Slashdot Mirror
MultiSwitch, the First USB Sharing Hub
Iddo Genuth writes "A new extension to USB that will enable sharing of various USB peripherals between computers will be available early in 2007. The new MultiSwitch hub technology, developed by SMSC, allows the sharing of information and content from devices such as DVD players, cameras, printers, and scanners, and between laptops and desktops using a simple USB cable. Future hubs may also allow wireless sharing of peripherals."
I remember a linux kernel module which would forward USB packets across the network to another machine which could access them like a virtual USB interface. It was kinda buggy and I don't think it ever made it into the main linux kernel, but it was a neat trick regardless, the guy who developed it told me he developed it after he was laid off and looking for work, but he got a job pretty quickly and stopped working on it.
Finally no more complicated CUPS setups for my printer!
There are both software and hardware solutions that do similar things already.
(Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with either company, but have used some of both company's techonology at work.)
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
Hello blatant product advertisement!
This is NOT "extension to USB"! - this is a proprietary technology that has nothing to do with the USB standard.
USB devices were never meant to be shared this way. Just because someone made 'a switch' that manages to reproduce and route the data between two different host machines at the hardware level doesn't solve anything. You will still have a hopeless guagmire of compatibility issues due to conflicting host software and drivers. Its hopeless because USB devices and software were never meant to work this way. Just because they show it works occationally on one or two devices, doesn't mean it'l work on your devices and with your software for them.
Told you so! Haha!
www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
I think your tinfoil hat is on too tight, bro. ;)
This is a sig. It is like every other sig in the world, except that it is mine, and it is different.
Sometimes I wonder, and this "multiswitch" idea just brings home the point, why we have USB and Firewire when it seems like it would be just as effective, and more standardized, for every device to just have built-in gigabit ethernet chips that can communicate using UDP or something.
Protocol? Why not USB over ethernet? Or use OpenSoundControl! _anything_ standardized... Think how much easier that would make it to write drivers. The point is that we can easily separate the protocol from the physical layer, or even from the transport layer. And yet we still have very specific protocols for USB and Firewire technology that are tied to the hardware they run on. It makes little sense to me.
It just seems silly to have all these communication standards that are basically just reinventing the IP protocol. IP has been "plug and play" for like a decade before USB was invented. At the time, of course, it was necessary to have something that could transfer data at certain rates that were unachievable otherwise, but now that most new computers have on-board gigabit ethernet, maybe it's time we took advantage of it. The nice thing about sticking to STANDARDS is that the next time they upgrade the ethernet hardware (10 Gb onboard, for example), device communication would automatically be upgraded with it. As a bonus, backwards compatibility would be easily assured.
Meanwhile, let's improve those damn ethernet connectors already. Goddamn tabs always breaking off...
I know the plastic tabs are a cost-effective solution, but I think we could do better, I honestly do.
If you had bothered to read the fine article, you would realize that four machines can't use the USB device at the same time with this, either.
From the article:
The opposite of progress is congress
It's called FireWire aka iLink aka IEEE 1394.
It's been out for years, it's a mature technology, it actually does support true sharing insofar as the devices can, and it doesn't require a host system. Add into that higher speeds with substantially less overhead (USB is dependent on your CPU) and it sure beats out the it's-USB-with-our-own-wonky-'extensions' stuff.
The downsides are a slightly higher hardware price due to a more sophisticated chipset and a bit of licensing fees (US$.25/device). And of course FW/1394 isn't as universal as USB, though whatever you're looking for is almost always available from somewhere.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Actually I use synergy to do this all the time. (Between Windows & Linux no less.)
It's useful when you have a laptop and a desktop workstation, like I do in my lab at school.
We really shouldn't answer. You've spent your $14. But more importantly, you've clearly made an emotional investment in your $14 hub. If anyone were to point out that this new type of hub was better, you'd feel hurt, and you'd probably start thinking that your $14 was wasted. So I think it's best if we leave you with your $14 hub and the rest of us will keep quiet about the benefit we derive from these new hubs.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.