be plugged into the network ) - I 'd configure my laptop to send all private subnet ranges to the ethernet port that was plugged directly into my device ( if the laptop needed network access , have a second port or wireless ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The great thing about a serial console is that it doesn't take long to figure it out.
And you only need 3 wires to get there.Another nice thing about it is that it's point-to-point, so you don't have to worry about your signals getting lost.Heck, you can create a serial interface from discrete components if you're really into fun.Wow.
Miss the point completely.
In the datacentre, trying to configure my SAN, I don't give a flying rats about whether my cable only needs 3 conductors and I can build a device using only discrete components.
I'm not building devices and the cable came in the box with the device.
I want to plug my special magical cable somewhere into a special magical and standard port somewhere on my laptop (ie, not a serial port), and have it talk to a special magical port somewhere on my device.
I'd rather it be error detected and corrected just so that when partitioning my device, it didn't interpret "create new partition" as "wipe all partitions".I strongly suspect a pl2302 or similar usb-serial chip that has linux drivers only costs a few cents, and the USB communications are error corrected (and the signal lines from the converter chip to the internals are all done within the metal enclosure of the device I'm configuring, so should be fairly resistant to errors).
So if these devices were built included as standard instead, I'd have a much better chance of getting my data onto the device error free for some time in to the future until USB has been superseded.
I've got devices at work that were advertised as containing "USB interface", which instead came with USB serial converters.
They work fine.
Just add udev rules to match the device and create a symlink somewhere in /dev, then configure minicom to talk to that location.Of course, I'd be equally happy with ethernet (unencrypted telnet talking on some random private IP would be fine, this port need not be plugged into the network) - I'd configure my laptop to send all private subnet ranges to the ethernet port that was plugged directly into my device (if the laptop needed network access, have a second port or wireless).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302056</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>darronb</author>
	<datestamp>1267287180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simplicity really is the key.</p><p>Just a few days ago I hacked together a 9600 baud serial output in like an hour to help me debug an embedded microcontroller design using only a single IO pin and a crude spin-delay based bit-bang function.  It worked great, and I found the trouble.</p><p>There's no way you could add something like USB nearly as easily.  FTDI makes some great chips / cables, but at the microcontroller it's still TTL-level serial IO.</p><p>Plenty of microcontrollers have lots of extra serial IO ports.  Many are adding USB ports as well, but it takes an absolutely stupid amount of firmware to make USB work.</p><p>There are several microcontrollers I can do USB for, since I've done it before.  However, it takes weeks of work to implement USB the first time on any new microcontroller.  It's usually really prone to bugs, too.  USB is just too complex for the simple dumb pipes that most embedded developers need.  On top of that...  most of the time the micro vendor's USB firmware examples just barely work, and aren't designed very well so they're very hard to modularize and include in another design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simplicity really is the key.Just a few days ago I hacked together a 9600 baud serial output in like an hour to help me debug an embedded microcontroller design using only a single IO pin and a crude spin-delay based bit-bang function .
It worked great , and I found the trouble.There 's no way you could add something like USB nearly as easily .
FTDI makes some great chips / cables , but at the microcontroller it 's still TTL-level serial IO.Plenty of microcontrollers have lots of extra serial IO ports .
Many are adding USB ports as well , but it takes an absolutely stupid amount of firmware to make USB work.There are several microcontrollers I can do USB for , since I 've done it before .
However , it takes weeks of work to implement USB the first time on any new microcontroller .
It 's usually really prone to bugs , too .
USB is just too complex for the simple dumb pipes that most embedded developers need .
On top of that... most of the time the micro vendor 's USB firmware examples just barely work , and are n't designed very well so they 're very hard to modularize and include in another design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simplicity really is the key.Just a few days ago I hacked together a 9600 baud serial output in like an hour to help me debug an embedded microcontroller design using only a single IO pin and a crude spin-delay based bit-bang function.
It worked great, and I found the trouble.There's no way you could add something like USB nearly as easily.
FTDI makes some great chips / cables, but at the microcontroller it's still TTL-level serial IO.Plenty of microcontrollers have lots of extra serial IO ports.
Many are adding USB ports as well, but it takes an absolutely stupid amount of firmware to make USB work.There are several microcontrollers I can do USB for, since I've done it before.
However, it takes weeks of work to implement USB the first time on any new microcontroller.
It's usually really prone to bugs, too.
USB is just too complex for the simple dumb pipes that most embedded developers need.
On top of that...  most of the time the micro vendor's USB firmware examples just barely work, and aren't designed very well so they're very hard to modularize and include in another design.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301864</id>
	<title>Serial replacement for consoles: Serial-over-USB</title>
	<author>davidgay</author>
	<datestamp>1267285680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A lot less annoying than serial, rather strangely.
<p>
David Gay</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot less annoying than serial , rather strangely .
David Gay</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot less annoying than serial, rather strangely.
David Gay</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303872</id>
	<title>Re:USB is a poor choice - Ethernet works pretty we</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1267348860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I think Ethernet is the real replacement. A little TFT or Telnet server / client is really trivial to write. This can (and often has been done) in firmware. For example, most (all?) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port. Their management is over Ethernet - works great.</p></div></blockquote><p>That works pretty well when the device is supposed to be a DHCP server to begin with, but not so much, otherwise.</p><p>How do you configure the IP address of a new device?  With, say, printers, there's some proprietary software that will scan the entire network for BrandX devices and offer a GUI to configure them.  And then any network protocol is pretty impractical for the simple reason that you get disconnected upon device reboots, and no way to know to auto-reconnect upon restart.  Compare this to RS-232, where it's as simple as walking over and plugging-in to the device directly, and having a continuous connection as good as if you had a keyboard and monitor wired-up.</p><p>These issues make it very cumbersome and clumsy in enough ways that it won't catch on in the business-space as it currently is.  A whole new protocol is needed for this kind of device management over ethernet...  and good luck implementing all this in a PC BIOS...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Ethernet is the real replacement .
A little TFT or Telnet server / client is really trivial to write .
This can ( and often has been done ) in firmware .
For example , most ( all ?
) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port .
Their management is over Ethernet - works great.That works pretty well when the device is supposed to be a DHCP server to begin with , but not so much , otherwise.How do you configure the IP address of a new device ?
With , say , printers , there 's some proprietary software that will scan the entire network for BrandX devices and offer a GUI to configure them .
And then any network protocol is pretty impractical for the simple reason that you get disconnected upon device reboots , and no way to know to auto-reconnect upon restart .
Compare this to RS-232 , where it 's as simple as walking over and plugging-in to the device directly , and having a continuous connection as good as if you had a keyboard and monitor wired-up.These issues make it very cumbersome and clumsy in enough ways that it wo n't catch on in the business-space as it currently is .
A whole new protocol is needed for this kind of device management over ethernet... and good luck implementing all this in a PC BIOS.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Ethernet is the real replacement.
A little TFT or Telnet server / client is really trivial to write.
This can (and often has been done) in firmware.
For example, most (all?
) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port.
Their management is over Ethernet - works great.That works pretty well when the device is supposed to be a DHCP server to begin with, but not so much, otherwise.How do you configure the IP address of a new device?
With, say, printers, there's some proprietary software that will scan the entire network for BrandX devices and offer a GUI to configure them.
And then any network protocol is pretty impractical for the simple reason that you get disconnected upon device reboots, and no way to know to auto-reconnect upon restart.
Compare this to RS-232, where it's as simple as walking over and plugging-in to the device directly, and having a continuous connection as good as if you had a keyboard and monitor wired-up.These issues make it very cumbersome and clumsy in enough ways that it won't catch on in the business-space as it currently is.
A whole new protocol is needed for this kind of device management over ethernet...  and good luck implementing all this in a PC BIOS...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302412</id>
	<title>Serial to Bluetooth Adapter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267290360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>USB-to-Serial Port adapters are old news, Bluetooth-enabled Serial Port Adapters are the new hotness. The first time I heard about one I thought it was a joke. They're real: no more balancing a laptop inside a half-filled rack or looking for an available crash cart!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>USB-to-Serial Port adapters are old news , Bluetooth-enabled Serial Port Adapters are the new hotness .
The first time I heard about one I thought it was a joke .
They 're real : no more balancing a laptop inside a half-filled rack or looking for an available crash cart !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>USB-to-Serial Port adapters are old news, Bluetooth-enabled Serial Port Adapters are the new hotness.
The first time I heard about one I thought it was a joke.
They're real: no more balancing a laptop inside a half-filled rack or looking for an available crash cart!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301888</id>
	<title>Only one use left</title>
	<author>mcpherrinm</author>
	<datestamp>1267285860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Consumers have long since stopped using serial cables in favour of USB.  The only real place that they still exist is to get a serial console on servers in a datacenter.  The OP suggests that it might be replaced by USB here too, but this is where I disagree.  For that sort of task, network-based services are becoming more common.  Ethernet is cheap and easy to deploy, and not that difficult to implement in hardware.

Though there'd be nothing to stop a server manufacturer from just building a serial-to-usb converter into their hardware so you get the traditional serial interfaces but using USB.

The serial cable isn't dead yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Consumers have long since stopped using serial cables in favour of USB .
The only real place that they still exist is to get a serial console on servers in a datacenter .
The OP suggests that it might be replaced by USB here too , but this is where I disagree .
For that sort of task , network-based services are becoming more common .
Ethernet is cheap and easy to deploy , and not that difficult to implement in hardware .
Though there 'd be nothing to stop a server manufacturer from just building a serial-to-usb converter into their hardware so you get the traditional serial interfaces but using USB .
The serial cable is n't dead yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consumers have long since stopped using serial cables in favour of USB.
The only real place that they still exist is to get a serial console on servers in a datacenter.
The OP suggests that it might be replaced by USB here too, but this is where I disagree.
For that sort of task, network-based services are becoming more common.
Ethernet is cheap and easy to deploy, and not that difficult to implement in hardware.
Though there'd be nothing to stop a server manufacturer from just building a serial-to-usb converter into their hardware so you get the traditional serial interfaces but using USB.
The serial cable isn't dead yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302066</id>
	<title>Re:Web Interface</title>
	<author>deniable</author>
	<datestamp>1267287240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Web interfaces are all well and good unless you're having to configure IP on the device. Fallback to DHCP is good, unless you have a device that somebody's configured wrong and needs to be corrected.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Web interfaces are all well and good unless you 're having to configure IP on the device .
Fallback to DHCP is good , unless you have a device that somebody 's configured wrong and needs to be corrected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Web interfaces are all well and good unless you're having to configure IP on the device.
Fallback to DHCP is good, unless you have a device that somebody's configured wrong and needs to be corrected.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31320240</id>
	<title>Re:It just works</title>
	<author>joshio</author>
	<datestamp>1267474680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Serial" shouldn't go away, but the massive plug should.</p></div><p>100\% agree with this. There is no reason (none that is obvious to me, anyways) why the existing DB-9 connector can't go bye-bye. Many manufacturers have been using RJ-45 serial connectors for a long time. Our APC PDUs use what appears to be a RJ-11 (or perhaps RJ-12) port for their Serial console. One or the other of these formats would be much more convenient to have on a laptop in my opinion. I can't remember the last time I used the modem in my laptop, it'd be nice for it to be multipurpose so I don't have to mess with a stupid barely working (if I'm lucky) USB Serial adapter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Serial " should n't go away , but the massive plug should.100 \ % agree with this .
There is no reason ( none that is obvious to me , anyways ) why the existing DB-9 connector ca n't go bye-bye .
Many manufacturers have been using RJ-45 serial connectors for a long time .
Our APC PDUs use what appears to be a RJ-11 ( or perhaps RJ-12 ) port for their Serial console .
One or the other of these formats would be much more convenient to have on a laptop in my opinion .
I ca n't remember the last time I used the modem in my laptop , it 'd be nice for it to be multipurpose so I do n't have to mess with a stupid barely working ( if I 'm lucky ) USB Serial adapter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Serial" shouldn't go away, but the massive plug should.100\% agree with this.
There is no reason (none that is obvious to me, anyways) why the existing DB-9 connector can't go bye-bye.
Many manufacturers have been using RJ-45 serial connectors for a long time.
Our APC PDUs use what appears to be a RJ-11 (or perhaps RJ-12) port for their Serial console.
One or the other of these formats would be much more convenient to have on a laptop in my opinion.
I can't remember the last time I used the modem in my laptop, it'd be nice for it to be multipurpose so I don't have to mess with a stupid barely working (if I'm lucky) USB Serial adapter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301950</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>c0mpliant</author>
	<datestamp>1267286280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately yes. In my workplace we still use floppy disks and other legacy devices because other institutions also still use them.
<br> <br>
Processes and systems that were setup 20 years ago still exist and when there is a system setup to handle something across an industry, in the example I'm thinking of its banking related, to get that changed across every company, institution and outlet take not only large amount of capital invest in the new hardware and software, but first agreement of the new standard, and then training after everything is done and then usually also changing large amounts of code that have been setup in each company.
<br> <br>
Just because we in IT can see better ways to do things, doesn't mean that management can have the foresight to actually implement it and see it through. And usually they have a point, by the time we have everything implemented and up and running, there could/would be a better way of doing it again!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately yes .
In my workplace we still use floppy disks and other legacy devices because other institutions also still use them .
Processes and systems that were setup 20 years ago still exist and when there is a system setup to handle something across an industry , in the example I 'm thinking of its banking related , to get that changed across every company , institution and outlet take not only large amount of capital invest in the new hardware and software , but first agreement of the new standard , and then training after everything is done and then usually also changing large amounts of code that have been setup in each company .
Just because we in IT can see better ways to do things , does n't mean that management can have the foresight to actually implement it and see it through .
And usually they have a point , by the time we have everything implemented and up and running , there could/would be a better way of doing it again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately yes.
In my workplace we still use floppy disks and other legacy devices because other institutions also still use them.
Processes and systems that were setup 20 years ago still exist and when there is a system setup to handle something across an industry, in the example I'm thinking of its banking related, to get that changed across every company, institution and outlet take not only large amount of capital invest in the new hardware and software, but first agreement of the new standard, and then training after everything is done and then usually also changing large amounts of code that have been setup in each company.
Just because we in IT can see better ways to do things, doesn't mean that management can have the foresight to actually implement it and see it through.
And usually they have a point, by the time we have everything implemented and up and running, there could/would be a better way of doing it again!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306252</id>
	<title>USB-to-Serial is a PitA</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1267376520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you need third party software to use it that adds to the piles off annoying stuff to maintain and configure. Before I knew I needed to use a serial port at work I bought a Thinkpad without one. The truly maddening thing is, the Thinkpad's mobo HAS a RS232 chip on it but there's no fricken serial port on the laptop! I think IBM made a serial port Ultrabay module for my R40 (yeah it's a dinosaur now) but I could never find one at a reasonable price.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When you need third party software to use it that adds to the piles off annoying stuff to maintain and configure .
Before I knew I needed to use a serial port at work I bought a Thinkpad without one .
The truly maddening thing is , the Thinkpad 's mobo HAS a RS232 chip on it but there 's no fricken serial port on the laptop !
I think IBM made a serial port Ultrabay module for my R40 ( yeah it 's a dinosaur now ) but I could never find one at a reasonable price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you need third party software to use it that adds to the piles off annoying stuff to maintain and configure.
Before I knew I needed to use a serial port at work I bought a Thinkpad without one.
The truly maddening thing is, the Thinkpad's mobo HAS a RS232 chip on it but there's no fricken serial port on the laptop!
I think IBM made a serial port Ultrabay module for my R40 (yeah it's a dinosaur now) but I could never find one at a reasonable price.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31376852</id>
	<title>Re:Would be nice to change the physical port spec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267791240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Even if on the back of laptops they used RJ45 for serial and marked they would keep it around longer?</p></div><p>Are you serious? There's a damn good and obvious reason why this doesn't happen. I used to get sick of support calls from people plugging their Ethernet jack into a phone line and wondering why it didn't work, thinking that it was a modem port because the two are so similar. Adding yet another similar connector to the average laptop is just asking for trouble.</p><p>If you have Cisco adapters lying everywhere one would think it's not an issue for you?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if on the back of laptops they used RJ45 for serial and marked they would keep it around longer ? Are you serious ?
There 's a damn good and obvious reason why this does n't happen .
I used to get sick of support calls from people plugging their Ethernet jack into a phone line and wondering why it did n't work , thinking that it was a modem port because the two are so similar .
Adding yet another similar connector to the average laptop is just asking for trouble.If you have Cisco adapters lying everywhere one would think it 's not an issue for you ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if on the back of laptops they used RJ45 for serial and marked they would keep it around longer?Are you serious?
There's a damn good and obvious reason why this doesn't happen.
I used to get sick of support calls from people plugging their Ethernet jack into a phone line and wondering why it didn't work, thinking that it was a modem port because the two are so similar.
Adding yet another similar connector to the average laptop is just asking for trouble.If you have Cisco adapters lying everywhere one would think it's not an issue for you?
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302338</id>
	<title>It enforces a management design constraint</title>
	<author>narnian</author>
	<datestamp>1267289820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the increasing complexity of network devices - switches, routers, load-balancers, firewalls, the expectancy of a functional terminal console puts a good design constraint on system developers. If they have to provide the ability within a 80x24 terminal funtionality to configure, operate and maintain a such a device it is a good thing. A good management is useful in providing an overview of the configuration and helps provide linkage to the management of components.</p><p>A serial terminal console is good because:-</p><p>* It enforces the designer to limit the presentation of management information to the 80x24 screen (possibly using pages), and often with a 9600bps data rate. My view is if they can't do it properly in a console they have not though well enough about management. Too often GUIs for management tend to hide important configuration parameters away.<br>* A terminal console allows easy copy-and-paste and script munging of configurations to ensure consistent deployment. GUIs don't allow such duplication of configurations very well.<br>* It allows simple out of band management through the use of a terminal server connecting multiple consoles. Such a simple management connection provides am always available management window in a network down situation. (Assuming this is deployed properly). You can also manage the risk well if management can ONLY be done by serial (preventing the management network inadvertently being connected to a production network.<br>* While standarardisation of the physical port (male or female DB9 or RJ45) and host type (DTE or DCE) and even hardware handshaking is right royal pain. At least it is usual possible to determine it after a minimum number of tries. But essential it is pretty straightforward to implement.<br>* While a USB connection sounds good, I would only prefer it if it was guaranteed to be a zero driver installation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the increasing complexity of network devices - switches , routers , load-balancers , firewalls , the expectancy of a functional terminal console puts a good design constraint on system developers .
If they have to provide the ability within a 80x24 terminal funtionality to configure , operate and maintain a such a device it is a good thing .
A good management is useful in providing an overview of the configuration and helps provide linkage to the management of components.A serial terminal console is good because : - * It enforces the designer to limit the presentation of management information to the 80x24 screen ( possibly using pages ) , and often with a 9600bps data rate .
My view is if they ca n't do it properly in a console they have not though well enough about management .
Too often GUIs for management tend to hide important configuration parameters away .
* A terminal console allows easy copy-and-paste and script munging of configurations to ensure consistent deployment .
GUIs do n't allow such duplication of configurations very well .
* It allows simple out of band management through the use of a terminal server connecting multiple consoles .
Such a simple management connection provides am always available management window in a network down situation .
( Assuming this is deployed properly ) .
You can also manage the risk well if management can ONLY be done by serial ( preventing the management network inadvertently being connected to a production network .
* While standarardisation of the physical port ( male or female DB9 or RJ45 ) and host type ( DTE or DCE ) and even hardware handshaking is right royal pain .
At least it is usual possible to determine it after a minimum number of tries .
But essential it is pretty straightforward to implement .
* While a USB connection sounds good , I would only prefer it if it was guaranteed to be a zero driver installation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the increasing complexity of network devices - switches, routers, load-balancers, firewalls, the expectancy of a functional terminal console puts a good design constraint on system developers.
If they have to provide the ability within a 80x24 terminal funtionality to configure, operate and maintain a such a device it is a good thing.
A good management is useful in providing an overview of the configuration and helps provide linkage to the management of components.A serial terminal console is good because:-* It enforces the designer to limit the presentation of management information to the 80x24 screen (possibly using pages), and often with a 9600bps data rate.
My view is if they can't do it properly in a console they have not though well enough about management.
Too often GUIs for management tend to hide important configuration parameters away.
* A terminal console allows easy copy-and-paste and script munging of configurations to ensure consistent deployment.
GUIs don't allow such duplication of configurations very well.
* It allows simple out of band management through the use of a terminal server connecting multiple consoles.
Such a simple management connection provides am always available management window in a network down situation.
(Assuming this is deployed properly).
You can also manage the risk well if management can ONLY be done by serial (preventing the management network inadvertently being connected to a production network.
* While standarardisation of the physical port (male or female DB9 or RJ45) and host type (DTE or DCE) and even hardware handshaking is right royal pain.
At least it is usual possible to determine it after a minimum number of tries.
But essential it is pretty straightforward to implement.
* While a USB connection sounds good, I would only prefer it if it was guaranteed to be a zero driver installation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142</id>
	<title>USB is a poor choice - Ethernet works pretty well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267288020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understand what you are saying: RS232 ports suck for any number of
reasons. </p><p>But there are a few why it is still often used.</p><p>First, it has been ubiquitous for 20 to 30 years. When I started
my first development job in 1982 - everything talked to everything else via
RS-232. Back then 9600 baud was considered fast. At 8 bits per
character with no parity and one stop bit, 9600 baud could paint a screen with
characters in one second. Yes, we thought that was fast.
Things got better as baud rates improved - but RS-232 remained everywhere - it
was the one constant universal interface. Even though it is incredible
antiqued, it is still in many PCs. </p><p>Second, RS-232 (and its many cousins like RS-422) are very, very easy to use
in software. The simplest I/O can be done in a few lines of code.
Its easy to put RS-232 code right in firmware. This makes it easy to write
bootstrapers, boot consoles, debug consoles etc. </p><p>USB would be a poor choice for a replacement. The reason is that it
isnt peer to peer - it is a master/slave architecture. There is always
one master -usually a PC, and one or more slaves (keyboards, mice,
printers, scanners, cable modems, disk drives, storage keys, cameras etc).</p><p>It requires a special cable to make to client USB devices talk to each other.
This cable has a small do-dad that looks like a master to both ends.
This works ok, but it requires special knowledge of this USB end point to work
correctly. Note, Windows began to support this in Vista for migration. Its
called
<a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/features/easy-transfer.aspx" title="microsoft.com">
Windows Easy Transfer/a&gt;.. There is a version for XP too (</a> [microsoft.com]<a href="http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=2B6F1631-973A-45C7-A4EC-4928FA173266&amp;displaylang=en" title="microsoft.com">downloadable/a&gt;).
It actually works very well, but the cables were not cheap. Note that the
cables really are not cables - but a dual-headed master USB controller with two
ports - it just looks like a cable with a lump in the middle -
</a> [microsoft.com]<a href="http://www.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Product\_Id=506029" title="belkin.com">
Belkin sells one for $40</a> [belkin.com]. </p><p>LLike a few other posters have said - USB is much more complex to use in
software than simple RS-232. Ive written code for it and I find it more
complex than Ethernet at the MAC level.</p><p>I think Ethernet is the real replacement. A little TFT or Telnet
server / client is really trivial to write. This can (and often has been done)
in firmware. For example, most (all?) home Ethernet and
wireless routers dont have a serial port. Their management is over
Ethernet - works great. </p><p>-<em>Foredecker</em> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand what you are saying : RS232 ports suck for any number of reasons .
But there are a few why it is still often used.First , it has been ubiquitous for 20 to 30 years .
When I started my first development job in 1982 - everything talked to everything else via RS-232 .
Back then 9600 baud was considered fast .
At 8 bits per character with no parity and one stop bit , 9600 baud could paint a screen with characters in one second .
Yes , we thought that was fast .
Things got better as baud rates improved - but RS-232 remained everywhere - it was the one constant universal interface .
Even though it is incredible antiqued , it is still in many PCs .
Second , RS-232 ( and its many cousins like RS-422 ) are very , very easy to use in software .
The simplest I/O can be done in a few lines of code .
Its easy to put RS-232 code right in firmware .
This makes it easy to write bootstrapers , boot consoles , debug consoles etc .
USB would be a poor choice for a replacement .
The reason is that it isnt peer to peer - it is a master/slave architecture .
There is always one master -usually a PC , and one or more slaves ( keyboards , mice , printers , scanners , cable modems , disk drives , storage keys , cameras etc ) .It requires a special cable to make to client USB devices talk to each other .
This cable has a small do-dad that looks like a master to both ends .
This works ok , but it requires special knowledge of this USB end point to work correctly .
Note , Windows began to support this in Vista for migration .
Its called Windows Easy Transfer/a &gt; .. There is a version for XP too ( [ microsoft.com ] downloadable/a &gt; ) .
It actually works very well , but the cables were not cheap .
Note that the cables really are not cables - but a dual-headed master USB controller with two ports - it just looks like a cable with a lump in the middle - [ microsoft.com ] Belkin sells one for $ 40 [ belkin.com ] .
LLike a few other posters have said - USB is much more complex to use in software than simple RS-232 .
Ive written code for it and I find it more complex than Ethernet at the MAC level.I think Ethernet is the real replacement .
A little TFT or Telnet server / client is really trivial to write .
This can ( and often has been done ) in firmware .
For example , most ( all ?
) home Ethernet and wireless routers dont have a serial port .
Their management is over Ethernet - works great .
-Foredecker</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand what you are saying: RS232 ports suck for any number of
reasons.
But there are a few why it is still often used.First, it has been ubiquitous for 20 to 30 years.
When I started
my first development job in 1982 - everything talked to everything else via
RS-232.
Back then 9600 baud was considered fast.
At 8 bits per
character with no parity and one stop bit, 9600 baud could paint a screen with
characters in one second.
Yes, we thought that was fast.
Things got better as baud rates improved - but RS-232 remained everywhere - it
was the one constant universal interface.
Even though it is incredible
antiqued, it is still in many PCs.
Second, RS-232 (and its many cousins like RS-422) are very, very easy to use
in software.
The simplest I/O can be done in a few lines of code.
Its easy to put RS-232 code right in firmware.
This makes it easy to write
bootstrapers, boot consoles, debug consoles etc.
USB would be a poor choice for a replacement.
The reason is that it
isnt peer to peer - it is a master/slave architecture.
There is always
one master -usually a PC, and one or more slaves (keyboards, mice,
printers, scanners, cable modems, disk drives, storage keys, cameras etc).It requires a special cable to make to client USB devices talk to each other.
This cable has a small do-dad that looks like a master to both ends.
This works ok, but it requires special knowledge of this USB end point to work
correctly.
Note, Windows began to support this in Vista for migration.
Its
called

Windows Easy Transfer/a&gt;.. There is a version for XP too ( [microsoft.com]downloadable/a&gt;).
It actually works very well, but the cables were not cheap.
Note that the
cables really are not cables - but a dual-headed master USB controller with two
ports - it just looks like a cable with a lump in the middle -
 [microsoft.com]
Belkin sells one for $40 [belkin.com].
LLike a few other posters have said - USB is much more complex to use in
software than simple RS-232.
Ive written code for it and I find it more
complex than Ethernet at the MAC level.I think Ethernet is the real replacement.
A little TFT or Telnet
server / client is really trivial to write.
This can (and often has been done)
in firmware.
For example, most (all?
) home Ethernet and
wireless routers dont have a serial port.
Their management is over
Ethernet - works great.
-Foredecker </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304788</id>
	<title>No.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267364460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why should it, if it 'aint broken, don't fix it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should it , if it 'aint broken , do n't fix it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should it, if it 'aint broken, don't fix it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304558</id>
	<title>You all are missing something here...distance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267361580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everybody saying just use USB are having a little bit of tunnel vision for YOUR use of serial/usb.<br>you are envisioning a laptop in hand and walking up to a device, close enough that a USB cable is an option.</p><p>It is not always that way.</p><p>I've personally run serial cables hundreds of feet to machine tools from a central code storage computer.</p><p>Now try that with a USB cable.  you have to have a powered hub every, what, 6 or 8 feet for a 250 foot run?</p><p>Not all serial connections are Rs-232, some have longer transmission lengths, and by slowing the baud rate, up to 4000 ft (from wikipedia).</p><p>Serial does things USB does not, so it won't be replaced till something does everything it does, and better.<br>It is just not USB at this point.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody saying just use USB are having a little bit of tunnel vision for YOUR use of serial/usb.you are envisioning a laptop in hand and walking up to a device , close enough that a USB cable is an option.It is not always that way.I 've personally run serial cables hundreds of feet to machine tools from a central code storage computer.Now try that with a USB cable .
you have to have a powered hub every , what , 6 or 8 feet for a 250 foot run ? Not all serial connections are Rs-232 , some have longer transmission lengths , and by slowing the baud rate , up to 4000 ft ( from wikipedia ) .Serial does things USB does not , so it wo n't be replaced till something does everything it does , and better.It is just not USB at this point .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody saying just use USB are having a little bit of tunnel vision for YOUR use of serial/usb.you are envisioning a laptop in hand and walking up to a device, close enough that a USB cable is an option.It is not always that way.I've personally run serial cables hundreds of feet to machine tools from a central code storage computer.Now try that with a USB cable.
you have to have a powered hub every, what, 6 or 8 feet for a 250 foot run?Not all serial connections are Rs-232, some have longer transmission lengths, and by slowing the baud rate, up to 4000 ft (from wikipedia).Serial does things USB does not, so it won't be replaced till something does everything it does, and better.It is just not USB at this point.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</id>
	<title>You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use one just fine with an old WACOM 12" tablet under linux, so while the port may be dead, we can still use serial software and hardware.  There's no reason you can't use two $15 converters plus a null modem to run that old DOS-based serial telecom program (ah, telix<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... thanks for the memories).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use one just fine with an old WACOM 12 " tablet under linux , so while the port may be dead , we can still use serial software and hardware .
There 's no reason you ca n't use two $ 15 converters plus a null modem to run that old DOS-based serial telecom program ( ah , telix ... thanks for the memories ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use one just fine with an old WACOM 12" tablet under linux, so while the port may be dead, we can still use serial software and hardware.
There's no reason you can't use two $15 converters plus a null modem to run that old DOS-based serial telecom program (ah, telix ... thanks for the memories).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301928</id>
	<title>Re:Serial Ports..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267286100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When it comes to managing important network switches, no, they aren't gone.

</p><p>When an important switch fails for some reason, how do you contact it to see if it's recoverable remotely?  (i.e. when your network admin has to manage switches that are located at remote satellite offices)

</p><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out-of-band\_management#Console\_redirection" title="wikipedia.org">Out-of-band management addresses this limitation by employing a management channel that is physically isolated from the data channel.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When it comes to managing important network switches , no , they are n't gone .
When an important switch fails for some reason , how do you contact it to see if it 's recoverable remotely ?
( i.e. when your network admin has to manage switches that are located at remote satellite offices ) Out-of-band management addresses this limitation by employing a management channel that is physically isolated from the data channel .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When it comes to managing important network switches, no, they aren't gone.
When an important switch fails for some reason, how do you contact it to see if it's recoverable remotely?
(i.e. when your network admin has to manage switches that are located at remote satellite offices)

 Out-of-band management addresses this limitation by employing a management channel that is physically isolated from the data channel.
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304878</id>
	<title>$11.14 at serialgear.com</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1267365600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The <a href="http://serialgear.com/1-Port-Serial-USB-USBG-RS232-F12.html" title="serialgear.com">two I bought</a> [serialgear.com] were only $11.14 each and worked in Ubuntu 9.10.  I haven't tried BSD or Windows, yet.  Well, OK, there is also shipping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The two I bought [ serialgear.com ] were only $ 11.14 each and worked in Ubuntu 9.10 .
I have n't tried BSD or Windows , yet .
Well , OK , there is also shipping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The two I bought [serialgear.com] were only $11.14 each and worked in Ubuntu 9.10.
I haven't tried BSD or Windows, yet.
Well, OK, there is also shipping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303188</id>
	<title>Dell Legacy Extender</title>
	<author>Space</author>
	<datestamp>1267297260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought my work laptop, a Dell E6400 ATG (semi-ruggedized) with the Dell Legacy Extender. It locks into the docking station port on the bottom of the rig and has a real UART chip inside attached to the system bus making it a real RS232 serial port. I program industrial robotics and have yet to find an instance where it does not work. Some of the systems I connect to are 20+ years old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought my work laptop , a Dell E6400 ATG ( semi-ruggedized ) with the Dell Legacy Extender .
It locks into the docking station port on the bottom of the rig and has a real UART chip inside attached to the system bus making it a real RS232 serial port .
I program industrial robotics and have yet to find an instance where it does not work .
Some of the systems I connect to are 20 + years old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought my work laptop, a Dell E6400 ATG (semi-ruggedized) with the Dell Legacy Extender.
It locks into the docking station port on the bottom of the rig and has a real UART chip inside attached to the system bus making it a real RS232 serial port.
I program industrial robotics and have yet to find an instance where it does not work.
Some of the systems I connect to are 20+ years old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305672</id>
	<title>Re:USB is a poor choice - Ethernet works pretty we</title>
	<author>Foredecker</author>
	<datestamp>1267372260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is actualy an old protocol (Cannot find the RFC) for ad hoc IP address assgiment.  There is also universal plug and play.   Both would work just fine here.   Two devices could also simply communite with a simple protocol righ ton top of the MAC layer.    Like many other things, people were doing this stuff 15 years ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is actualy an old protocol ( Can not find the RFC ) for ad hoc IP address assgiment .
There is also universal plug and play .
Both would work just fine here .
Two devices could also simply communite with a simple protocol righ ton top of the MAC layer .
Like many other things , people were doing this stuff 15 years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is actualy an old protocol (Cannot find the RFC) for ad hoc IP address assgiment.
There is also universal plug and play.
Both would work just fine here.
Two devices could also simply communite with a simple protocol righ ton top of the MAC layer.
Like many other things, people were doing this stuff 15 years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302950</id>
	<title>its up to the server hardware vendors to fix this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267294800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>serial consoles for unix / linux servers will continue as long as vendors ship their servers/blades with lame java based video console extenders and terrible buggy ssh implementations.   The latest IBM system X 'imm' implementations still suck because of complex architectures like Java WebStart that dont play well with the firewalls that NAT which are almost always in between the sysadmins workstation and the servers to be administered. sun x86 and HP servers are not much better. at least with sun sparc gear the openboot implementations are very stable now, and hardly anyone contemplates running serial to these much any more. but the future of x86/x64 architectures still seems bound up in video consoles, or 'serial redirect' where the bios setup gets turned into curses style serial.. sorta. ie its all hacks and kludges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>serial consoles for unix / linux servers will continue as long as vendors ship their servers/blades with lame java based video console extenders and terrible buggy ssh implementations .
The latest IBM system X 'imm ' implementations still suck because of complex architectures like Java WebStart that dont play well with the firewalls that NAT which are almost always in between the sysadmins workstation and the servers to be administered .
sun x86 and HP servers are not much better .
at least with sun sparc gear the openboot implementations are very stable now , and hardly anyone contemplates running serial to these much any more .
but the future of x86/x64 architectures still seems bound up in video consoles , or 'serial redirect ' where the bios setup gets turned into curses style serial.. sorta. ie its all hacks and kludges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>serial consoles for unix / linux servers will continue as long as vendors ship their servers/blades with lame java based video console extenders and terrible buggy ssh implementations.
The latest IBM system X 'imm' implementations still suck because of complex architectures like Java WebStart that dont play well with the firewalls that NAT which are almost always in between the sysadmins workstation and the servers to be administered.
sun x86 and HP servers are not much better.
at least with sun sparc gear the openboot implementations are very stable now, and hardly anyone contemplates running serial to these much any more.
but the future of x86/x64 architectures still seems bound up in video consoles, or 'serial redirect' where the bios setup gets turned into curses style serial.. sorta. ie its all hacks and kludges.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302658</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1267292400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where? Mine cost $35. Had to have one, because my laptop has no serial ports, and I was writing administrative manuals for Sun servers. The fact that I needed a serial port despite the extremely sophisticated alternatives to a serial console on Sun servers should tell you something.</p><p>I remember Telix. Excellent piece of software. Fast, good scripting language, excellent built-in file transfer implementations, nice plugin architecture (though the builtin features pretty much made it it superfluous). My biggest disappointment was that it didn't get ported to Windows until way too late. And there <i>still</i> isn't a Windows serial terminal program that's half as good.</p><p>Amusing discovery running Telix under Windows 3.0. When I first tried it, it was slow as hell. Increasing the DOS box priority didn't help. Then it occurred to me that the whole program must be written around a serial port polling loop. Querying hardware status too often in a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual\_DOS\_machine" title="wikipedia.org">386 virtual machine</a> [wikipedia.org] was bound to slow the program down. So I <i>lowered</i> the priority, and Telix started running as fast as before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where ?
Mine cost $ 35 .
Had to have one , because my laptop has no serial ports , and I was writing administrative manuals for Sun servers .
The fact that I needed a serial port despite the extremely sophisticated alternatives to a serial console on Sun servers should tell you something.I remember Telix .
Excellent piece of software .
Fast , good scripting language , excellent built-in file transfer implementations , nice plugin architecture ( though the builtin features pretty much made it it superfluous ) .
My biggest disappointment was that it did n't get ported to Windows until way too late .
And there still is n't a Windows serial terminal program that 's half as good.Amusing discovery running Telix under Windows 3.0 .
When I first tried it , it was slow as hell .
Increasing the DOS box priority did n't help .
Then it occurred to me that the whole program must be written around a serial port polling loop .
Querying hardware status too often in a 386 virtual machine [ wikipedia.org ] was bound to slow the program down .
So I lowered the priority , and Telix started running as fast as before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where?
Mine cost $35.
Had to have one, because my laptop has no serial ports, and I was writing administrative manuals for Sun servers.
The fact that I needed a serial port despite the extremely sophisticated alternatives to a serial console on Sun servers should tell you something.I remember Telix.
Excellent piece of software.
Fast, good scripting language, excellent built-in file transfer implementations, nice plugin architecture (though the builtin features pretty much made it it superfluous).
My biggest disappointment was that it didn't get ported to Windows until way too late.
And there still isn't a Windows serial terminal program that's half as good.Amusing discovery running Telix under Windows 3.0.
When I first tried it, it was slow as hell.
Increasing the DOS box priority didn't help.
Then it occurred to me that the whole program must be written around a serial port polling loop.
Querying hardware status too often in a 386 virtual machine [wikipedia.org] was bound to slow the program down.
So I lowered the priority, and Telix started running as fast as before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302000</id>
	<title>first po5t</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267286760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>[samag.comn] in the for a momeRnt and</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ samag.comn ] in the for a momeRnt and</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[samag.comn] in the for a momeRnt and</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303016</id>
	<title>Re:USB is a poor choice - Ethernet works pretty we</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1267295400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't forget USB kernel debugging support in Vista too. It uses a <a href="http://www.ajaystech.com/net20dc.htm" title="ajaystech.com" rel="nofollow">Net20DC</a> [ajaystech.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget USB kernel debugging support in Vista too .
It uses a Net20DC [ ajaystech.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget USB kernel debugging support in Vista too.
It uses a Net20DC [ajaystech.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302860</id>
	<title>It depends</title>
	<author>bXTr</author>
	<datestamp>1267294140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your serial console is 5 meters (16.4 feet) away, or less, USB is fine. 5 meters is the stated maximum cable length for USB. Any longer, and you'll have timing issues. RS232 has a stated maximum cable length of 50 feet at 19200 bps. As another commenter stated, 9600 bps would be quite fast enough, so you can go up to 500 feet. Just make sure you use good cables that effectively shield out both external and internal noise.</p><p>For longer distances or noise concerns, like in a manufacturing plant, you can use fiberoptic cable with converters on either end. RS232-to-fiber converters have been around for years, and USB-to-fiber converters are available, too.</p><p>As an aside, years ago we upgraded our servers from ones that only had a serial console terminal to ones that had both serial and ethernet based ones. I had no problem going to the ethernet ones, but my boss at the time got nervous. She made me hook up one of the console terminals from our old servers to the new ones. Unfortunately, we had already removed the desk we used in the server room for the console terminals to make room for other servers. I had to put it on one of those movable computer desks and I never could find a good spot for it. Eventually, I went from ops to development, so it became someone else's problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your serial console is 5 meters ( 16.4 feet ) away , or less , USB is fine .
5 meters is the stated maximum cable length for USB .
Any longer , and you 'll have timing issues .
RS232 has a stated maximum cable length of 50 feet at 19200 bps .
As another commenter stated , 9600 bps would be quite fast enough , so you can go up to 500 feet .
Just make sure you use good cables that effectively shield out both external and internal noise.For longer distances or noise concerns , like in a manufacturing plant , you can use fiberoptic cable with converters on either end .
RS232-to-fiber converters have been around for years , and USB-to-fiber converters are available , too.As an aside , years ago we upgraded our servers from ones that only had a serial console terminal to ones that had both serial and ethernet based ones .
I had no problem going to the ethernet ones , but my boss at the time got nervous .
She made me hook up one of the console terminals from our old servers to the new ones .
Unfortunately , we had already removed the desk we used in the server room for the console terminals to make room for other servers .
I had to put it on one of those movable computer desks and I never could find a good spot for it .
Eventually , I went from ops to development , so it became someone else 's problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your serial console is 5 meters (16.4 feet) away, or less, USB is fine.
5 meters is the stated maximum cable length for USB.
Any longer, and you'll have timing issues.
RS232 has a stated maximum cable length of 50 feet at 19200 bps.
As another commenter stated, 9600 bps would be quite fast enough, so you can go up to 500 feet.
Just make sure you use good cables that effectively shield out both external and internal noise.For longer distances or noise concerns, like in a manufacturing plant, you can use fiberoptic cable with converters on either end.
RS232-to-fiber converters have been around for years, and USB-to-fiber converters are available, too.As an aside, years ago we upgraded our servers from ones that only had a serial console terminal to ones that had both serial and ethernet based ones.
I had no problem going to the ethernet ones, but my boss at the time got nervous.
She made me hook up one of the console terminals from our old servers to the new ones.
Unfortunately, we had already removed the desk we used in the server room for the console terminals to make room for other servers.
I had to put it on one of those movable computer desks and I never could find a good spot for it.
Eventually, I went from ops to development, so it became someone else's problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856</id>
	<title>Simplicity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It calls out to you.</p><p>The great thing about a serial console is that it doesn't take long to figure it out. And you only need 3 wires to get there.<br>Another nice thing about it is that it's point-to-point, so you don't have to worry about your signals getting lost.</p><p>Heck, you can create a serial interface from discrete components if you're really into fun.</p><p>So use your serial console for what it's intended to be used for: emergencies and initial configurations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It calls out to you.The great thing about a serial console is that it does n't take long to figure it out .
And you only need 3 wires to get there.Another nice thing about it is that it 's point-to-point , so you do n't have to worry about your signals getting lost.Heck , you can create a serial interface from discrete components if you 're really into fun.So use your serial console for what it 's intended to be used for : emergencies and initial configurations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It calls out to you.The great thing about a serial console is that it doesn't take long to figure it out.
And you only need 3 wires to get there.Another nice thing about it is that it's point-to-point, so you don't have to worry about your signals getting lost.Heck, you can create a serial interface from discrete components if you're really into fun.So use your serial console for what it's intended to be used for: emergencies and initial configurations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31316936</id>
	<title>USB drivers require OS before loading</title>
	<author>nitro322</author>
	<datestamp>1267462080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen drivers mentioned a few times as an issue with USB serial adapters, but something I haven't seen mentioned yet is the fact that these drivers are usually (or always?) tied to the OS, which means the device can't be used until the OS is running and the driver is loaded.</p><p>From the client perspective this isn't a big deal.  Eg., when using a USB serial adapter on a laptop to connect to a switch or modem, you're already going to have your OS up and running on the laptop.  However, from the server perspective, this can be a major problem.  If you use this on a server that, say, doesn't have a native serial port, nothing can be redirected until after the OS loads the appropriate USB driver.  So, POST/BIOS messages, bootloader options, initial boot messages (eg., dmesg for Linux) are all unavailable.  This severely limits the usefulness of USB serial adapters.</p><p>I think this problem needs to be resolved before USB can ever be considered a viable replacement, though personally I hope it does.  It seems like it should certainly be possible; HID device (keyboard and mouse) support is offered by most BIOSes by enabling the "Legacy USB" support option, so obviously it's possible to talk to USB devices at this level.  They just need to settle on a standard protocol for serial communication that can be implemented in a similar manner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen drivers mentioned a few times as an issue with USB serial adapters , but something I have n't seen mentioned yet is the fact that these drivers are usually ( or always ?
) tied to the OS , which means the device ca n't be used until the OS is running and the driver is loaded.From the client perspective this is n't a big deal .
Eg. , when using a USB serial adapter on a laptop to connect to a switch or modem , you 're already going to have your OS up and running on the laptop .
However , from the server perspective , this can be a major problem .
If you use this on a server that , say , does n't have a native serial port , nothing can be redirected until after the OS loads the appropriate USB driver .
So , POST/BIOS messages , bootloader options , initial boot messages ( eg. , dmesg for Linux ) are all unavailable .
This severely limits the usefulness of USB serial adapters.I think this problem needs to be resolved before USB can ever be considered a viable replacement , though personally I hope it does .
It seems like it should certainly be possible ; HID device ( keyboard and mouse ) support is offered by most BIOSes by enabling the " Legacy USB " support option , so obviously it 's possible to talk to USB devices at this level .
They just need to settle on a standard protocol for serial communication that can be implemented in a similar manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen drivers mentioned a few times as an issue with USB serial adapters, but something I haven't seen mentioned yet is the fact that these drivers are usually (or always?
) tied to the OS, which means the device can't be used until the OS is running and the driver is loaded.From the client perspective this isn't a big deal.
Eg., when using a USB serial adapter on a laptop to connect to a switch or modem, you're already going to have your OS up and running on the laptop.
However, from the server perspective, this can be a major problem.
If you use this on a server that, say, doesn't have a native serial port, nothing can be redirected until after the OS loads the appropriate USB driver.
So, POST/BIOS messages, bootloader options, initial boot messages (eg., dmesg for Linux) are all unavailable.
This severely limits the usefulness of USB serial adapters.I think this problem needs to be resolved before USB can ever be considered a viable replacement, though personally I hope it does.
It seems like it should certainly be possible; HID device (keyboard and mouse) support is offered by most BIOSes by enabling the "Legacy USB" support option, so obviously it's possible to talk to USB devices at this level.
They just need to settle on a standard protocol for serial communication that can be implemented in a similar manner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302404</id>
	<title>the PORT may die but serial will live on</title>
	<author>cryoman23</author>
	<datestamp>1267290300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>the Serial port may died out but im sure Serial will stay with us for a very long time since micros need Serial to be programmed with and ontop of that a lot of things use serial type communications such as SATA(SERIAL ata) USB (universal SERIAL bus) and i think Ethernet would have to use a type of serial communication albeit not the same as traditional serial. really i suppose anything that nots parallel(and my laptop has one of those ports but not RS232 serial?!?) is a type of serial...</htmltext>
<tokenext>the Serial port may died out but im sure Serial will stay with us for a very long time since micros need Serial to be programmed with and ontop of that a lot of things use serial type communications such as SATA ( SERIAL ata ) USB ( universal SERIAL bus ) and i think Ethernet would have to use a type of serial communication albeit not the same as traditional serial .
really i suppose anything that nots parallel ( and my laptop has one of those ports but not RS232 serial ? ! ?
) is a type of serial.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Serial port may died out but im sure Serial will stay with us for a very long time since micros need Serial to be programmed with and ontop of that a lot of things use serial type communications such as SATA(SERIAL ata) USB (universal SERIAL bus) and i think Ethernet would have to use a type of serial communication albeit not the same as traditional serial.
really i suppose anything that nots parallel(and my laptop has one of those ports but not RS232 serial?!?
) is a type of serial...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302180</id>
	<title>they need use SD card / usb keys for firmware / co</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1267288320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they need to use SD card / usb keys for firmware / base / fallback config. just put in a small eprom with a base boot code that can reed a usb key to upload the firmware. The SAM system is build like this and is a lot easier to update then burning new eprom for full code updates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they need to use SD card / usb keys for firmware / base / fallback config .
just put in a small eprom with a base boot code that can reed a usb key to upload the firmware .
The SAM system is build like this and is a lot easier to update then burning new eprom for full code updates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they need to use SD card / usb keys for firmware / base / fallback config.
just put in a small eprom with a base boot code that can reed a usb key to upload the firmware.
The SAM system is build like this and is a lot easier to update then burning new eprom for full code updates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302100</id>
	<title>Too late!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267287600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I attended its funeral yesterday.  It was an open-casket ceremony, and people just couldn't seem to resist fingering the deceased.  Sadly it didn't respond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I attended its funeral yesterday .
It was an open-casket ceremony , and people just could n't seem to resist fingering the deceased .
Sadly it did n't respond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I attended its funeral yesterday.
It was an open-casket ceremony, and people just couldn't seem to resist fingering the deceased.
Sadly it didn't respond.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302460</id>
	<title>Re:What will we do with all the US Robotics Courie</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267290600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...maybe from USR?<br><a href="http://www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp?sku=USR3453c" title="usr.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp?sku=USR3453c</a> [usr.com]</p><p>Hell, 386 chips only went out of production in 2007. Home computers do not represent the full industry. Maybe we should do a thread of Tech You Thought Was Dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...maybe from USR ? http : //www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp ? sku = USR3453c [ usr.com ] Hell , 386 chips only went out of production in 2007 .
Home computers do not represent the full industry .
Maybe we should do a thread of Tech You Thought Was Dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...maybe from USR?http://www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp?sku=USR3453c [usr.com]Hell, 386 chips only went out of production in 2007.
Home computers do not represent the full industry.
Maybe we should do a thread of Tech You Thought Was Dead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303850</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>IntlHarvester</author>
	<datestamp>1267348380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not as optimistic as you. RS232 will be around forever, but I'd bet the server/router/switch stuff standardizes on USB within 5 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not as optimistic as you .
RS232 will be around forever , but I 'd bet the server/router/switch stuff standardizes on USB within 5 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not as optimistic as you.
RS232 will be around forever, but I'd bet the server/router/switch stuff standardizes on USB within 5 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31308616</id>
	<title>The Way of the True Hacker</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1267350060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I made my own, more or less home-brewed, networked, serial, multi-console, hmm, can I put any more adjectives on that? Anyway, what I did was very simply, sort of: you take a big pile of USB-to-Serial devices, a suitable number of USB hubs and connect them to your (Linux-) system. The you start up a minicom on each of them inside screen, running in detached mode; you can now connect to the Linux system with ssh or telnet and attach to any of the screen sessions. The Power of Linux, Mwahahahaha!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I made my own , more or less home-brewed , networked , serial , multi-console , hmm , can I put any more adjectives on that ?
Anyway , what I did was very simply , sort of : you take a big pile of USB-to-Serial devices , a suitable number of USB hubs and connect them to your ( Linux- ) system .
The you start up a minicom on each of them inside screen , running in detached mode ; you can now connect to the Linux system with ssh or telnet and attach to any of the screen sessions .
The Power of Linux , Mwahahahaha !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I made my own, more or less home-brewed, networked, serial, multi-console, hmm, can I put any more adjectives on that?
Anyway, what I did was very simply, sort of: you take a big pile of USB-to-Serial devices, a suitable number of USB hubs and connect them to your (Linux-) system.
The you start up a minicom on each of them inside screen, running in detached mode; you can now connect to the Linux system with ssh or telnet and attach to any of the screen sessions.
The Power of Linux, Mwahahahaha!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302124</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>glyn.phillips</author>
	<datestamp>1267287780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another feature is software simplicity.  This may not be an issue for the laptop, but it is an issue for the embedded system.  Or it can be during development.</p><p>USB is a complex protocol which requires a fair amount of code and data structures to support.  A serial port on the other hand requires less than a page of code (in it's most simple form).  The result is that when a system crashes, a serial port has a much better chance of being operational than a USB interface.  Many systems with serial ports are designed so that a break signal on the line will interrupt the processor from whatever it's doing and send it directly to the debugger.  When you can examine the entrails it is much easier to divine the cause.</p><p>Of course it is possible to design a bit of hardware which looks like a USB serial port adapter to a laptop and a serial port to the embedded system.  Even better would be a new USB interface which gives full access to system memory and processor state.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another feature is software simplicity .
This may not be an issue for the laptop , but it is an issue for the embedded system .
Or it can be during development.USB is a complex protocol which requires a fair amount of code and data structures to support .
A serial port on the other hand requires less than a page of code ( in it 's most simple form ) .
The result is that when a system crashes , a serial port has a much better chance of being operational than a USB interface .
Many systems with serial ports are designed so that a break signal on the line will interrupt the processor from whatever it 's doing and send it directly to the debugger .
When you can examine the entrails it is much easier to divine the cause.Of course it is possible to design a bit of hardware which looks like a USB serial port adapter to a laptop and a serial port to the embedded system .
Even better would be a new USB interface which gives full access to system memory and processor state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another feature is software simplicity.
This may not be an issue for the laptop, but it is an issue for the embedded system.
Or it can be during development.USB is a complex protocol which requires a fair amount of code and data structures to support.
A serial port on the other hand requires less than a page of code (in it's most simple form).
The result is that when a system crashes, a serial port has a much better chance of being operational than a USB interface.
Many systems with serial ports are designed so that a break signal on the line will interrupt the processor from whatever it's doing and send it directly to the debugger.
When you can examine the entrails it is much easier to divine the cause.Of course it is possible to design a bit of hardware which looks like a USB serial port adapter to a laptop and a serial port to the embedded system.
Even better would be a new USB interface which gives full access to system memory and processor state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302984</id>
	<title>Newest Cisco gear uses mini-USB or Serial</title>
	<author>Blademan007</author>
	<datestamp>1267295160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>take your pick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>take your pick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>take your pick.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303260</id>
	<title>Re:Other industrial devices</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1267298280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The industrial world is transitioning to twisted-pair Ethernet.  From an industrial perspective,
twisted-pair Ethernet is a nice interface.  It's balanced drive and twisted pair, so it has very good common-mode noise rejection.  (Better than RS-232 and 5V encoder signals, in fact.)
There's full error checking and retransmission, unlike serial lines.
This is important when it attaches to a welding robot, or runs past a circuit breaker that's switching 5KV.
Long cable runs of 10baseT and 100baseT work fine.  Bridges and routers are easily available and cheap, even in industrial form.  And, of course, you can put many devices on one cable.
</p><p>
From a security perspective, though, this creates the problem that it's too easy to get devices on an Ethernet cable connected to the external Internet. Especially since the support programs for the devices tend to run on Windows.  Most of the industrial Ethernet devices have little or no security.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The industrial world is transitioning to twisted-pair Ethernet .
From an industrial perspective , twisted-pair Ethernet is a nice interface .
It 's balanced drive and twisted pair , so it has very good common-mode noise rejection .
( Better than RS-232 and 5V encoder signals , in fact .
) There 's full error checking and retransmission , unlike serial lines .
This is important when it attaches to a welding robot , or runs past a circuit breaker that 's switching 5KV .
Long cable runs of 10baseT and 100baseT work fine .
Bridges and routers are easily available and cheap , even in industrial form .
And , of course , you can put many devices on one cable .
From a security perspective , though , this creates the problem that it 's too easy to get devices on an Ethernet cable connected to the external Internet .
Especially since the support programs for the devices tend to run on Windows .
Most of the industrial Ethernet devices have little or no security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The industrial world is transitioning to twisted-pair Ethernet.
From an industrial perspective,
twisted-pair Ethernet is a nice interface.
It's balanced drive and twisted pair, so it has very good common-mode noise rejection.
(Better than RS-232 and 5V encoder signals, in fact.
)
There's full error checking and retransmission, unlike serial lines.
This is important when it attaches to a welding robot, or runs past a circuit breaker that's switching 5KV.
Long cable runs of 10baseT and 100baseT work fine.
Bridges and routers are easily available and cheap, even in industrial form.
And, of course, you can put many devices on one cable.
From a security perspective, though, this creates the problem that it's too easy to get devices on an Ethernet cable connected to the external Internet.
Especially since the support programs for the devices tend to run on Windows.
Most of the industrial Ethernet devices have little or no security.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305532</id>
	<title>Most discussions missing the point</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1267371420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most discussions are talking about USB to serial adapters of one sort or another.</p><p>While I appreciate the discussion, the question of the article is whether or not new devices that use serial ports for their console should move on to something else.  I think they should.  We flipped out when people spoke of ditching the floppy.  PS/2 ports disappeared without much discussion or complaint.  And as for printer ports?  I barely noticed that they disappeared, but now that you mention it, they are mostly gone too.  (Most of my printers are connected using the network port.)  But once again, I find myself talking more about the PC side of things rather than the devices we seek to access or control.</p><p>Frankly, console ports should either be network or USB ports and I favor network ports.  While the complexity of a web console would make them more expensive, things are still evolving and make them less expensive.  Web consoles can be accessed by any number of devices and made to work in any number of ways not the least of which is remotely from very long distances.  (This also brings about security concerns, I know... that's another discussion.)  USB suffers from the same problem that serial suffers -- its capacity for distance (length of cable) and the requirement of physical access.  Some would argue those are a plus when it comes to security (once again, another discussion) but for all other concerns, USB is lacking and frankly, while USB is a great carrier bus, it doesn't have particular protocols implied to it that ethernet does.</p><p>What do I mean by that?  Well, while ethernet can carry a wide range of protocols over its wires (just as USB can) lately, nearly all other protocols have falled out of favor or completely from view.  Does anyone use Netbeui?  IPX?  Banyan VINES?  Essentially, ethernet says "TCP/IP" these days and all of the stuff it involves from telnet to http.  If a console standard were to be issued, it should be using ethernet and http as the interface to the user.  Telnet would be more simple in many respects, but http is a much more available client protocol.</p><p>With USB, on the other hand, you pretty much have to decide on what will be emulated over USB before anything useful in the way of a console could be developed.  Would we be emulating a serial port?  A network link?  What sort of user interface would we use when accessing the consoles of these devices?  There is CLI and GUI.  What else is there?  In any case, the emulation of whatever would likely require drivers of some sort or another.  The USB to serial and serial to USB chips out there would make plugging into a device with USB show a new serial port connected to the PC.  That's easy enough, I suppose, but do we really want to add and remove entire devices to our kernels when connecting and disconnecting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most discussions are talking about USB to serial adapters of one sort or another.While I appreciate the discussion , the question of the article is whether or not new devices that use serial ports for their console should move on to something else .
I think they should .
We flipped out when people spoke of ditching the floppy .
PS/2 ports disappeared without much discussion or complaint .
And as for printer ports ?
I barely noticed that they disappeared , but now that you mention it , they are mostly gone too .
( Most of my printers are connected using the network port .
) But once again , I find myself talking more about the PC side of things rather than the devices we seek to access or control.Frankly , console ports should either be network or USB ports and I favor network ports .
While the complexity of a web console would make them more expensive , things are still evolving and make them less expensive .
Web consoles can be accessed by any number of devices and made to work in any number of ways not the least of which is remotely from very long distances .
( This also brings about security concerns , I know... that 's another discussion .
) USB suffers from the same problem that serial suffers -- its capacity for distance ( length of cable ) and the requirement of physical access .
Some would argue those are a plus when it comes to security ( once again , another discussion ) but for all other concerns , USB is lacking and frankly , while USB is a great carrier bus , it does n't have particular protocols implied to it that ethernet does.What do I mean by that ?
Well , while ethernet can carry a wide range of protocols over its wires ( just as USB can ) lately , nearly all other protocols have falled out of favor or completely from view .
Does anyone use Netbeui ?
IPX ? Banyan VINES ?
Essentially , ethernet says " TCP/IP " these days and all of the stuff it involves from telnet to http .
If a console standard were to be issued , it should be using ethernet and http as the interface to the user .
Telnet would be more simple in many respects , but http is a much more available client protocol.With USB , on the other hand , you pretty much have to decide on what will be emulated over USB before anything useful in the way of a console could be developed .
Would we be emulating a serial port ?
A network link ?
What sort of user interface would we use when accessing the consoles of these devices ?
There is CLI and GUI .
What else is there ?
In any case , the emulation of whatever would likely require drivers of some sort or another .
The USB to serial and serial to USB chips out there would make plugging into a device with USB show a new serial port connected to the PC .
That 's easy enough , I suppose , but do we really want to add and remove entire devices to our kernels when connecting and disconnecting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most discussions are talking about USB to serial adapters of one sort or another.While I appreciate the discussion, the question of the article is whether or not new devices that use serial ports for their console should move on to something else.
I think they should.
We flipped out when people spoke of ditching the floppy.
PS/2 ports disappeared without much discussion or complaint.
And as for printer ports?
I barely noticed that they disappeared, but now that you mention it, they are mostly gone too.
(Most of my printers are connected using the network port.
)  But once again, I find myself talking more about the PC side of things rather than the devices we seek to access or control.Frankly, console ports should either be network or USB ports and I favor network ports.
While the complexity of a web console would make them more expensive, things are still evolving and make them less expensive.
Web consoles can be accessed by any number of devices and made to work in any number of ways not the least of which is remotely from very long distances.
(This also brings about security concerns, I know... that's another discussion.
)  USB suffers from the same problem that serial suffers -- its capacity for distance (length of cable) and the requirement of physical access.
Some would argue those are a plus when it comes to security (once again, another discussion) but for all other concerns, USB is lacking and frankly, while USB is a great carrier bus, it doesn't have particular protocols implied to it that ethernet does.What do I mean by that?
Well, while ethernet can carry a wide range of protocols over its wires (just as USB can) lately, nearly all other protocols have falled out of favor or completely from view.
Does anyone use Netbeui?
IPX?  Banyan VINES?
Essentially, ethernet says "TCP/IP" these days and all of the stuff it involves from telnet to http.
If a console standard were to be issued, it should be using ethernet and http as the interface to the user.
Telnet would be more simple in many respects, but http is a much more available client protocol.With USB, on the other hand, you pretty much have to decide on what will be emulated over USB before anything useful in the way of a console could be developed.
Would we be emulating a serial port?
A network link?
What sort of user interface would we use when accessing the consoles of these devices?
There is CLI and GUI.
What else is there?
In any case, the emulation of whatever would likely require drivers of some sort or another.
The USB to serial and serial to USB chips out there would make plugging into a device with USB show a new serial port connected to the PC.
That's easy enough, I suppose, but do we really want to add and remove entire devices to our kernels when connecting and disconnecting?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31328380</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267535040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>byterunner.com... they've always worked for me where standard over-the-counter models failed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>byterunner.com... they 've always worked for me where standard over-the-counter models failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>byterunner.com... they've always worked for me where standard over-the-counter models failed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302480</id>
	<title>Real servers, serial is standard</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1267290780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We got a new Sun T5120 Niagara box the other week. New build server. (32 threads in 4 cores, yeah we bought the little one.) Initial setup procedure *requires* serial to the service processor. The IT guy was already upset enough that the KVM he'd arranged had no use on a SPARC box and had to grovel around for a USB serial adapter.</p><p>Serial is all-but-dead in desktop PC land and deader than it should be in server PC land. (Sun x86 servers always have serial.) Everything else, serial is standard and thank fuck. RS232 9600 8-N-1, usually to an RJ-45 rather than DB-9 these days. But it remains standard and indispensable. The more back doors you have into your own server, the happier you are when shit breaks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We got a new Sun T5120 Niagara box the other week .
New build server .
( 32 threads in 4 cores , yeah we bought the little one .
) Initial setup procedure * requires * serial to the service processor .
The IT guy was already upset enough that the KVM he 'd arranged had no use on a SPARC box and had to grovel around for a USB serial adapter.Serial is all-but-dead in desktop PC land and deader than it should be in server PC land .
( Sun x86 servers always have serial .
) Everything else , serial is standard and thank fuck .
RS232 9600 8-N-1 , usually to an RJ-45 rather than DB-9 these days .
But it remains standard and indispensable .
The more back doors you have into your own server , the happier you are when shit breaks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We got a new Sun T5120 Niagara box the other week.
New build server.
(32 threads in 4 cores, yeah we bought the little one.
) Initial setup procedure *requires* serial to the service processor.
The IT guy was already upset enough that the KVM he'd arranged had no use on a SPARC box and had to grovel around for a USB serial adapter.Serial is all-but-dead in desktop PC land and deader than it should be in server PC land.
(Sun x86 servers always have serial.
) Everything else, serial is standard and thank fuck.
RS232 9600 8-N-1, usually to an RJ-45 rather than DB-9 these days.
But it remains standard and indispensable.
The more back doors you have into your own server, the happier you are when shit breaks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302584</id>
	<title>It's no so simple serial comunication</title>
	<author>Draasti</author>
	<datestamp>1267291800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many people think it's only 2 wires (TX / RX) comunication. Well you are deadly wrong, you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial\_port have a lot of other signal and the problem is many "serial usb" conversor are not working properly. I'm having nightmare trying to conect some "not so old" devices with serial port through this "serial-usb" conversor, many simple don't work.</p><p>The true is the comunication with serial port is a mess. You don't know if you are receiving or transmiting correctly unless you "alredy" know what you will receive and can check the integrety by youself or the data your sending to device is correct. You even don't know if there are anything conected in serial port. Bottom line, there is no standard for reliable comunication.</p><p>Yes, It's easy to develop to serial, very cheap to construct devices with serial port and (for embedded) is very low power consumption, but I think is time to let go this type of device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many people think it 's only 2 wires ( TX / RX ) comunication .
Well you are deadly wrong , you can see in http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial \ _port have a lot of other signal and the problem is many " serial usb " conversor are not working properly .
I 'm having nightmare trying to conect some " not so old " devices with serial port through this " serial-usb " conversor , many simple do n't work.The true is the comunication with serial port is a mess .
You do n't know if you are receiving or transmiting correctly unless you " alredy " know what you will receive and can check the integrety by youself or the data your sending to device is correct .
You even do n't know if there are anything conected in serial port .
Bottom line , there is no standard for reliable comunication.Yes , It 's easy to develop to serial , very cheap to construct devices with serial port and ( for embedded ) is very low power consumption , but I think is time to let go this type of device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many people think it's only 2 wires (TX / RX) comunication.
Well you are deadly wrong, you can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial\_port have a lot of other signal and the problem is many "serial usb" conversor are not working properly.
I'm having nightmare trying to conect some "not so old" devices with serial port through this "serial-usb" conversor, many simple don't work.The true is the comunication with serial port is a mess.
You don't know if you are receiving or transmiting correctly unless you "alredy" know what you will receive and can check the integrety by youself or the data your sending to device is correct.
You even don't know if there are anything conected in serial port.
Bottom line, there is no standard for reliable comunication.Yes, It's easy to develop to serial, very cheap to construct devices with serial port and (for embedded) is very low power consumption, but I think is time to let go this type of device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305720</id>
	<title>The OS manufacturers need to support it first</title>
	<author>dyeazel</author>
	<datestamp>1267372560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When it comes to USB there is the DFU (Device Firmware Update) class, but Apple and Microsoft do not include DFU drivers with their OS's. Even though DFU is a standard class, there are no decent commercially available DFU drivers out there. Atmel has a series of micros that have USB built in to the micro and DFU included in their application framework, but they use the open-source libusb drivers for updating firmware on their chips.

I write installers for software that updates commercially available embedded systems. We currently use FTDI USB to serial chips in most of our devices.. Driver installation is one of our biggest support hassles. Every time a new version of an OS comes out, it is a scramble to make sure we support it. However, FTDI provide drivers for free, so I can't complain too much. Until the OS vendors include drivers for some of these "standard" devices like DFU, there is no incentive for device manufacturers to switch away from serial.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When it comes to USB there is the DFU ( Device Firmware Update ) class , but Apple and Microsoft do not include DFU drivers with their OS 's .
Even though DFU is a standard class , there are no decent commercially available DFU drivers out there .
Atmel has a series of micros that have USB built in to the micro and DFU included in their application framework , but they use the open-source libusb drivers for updating firmware on their chips .
I write installers for software that updates commercially available embedded systems .
We currently use FTDI USB to serial chips in most of our devices.. Driver installation is one of our biggest support hassles .
Every time a new version of an OS comes out , it is a scramble to make sure we support it .
However , FTDI provide drivers for free , so I ca n't complain too much .
Until the OS vendors include drivers for some of these " standard " devices like DFU , there is no incentive for device manufacturers to switch away from serial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When it comes to USB there is the DFU (Device Firmware Update) class, but Apple and Microsoft do not include DFU drivers with their OS's.
Even though DFU is a standard class, there are no decent commercially available DFU drivers out there.
Atmel has a series of micros that have USB built in to the micro and DFU included in their application framework, but they use the open-source libusb drivers for updating firmware on their chips.
I write installers for software that updates commercially available embedded systems.
We currently use FTDI USB to serial chips in most of our devices.. Driver installation is one of our biggest support hassles.
Every time a new version of an OS comes out, it is a scramble to make sure we support it.
However, FTDI provide drivers for free, so I can't complain too much.
Until the OS vendors include drivers for some of these "standard" devices like DFU, there is no incentive for device manufacturers to switch away from serial.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306360</id>
	<title>I have an old box</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267377360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With a network port and 64 serial ports.  It is kind of overkill.  You can telnet into the box and then switch to any serial port.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With a network port and 64 serial ports .
It is kind of overkill .
You can telnet into the box and then switch to any serial port .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With a network port and 64 serial ports.
It is kind of overkill.
You can telnet into the box and then switch to any serial port.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307108</id>
	<title>Not all USB to serial devices are created equal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267382100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a lot of crappy ones out there that don't work with a lot serial devices.  The one that works best has a FTDI chip such as Cable Unlimited USB-2920 product.  You can also go to FTDI's web site to get the latest drivers including support for Windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a lot of crappy ones out there that do n't work with a lot serial devices .
The one that works best has a FTDI chip such as Cable Unlimited USB-2920 product .
You can also go to FTDI 's web site to get the latest drivers including support for Windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a lot of crappy ones out there that don't work with a lot serial devices.
The one that works best has a FTDI chip such as Cable Unlimited USB-2920 product.
You can also go to FTDI's web site to get the latest drivers including support for Windows 7.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303228</id>
	<title>It's okay</title>
	<author>jones\_supa</author>
	<datestamp>1267297860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not all hardware has to be thrown into garbage just because it's old.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all hardware has to be thrown into garbage just because it 's old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all hardware has to be thrown into garbage just because it's old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305552</id>
	<title>It's starting....slowly.</title>
	<author>equipto76</author>
	<datestamp>1267371480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The latest series of branch routers from Cisco, the <a href="http://www.cisco.com/go/isrg2" title="cisco.com" rel="nofollow">ISR G2</a> [cisco.com], includes both a traditional serial and new-fangled USB console port.  Essentially it's just moving the USB-to-Serial chip inside the router, but it does eliminate one potential thing you can lose or forget.  They're going to be including both option on several new devices in the future but it's going to take a really really long time for serial to completely go away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest series of branch routers from Cisco , the ISR G2 [ cisco.com ] , includes both a traditional serial and new-fangled USB console port .
Essentially it 's just moving the USB-to-Serial chip inside the router , but it does eliminate one potential thing you can lose or forget .
They 're going to be including both option on several new devices in the future but it 's going to take a really really long time for serial to completely go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest series of branch routers from Cisco, the ISR G2 [cisco.com], includes both a traditional serial and new-fangled USB console port.
Essentially it's just moving the USB-to-Serial chip inside the router, but it does eliminate one potential thing you can lose or forget.
They're going to be including both option on several new devices in the future but it's going to take a really really long time for serial to completely go away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305758</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>effigiate</author>
	<datestamp>1267372980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've found the same thing when working with items that interface to a SCADA system.  I've had really good luck with SIIG devices, I'd suggest you give one of their products a try.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found the same thing when working with items that interface to a SCADA system .
I 've had really good luck with SIIG devices , I 'd suggest you give one of their products a try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found the same thing when working with items that interface to a SCADA system.
I've had really good luck with SIIG devices, I'd suggest you give one of their products a try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31314452</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>RockDoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1267451040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm not as optimistic as you. RS232 will be around forever, but I'd bet the server/router/switch stuff standardizes on USB within 5 years.</p></div></blockquote><p>Which would imply to me that the typical SlashDot IT worker will still be needing to deal with serial ports for 15 or 20 years yet. People working with lab equipment for a generation after that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not as optimistic as you .
RS232 will be around forever , but I 'd bet the server/router/switch stuff standardizes on USB within 5 years.Which would imply to me that the typical SlashDot IT worker will still be needing to deal with serial ports for 15 or 20 years yet .
People working with lab equipment for a generation after that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not as optimistic as you.
RS232 will be around forever, but I'd bet the server/router/switch stuff standardizes on USB within 5 years.Which would imply to me that the typical SlashDot IT worker will still be needing to deal with serial ports for 15 or 20 years yet.
People working with lab equipment for a generation after that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302922</id>
	<title>USB nothing to do with RS-232</title>
	<author>tristezo2k</author>
	<datestamp>1267294680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just  to make sure it is understood.
There is no relationship between USB and RS-232  or RS-422/455 but the term "serial"  on its name.
RS-232 is not to be replaced any soon since it is simple, solid, easy and do not fails for what it is meant to be used. There is no replacement for it yet.
USB is good at what it is, but it is not good at replacing RS-232. It is like plane replacing bicycles. Both are transports, similarities ends there.
RS-232 will be left when ethernet interfaces get so interoperables that a single driver will be needed. Do not hold your breath for it.
Even now some devices are setup using broadcast and carefully crafted packets. Would be nice to know that IPv6 has reserved a network for that, but I do not think that something so usefull is to be done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to make sure it is understood .
There is no relationship between USB and RS-232 or RS-422/455 but the term " serial " on its name .
RS-232 is not to be replaced any soon since it is simple , solid , easy and do not fails for what it is meant to be used .
There is no replacement for it yet .
USB is good at what it is , but it is not good at replacing RS-232 .
It is like plane replacing bicycles .
Both are transports , similarities ends there .
RS-232 will be left when ethernet interfaces get so interoperables that a single driver will be needed .
Do not hold your breath for it .
Even now some devices are setup using broadcast and carefully crafted packets .
Would be nice to know that IPv6 has reserved a network for that , but I do not think that something so usefull is to be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just  to make sure it is understood.
There is no relationship between USB and RS-232  or RS-422/455 but the term "serial"  on its name.
RS-232 is not to be replaced any soon since it is simple, solid, easy and do not fails for what it is meant to be used.
There is no replacement for it yet.
USB is good at what it is, but it is not good at replacing RS-232.
It is like plane replacing bicycles.
Both are transports, similarities ends there.
RS-232 will be left when ethernet interfaces get so interoperables that a single driver will be needed.
Do not hold your breath for it.
Even now some devices are setup using broadcast and carefully crafted packets.
Would be nice to know that IPv6 has reserved a network for that, but I do not think that something so usefull is to be done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305620</id>
	<title>I do remote management</title>
	<author>tthomas48</author>
	<datestamp>1267371960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a company that builds essentially really smart terminal servers, and we still highly favor serial console ports. You can dial into our device and still access all your devices via the console port. Which is pretty important when you consider that one of the most common reasons a network is unavailable is a misconfigured router (so getting onto the network isn't always that helpful).</p><p>I think that keeping the console port and having a usb port where you can attach a thumb drive to upload the os via flash if necessary is probably the best route. USB/Serial is not particularly reliable in our experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a company that builds essentially really smart terminal servers , and we still highly favor serial console ports .
You can dial into our device and still access all your devices via the console port .
Which is pretty important when you consider that one of the most common reasons a network is unavailable is a misconfigured router ( so getting onto the network is n't always that helpful ) .I think that keeping the console port and having a usb port where you can attach a thumb drive to upload the os via flash if necessary is probably the best route .
USB/Serial is not particularly reliable in our experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a company that builds essentially really smart terminal servers, and we still highly favor serial console ports.
You can dial into our device and still access all your devices via the console port.
Which is pretty important when you consider that one of the most common reasons a network is unavailable is a misconfigured router (so getting onto the network isn't always that helpful).I think that keeping the console port and having a usb port where you can attach a thumb drive to upload the os via flash if necessary is probably the best route.
USB/Serial is not particularly reliable in our experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303984</id>
	<title>2 main problems</title>
	<author>Casandro</author>
	<datestamp>1267350360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first is obviously that it's really easy to implement on microcontrollers. Plus it always works.</p><p>The second problem is less obvious. Have you ever tried to use one of those USB-&gt;Serial converters under Windows? In every other OS you just plug them in and they work. This is because they are part of the USB standard. With Windows you need a driver for each one of them. So if you want to save your bricked router over USB, you'd first have to find the CD-Rom with the driver for that particular USB-&gt;Serial converter. Good luck with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first is obviously that it 's really easy to implement on microcontrollers .
Plus it always works.The second problem is less obvious .
Have you ever tried to use one of those USB- &gt; Serial converters under Windows ?
In every other OS you just plug them in and they work .
This is because they are part of the USB standard .
With Windows you need a driver for each one of them .
So if you want to save your bricked router over USB , you 'd first have to find the CD-Rom with the driver for that particular USB- &gt; Serial converter .
Good luck with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first is obviously that it's really easy to implement on microcontrollers.
Plus it always works.The second problem is less obvious.
Have you ever tried to use one of those USB-&gt;Serial converters under Windows?
In every other OS you just plug them in and they work.
This is because they are part of the USB standard.
With Windows you need a driver for each one of them.
So if you want to save your bricked router over USB, you'd first have to find the CD-Rom with the driver for that particular USB-&gt;Serial converter.
Good luck with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302300</id>
	<title>Re:The serial connection</title>
	<author>X0563511</author>
	<datestamp>1267289580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahahahahaha!</p><p>USB-Serial is just about useless for \_many\_ things. It works for consumer shit, but you tend to have problems when you work away from consumer level cruft. The best part is there's no easy way to know if it works or not. Some times it sorta-works. Other times it just plain doesn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahahahahaha ! USB-Serial is just about useless for \ _many \ _ things .
It works for consumer shit , but you tend to have problems when you work away from consumer level cruft .
The best part is there 's no easy way to know if it works or not .
Some times it sorta-works .
Other times it just plain does n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahahahahaha!USB-Serial is just about useless for \_many\_ things.
It works for consumer shit, but you tend to have problems when you work away from consumer level cruft.
The best part is there's no easy way to know if it works or not.
Some times it sorta-works.
Other times it just plain doesn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31310230</id>
	<title>Re:Current loop?</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1267361940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>classic MIDI is current loop - ie proper din conected deveices</htmltext>
<tokenext>classic MIDI is current loop - ie proper din conected deveices</tokentext>
<sentencetext>classic MIDI is current loop - ie proper din conected deveices</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302510</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1267291140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>USB would work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>USB would work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>USB would work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304434</id>
	<title>USB...</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1267359060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Serial is standard, whereas USB devices typically need drivers...<br>The Marvell Sheevaplug for instance has a USB console port, but you need to install drivers... Linux has these drivers by default, but osx/windows don't, and the osx drivers are horrendously buggy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Serial is standard , whereas USB devices typically need drivers...The Marvell Sheevaplug for instance has a USB console port , but you need to install drivers... Linux has these drivers by default , but osx/windows do n't , and the osx drivers are horrendously buggy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serial is standard, whereas USB devices typically need drivers...The Marvell Sheevaplug for instance has a USB console port, but you need to install drivers... Linux has these drivers by default, but osx/windows don't, and the osx drivers are horrendously buggy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302076</id>
	<title>Re:It just works</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1267287300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My <a href="http://www.plugcomputer.org/" title="plugcomputer.org">SheevaPlug</a> [plugcomputer.org] has a mini-USB connector on it. It's near impossible to brick. I even did a dd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/zero to the entire flash memory and was still able to get to the JTAG interface with a USB cable to my MacBookPro.</p><p>"Serial" shouldn't go away, but the massive plug should.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My SheevaPlug [ plugcomputer.org ] has a mini-USB connector on it .
It 's near impossible to brick .
I even did a dd /dev/zero to the entire flash memory and was still able to get to the JTAG interface with a USB cable to my MacBookPro .
" Serial " should n't go away , but the massive plug should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My SheevaPlug [plugcomputer.org] has a mini-USB connector on it.
It's near impossible to brick.
I even did a dd /dev/zero to the entire flash memory and was still able to get to the JTAG interface with a USB cable to my MacBookPro.
"Serial" shouldn't go away, but the massive plug should.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301870</id>
	<title>It just works</title>
	<author>mtmra70</author>
	<datestamp>1267285740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I upload firmware and program various devices at work via USB or TCP/IP - and it is great because the connections are fast. However, when something goes very wrong with the devices, the RS232 port always works. Also, being able to get serial data just by listening to a couple pins is far easier than trying to deal with USB connections/drivers you have no clue about.<br> <br>When it comes down to it, serial works, its easy and it's a life saver.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I upload firmware and program various devices at work via USB or TCP/IP - and it is great because the connections are fast .
However , when something goes very wrong with the devices , the RS232 port always works .
Also , being able to get serial data just by listening to a couple pins is far easier than trying to deal with USB connections/drivers you have no clue about .
When it comes down to it , serial works , its easy and it 's a life saver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I upload firmware and program various devices at work via USB or TCP/IP - and it is great because the connections are fast.
However, when something goes very wrong with the devices, the RS232 port always works.
Also, being able to get serial data just by listening to a couple pins is far easier than trying to deal with USB connections/drivers you have no clue about.
When it comes down to it, serial works, its easy and it's a life saver.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304716</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Gordonjcp</author>
	<datestamp>1267363620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>...just about had to special order a laptop with a real serial port on it, or you just couldn't read all the equipment in the field.</i> </p><p>The problem is that it's very hard to generate the right voltages for the serial port from the 5V 500mA USB port supply.  If you got something like an FTDI chip and hung a couple of *proper* RS232 drivers off it running from a decent power supply, then you'd have a better chance of getting it to work.  It would be bulkier, but still cheaper than ordering a special laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...just about had to special order a laptop with a real serial port on it , or you just could n't read all the equipment in the field .
The problem is that it 's very hard to generate the right voltages for the serial port from the 5V 500mA USB port supply .
If you got something like an FTDI chip and hung a couple of * proper * RS232 drivers off it running from a decent power supply , then you 'd have a better chance of getting it to work .
It would be bulkier , but still cheaper than ordering a special laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...just about had to special order a laptop with a real serial port on it, or you just couldn't read all the equipment in the field.
The problem is that it's very hard to generate the right voltages for the serial port from the 5V 500mA USB port supply.
If you got something like an FTDI chip and hung a couple of *proper* RS232 drivers off it running from a decent power supply, then you'd have a better chance of getting it to work.
It would be bulkier, but still cheaper than ordering a special laptop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31319506</id>
	<title>What about my terminals?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If serial goes away what am I going to do with all of these DEC and HP terminals I have laying around the data center?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If serial goes away what am I going to do with all of these DEC and HP terminals I have laying around the data center ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If serial goes away what am I going to do with all of these DEC and HP terminals I have laying around the data center?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307724</id>
	<title>No!  RS232 can't die!</title>
	<author>bkeahl</author>
	<datestamp>1267386360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, it's the ultimate standard.  Right?  2,3,7 - swap 2&amp;3 if things don't work.

Well, there is sometimes that pesky DTR signal, so sometimes you have to hook up 20.  Unless you swap 2 and 3, in which case you need to swap pins 20 and 6 too.

Then, sometimes you need DSR, so just hook up six.  Unless you swapped 2 and 3, then you have to swap 6 and twenty for that.

Of course, then there's the device that emulates a MODEM and you have to hook up CD<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...

Yeah, serial interfacing is just so straight forward and simple, we can't get rid of it!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , it 's the ultimate standard .
Right ? 2,3,7 - swap 2&amp;3 if things do n't work .
Well , there is sometimes that pesky DTR signal , so sometimes you have to hook up 20 .
Unless you swap 2 and 3 , in which case you need to swap pins 20 and 6 too .
Then , sometimes you need DSR , so just hook up six .
Unless you swapped 2 and 3 , then you have to swap 6 and twenty for that .
Of course , then there 's the device that emulates a MODEM and you have to hook up CD .. . Yeah , serial interfacing is just so straight forward and simple , we ca n't get rid of it !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, it's the ultimate standard.
Right?  2,3,7 - swap 2&amp;3 if things don't work.
Well, there is sometimes that pesky DTR signal, so sometimes you have to hook up 20.
Unless you swap 2 and 3, in which case you need to swap pins 20 and 6 too.
Then, sometimes you need DSR, so just hook up six.
Unless you swapped 2 and 3, then you have to swap 6 and twenty for that.
Of course, then there's the device that emulates a MODEM and you have to hook up CD ...

Yeah, serial interfacing is just so straight forward and simple, we can't get rid of it!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303246</id>
	<title>It will be a cold day in hell before mine go.</title>
	<author>mirix</author>
	<datestamp>1267298100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This machine has 11 UARTs on it, 4 of them are RS-422, the rest are normal 232.</p><p>I've got a couple 232 lines to other puters in this room, and a router.<br>RS-422 goes down to the basement, and controls the machines down there, ethernet or not.<br>There is a getty running on one, in case I get too drunk and smash the monitor.</p><p>I use the remainder for connecting to my microcontroller projects and programmers, etc.<br>You can run it on *ancient* hardware, with no resources. It's incredibly useful for debugging microcontroller programs.<br>Things that only have 128bytes of RAM, and a few k of program rom...</p><p>You can hook it up to a 40 year old  TTY and it will work.<br>You can haul a dumb terminal out from a cave and it will work.<br>You can short every pin of the serial port together, leave it there for a decade, come back, and the bloody thing will still work.</p><p>I'm a rather miserable programmer, and serial is a bloody cakewalk to interface to. USB, on the other hand, isn't quite as simple.<br>And it's a *standard*. Man I love things that are standardized.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This machine has 11 UARTs on it , 4 of them are RS-422 , the rest are normal 232.I 've got a couple 232 lines to other puters in this room , and a router.RS-422 goes down to the basement , and controls the machines down there , ethernet or not.There is a getty running on one , in case I get too drunk and smash the monitor.I use the remainder for connecting to my microcontroller projects and programmers , etc.You can run it on * ancient * hardware , with no resources .
It 's incredibly useful for debugging microcontroller programs.Things that only have 128bytes of RAM , and a few k of program rom...You can hook it up to a 40 year old TTY and it will work.You can haul a dumb terminal out from a cave and it will work.You can short every pin of the serial port together , leave it there for a decade , come back , and the bloody thing will still work.I 'm a rather miserable programmer , and serial is a bloody cakewalk to interface to .
USB , on the other hand , is n't quite as simple.And it 's a * standard * .
Man I love things that are standardized .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This machine has 11 UARTs on it, 4 of them are RS-422, the rest are normal 232.I've got a couple 232 lines to other puters in this room, and a router.RS-422 goes down to the basement, and controls the machines down there, ethernet or not.There is a getty running on one, in case I get too drunk and smash the monitor.I use the remainder for connecting to my microcontroller projects and programmers, etc.You can run it on *ancient* hardware, with no resources.
It's incredibly useful for debugging microcontroller programs.Things that only have 128bytes of RAM, and a few k of program rom...You can hook it up to a 40 year old  TTY and it will work.You can haul a dumb terminal out from a cave and it will work.You can short every pin of the serial port together, leave it there for a decade, come back, and the bloody thing will still work.I'm a rather miserable programmer, and serial is a bloody cakewalk to interface to.
USB, on the other hand, isn't quite as simple.And it's a *standard*.
Man I love things that are standardized.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31320298</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>yurtinus</author>
	<datestamp>1267474800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who missed the point? He mentioned nothing of datacenters and configuring SANs... There are plenty of applications where that simplicity is preferred and even necessary. In his case (and mine), we *are* building devices and the cables to interface with them. It's a tool for a job, nobody is dumb enough to try using a single tool for every job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who missed the point ?
He mentioned nothing of datacenters and configuring SANs... There are plenty of applications where that simplicity is preferred and even necessary .
In his case ( and mine ) , we * are * building devices and the cables to interface with them .
It 's a tool for a job , nobody is dumb enough to try using a single tool for every job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who missed the point?
He mentioned nothing of datacenters and configuring SANs... There are plenty of applications where that simplicity is preferred and even necessary.
In his case (and mine), we *are* building devices and the cables to interface with them.
It's a tool for a job, nobody is dumb enough to try using a single tool for every job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301900</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>Megaweapon</author>
	<datestamp>1267285920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean does ANYONE ever use a floppy disk anymore?</p></div><p>For kicks I just hit Servers Direct, and some, maybe most, of the server still offer the option of a 1.44" drive (presumably plugged into the motherboard).  I'd hope these days a big honking server mobo would at least support booting from USB key.  Certainly seems like a waste these days to be able to buy an 8U box, 3X redundant power supplies, dual or quad Xeon class CPUs, and they're still wasting space for a damn floppy cable mount on the motherboard.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean does ANYONE ever use a floppy disk anymore ? For kicks I just hit Servers Direct , and some , maybe most , of the server still offer the option of a 1.44 " drive ( presumably plugged into the motherboard ) .
I 'd hope these days a big honking server mobo would at least support booting from USB key .
Certainly seems like a waste these days to be able to buy an 8U box , 3X redundant power supplies , dual or quad Xeon class CPUs , and they 're still wasting space for a damn floppy cable mount on the motherboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean does ANYONE ever use a floppy disk anymore?For kicks I just hit Servers Direct, and some, maybe most, of the server still offer the option of a 1.44" drive (presumably plugged into the motherboard).
I'd hope these days a big honking server mobo would at least support booting from USB key.
Certainly seems like a waste these days to be able to buy an 8U box, 3X redundant power supplies, dual or quad Xeon class CPUs, and they're still wasting space for a damn floppy cable mount on the motherboard.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303668</id>
	<title>Re:What will we do with all the US Robotics Courie</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267389180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Damned if I know where they're getting them from - but there they are...</p></div><p>They still sell them[1]. No matter how much engineering goes into USB or the TCP/IP stack, they're still more prone to failure than 56k modems and a serial port.</p><p>[1] http://www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp?sku=USR3453c</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Damned if I know where they 're getting them from - but there they are...They still sell them [ 1 ] .
No matter how much engineering goes into USB or the TCP/IP stack , they 're still more prone to failure than 56k modems and a serial port .
[ 1 ] http : //www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp ? sku = USR3453c</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damned if I know where they're getting them from - but there they are...They still sell them[1].
No matter how much engineering goes into USB or the TCP/IP stack, they're still more prone to failure than 56k modems and a serial port.
[1] http://www.usr.com/products/modem/business-product.asp?sku=USR3453c
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31316208</id>
	<title>Re:What will we do with all the US Robotics Courie</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267459380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just bought a managed DS-3 from ATT and wouldn't you know- we have the same thing!  When we replaced our old managed line I figured the US robotics MODEM was just a relic.  But then showed up my new 3800, and a brand new, shiny, in the box, US Robotics modem.  I mean seriously?  I had a smaller 56k line when dial up was still the thing at home...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just bought a managed DS-3 from ATT and would n't you know- we have the same thing !
When we replaced our old managed line I figured the US robotics MODEM was just a relic .
But then showed up my new 3800 , and a brand new , shiny , in the box , US Robotics modem .
I mean seriously ?
I had a smaller 56k line when dial up was still the thing at home.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just bought a managed DS-3 from ATT and wouldn't you know- we have the same thing!
When we replaced our old managed line I figured the US robotics MODEM was just a relic.
But then showed up my new 3800, and a brand new, shiny, in the box, US Robotics modem.
I mean seriously?
I had a smaller 56k line when dial up was still the thing at home...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302260</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267289280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't speak to switch access, but the serial port is paramount in the medical instrumentation field.  Virtually all interfaces are serial.  Need to hook up a CBC machine?  Cobas?  Vitek?  Serial!</p><p>Most machine shops -- their equipment is serial.  Sending cut information to the lathe?  Serial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't speak to switch access , but the serial port is paramount in the medical instrumentation field .
Virtually all interfaces are serial .
Need to hook up a CBC machine ?
Cobas ? Vitek ?
Serial ! Most machine shops -- their equipment is serial .
Sending cut information to the lathe ?
Serial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't speak to switch access, but the serial port is paramount in the medical instrumentation field.
Virtually all interfaces are serial.
Need to hook up a CBC machine?
Cobas?  Vitek?
Serial!Most machine shops -- their equipment is serial.
Sending cut information to the lathe?
Serial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306078</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>iguana</author>
	<datestamp>1267375260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>USB is an astonishing pain in the @$$ compared to the simple TX/RX/GND of US232.</p><p>You have control interface, bulk in/out, a complete PHY with all its weirdness (DMA IO maybe?) and required code.</p><p>New boards with flaky USB have crashed my systems more time than I can count. I have to reboot USB hubs on a regular basis.</p><p>RS232 I've never had any trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>USB is an astonishing pain in the @ $ $ compared to the simple TX/RX/GND of US232.You have control interface , bulk in/out , a complete PHY with all its weirdness ( DMA IO maybe ?
) and required code.New boards with flaky USB have crashed my systems more time than I can count .
I have to reboot USB hubs on a regular basis.RS232 I 've never had any trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>USB is an astonishing pain in the @$$ compared to the simple TX/RX/GND of US232.You have control interface, bulk in/out, a complete PHY with all its weirdness (DMA IO maybe?
) and required code.New boards with flaky USB have crashed my systems more time than I can count.
I have to reboot USB hubs on a regular basis.RS232 I've never had any trouble.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307042</id>
	<title>Re:Web Interface</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267381620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some gear is starting to provide options like the newer Cisco routers that have both serial and USB consoles.  The serial is still key for the terminal servers deployed in today's networks for OOB access.  Dial into the terminal server via OOB modem (connected to the AUX port) and session in through the serial ports.  However, USB access provides a nice option when you're trying to configure with a modern laptop with no serial port.</p><p><a href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10536/data\_sheet\_c78\_553924.html" title="cisco.com" rel="nofollow">Data sheet</a> [cisco.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some gear is starting to provide options like the newer Cisco routers that have both serial and USB consoles .
The serial is still key for the terminal servers deployed in today 's networks for OOB access .
Dial into the terminal server via OOB modem ( connected to the AUX port ) and session in through the serial ports .
However , USB access provides a nice option when you 're trying to configure with a modern laptop with no serial port.Data sheet [ cisco.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some gear is starting to provide options like the newer Cisco routers that have both serial and USB consoles.
The serial is still key for the terminal servers deployed in today's networks for OOB access.
Dial into the terminal server via OOB modem (connected to the AUX port) and session in through the serial ports.
However, USB access provides a nice option when you're trying to configure with a modern laptop with no serial port.Data sheet [cisco.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31315744</id>
	<title>SPARC anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267457940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to have been overlooked in that a lot of large enterprise settings, the SPARC based servers are still loaded with the old RS232 as well.  Personally I love the damn thing (RS232) and would rather see a resurgance in it's popularity.  Even if that means a serial RJ45.  It just works.  Leave it the hell alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to have been overlooked in that a lot of large enterprise settings , the SPARC based servers are still loaded with the old RS232 as well .
Personally I love the damn thing ( RS232 ) and would rather see a resurgance in it 's popularity .
Even if that means a serial RJ45 .
It just works .
Leave it the hell alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to have been overlooked in that a lot of large enterprise settings, the SPARC based servers are still loaded with the old RS232 as well.
Personally I love the damn thing (RS232) and would rather see a resurgance in it's popularity.
Even if that means a serial RJ45.
It just works.
Leave it the hell alone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303344</id>
	<title>Re:Serial Ports..</title>
	<author>spydabyte</author>
	<datestamp>1267299180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think his question is "why won't they die" USB should be replacing it by now... which I completely agree on. Sure it's an extra $0.50 in hardware costs, but if you're (Cisco, TI, Altera, etc...) a little implementation complexity for the sake of use simplicity would make my life a whole lot easier.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think his question is " why wo n't they die " USB should be replacing it by now... which I completely agree on .
Sure it 's an extra $ 0.50 in hardware costs , but if you 're ( Cisco , TI , Altera , etc... ) a little implementation complexity for the sake of use simplicity would make my life a whole lot easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think his question is "why won't they die" USB should be replacing it by now... which I completely agree on.
Sure it's an extra $0.50 in hardware costs, but if you're (Cisco, TI, Altera, etc...) a little implementation complexity for the sake of use simplicity would make my life a whole lot easier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302048</id>
	<title>Re:Web Interface</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1267287180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who has worked with Cisco routers running IOS, I can tell you that there are plenty of situations where a console cable (which plugs into a serial port) is essential.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who has worked with Cisco routers running IOS , I can tell you that there are plenty of situations where a console cable ( which plugs into a serial port ) is essential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who has worked with Cisco routers running IOS, I can tell you that there are plenty of situations where a console cable (which plugs into a serial port) is essential.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304960</id>
	<title>Windows guy?</title>
	<author>otis wildflower</author>
	<datestamp>1267366620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For anyone in the unix world, this is a ridiculous question.  Serial ain't goin' nowhere, thank Xenu.  Actually, MacOSX + screen + generic USB serial dongle works darn well for consoling into host serials..</p><p>For Windows folks, I can understand the curiosity.</p><p>Serial is the ASCII of communications links.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For anyone in the unix world , this is a ridiculous question .
Serial ai n't goin ' nowhere , thank Xenu .
Actually , MacOSX + screen + generic USB serial dongle works darn well for consoling into host serials..For Windows folks , I can understand the curiosity.Serial is the ASCII of communications links .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For anyone in the unix world, this is a ridiculous question.
Serial ain't goin' nowhere, thank Xenu.
Actually, MacOSX + screen + generic USB serial dongle works darn well for consoling into host serials..For Windows folks, I can understand the curiosity.Serial is the ASCII of communications links.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31310038</id>
	<title>Remote Access aka MODEM</title>
	<author>tengu1sd</author>
	<datestamp>1267360800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The nifty thing no one has mentioned about serial communications is the ability to provide reasonably reliable remote access into remote equipment.  I worked for a consulting and services group which always located at least one modem into each customer site.  That modem linked to a terminal server where access to firewalls, switching, routers load balancing equipment, servers and in some cases storage  was available.  If you can't reach a site this can answer all sorts of questions and provide a <b>really fast</b> way to put a customer back into service saving the time and potential travel costs.
</p><p>
If the widget is right next to you, USB or even network connection can make a lot of sense.  If you're forcing a switch to fail over or rebooting a server from a PDA with a modem, serial is the way to go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The nifty thing no one has mentioned about serial communications is the ability to provide reasonably reliable remote access into remote equipment .
I worked for a consulting and services group which always located at least one modem into each customer site .
That modem linked to a terminal server where access to firewalls , switching , routers load balancing equipment , servers and in some cases storage was available .
If you ca n't reach a site this can answer all sorts of questions and provide a really fast way to put a customer back into service saving the time and potential travel costs .
If the widget is right next to you , USB or even network connection can make a lot of sense .
If you 're forcing a switch to fail over or rebooting a server from a PDA with a modem , serial is the way to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The nifty thing no one has mentioned about serial communications is the ability to provide reasonably reliable remote access into remote equipment.
I worked for a consulting and services group which always located at least one modem into each customer site.
That modem linked to a terminal server where access to firewalls, switching, routers load balancing equipment, servers and in some cases storage  was available.
If you can't reach a site this can answer all sorts of questions and provide a really fast way to put a customer back into service saving the time and potential travel costs.
If the widget is right next to you, USB or even network connection can make a lot of sense.
If you're forcing a switch to fail over or rebooting a server from a PDA with a modem, serial is the way to go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302030</id>
	<title>Re:Serial Ports..</title>
	<author>deniable</author>
	<datestamp>1267286940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"the serial port is rapidly disappearing from new laptops" in full, and yes, they've been gone from most laptops for years now. We have to salvage old gear if we need to talk to a serial port. USB -&gt; Serial mostly works, but not always.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" the serial port is rapidly disappearing from new laptops " in full , and yes , they 've been gone from most laptops for years now .
We have to salvage old gear if we need to talk to a serial port .
USB - &gt; Serial mostly works , but not always .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the serial port is rapidly disappearing from new laptops" in full, and yes, they've been gone from most laptops for years now.
We have to salvage old gear if we need to talk to a serial port.
USB -&gt; Serial mostly works, but not always.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302316</id>
	<title>Baud rates, parity?</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1267289700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't recall the last time I saw a serial port that wouldn't accept 9600 8-N-1. Not in a couple of decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't recall the last time I saw a serial port that would n't accept 9600 8-N-1 .
Not in a couple of decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't recall the last time I saw a serial port that wouldn't accept 9600 8-N-1.
Not in a couple of decades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302120</id>
	<title>USB console</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1267287780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Is there any sign on the horizon of a USB console connection?</i>
</p><p>
There is no standard USB device class for serial adapters. There is communications device class, but it is huge and doesn't really help. So FTDI and Cygnal and others have to write their own drivers for tens of OSes and architectures. If you walk up to a device with a laptop and a USB cable, chances are that your laptop doesn't have a proper driver. To make things worse, many USB-Serial adapters have to use their own VID/PID/REV identifiers, and that makes it even harder to recognize the device. Class-compliant devices would "just work" like a USB drive does, or a mouse.
</p><p>
There is also no standard API in OSes to talk to *modern* serial devices. USB serial devices are emulated into a virtual COM port.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there any sign on the horizon of a USB console connection ?
There is no standard USB device class for serial adapters .
There is communications device class , but it is huge and does n't really help .
So FTDI and Cygnal and others have to write their own drivers for tens of OSes and architectures .
If you walk up to a device with a laptop and a USB cable , chances are that your laptop does n't have a proper driver .
To make things worse , many USB-Serial adapters have to use their own VID/PID/REV identifiers , and that makes it even harder to recognize the device .
Class-compliant devices would " just work " like a USB drive does , or a mouse .
There is also no standard API in OSes to talk to * modern * serial devices .
USB serial devices are emulated into a virtual COM port .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Is there any sign on the horizon of a USB console connection?
There is no standard USB device class for serial adapters.
There is communications device class, but it is huge and doesn't really help.
So FTDI and Cygnal and others have to write their own drivers for tens of OSes and architectures.
If you walk up to a device with a laptop and a USB cable, chances are that your laptop doesn't have a proper driver.
To make things worse, many USB-Serial adapters have to use their own VID/PID/REV identifiers, and that makes it even harder to recognize the device.
Class-compliant devices would "just work" like a USB drive does, or a mouse.
There is also no standard API in OSes to talk to *modern* serial devices.
USB serial devices are emulated into a virtual COM port.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302980</id>
	<title>It'll never die</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1267295100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who wants to be known as a serial killer?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who wants to be known as a serial killer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who wants to be known as a serial killer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303626</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1267388820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
That's great, until you need to get a decent baud rate out of the port such as 76800 115200 or 230400
with proper behavior against finicky devices.
</p><p>
Or to be able to send a proper BREAK signal over your 'USB serial port' to get the router into rommon mode for password recovery.
</p><p>
Then suddenly (maybe) you find the $15 adapter isn't that good,  and you need a feature that requires the $45 adapter  that's hard-to-find .
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great , until you need to get a decent baud rate out of the port such as 76800 115200 or 230400 with proper behavior against finicky devices .
Or to be able to send a proper BREAK signal over your 'USB serial port ' to get the router into rommon mode for password recovery .
Then suddenly ( maybe ) you find the $ 15 adapter is n't that good , and you need a feature that requires the $ 45 adapter that 's hard-to-find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
That's great, until you need to get a decent baud rate out of the port such as 76800 115200 or 230400
with proper behavior against finicky devices.
Or to be able to send a proper BREAK signal over your 'USB serial port' to get the router into rommon mode for password recovery.
Then suddenly (maybe) you find the $15 adapter isn't that good,  and you need a feature that requires the $45 adapter  that's hard-to-find .
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302448</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267290540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in an environment where we use Serial connections on Sprinkler controllers to Intersection battery backup and even traffic counters. We have multiple devices in which the usb to serial does not work. "multiple brands" Fortunately since most of our guys doing this type of work are outside daily in all weather. We started buying toughbooks around 6 years ago. As they are mil-spec they require that port.

Imagine my surprise when I got a newer model HP 6730b and it had a serial port but no hdmi/displayport etc? It's the first serial on a brand name corporate laptop I've seen in a long while."However we are limited to which mfg's we can buy from most of the time"

Serial needs to go. It's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg's that keep it around. Instead of designing something around USB.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in an environment where we use Serial connections on Sprinkler controllers to Intersection battery backup and even traffic counters .
We have multiple devices in which the usb to serial does not work .
" multiple brands " Fortunately since most of our guys doing this type of work are outside daily in all weather .
We started buying toughbooks around 6 years ago .
As they are mil-spec they require that port .
Imagine my surprise when I got a newer model HP 6730b and it had a serial port but no hdmi/displayport etc ?
It 's the first serial on a brand name corporate laptop I 've seen in a long while .
" However we are limited to which mfg 's we can buy from most of the time " Serial needs to go .
It 's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg 's that keep it around .
Instead of designing something around USB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in an environment where we use Serial connections on Sprinkler controllers to Intersection battery backup and even traffic counters.
We have multiple devices in which the usb to serial does not work.
"multiple brands" Fortunately since most of our guys doing this type of work are outside daily in all weather.
We started buying toughbooks around 6 years ago.
As they are mil-spec they require that port.
Imagine my surprise when I got a newer model HP 6730b and it had a serial port but no hdmi/displayport etc?
It's the first serial on a brand name corporate laptop I've seen in a long while.
"However we are limited to which mfg's we can buy from most of the time"

Serial needs to go.
It's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg's that keep it around.
Instead of designing something around USB.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302236</id>
	<title>Re:No</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267289040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it slow? Not really, but firmware updates should be through TFTP or HTTP by now anyways for larger files.</p></div><p>Really, it all depends.  The big problem is that it uses RS232.  I've used serial UART at 20Mbps on embedded microprocessors.  I'm not sure why this couldn't be applied to these systems to increase the speed beyond the current 115Kbps.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it slow ?
Not really , but firmware updates should be through TFTP or HTTP by now anyways for larger files.Really , it all depends .
The big problem is that it uses RS232 .
I 've used serial UART at 20Mbps on embedded microprocessors .
I 'm not sure why this could n't be applied to these systems to increase the speed beyond the current 115Kbps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it slow?
Not really, but firmware updates should be through TFTP or HTTP by now anyways for larger files.Really, it all depends.
The big problem is that it uses RS232.
I've used serial UART at 20Mbps on embedded microprocessors.
I'm not sure why this couldn't be applied to these systems to increase the speed beyond the current 115Kbps.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302788</id>
	<title>Re:No</title>
	<author>Antique Geekmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1267293600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, every untrained technician and their ill-trained supervisor gets these wrong. The flow control lines are not there for laughs: mis-handled, they lead to many unfortunate adventures, at the worst moments. I've had to deal with the errors when someone thought the way you did, failed to connect the flow control to anything, and wound up with jammed serial lines.</p><p>The standard is published many places, such as <a href="http://www.zytrax.com/tech/layer\_1/cables/tech\_rs232.htm#db25" title="zytrax.com">http://www.zytrax.com/tech/layer\_1/cables/tech\_rs232.htm#db25</a> [zytrax.com]. Even your "three wire description" has left something important out, that I've seen mis-wired: the third wire is \_signal ground\_, not "common ground". "Common ground" is when we share something interesting to talk about: it's an unfortunate choice of words for wiring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , every untrained technician and their ill-trained supervisor gets these wrong .
The flow control lines are not there for laughs : mis-handled , they lead to many unfortunate adventures , at the worst moments .
I 've had to deal with the errors when someone thought the way you did , failed to connect the flow control to anything , and wound up with jammed serial lines.The standard is published many places , such as http : //www.zytrax.com/tech/layer \ _1/cables/tech \ _rs232.htm # db25 [ zytrax.com ] .
Even your " three wire description " has left something important out , that I 've seen mis-wired : the third wire is \ _signal ground \ _ , not " common ground " .
" Common ground " is when we share something interesting to talk about : it 's an unfortunate choice of words for wiring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, every untrained technician and their ill-trained supervisor gets these wrong.
The flow control lines are not there for laughs: mis-handled, they lead to many unfortunate adventures, at the worst moments.
I've had to deal with the errors when someone thought the way you did, failed to connect the flow control to anything, and wound up with jammed serial lines.The standard is published many places, such as http://www.zytrax.com/tech/layer\_1/cables/tech\_rs232.htm#db25 [zytrax.com].
Even your "three wire description" has left something important out, that I've seen mis-wired: the third wire is \_signal ground\_, not "common ground".
"Common ground" is when we share something interesting to talk about: it's an unfortunate choice of words for wiring.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31309266</id>
	<title>perfect :D</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267355160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.oynatsak.com/" title="oynatsak.com" rel="nofollow">Barbie oyunlar</a> [oynatsak.com]
<a href="http://www.oynatsak.com/" title="oynatsak.com" rel="nofollow">kiz oyunlar</a> [oynatsak.com]
<a href="http://www.mehmetkecelioglu.com/" title="mehmetkecelioglu.com" rel="nofollow"> Php dersleri </a> [mehmetkecelioglu.com]
<a href="http://www.mehmetkecelioglu.com/category/php-mysql-egitimleri" title="mehmetkecelioglu.com" rel="nofollow"> php eitimleri </a> [mehmetkecelioglu.com]
thank yo</htmltext>
<tokenext>Barbie oyunlar [ oynatsak.com ] kiz oyunlar [ oynatsak.com ] Php dersleri [ mehmetkecelioglu.com ] php eitimleri [ mehmetkecelioglu.com ] thank yo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Barbie oyunlar [oynatsak.com]
kiz oyunlar [oynatsak.com]
 Php dersleri  [mehmetkecelioglu.com]
 php eitimleri  [mehmetkecelioglu.com]
thank yo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306380</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>gravyface</author>
	<datestamp>1267377420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yup, and this is why I still have (and use) an old Dell Inspiron 2500 with a serial port (running Debian Etch with FluxBox).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup , and this is why I still have ( and use ) an old Dell Inspiron 2500 with a serial port ( running Debian Etch with FluxBox ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup, and this is why I still have (and use) an old Dell Inspiron 2500 with a serial port (running Debian Etch with FluxBox).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305856</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>wheeda</author>
	<datestamp>1267373700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm doing my part.  Future products at my company won't have serial ports.  While my embedded counter part and I've been working on the board, I've had to solder a lot of db9's onto my board, but there is no production connector.  I took a survey of our machines in engineering, only one out of 3 had a serial cable attached.  I'm sure it is much worse in the field.  I refused my coworker's request to put a production db9 on the board,  now all that debug info goes over usb.  This is way better</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm doing my part .
Future products at my company wo n't have serial ports .
While my embedded counter part and I 've been working on the board , I 've had to solder a lot of db9 's onto my board , but there is no production connector .
I took a survey of our machines in engineering , only one out of 3 had a serial cable attached .
I 'm sure it is much worse in the field .
I refused my coworker 's request to put a production db9 on the board , now all that debug info goes over usb .
This is way better</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm doing my part.
Future products at my company won't have serial ports.
While my embedded counter part and I've been working on the board, I've had to solder a lot of db9's onto my board, but there is no production connector.
I took a survey of our machines in engineering, only one out of 3 had a serial cable attached.
I'm sure it is much worse in the field.
I refused my coworker's request to put a production db9 on the board,  now all that debug info goes over usb.
This is way better</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31316242</id>
	<title>Cheezy Spoprts Analogy</title>
	<author>bregmata</author>
	<datestamp>1267459440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
USB is like ice hockey.  It's fast, exciting, and sexy.  All you need to do is keep your blades sharp, wear the proper protective gear, and hope your Zamboni or ice-making equipment does not break down during international competitions.  You also need years of expensive training to play it well. Other than that it's great.
</p><p>
Serial ports are like soccer.  All you need is a ball, you can play anywhere, and anyone can play.
</p><p>
Yep, won't be long before we'll be asking when the world will switch over from soccer to ice hockey.  Or from serial to USB.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>USB is like ice hockey .
It 's fast , exciting , and sexy .
All you need to do is keep your blades sharp , wear the proper protective gear , and hope your Zamboni or ice-making equipment does not break down during international competitions .
You also need years of expensive training to play it well .
Other than that it 's great .
Serial ports are like soccer .
All you need is a ball , you can play anywhere , and anyone can play .
Yep , wo n't be long before we 'll be asking when the world will switch over from soccer to ice hockey .
Or from serial to USB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
USB is like ice hockey.
It's fast, exciting, and sexy.
All you need to do is keep your blades sharp, wear the proper protective gear, and hope your Zamboni or ice-making equipment does not break down during international competitions.
You also need years of expensive training to play it well.
Other than that it's great.
Serial ports are like soccer.
All you need is a ball, you can play anywhere, and anyone can play.
Yep, won't be long before we'll be asking when the world will switch over from soccer to ice hockey.
Or from serial to USB.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307792</id>
	<title>I use it to hook up my Atari 8-bit computer</title>
	<author>calagan800xl</author>
	<datestamp>1267386900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I keep an old laptop with a serial port, so that I can transfer stuff to my good old Atari 800XL with the awesome SIO2PC cable from Nick Kennedy: <a href="http://pages.suddenlink.net/wa5bdu/sio2pc.htm" title="suddenlink.net" rel="nofollow">http://pages.suddenlink.net/wa5bdu/sio2pc.htm</a> [suddenlink.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep an old laptop with a serial port , so that I can transfer stuff to my good old Atari 800XL with the awesome SIO2PC cable from Nick Kennedy : http : //pages.suddenlink.net/wa5bdu/sio2pc.htm [ suddenlink.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep an old laptop with a serial port, so that I can transfer stuff to my good old Atari 800XL with the awesome SIO2PC cable from Nick Kennedy: http://pages.suddenlink.net/wa5bdu/sio2pc.htm [suddenlink.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362</id>
	<title>You young whippersnappers and your newfangled...</title>
	<author>ameline</author>
	<datestamp>1267289880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You young whippersnapers and your newfangled serial consoles.

</p><p>Back when men were men, this is what a manly console looked like;

<a href="http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg" title="columbia.edu">http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg</a> [columbia.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You young whippersnapers and your newfangled serial consoles .
Back when men were men , this is what a manly console looked like ; http : //www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg [ columbia.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You young whippersnapers and your newfangled serial consoles.
Back when men were men, this is what a manly console looked like;

http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/360-91-panel.jpg [columbia.edu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302636</id>
	<title>Keep a few old lappies, y'all!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267292220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just keep a few old 486 notebooks around with the DB-9 serial ports, and  with Win95 and Hyperterm or Kermit (maybe even just FreeDOS and MSDOS Kermit?).   Pick up spares whenever someone wants to throw them out as worthless.  I used a Compaq Contura 4/33C, a "netbook" before its time from about 15 years ago, with a 486/33 SX, 12 MB RAM, 250 MB HDD  (right "Mega", not "Giga"), Win95 and Kermit to manage a number of Sun Servers about 8 years ago when we did patching or trouble shooting.  I still use it occasionally for messing with my Ultra60 and Ultra80 at home.</p><p>Heck, at times I even used/use a Sharp Zaurus 3500 clamshell PDA ( NOT the Linux types - 1MB RAM, no disk, flash, or any other storage, runs on several AA batteries) with its built-in termulator when I just wanted to do some quick work, and take that in a belt holster to keep my load light for the trek to the server farm.   Simple is good.</p><p>RO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just keep a few old 486 notebooks around with the DB-9 serial ports , and with Win95 and Hyperterm or Kermit ( maybe even just FreeDOS and MSDOS Kermit ? ) .
Pick up spares whenever someone wants to throw them out as worthless .
I used a Compaq Contura 4/33C , a " netbook " before its time from about 15 years ago , with a 486/33 SX , 12 MB RAM , 250 MB HDD ( right " Mega " , not " Giga " ) , Win95 and Kermit to manage a number of Sun Servers about 8 years ago when we did patching or trouble shooting .
I still use it occasionally for messing with my Ultra60 and Ultra80 at home.Heck , at times I even used/use a Sharp Zaurus 3500 clamshell PDA ( NOT the Linux types - 1MB RAM , no disk , flash , or any other storage , runs on several AA batteries ) with its built-in termulator when I just wanted to do some quick work , and take that in a belt holster to keep my load light for the trek to the server farm .
Simple is good.RO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just keep a few old 486 notebooks around with the DB-9 serial ports, and  with Win95 and Hyperterm or Kermit (maybe even just FreeDOS and MSDOS Kermit?).
Pick up spares whenever someone wants to throw them out as worthless.
I used a Compaq Contura 4/33C, a "netbook" before its time from about 15 years ago, with a 486/33 SX, 12 MB RAM, 250 MB HDD  (right "Mega", not "Giga"), Win95 and Kermit to manage a number of Sun Servers about 8 years ago when we did patching or trouble shooting.
I still use it occasionally for messing with my Ultra60 and Ultra80 at home.Heck, at times I even used/use a Sharp Zaurus 3500 clamshell PDA ( NOT the Linux types - 1MB RAM, no disk, flash, or any other storage, runs on several AA batteries) with its built-in termulator when I just wanted to do some quick work, and take that in a belt holster to keep my load light for the trek to the server farm.
Simple is good.RO</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304128</id>
	<title>console on new laptops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267352820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in networking and the console port a must for out-of-band recovery and initial setup.</p><p>What really iritates me is the removal of console ports on laptops.  My works laptop has a console port, because we are careful about rthe correct box (my next laptop will not have a console port due to changes in the company).</p><p>Solution - All laptops have a modem port, but increasingly no console - now why can't the modem port be made to switch to pure serial RS232 signalling for people like me who never use the modem but use serial consoles every day.</p><p>Then you could get a RJ11 to db9 to give you a proper serial port.  So that RJ11 port for the modem could server two functions and without having the large DB9 using up laptop port real estate.</p><p>Just my thoughts</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in networking and the console port a must for out-of-band recovery and initial setup.What really iritates me is the removal of console ports on laptops .
My works laptop has a console port , because we are careful about rthe correct box ( my next laptop will not have a console port due to changes in the company ) .Solution - All laptops have a modem port , but increasingly no console - now why ca n't the modem port be made to switch to pure serial RS232 signalling for people like me who never use the modem but use serial consoles every day.Then you could get a RJ11 to db9 to give you a proper serial port .
So that RJ11 port for the modem could server two functions and without having the large DB9 using up laptop port real estate.Just my thoughts</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in networking and the console port a must for out-of-band recovery and initial setup.What really iritates me is the removal of console ports on laptops.
My works laptop has a console port, because we are careful about rthe correct box (my next laptop will not have a console port due to changes in the company).Solution - All laptops have a modem port, but increasingly no console - now why can't the modem port be made to switch to pure serial RS232 signalling for people like me who never use the modem but use serial consoles every day.Then you could get a RJ11 to db9 to give you a proper serial port.
So that RJ11 port for the modem could server two functions and without having the large DB9 using up laptop port real estate.Just my thoughts</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834</id>
	<title>Serial Ports..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you mean 'serial ports are rapidly disappearing..' They're all but gone, aren't they?!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you mean 'serial ports are rapidly disappearing.. ' They 're all but gone , are n't they ? !
: -/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you mean 'serial ports are rapidly disappearing..' They're all but gone, aren't they?!
:-/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302096</id>
	<title>Offshore Survey Industry</title>
	<author>ss\_teven</author>
	<datestamp>1267287540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in the offshore survey industry (oil/gas industry), and 95\% of products to date still come with serial ports. They are critical for our purposes, and onboard com ports are a must for timing critical jobs such as multibeam bathymetric surveys.
<br> <br>
Current project im working on we are using Moxa multiport serial boards w/ 32 serial ports on this pc with around 25 currently inuse for IO. (Historically used Digi boards but they were awful for timing (relatively!), 30ms delay compared to the near 0ms on the Moxa units.)
<br> <br>
Simple to use, easily available, and cheap. Almost all the devices I work with use standard parity/stop bits etc, just varying baud rates, which is easy enough to remember.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the offshore survey industry ( oil/gas industry ) , and 95 \ % of products to date still come with serial ports .
They are critical for our purposes , and onboard com ports are a must for timing critical jobs such as multibeam bathymetric surveys .
Current project im working on we are using Moxa multiport serial boards w/ 32 serial ports on this pc with around 25 currently inuse for IO .
( Historically used Digi boards but they were awful for timing ( relatively !
) , 30ms delay compared to the near 0ms on the Moxa units .
) Simple to use , easily available , and cheap .
Almost all the devices I work with use standard parity/stop bits etc , just varying baud rates , which is easy enough to remember .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the offshore survey industry (oil/gas industry), and 95\% of products to date still come with serial ports.
They are critical for our purposes, and onboard com ports are a must for timing critical jobs such as multibeam bathymetric surveys.
Current project im working on we are using Moxa multiport serial boards w/ 32 serial ports on this pc with around 25 currently inuse for IO.
(Historically used Digi boards but they were awful for timing (relatively!
), 30ms delay compared to the near 0ms on the Moxa units.
)
 
Simple to use, easily available, and cheap.
Almost all the devices I work with use standard parity/stop bits etc, just varying baud rates, which is easy enough to remember.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302002</id>
	<title>No, because it requires no configuration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267286760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you can boot and start listening for commands on a serial port without<br>any ip addresses or netmasks or gateways or any configuration<br>whatsoever.  That's the key.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you can boot and start listening for commands on a serial port withoutany ip addresses or netmasks or gateways or any configurationwhatsoever .
That 's the key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can boot and start listening for commands on a serial port withoutany ip addresses or netmasks or gateways or any configurationwhatsoever.
That's the key.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302406</id>
	<title>Re:Simplicity</title>
	<author>EdIII</author>
	<datestamp>1267290300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay....</p><p>You make some really good points.  Problem is that manufacturers on the 'other end' don't give a shit.  It's not economically viable to create a netbook/tablet/laptop just for IT either.  Sure, there are some pretty high end pieces of equipment, but they are *expensive*.  I could be running around with a multi-thousand dollar Fluke to troubleshoot networking problems, but I don't because of the cost.</p><p>Most of our equipment is off the shelf components and even double duty on our personal equipment.</p><p>This is a question that applied to me very recently too.  Only way we could get back into a managed switch was the serial port, and although we had a few cables lying around, we are all unpleasantly surprised to find we had no functioning equipment with a serial port at all.</p><p>We had to order a Serial to USB device by Trendnet from Amazon and wait a few days.  Now we have a couple in our bags.</p><p>You have made some great points about the simplicity and reliability of the connection itself.  Only problem is that for the most part it only exists on *one* side, not both.</p><p>It is not suited to other purposes either, so it makes it very hard to justify its inclusion on consumer equipment... so... more crap I got to take around in the bag?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay....You make some really good points .
Problem is that manufacturers on the 'other end ' do n't give a shit .
It 's not economically viable to create a netbook/tablet/laptop just for IT either .
Sure , there are some pretty high end pieces of equipment , but they are * expensive * .
I could be running around with a multi-thousand dollar Fluke to troubleshoot networking problems , but I do n't because of the cost.Most of our equipment is off the shelf components and even double duty on our personal equipment.This is a question that applied to me very recently too .
Only way we could get back into a managed switch was the serial port , and although we had a few cables lying around , we are all unpleasantly surprised to find we had no functioning equipment with a serial port at all.We had to order a Serial to USB device by Trendnet from Amazon and wait a few days .
Now we have a couple in our bags.You have made some great points about the simplicity and reliability of the connection itself .
Only problem is that for the most part it only exists on * one * side , not both.It is not suited to other purposes either , so it makes it very hard to justify its inclusion on consumer equipment... so... more crap I got to take around in the bag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay....You make some really good points.
Problem is that manufacturers on the 'other end' don't give a shit.
It's not economically viable to create a netbook/tablet/laptop just for IT either.
Sure, there are some pretty high end pieces of equipment, but they are *expensive*.
I could be running around with a multi-thousand dollar Fluke to troubleshoot networking problems, but I don't because of the cost.Most of our equipment is off the shelf components and even double duty on our personal equipment.This is a question that applied to me very recently too.
Only way we could get back into a managed switch was the serial port, and although we had a few cables lying around, we are all unpleasantly surprised to find we had no functioning equipment with a serial port at all.We had to order a Serial to USB device by Trendnet from Amazon and wait a few days.
Now we have a couple in our bags.You have made some great points about the simplicity and reliability of the connection itself.
Only problem is that for the most part it only exists on *one* side, not both.It is not suited to other purposes either, so it makes it very hard to justify its inclusion on consumer equipment... so... more crap I got to take around in the bag?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302488</id>
	<title>Re:The serial connection</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267290960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean DE9. DB9 would be a shell the size of a 25-pin serial connector (that's the "B" size) but with only 9 pins fitted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean DE9 .
DB9 would be a shell the size of a 25-pin serial connector ( that 's the " B " size ) but with only 9 pins fitted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean DE9.
DB9 would be a shell the size of a 25-pin serial connector (that's the "B" size) but with only 9 pins fitted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301990</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>c\_forq</author>
	<datestamp>1267286700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, unfortunately.  Where I work there is a plasma burning table that has no network interface.  We have fiber-optic to all of our other machines but for that table the only option is a floppy disc.  This is a concern as floppy's become more scarce, as once a disk goes out to the warehouse we do not let it back into the office (they get very dirty very quickly and jam up the office floppy drives).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , unfortunately .
Where I work there is a plasma burning table that has no network interface .
We have fiber-optic to all of our other machines but for that table the only option is a floppy disc .
This is a concern as floppy 's become more scarce , as once a disk goes out to the warehouse we do not let it back into the office ( they get very dirty very quickly and jam up the office floppy drives ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, unfortunately.
Where I work there is a plasma burning table that has no network interface.
We have fiber-optic to all of our other machines but for that table the only option is a floppy disc.
This is a concern as floppy's become more scarce, as once a disk goes out to the warehouse we do not let it back into the office (they get very dirty very quickly and jam up the office floppy drives).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31393048</id>
	<title>USB EHCI Debug</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267952400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a way,and it's used by coreboot:<br>http://www.coreboot.org/EHCI\_Debug\_Port</p><p>Denis 'GNUtoo'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a way,and it 's used by coreboot : http : //www.coreboot.org/EHCI \ _Debug \ _PortDenis 'GNUtoo'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a way,and it's used by coreboot:http://www.coreboot.org/EHCI\_Debug\_PortDenis 'GNUtoo'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302732</id>
	<title>Won't die anytime soon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267293240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When configuring a server (regardless of brand) remotely, what do you do if you really muck up the ports or routes? What if you muck up the management port, too? (I've done this too many times for comfort.) There needs to be an ohshit access method. It needs to be as simple, reliable, and cheap as possible. Serial over rs232 is exquisitely simple, amazingly reliable, and at under $10 a port (server hardware, ditto for a serial switch if you want every box available all the time) it's cheap as heck.</p><p>Also, from the server room point of view, one should *never* send updates (software, firmware, FPGA, doesn't matter) over serial. The serial port is there as a last-ditch, nothing-else-is-working connection. It is essentially infallible, and it's what you use to get the management port working again.</p><p>So will it go away? Very doubtful. And I would expect the same for every other industrial scenario.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When configuring a server ( regardless of brand ) remotely , what do you do if you really muck up the ports or routes ?
What if you muck up the management port , too ?
( I 've done this too many times for comfort .
) There needs to be an ohshit access method .
It needs to be as simple , reliable , and cheap as possible .
Serial over rs232 is exquisitely simple , amazingly reliable , and at under $ 10 a port ( server hardware , ditto for a serial switch if you want every box available all the time ) it 's cheap as heck.Also , from the server room point of view , one should * never * send updates ( software , firmware , FPGA , does n't matter ) over serial .
The serial port is there as a last-ditch , nothing-else-is-working connection .
It is essentially infallible , and it 's what you use to get the management port working again.So will it go away ?
Very doubtful .
And I would expect the same for every other industrial scenario .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When configuring a server (regardless of brand) remotely, what do you do if you really muck up the ports or routes?
What if you muck up the management port, too?
(I've done this too many times for comfort.
) There needs to be an ohshit access method.
It needs to be as simple, reliable, and cheap as possible.
Serial over rs232 is exquisitely simple, amazingly reliable, and at under $10 a port (server hardware, ditto for a serial switch if you want every box available all the time) it's cheap as heck.Also, from the server room point of view, one should *never* send updates (software, firmware, FPGA, doesn't matter) over serial.
The serial port is there as a last-ditch, nothing-else-is-working connection.
It is essentially infallible, and it's what you use to get the management port working again.So will it go away?
Very doubtful.
And I would expect the same for every other industrial scenario.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304564</id>
	<title>Realible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267361640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More realible than USB (EMC).<br>Serial connectors are a lot more reliable than those modular things used for ethernet.<br>RS232 still makes sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More realible than USB ( EMC ) .Serial connectors are a lot more reliable than those modular things used for ethernet.RS232 still makes sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More realible than USB (EMC).Serial connectors are a lot more reliable than those modular things used for ethernet.RS232 still makes sense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306246</id>
	<title>for the leet</title>
	<author>Danzigism</author>
	<datestamp>1267376520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The bottom line is that serial ports are still leet. I don't see why they should phase them out. I use a crappy Pentium 133mhz Laptop running NetBSD for my console work. when it dies, I will buy another one for $30 on eBay. I always thought it was for security anyway. Being able to only admin certain features of routers and other devices using only the serial console. nothing wrong with that. plus, a lot of the firmwares I've seen can be installed via TFTP server and you don't even need to transfer anything over the serial connection. it's there merely as means to administer the machine. all hail the serial console. and the pinouts are easy as shit. there's only 9 freakin pins for christ's sake and all 9 of them aren't even used half the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The bottom line is that serial ports are still leet .
I do n't see why they should phase them out .
I use a crappy Pentium 133mhz Laptop running NetBSD for my console work .
when it dies , I will buy another one for $ 30 on eBay .
I always thought it was for security anyway .
Being able to only admin certain features of routers and other devices using only the serial console .
nothing wrong with that .
plus , a lot of the firmwares I 've seen can be installed via TFTP server and you do n't even need to transfer anything over the serial connection .
it 's there merely as means to administer the machine .
all hail the serial console .
and the pinouts are easy as shit .
there 's only 9 freakin pins for christ 's sake and all 9 of them are n't even used half the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bottom line is that serial ports are still leet.
I don't see why they should phase them out.
I use a crappy Pentium 133mhz Laptop running NetBSD for my console work.
when it dies, I will buy another one for $30 on eBay.
I always thought it was for security anyway.
Being able to only admin certain features of routers and other devices using only the serial console.
nothing wrong with that.
plus, a lot of the firmwares I've seen can be installed via TFTP server and you don't even need to transfer anything over the serial connection.
it's there merely as means to administer the machine.
all hail the serial console.
and the pinouts are easy as shit.
there's only 9 freakin pins for christ's sake and all 9 of them aren't even used half the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303580</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>tzot</author>
	<datestamp>1267388100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And there <i>still</i> isn't a Windows serial terminal program that's half as good.</p></div><p>Oh, come on. Putty using RS232 is at least *half* as good.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And there still is n't a Windows serial terminal program that 's half as good.Oh , come on .
Putty using RS232 is at least * half * as good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And there still isn't a Windows serial terminal program that's half as good.Oh, come on.
Putty using RS232 is at least *half* as good.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304310</id>
	<title>People Who do "Routers and switches and stuff"</title>
	<author>Hymer</author>
	<datestamp>1267356360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People who configure routers, switches and other RS232 equipped things do usually know those funny baud rate, parity, stop bit etc. things. <br>Btw. you may run an RS232 at a megabit or more, that is what UMTS adapters usually do, even when you connect them as USB or PCCARD devices.<br> Limits are only in BIOS, you may run is as fast as it is technically possible which is a lot more than the usual max of [insert preferred max. speed here]. The reason for not doing it is to be compatible with older hardware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People who configure routers , switches and other RS232 equipped things do usually know those funny baud rate , parity , stop bit etc .
things. Btw .
you may run an RS232 at a megabit or more , that is what UMTS adapters usually do , even when you connect them as USB or PCCARD devices .
Limits are only in BIOS , you may run is as fast as it is technically possible which is a lot more than the usual max of [ insert preferred max .
speed here ] .
The reason for not doing it is to be compatible with older hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People who configure routers, switches and other RS232 equipped things do usually know those funny baud rate, parity, stop bit etc.
things. Btw.
you may run an RS232 at a megabit or more, that is what UMTS adapters usually do, even when you connect them as USB or PCCARD devices.
Limits are only in BIOS, you may run is as fast as it is technically possible which is a lot more than the usual max of [insert preferred max.
speed here].
The reason for not doing it is to be compatible with older hardware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302838</id>
	<title>Wait a minute...</title>
	<author>avatar139</author>
	<datestamp>1267293960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...You mean it's not already dead?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...You mean it 's not already dead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...You mean it's not already dead?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302216</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1267288800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yarg, I've got some industrial machinery that uses serial and I've yet to find a converter that has timing exactly like a real serial port.  Know any with very exact timing(not bloody likely with USB)?</p><p>Fortunately, most of our newer machinery runs on straight cat5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yarg , I 've got some industrial machinery that uses serial and I 've yet to find a converter that has timing exactly like a real serial port .
Know any with very exact timing ( not bloody likely with USB ) ? Fortunately , most of our newer machinery runs on straight cat5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yarg, I've got some industrial machinery that uses serial and I've yet to find a converter that has timing exactly like a real serial port.
Know any with very exact timing(not bloody likely with USB)?Fortunately, most of our newer machinery runs on straight cat5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302900</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1267294440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who has to support Windows 2003 or XP or earlier uses floppy drives on a regular basis.</p><p>Fortunately, most servers will work with a USB floppy drive just fine. Not all will though.</p><p>Also, many server BIOS update routines require booting off the floppy drive - You can often work around that but it's a pain in the neck - it's easier just to have a floppy drive installed in the server even though you'll use it two or three times during the life of the server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who has to support Windows 2003 or XP or earlier uses floppy drives on a regular basis.Fortunately , most servers will work with a USB floppy drive just fine .
Not all will though.Also , many server BIOS update routines require booting off the floppy drive - You can often work around that but it 's a pain in the neck - it 's easier just to have a floppy drive installed in the server even though you 'll use it two or three times during the life of the server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who has to support Windows 2003 or XP or earlier uses floppy drives on a regular basis.Fortunately, most servers will work with a USB floppy drive just fine.
Not all will though.Also, many server BIOS update routines require booting off the floppy drive - You can often work around that but it's a pain in the neck - it's easier just to have a floppy drive installed in the server even though you'll use it two or three times during the life of the server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306612</id>
	<title>USB-only console connection for HP P2000 G3</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1267378860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The <a href="http://hp.com/go/p2000" title="hp.com">HP StorageWorks P2000 G3</a> [hp.com] disk arrays have only USB and TCP/IP management. For most operating systems that support USB serial devices you can just plug it in and it'll be recognized. For Windows you have to download and install an INF file before Windows will see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The HP StorageWorks P2000 G3 [ hp.com ] disk arrays have only USB and TCP/IP management .
For most operating systems that support USB serial devices you can just plug it in and it 'll be recognized .
For Windows you have to download and install an INF file before Windows will see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The HP StorageWorks P2000 G3 [hp.com] disk arrays have only USB and TCP/IP management.
For most operating systems that support USB serial devices you can just plug it in and it'll be recognized.
For Windows you have to download and install an INF file before Windows will see it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307750</id>
	<title>Re:No</title>
	<author>dindi</author>
	<datestamp>1267386600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I wrote (3-wire) was for the most minimal setup of course.</p><p>Common ground, signal ground<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...    grounds are connected together with a wire....</p><p>I am a software engineer, so if I messed with an electrical engineering term in a language, that is not my 1st, well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....    then excuse me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....   that should not put me in the  "untrained technician" bin I hope<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>I actually use the 3-wire setup on simple electronic project, and if shielding is OK, and the distance is not too far it works pretty ok. Then again, I know, that is is enough to put a power supply nearby and the crap starts flowing on the port, in and out<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I wrote ( 3-wire ) was for the most minimal setup of course.Common ground , signal ground ... grounds are connected together with a wire....I am a software engineer , so if I messed with an electrical engineering term in a language , that is not my 1st , well .... then excuse me .... that should not put me in the " untrained technician " bin I hope : ) ....I actually use the 3-wire setup on simple electronic project , and if shielding is OK , and the distance is not too far it works pretty ok. Then again , I know , that is is enough to put a power supply nearby and the crap starts flowing on the port , in and out : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I wrote (3-wire) was for the most minimal setup of course.Common ground, signal ground ...    grounds are connected together with a wire....I am a software engineer, so if I messed with an electrical engineering term in a language, that is not my 1st, well ....    then excuse me ....   that should not put me in the  "untrained technician" bin I hope :) ....I actually use the 3-wire setup on simple electronic project, and if shielding is OK, and the distance is not too far it works pretty ok. Then again, I know, that is is enough to put a power supply nearby and the crap starts flowing on the port, in and out :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305722</id>
	<title>i used to wonder that too, but the reality is...</title>
	<author>pjr.cc</author>
	<datestamp>1267372620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Serial has one huge advantage... its a standard..</p><p>I used to wonder why people didnt start embedding usb to serial ports on their devices until i started using one on my laptop... there are several chipsets out there with various quirks, and the place they are most used will mean these kind of barriers are fairly insummountable.</p><p>I have a sheeva plug and it does use an embedded usb to serial converter, but that device is a good example of where it would work and most places it wont.</p><p>What im refering to is of course the data center, serial ports thrive here because so many devices have serial consoles and this is a VERY VERY GOOD THING. As I said before, its a standard. I can buy a cisco (or any brand really) serial concentrator and then manage ANYTHING that has a serial console. Can you imagine the nightmare that would erupt if we went to usb consoles? "I have a cisco usb console concentrator, and its not compatible with our HP procurves or our dell poweredge devices"... dear god I hope they never ever do that. Buying cheap usb to serial converters for the people out in the field that need to get on consoles is far easier and cheaper. The vendor lock-in insanity would be such a painful experience here.  On top of that, you can route most serial consoles over standard cat6 cable (huge bonus in the DC).</p><p>While pinouts (for serial) on some devices may differ, they really aren't any where near the agony of what a usb console would be.</p><p>As for speed, what device on earth has a serial console for more then a command line? I cannot think of a single device that was build in the last 10 years (perhaps even 20) that would require you to (or even let you) upload a firmware over its serial console. Even when truely broken, devices can usually get to their network ports for tftp or something similar. I hope to god the OP gets a clue because its an appalling suggestion that I hope never reaches the light of day that could only come from someone who really had a rough day with one particularly strange device and decided to have a whine about it on slashdot and try to apply it to a more general set of circumstances.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Serial has one huge advantage... its a standard..I used to wonder why people didnt start embedding usb to serial ports on their devices until i started using one on my laptop... there are several chipsets out there with various quirks , and the place they are most used will mean these kind of barriers are fairly insummountable.I have a sheeva plug and it does use an embedded usb to serial converter , but that device is a good example of where it would work and most places it wont.What im refering to is of course the data center , serial ports thrive here because so many devices have serial consoles and this is a VERY VERY GOOD THING .
As I said before , its a standard .
I can buy a cisco ( or any brand really ) serial concentrator and then manage ANYTHING that has a serial console .
Can you imagine the nightmare that would erupt if we went to usb consoles ?
" I have a cisco usb console concentrator , and its not compatible with our HP procurves or our dell poweredge devices " ... dear god I hope they never ever do that .
Buying cheap usb to serial converters for the people out in the field that need to get on consoles is far easier and cheaper .
The vendor lock-in insanity would be such a painful experience here .
On top of that , you can route most serial consoles over standard cat6 cable ( huge bonus in the DC ) .While pinouts ( for serial ) on some devices may differ , they really are n't any where near the agony of what a usb console would be.As for speed , what device on earth has a serial console for more then a command line ?
I can not think of a single device that was build in the last 10 years ( perhaps even 20 ) that would require you to ( or even let you ) upload a firmware over its serial console .
Even when truely broken , devices can usually get to their network ports for tftp or something similar .
I hope to god the OP gets a clue because its an appalling suggestion that I hope never reaches the light of day that could only come from someone who really had a rough day with one particularly strange device and decided to have a whine about it on slashdot and try to apply it to a more general set of circumstances .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serial has one huge advantage... its a standard..I used to wonder why people didnt start embedding usb to serial ports on their devices until i started using one on my laptop... there are several chipsets out there with various quirks, and the place they are most used will mean these kind of barriers are fairly insummountable.I have a sheeva plug and it does use an embedded usb to serial converter, but that device is a good example of where it would work and most places it wont.What im refering to is of course the data center, serial ports thrive here because so many devices have serial consoles and this is a VERY VERY GOOD THING.
As I said before, its a standard.
I can buy a cisco (or any brand really) serial concentrator and then manage ANYTHING that has a serial console.
Can you imagine the nightmare that would erupt if we went to usb consoles?
"I have a cisco usb console concentrator, and its not compatible with our HP procurves or our dell poweredge devices"... dear god I hope they never ever do that.
Buying cheap usb to serial converters for the people out in the field that need to get on consoles is far easier and cheaper.
The vendor lock-in insanity would be such a painful experience here.
On top of that, you can route most serial consoles over standard cat6 cable (huge bonus in the DC).While pinouts (for serial) on some devices may differ, they really aren't any where near the agony of what a usb console would be.As for speed, what device on earth has a serial console for more then a command line?
I cannot think of a single device that was build in the last 10 years (perhaps even 20) that would require you to (or even let you) upload a firmware over its serial console.
Even when truely broken, devices can usually get to their network ports for tftp or something similar.
I hope to god the OP gets a clue because its an appalling suggestion that I hope never reaches the light of day that could only come from someone who really had a rough day with one particularly strange device and decided to have a whine about it on slashdot and try to apply it to a more general set of circumstances.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304154</id>
	<title>replacement? no, but already here for non-x86</title>
	<author>cfriedt</author>
	<datestamp>1267353240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all, it's important to distinguish that RS-232 is just a signalling convention. RS-232 requires an RS-232 transceiver, exactly the same way that USB requires a USB transceiver. Both of these technologies are for serial communication. Both of these technologies can be backed by a UART (see <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=KoR1FxOOmO8C&amp;lpg=PP1&amp;dq=embedded\%20hardware&amp;hl=en&amp;pg=PP1#v=onepage&amp;q=&amp;f=false" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Catsoulis</a> [google.com]) but USB often skips the UART backend, opting for direct access instead. What you're really talking about is replacing the traditional RS-232 transceiver with a USB transceiver on devices. Sure, why not?</p><p> <b>Reason 1)</b> a UART is absolutely crucial for OS debugging, boot loader debugging, and recovery from corrupt nand, because it's cheap, simple, and sufficient. Often (especially when reverse engineering a device) a UART can be the <i>only</i> way to interact with the OS during the porting phase.</p><p> <b>Reason 2)</b> Although most (decent) OS have a USB stack that will work in both host and device mode simultaneously, often there is some external hardware preventing direct usage of an OTG or USB-device port (e.g. VBUS sensing). Interfacing with a UART requires no knowledge of external circuitry aside from pin configuration.</p><p> <b>Reason 3)</b> Lower-level 'operating systems' that run on microcontrollers or DSP often do not have such a sophisticated USB stack. UARTs are just simpler.</p><p>So now that we know complete replacement is unlikely... I can tell you that the USB console you're asking for is already here (with varying protocols). The protocol is determined by the device in question (either statically or at runtime) and will typically be one of i) CDC Ethernet / RNDIS, or ii) CDC Modem, but custom protocols are also possible.</p><p>CDC Ethernet is essentially what you're looking for in terms of 'auto-negotiating' baud rates, but you still need to configure the Ethernet / IP layers. Drivers exist for most decent host operating systems, and even Windows!</p><p>The device in question needs to have an OTG or USB-device port, neither of which you're likely to see on x86 or x86\_64 chips without external hardware (AFAIK manufacturers assume that x86 chips are always the host in a USB transaction). On the other hand, most ARM SoC have had an OTG or USB-device port for years already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , it 's important to distinguish that RS-232 is just a signalling convention .
RS-232 requires an RS-232 transceiver , exactly the same way that USB requires a USB transceiver .
Both of these technologies are for serial communication .
Both of these technologies can be backed by a UART ( see Catsoulis [ google.com ] ) but USB often skips the UART backend , opting for direct access instead .
What you 're really talking about is replacing the traditional RS-232 transceiver with a USB transceiver on devices .
Sure , why not ?
Reason 1 ) a UART is absolutely crucial for OS debugging , boot loader debugging , and recovery from corrupt nand , because it 's cheap , simple , and sufficient .
Often ( especially when reverse engineering a device ) a UART can be the only way to interact with the OS during the porting phase .
Reason 2 ) Although most ( decent ) OS have a USB stack that will work in both host and device mode simultaneously , often there is some external hardware preventing direct usage of an OTG or USB-device port ( e.g .
VBUS sensing ) .
Interfacing with a UART requires no knowledge of external circuitry aside from pin configuration .
Reason 3 ) Lower-level 'operating systems ' that run on microcontrollers or DSP often do not have such a sophisticated USB stack .
UARTs are just simpler.So now that we know complete replacement is unlikely... I can tell you that the USB console you 're asking for is already here ( with varying protocols ) .
The protocol is determined by the device in question ( either statically or at runtime ) and will typically be one of i ) CDC Ethernet / RNDIS , or ii ) CDC Modem , but custom protocols are also possible.CDC Ethernet is essentially what you 're looking for in terms of 'auto-negotiating ' baud rates , but you still need to configure the Ethernet / IP layers .
Drivers exist for most decent host operating systems , and even Windows ! The device in question needs to have an OTG or USB-device port , neither of which you 're likely to see on x86 or x86 \ _64 chips without external hardware ( AFAIK manufacturers assume that x86 chips are always the host in a USB transaction ) .
On the other hand , most ARM SoC have had an OTG or USB-device port for years already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, it's important to distinguish that RS-232 is just a signalling convention.
RS-232 requires an RS-232 transceiver, exactly the same way that USB requires a USB transceiver.
Both of these technologies are for serial communication.
Both of these technologies can be backed by a UART (see Catsoulis [google.com]) but USB often skips the UART backend, opting for direct access instead.
What you're really talking about is replacing the traditional RS-232 transceiver with a USB transceiver on devices.
Sure, why not?
Reason 1) a UART is absolutely crucial for OS debugging, boot loader debugging, and recovery from corrupt nand, because it's cheap, simple, and sufficient.
Often (especially when reverse engineering a device) a UART can be the only way to interact with the OS during the porting phase.
Reason 2) Although most (decent) OS have a USB stack that will work in both host and device mode simultaneously, often there is some external hardware preventing direct usage of an OTG or USB-device port (e.g.
VBUS sensing).
Interfacing with a UART requires no knowledge of external circuitry aside from pin configuration.
Reason 3) Lower-level 'operating systems' that run on microcontrollers or DSP often do not have such a sophisticated USB stack.
UARTs are just simpler.So now that we know complete replacement is unlikely... I can tell you that the USB console you're asking for is already here (with varying protocols).
The protocol is determined by the device in question (either statically or at runtime) and will typically be one of i) CDC Ethernet / RNDIS, or ii) CDC Modem, but custom protocols are also possible.CDC Ethernet is essentially what you're looking for in terms of 'auto-negotiating' baud rates, but you still need to configure the Ethernet / IP layers.
Drivers exist for most decent host operating systems, and even Windows!The device in question needs to have an OTG or USB-device port, neither of which you're likely to see on x86 or x86\_64 chips without external hardware (AFAIK manufacturers assume that x86 chips are always the host in a USB transaction).
On the other hand, most ARM SoC have had an OTG or USB-device port for years already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302294</id>
	<title>Actually quite useful for simple hardware hacks</title>
	<author>Richard\_J\_N</author>
	<datestamp>1267289520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you exclude the TxD and RxD (and Ground) lines, there are still 6 others, which are trivial to interface to. YOu get 4 inputs and 2 outputs, to which you can connect switches and LEDs directly. Then use setserial/statserial to control/monitor the logic levels. This is actually quite useful sometimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you exclude the TxD and RxD ( and Ground ) lines , there are still 6 others , which are trivial to interface to .
YOu get 4 inputs and 2 outputs , to which you can connect switches and LEDs directly .
Then use setserial/statserial to control/monitor the logic levels .
This is actually quite useful sometimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you exclude the TxD and RxD (and Ground) lines, there are still 6 others, which are trivial to interface to.
YOu get 4 inputs and 2 outputs, to which you can connect switches and LEDs directly.
Then use setserial/statserial to control/monitor the logic levels.
This is actually quite useful sometimes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302058</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1267287240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, they filter dust in my desktop machines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , they filter dust in my desktop machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, they filter dust in my desktop machines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31312140</id>
	<title>Getting more difficult all the time</title>
	<author>Douglas Goodall</author>
	<datestamp>1267380780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the past when serial interfaces were implemented with UARTs. Things were very stable. Once you got the
cable, speed, bits... right, things were usually VERY stable. I have noticed that since serial ports have become
IP blown into gate arrays, and more recently with these USB/serial converters, things are not reliable at all.

I get things running, then for no reason, things hang up, and for no reason start working again. This is maddening
for a software/hardware engineer used to having things that work, continue to work. While these interfaces are
going to be around for a while longer, they are no where near as fun as they used to be. My recent experience
using ADTPRO to bootstrap a bare-metal Apple ][ was an exercise in heartache. Armed with gender changers,
null modems, serial breakout boxes, and plenty of little wires, things seem much harder than they used to be.

We really need something else to become ubiquitous and usable, sooner than later, this is making me nauseous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the past when serial interfaces were implemented with UARTs .
Things were very stable .
Once you got the cable , speed , bits... right , things were usually VERY stable .
I have noticed that since serial ports have become IP blown into gate arrays , and more recently with these USB/serial converters , things are not reliable at all .
I get things running , then for no reason , things hang up , and for no reason start working again .
This is maddening for a software/hardware engineer used to having things that work , continue to work .
While these interfaces are going to be around for a while longer , they are no where near as fun as they used to be .
My recent experience using ADTPRO to bootstrap a bare-metal Apple ] [ was an exercise in heartache .
Armed with gender changers , null modems , serial breakout boxes , and plenty of little wires , things seem much harder than they used to be .
We really need something else to become ubiquitous and usable , sooner than later , this is making me nauseous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the past when serial interfaces were implemented with UARTs.
Things were very stable.
Once you got the
cable, speed, bits... right, things were usually VERY stable.
I have noticed that since serial ports have become
IP blown into gate arrays, and more recently with these USB/serial converters, things are not reliable at all.
I get things running, then for no reason, things hang up, and for no reason start working again.
This is maddening
for a software/hardware engineer used to having things that work, continue to work.
While these interfaces are
going to be around for a while longer, they are no where near as fun as they used to be.
My recent experience
using ADTPRO to bootstrap a bare-metal Apple ][ was an exercise in heartache.
Armed with gender changers,
null modems, serial breakout boxes, and plenty of little wires, things seem much harder than they used to be.
We really need something else to become ubiquitous and usable, sooner than later, this is making me nauseous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302650</id>
	<title>indispensable for remote *nix development</title>
	<author>ChipMonk</author>
	<datestamp>1267292340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At my last IT job, we had a serial-to-telnet converter/concentrator, with 20 or 24 RJ-45 serial ports. We also had ~30 headless systems, of all stripes: IBM Power, HP PA-RISC 6U rack-mounts, and lots of Sparcs and PC's. Only LILO or GRUB on the PC's needed to be configured post-install to talk to the serial port; the others were already set up to talk to the serial port, either by default or as a fall-back if the keyboard was detached. Add to that a telnet-enabled power strip, and it was a remote developer's dream.<br> <br>

The big advantage the serial concentrator gave us was being able to reboot and recover from a kernel panic, by being able to manipulate kernel command lines. In the event of a corrupt filesystem, if the fsck program couldn't repair it automatically during boot, the serial console made it possible to attempt a repair remotely. Not having that ability would have severely hampered our development ability.<br> <br>

I have even (very, very carefully) typed serial console parameters into a Linux boot command in SYSLINUX, blindly, and done a Slackware install through a serial console. It took a few tries to get it right, but it saved moving my only monitor, which let me continue working on my desktop system while the install ran.<br> <br>

Well, okay, there was also the "because I can" aspect to it...</htmltext>
<tokenext>At my last IT job , we had a serial-to-telnet converter/concentrator , with 20 or 24 RJ-45 serial ports .
We also had ~ 30 headless systems , of all stripes : IBM Power , HP PA-RISC 6U rack-mounts , and lots of Sparcs and PC 's .
Only LILO or GRUB on the PC 's needed to be configured post-install to talk to the serial port ; the others were already set up to talk to the serial port , either by default or as a fall-back if the keyboard was detached .
Add to that a telnet-enabled power strip , and it was a remote developer 's dream .
The big advantage the serial concentrator gave us was being able to reboot and recover from a kernel panic , by being able to manipulate kernel command lines .
In the event of a corrupt filesystem , if the fsck program could n't repair it automatically during boot , the serial console made it possible to attempt a repair remotely .
Not having that ability would have severely hampered our development ability .
I have even ( very , very carefully ) typed serial console parameters into a Linux boot command in SYSLINUX , blindly , and done a Slackware install through a serial console .
It took a few tries to get it right , but it saved moving my only monitor , which let me continue working on my desktop system while the install ran .
Well , okay , there was also the " because I can " aspect to it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At my last IT job, we had a serial-to-telnet converter/concentrator, with 20 or 24 RJ-45 serial ports.
We also had ~30 headless systems, of all stripes: IBM Power, HP PA-RISC 6U rack-mounts, and lots of Sparcs and PC's.
Only LILO or GRUB on the PC's needed to be configured post-install to talk to the serial port; the others were already set up to talk to the serial port, either by default or as a fall-back if the keyboard was detached.
Add to that a telnet-enabled power strip, and it was a remote developer's dream.
The big advantage the serial concentrator gave us was being able to reboot and recover from a kernel panic, by being able to manipulate kernel command lines.
In the event of a corrupt filesystem, if the fsck program couldn't repair it automatically during boot, the serial console made it possible to attempt a repair remotely.
Not having that ability would have severely hampered our development ability.
I have even (very, very carefully) typed serial console parameters into a Linux boot command in SYSLINUX, blindly, and done a Slackware install through a serial console.
It took a few tries to get it right, but it saved moving my only monitor, which let me continue working on my desktop system while the install ran.
Well, okay, there was also the "because I can" aspect to it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303296</id>
	<title>Re:It should have been phased out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267298700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been developing for the Atmel ATSAM3U chip, which uses the ARM Cortex-M3 core.  Its development board has serial ports, but I can reprogram the chip entirely, from full eraase, with just the built-in USB port.</p><p>When erased, the chip boots off an internal ROM.  That ROM, if yo have a 12 MHz crystal hooked up, will activate the USB 2.0 Device port and make it look like a serial dongle.  You talk to the thing via<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/ttyUSB0 and download the program top flash through it.  As a final step, you run a couple commands on it to switch the booting over to Flash.  And you're done.  If you want to erase the chip, there's an ERASE pin you pull down for 200 ms or so, and it's erased.</p><p>The dev board adds another twist to it.  It has an onboard NAND Flash chip, which uses the built-in ECC unit on the SAM3U.  If the development board is running the demo code, then that NAND Flash will show up as a USB thumb drive when you plug the board into your computer.  So you can read and write the NAND Flash from your computer as if the ARM wasn't there.  The board ships with its source code, binaries, and data sheets on that NAND Flash, just to prove its point.</p><p>This is where the future is going.  RS-232/422/485 will become more and more niche oriented.  Industrial apps that need more than 15 foot cables will still use serial ports.</p><p>But I doubt it'll always be a requirement for embedded work, I've found that using an FT232 USB-to-serial chip is the way to go in my embedded designs.  It pretty much replaces the RS-232 transceiver chip, and doesn't need charge pump capacitors or funny voltages.  You never need a null-modem adapter or gender changer.  You never have to wonder what baud rate/parity/whatever is needed; just set that in the FT232's EEPROM.  The chip hooks directly to TTL serial port pins that all microprocessors use.  You can even choose if you want handshaking or not, and the FT232 can even drive activity LEDs for you.  A USB Mini-B or Micro-B connector is far easier to find a home for than a DB-9.  What's not to like?</p><p>I've been using serial ports for 25 years.  I will NOT miss them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been developing for the Atmel ATSAM3U chip , which uses the ARM Cortex-M3 core .
Its development board has serial ports , but I can reprogram the chip entirely , from full eraase , with just the built-in USB port.When erased , the chip boots off an internal ROM .
That ROM , if yo have a 12 MHz crystal hooked up , will activate the USB 2.0 Device port and make it look like a serial dongle .
You talk to the thing via /dev/ttyUSB0 and download the program top flash through it .
As a final step , you run a couple commands on it to switch the booting over to Flash .
And you 're done .
If you want to erase the chip , there 's an ERASE pin you pull down for 200 ms or so , and it 's erased.The dev board adds another twist to it .
It has an onboard NAND Flash chip , which uses the built-in ECC unit on the SAM3U .
If the development board is running the demo code , then that NAND Flash will show up as a USB thumb drive when you plug the board into your computer .
So you can read and write the NAND Flash from your computer as if the ARM was n't there .
The board ships with its source code , binaries , and data sheets on that NAND Flash , just to prove its point.This is where the future is going .
RS-232/422/485 will become more and more niche oriented .
Industrial apps that need more than 15 foot cables will still use serial ports.But I doubt it 'll always be a requirement for embedded work , I 've found that using an FT232 USB-to-serial chip is the way to go in my embedded designs .
It pretty much replaces the RS-232 transceiver chip , and does n't need charge pump capacitors or funny voltages .
You never need a null-modem adapter or gender changer .
You never have to wonder what baud rate/parity/whatever is needed ; just set that in the FT232 's EEPROM .
The chip hooks directly to TTL serial port pins that all microprocessors use .
You can even choose if you want handshaking or not , and the FT232 can even drive activity LEDs for you .
A USB Mini-B or Micro-B connector is far easier to find a home for than a DB-9 .
What 's not to like ? I 've been using serial ports for 25 years .
I will NOT miss them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been developing for the Atmel ATSAM3U chip, which uses the ARM Cortex-M3 core.
Its development board has serial ports, but I can reprogram the chip entirely, from full eraase, with just the built-in USB port.When erased, the chip boots off an internal ROM.
That ROM, if yo have a 12 MHz crystal hooked up, will activate the USB 2.0 Device port and make it look like a serial dongle.
You talk to the thing via /dev/ttyUSB0 and download the program top flash through it.
As a final step, you run a couple commands on it to switch the booting over to Flash.
And you're done.
If you want to erase the chip, there's an ERASE pin you pull down for 200 ms or so, and it's erased.The dev board adds another twist to it.
It has an onboard NAND Flash chip, which uses the built-in ECC unit on the SAM3U.
If the development board is running the demo code, then that NAND Flash will show up as a USB thumb drive when you plug the board into your computer.
So you can read and write the NAND Flash from your computer as if the ARM wasn't there.
The board ships with its source code, binaries, and data sheets on that NAND Flash, just to prove its point.This is where the future is going.
RS-232/422/485 will become more and more niche oriented.
Industrial apps that need more than 15 foot cables will still use serial ports.But I doubt it'll always be a requirement for embedded work, I've found that using an FT232 USB-to-serial chip is the way to go in my embedded designs.
It pretty much replaces the RS-232 transceiver chip, and doesn't need charge pump capacitors or funny voltages.
You never need a null-modem adapter or gender changer.
You never have to wonder what baud rate/parity/whatever is needed; just set that in the FT232's EEPROM.
The chip hooks directly to TTL serial port pins that all microprocessors use.
You can even choose if you want handshaking or not, and the FT232 can even drive activity LEDs for you.
A USB Mini-B or Micro-B connector is far easier to find a home for than a DB-9.
What's not to like?I've been using serial ports for 25 years.
I will NOT miss them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301862</id>
	<title>The serial connection</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267285680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First there are plenty of USB-serial converters, so the lack of old-school DB9 serial ports on laptops is entirely a non-issue.</p><p>Also, some devices I see are already offering serial console access over USB, basically simulating I imagine what a USB-serial converter looks like, so if you plug into the device, you get USB-serial console access without the need of converting to serial and then having a serial cable.  Also, USB carried serial consoles can operate at higher speeds than traditional rs232 cabling allowed, which should address firmware updates, as well as offering other means, such as USB access to real or simulated filesystems over the same USB port as a multi-device hub.</p><p>So the short answer, I see, is that the serial console is not "going away", but rather is slowly migrating to USB.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First there are plenty of USB-serial converters , so the lack of old-school DB9 serial ports on laptops is entirely a non-issue.Also , some devices I see are already offering serial console access over USB , basically simulating I imagine what a USB-serial converter looks like , so if you plug into the device , you get USB-serial console access without the need of converting to serial and then having a serial cable .
Also , USB carried serial consoles can operate at higher speeds than traditional rs232 cabling allowed , which should address firmware updates , as well as offering other means , such as USB access to real or simulated filesystems over the same USB port as a multi-device hub.So the short answer , I see , is that the serial console is not " going away " , but rather is slowly migrating to USB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First there are plenty of USB-serial converters, so the lack of old-school DB9 serial ports on laptops is entirely a non-issue.Also, some devices I see are already offering serial console access over USB, basically simulating I imagine what a USB-serial converter looks like, so if you plug into the device, you get USB-serial console access without the need of converting to serial and then having a serial cable.
Also, USB carried serial consoles can operate at higher speeds than traditional rs232 cabling allowed, which should address firmware updates, as well as offering other means, such as USB access to real or simulated filesystems over the same USB port as a multi-device hub.So the short answer, I see, is that the serial console is not "going away", but rather is slowly migrating to USB.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306876</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>Dun Malg</author>
	<datestamp>1267380480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg's that keep it around. Instead of designing something around USB.</p></div><p>Anyone who's ever done any work with microcontrollers knows why they still use serial in these devices. It's not a "fault" at all, it's simply a matter of complexity. I can bang out a crude serial interface in forty lines of C using two IC pins. Going USB would require either (a) writing a USB  compliant interface and client driver for whatever computers might plug in, or (b) putting the same damn USB-&gt;serial chip you find in cheap adapter cables in the device and using their driver. Solution (a) requires a significant investment in time and materials (more code = more RAM = more $), and solution (b) will have the exact same timing problems as a separate USB-&gt;serial cable will.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg 's that keep it around .
Instead of designing something around USB.Anyone who 's ever done any work with microcontrollers knows why they still use serial in these devices .
It 's not a " fault " at all , it 's simply a matter of complexity .
I can bang out a crude serial interface in forty lines of C using two IC pins .
Going USB would require either ( a ) writing a USB compliant interface and client driver for whatever computers might plug in , or ( b ) putting the same damn USB- &gt; serial chip you find in cheap adapter cables in the device and using their driver .
Solution ( a ) requires a significant investment in time and materials ( more code = more RAM = more $ ) , and solution ( b ) will have the exact same timing problems as a separate USB- &gt; serial cable will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg's that keep it around.
Instead of designing something around USB.Anyone who's ever done any work with microcontrollers knows why they still use serial in these devices.
It's not a "fault" at all, it's simply a matter of complexity.
I can bang out a crude serial interface in forty lines of C using two IC pins.
Going USB would require either (a) writing a USB  compliant interface and client driver for whatever computers might plug in, or (b) putting the same damn USB-&gt;serial chip you find in cheap adapter cables in the device and using their driver.
Solution (a) requires a significant investment in time and materials (more code = more RAM = more $), and solution (b) will have the exact same timing problems as a separate USB-&gt;serial cable will.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>GNUALMAFUERTE</author>
	<datestamp>1267294020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main issue is delay. USB is a complex standard, it requires more processing power on both sides to run, and it's not truly great for realtime applications.</p><p>Certain  simple electronic devices are just meant to be serial. Most PICs have built-in RS232/RS485 support while only few have USB support (and the very few are way more expensive.</p><p>I was wondering the same thing the other day. Actually, the only thing that is dying is parallel output.</p><p>Think about it:</p><p>LPT got replaced by USB<br>PCI (Which is parallel) got replaced by PCI express (serial)<br>IDE/PATA got replaced by SATA<br>Parallel SCSI got replaced by Serial SCSI</p><p>But regarding serial devices, wether it's USB or the simpler and slower RS232, they are here to stay. They are cheaper, simpler to implement, and more effective. Computers will have UART chips as long as 3D routers, PIC recorders, home-made electronics, and other similar devices have RS232 ports.</p><p>I believe we'll see RS232 for at least another decade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main issue is delay .
USB is a complex standard , it requires more processing power on both sides to run , and it 's not truly great for realtime applications.Certain simple electronic devices are just meant to be serial .
Most PICs have built-in RS232/RS485 support while only few have USB support ( and the very few are way more expensive.I was wondering the same thing the other day .
Actually , the only thing that is dying is parallel output.Think about it : LPT got replaced by USBPCI ( Which is parallel ) got replaced by PCI express ( serial ) IDE/PATA got replaced by SATAParallel SCSI got replaced by Serial SCSIBut regarding serial devices , wether it 's USB or the simpler and slower RS232 , they are here to stay .
They are cheaper , simpler to implement , and more effective .
Computers will have UART chips as long as 3D routers , PIC recorders , home-made electronics , and other similar devices have RS232 ports.I believe we 'll see RS232 for at least another decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main issue is delay.
USB is a complex standard, it requires more processing power on both sides to run, and it's not truly great for realtime applications.Certain  simple electronic devices are just meant to be serial.
Most PICs have built-in RS232/RS485 support while only few have USB support (and the very few are way more expensive.I was wondering the same thing the other day.
Actually, the only thing that is dying is parallel output.Think about it:LPT got replaced by USBPCI (Which is parallel) got replaced by PCI express (serial)IDE/PATA got replaced by SATAParallel SCSI got replaced by Serial SCSIBut regarding serial devices, wether it's USB or the simpler and slower RS232, they are here to stay.
They are cheaper, simpler to implement, and more effective.
Computers will have UART chips as long as 3D routers, PIC recorders, home-made electronics, and other similar devices have RS232 ports.I believe we'll see RS232 for at least another decade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302312</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>RightwingNutjob</author>
	<datestamp>1267289640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A microcontroller intermediary would probably be the best way to go:

PC -&gt; usb -&gt;usb2serial -&gt; microcontroller -&gt; serial -&gt; machinery

A bunch of PICs come with two built-in UARTs, and can be coded to do exact timing on the side where it matters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A microcontroller intermediary would probably be the best way to go : PC - &gt; usb - &gt; usb2serial - &gt; microcontroller - &gt; serial - &gt; machinery A bunch of PICs come with two built-in UARTs , and can be coded to do exact timing on the side where it matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A microcontroller intermediary would probably be the best way to go:

PC -&gt; usb -&gt;usb2serial -&gt; microcontroller -&gt; serial -&gt; machinery

A bunch of PICs come with two built-in UARTs, and can be coded to do exact timing on the side where it matters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305508</id>
	<title>Medical devices as well; USB to DB9 not reliable</title>
	<author>moxley</author>
	<datestamp>1267371240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am the IT director for a medical device company - we make software that runs on laptops which connected to physiological monitors,  and the way these connect is via a serial port.  I procure the laptops, etc and this has been a major problem  since the DB ports started being phased out around 2005 or so.</p><p>Serial ports have disappeared from almost all consumer laptops; basically any laptop made for anything other than business or utilitarian use no longer has one.</p><p>Models which do have serial ports still are Panasonic Toughbooks,  one model of Dell Latitude, and HP and Toshiba both have at least one model. (these are the ones I know about).</p><p>USB to serial (DB9) adaptors are convenient and nice and all that, but when things like timing matter they are not reliable - so for things like military and medical applications, they aren't a good way to go.</p><p>As far as USB to Serial adaptors go, we've tried all of them, and in my opinion, when it comes to proper timing and reliable usage, the Belkins are the best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am the IT director for a medical device company - we make software that runs on laptops which connected to physiological monitors , and the way these connect is via a serial port .
I procure the laptops , etc and this has been a major problem since the DB ports started being phased out around 2005 or so.Serial ports have disappeared from almost all consumer laptops ; basically any laptop made for anything other than business or utilitarian use no longer has one.Models which do have serial ports still are Panasonic Toughbooks , one model of Dell Latitude , and HP and Toshiba both have at least one model .
( these are the ones I know about ) .USB to serial ( DB9 ) adaptors are convenient and nice and all that , but when things like timing matter they are not reliable - so for things like military and medical applications , they are n't a good way to go.As far as USB to Serial adaptors go , we 've tried all of them , and in my opinion , when it comes to proper timing and reliable usage , the Belkins are the best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am the IT director for a medical device company - we make software that runs on laptops which connected to physiological monitors,  and the way these connect is via a serial port.
I procure the laptops, etc and this has been a major problem  since the DB ports started being phased out around 2005 or so.Serial ports have disappeared from almost all consumer laptops; basically any laptop made for anything other than business or utilitarian use no longer has one.Models which do have serial ports still are Panasonic Toughbooks,  one model of Dell Latitude, and HP and Toshiba both have at least one model.
(these are the ones I know about).USB to serial (DB9) adaptors are convenient and nice and all that, but when things like timing matter they are not reliable - so for things like military and medical applications, they aren't a good way to go.As far as USB to Serial adaptors go, we've tried all of them, and in my opinion, when it comes to proper timing and reliable usage, the Belkins are the best.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304240</id>
	<title>Will the VGA port ever die?</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1267354680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Serial is a digital, bit-accurate protocol that has been phased out for a long time. On the other hand, we still have the analog blur of VGA as the only external display connection on many current computers.
</p><p>
<a href="http://iki.fi/teknohog/rants/vga.php" title="iki.fi">http://iki.fi/teknohog/rants/vga.php</a> [iki.fi]
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Serial is a digital , bit-accurate protocol that has been phased out for a long time .
On the other hand , we still have the analog blur of VGA as the only external display connection on many current computers .
http : //iki.fi/teknohog/rants/vga.php [ iki.fi ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Serial is a digital, bit-accurate protocol that has been phased out for a long time.
On the other hand, we still have the analog blur of VGA as the only external display connection on many current computers.
http://iki.fi/teknohog/rants/vga.php [iki.fi]
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304522</id>
	<title>Let's not let this fallacy through either</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267360920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Centronics, PS/2, and current loop are mostly defunct.</p></div></blockquote><p>Properly secured business workstations and servers have USB (and FW) disabled.  Add to that huge investment in PS/2 based KVM switches and no, PS/2 is not "mostly defunct".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Centronics , PS/2 , and current loop are mostly defunct.Properly secured business workstations and servers have USB ( and FW ) disabled .
Add to that huge investment in PS/2 based KVM switches and no , PS/2 is not " mostly defunct " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Centronics, PS/2, and current loop are mostly defunct.Properly secured business workstations and servers have USB (and FW) disabled.
Add to that huge investment in PS/2 based KVM switches and no, PS/2 is not "mostly defunct".
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304990</id>
	<title>Re:You can buy a serial-to-usb converter for $15</title>
	<author>dumb\_jedi</author>
	<datestamp>1267366860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, as a Electrial Engineer who designs equipment that have a serial console, I think I give you several reasons that the serial console will be round for some years yet.<br>
<br>
First, legacy. Most professional routers have come with a serial management console since ever. So anyone who's been trained to manage these devices use serial consoles for that. Of course, by being an IP equipment, you can manage them by accessing the same console using telnet, and you can upgrade their firmware using that console too. A USB to serial converter is a basic tool for anyone managing these type of routers<br>
<br>
Second, design. In a microcontroller, one of the simplest devices you can use is the serial port. A lot of bootloaders for embedded devices (U-Boot, Redboot, CFE) usually start with a banner on the serial console even before configuring the RAM controller on the CPU, so you know your board is running and you can output valuable error messages very early on the boot processes. Other devices, even a true USB console, need much more complex drivers that are loaded later on the boot process or need more configuration options than a simple "115,8n1" somewhere on the manual.<br>
<br>
Most domestic routers don't have a serial port. Well, they have, but you can't access them unless you open the case, the bottom line is that domestic users aren't even aware their wifi router have a serial port, much less that they have to use it. How often you need to unbrick your wifi router if you don't load custom firmware on it ? My guess is never.
<br>
Third is that it doesn't make a difference, as others have pointed out, if the equipment uses a USB to serial conververter, as the serial device will usually be limited to 115 kbps, even if your serial interface can transmit up to 12 mbps. Only CPUs with USB devices on them will benefit from a faster interface. The iMX line of processors from Freescale is one of them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , as a Electrial Engineer who designs equipment that have a serial console , I think I give you several reasons that the serial console will be round for some years yet .
First , legacy .
Most professional routers have come with a serial management console since ever .
So anyone who 's been trained to manage these devices use serial consoles for that .
Of course , by being an IP equipment , you can manage them by accessing the same console using telnet , and you can upgrade their firmware using that console too .
A USB to serial converter is a basic tool for anyone managing these type of routers Second , design .
In a microcontroller , one of the simplest devices you can use is the serial port .
A lot of bootloaders for embedded devices ( U-Boot , Redboot , CFE ) usually start with a banner on the serial console even before configuring the RAM controller on the CPU , so you know your board is running and you can output valuable error messages very early on the boot processes .
Other devices , even a true USB console , need much more complex drivers that are loaded later on the boot process or need more configuration options than a simple " 115,8n1 " somewhere on the manual .
Most domestic routers do n't have a serial port .
Well , they have , but you ca n't access them unless you open the case , the bottom line is that domestic users are n't even aware their wifi router have a serial port , much less that they have to use it .
How often you need to unbrick your wifi router if you do n't load custom firmware on it ?
My guess is never .
Third is that it does n't make a difference , as others have pointed out , if the equipment uses a USB to serial conververter , as the serial device will usually be limited to 115 kbps , even if your serial interface can transmit up to 12 mbps .
Only CPUs with USB devices on them will benefit from a faster interface .
The iMX line of processors from Freescale is one of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, as a Electrial Engineer who designs equipment that have a serial console, I think I give you several reasons that the serial console will be round for some years yet.
First, legacy.
Most professional routers have come with a serial management console since ever.
So anyone who's been trained to manage these devices use serial consoles for that.
Of course, by being an IP equipment, you can manage them by accessing the same console using telnet, and you can upgrade their firmware using that console too.
A USB to serial converter is a basic tool for anyone managing these type of routers

Second, design.
In a microcontroller, one of the simplest devices you can use is the serial port.
A lot of bootloaders for embedded devices (U-Boot, Redboot, CFE) usually start with a banner on the serial console even before configuring the RAM controller on the CPU, so you know your board is running and you can output valuable error messages very early on the boot processes.
Other devices, even a true USB console, need much more complex drivers that are loaded later on the boot process or need more configuration options than a simple "115,8n1" somewhere on the manual.
Most domestic routers don't have a serial port.
Well, they have, but you can't access them unless you open the case, the bottom line is that domestic users aren't even aware their wifi router have a serial port, much less that they have to use it.
How often you need to unbrick your wifi router if you don't load custom firmware on it ?
My guess is never.
Third is that it doesn't make a difference, as others have pointed out, if the equipment uses a USB to serial conververter, as the serial device will usually be limited to 115 kbps, even if your serial interface can transmit up to 12 mbps.
Only CPUs with USB devices on them will benefit from a faster interface.
The iMX line of processors from Freescale is one of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31386914</id>
	<title>Re: Will the Serial Console Ever Die?</title>
	<author>phillipsjk256</author>
	<datestamp>1267902000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <strong>Chuck Swiger</strong> on the <em>freebsd-questions</em> mailing list pointed out that some USB flash drives have write-protect switches:</p><p><a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820141486" title="newegg.com" rel="nofollow">PQI U339H 8GB Flash Drive (USB2.0 Portable) Model BB18-8039R0151 - Retail</a> [newegg.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chuck Swiger on the freebsd-questions mailing list pointed out that some USB flash drives have write-protect switches : PQI U339H 8GB Flash Drive ( USB2.0 Portable ) Model BB18-8039R0151 - Retail [ newegg.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Chuck Swiger on the freebsd-questions mailing list pointed out that some USB flash drives have write-protect switches:PQI U339H 8GB Flash Drive (USB2.0 Portable) Model BB18-8039R0151 - Retail [newegg.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302916</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304716
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31320240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31328380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31312140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31312860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31308616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31314452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31386914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31320298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31376852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31308494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31316208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31310230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_27_208213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302096
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304154
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302916
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31386914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304240
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31320240
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303930
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302176
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302236
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307750
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31308616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301936
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302448
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305856
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302216
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31312860
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305758
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302844
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305600
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31312140
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303850
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31314452
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31328380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304716
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305392
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31310230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305532
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31376852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31307140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304090
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302488
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303260
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31316208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302912
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31308494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31320298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302056
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_27_208213.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31301830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302510
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31306078
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302564
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31303296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31302260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31305546
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_27_208213.31304558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
