Quickcam VC parallel and 2k/XP?

[Nowhere]

So I've found a place here with new (not used that is - this thing is pretty old actually ) Quickcams VC parallel for just ~14€ (and probably will be less since it was ~18€). Perfect for me (wanting to have some basic and cheap webcam with the pc - probably just some very old Celeron) at the new place.
But Logitech says on webpage that it's only for win9x and NT4.0.
Unfortunatelly I couldn't find any WURC (galleries everywhere ) except this one which states that win2k is unoficially supported (there is a way to use drivers for NT 4.0) and winXP might work only.
So have you heard about some others WUR Centers perhaps?
With more specific info.
Or maybe there is some unoficiall driver for winXP? (there is for Linux after all)

Anyway not much of a difference since the old (and cheap thanks to this) machine will be too slow to run XP reasonably anyway, and 2k is presumably working.
I only hope it works good.

[Gurm]

Is this somehow an amazing webcam? I mean, you can get a new USB model for not too much more than that.

- Gurm

[Nowhere]

But still - more.
And here usually two times more minimum. (and I hope that by the time I'll get it it'll be even less than 14€)

edit: Oh, and it's more stylish than usual webcam (colour).

[leech]

Don't worry, it works fine in Windows XP. I have had one myself for a long long time. The USB model does NOT work under Windows XP, but the parallel port one does. (or at least that's what the driver says when you install it.) It will work on Windows XP Professional at least (don't have Home edition to test it out)

The only problem I have with the cam is that I also have a WinTV card. Usually whenever I try to use my webcam the program that I'm trying to use it through (Yahoo Messenger in this case) will always try to use the video signal of the TV card, so I just disabled the WinTV Video inside the device manager and life is good. It works quite well.

As for wha Gurm said.... yes, this webcam actually is quite nice. Any of the other webcams I have tried (well at least the two others that I've tried) don't do the lighting properly. The Quickcam VC is quite good at it.

Leech

[UtwigMU]

Parallel port = massive CPU utilization and slow (at least for the scanners - had Parallel, USB and SCSI experience here).

So I recommend getting getting a USB one. Unless you have one already, it's IMO not worth it.

[leech]

I didn't notice any massive CPU utilization on my Pentium 3 850. And definitely not on my 3.06ghz computer. Then again with my Lexmark z52 printer, if I print in the highest quality there is a HUGE amount of CPU usage (and yes this is on my 3.06ghz CPU.) In both linux and WindowsXP it caused the games I was playing (Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory on linux and Enter the Matrix in windows) to 'hiccup' about every 10 seconds. And that WAS through the USB cable. So I think that it really just depends on the device. I could fully understand a scanner eating up the CPU through the parallel port, but I bet if you had the same scanner going through USB it'd do the same thing.

Leech

[Wombat]

Originally posted by UtwigMU
Parallel port = massive CPU utilization and slow (at least for the scanners - had Parallel, USB and SCSI experience here).

So I recommend getting getting a USB one. Unless you have one already, it's IMO not worth it.

The slowness isn't really because of the port, it's because of the work that the device is offloading to the CPU.

Also, there are nifty PCI cards that give you a parellel port, and they're very fast, and fairly cheap.