From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ld9Km-0008BA-2C for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:29:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6FF05E0211; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:29:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42FDAE0211 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:29:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j4so633282wah.2 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:29:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=87Jw/mRKo97j4P95Dr3zgwKwEZHTwwsxeDuStwigacY=; b=subAdjD27NjdZDp8krsiOzdHADUYBVUv5saMUhpXQ5RFMUFwy9yeXLMrMbMMtjILQh S0ud/eDmEqXcdgnSx793kUU6GrJdKNUI6C1zgf1GFtD9sdZnjUm/xFnIGWcrW4B2qzyu 9zMmCJEf2FALpYgszYxQ43RRrvpv8CO5lRSs8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=GJJjQqY+tbGuxOhUqEnmk9FSgWlN+hX9m/x0WDJKoZ/AJMb6mKIWWbuhclY8xJSn0n eweaKqym6qXKzvEwu9LyNNuyjO4h9HSnKQjyic0bpo7g8xZdSfZRgpE7/ex3z9Di1sBz rEdW4peGTBmqRVUA88bnh+GU5xGxp7trdgYX8= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.114.197.10 with SMTP id u10mr1316571waf.174.1235766081486; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:21:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <49A82351.8090009@gmail.com> References: <49bf44f10902261934l1d33ff17nd64fbfaff4d5b1a3@mail.gmail.com> <49A763C4.5010201@gmail.com> <49bf44f10902262142u68d0a789g336e23849987494d@mail.gmail.com> <49A78BA0.8030602@gmail.com> <49bf44f10902270737s7cd41da0t734fdc00d5c67a73@mail.gmail.com> <49A80CEE.5000200@gmail.com> <49bf44f10902270900q2ec748f6p489fc1839bf32f7d@mail.gmail.com> <49A82351.8090009@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:21:21 -0800 Message-ID: <49bf44f10902271221k30134a9fg907bc477dfc3683@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Which USB device on which controller? From: Grant To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: f28da31a-a467-447e-9a39-8eedf0b37a46 X-Archives-Hash: 3c62ededfa7a4066285feea8955c2e54 >>> I'm looking at the box of one of the webcams and it says "USB 2.0 >>> compatible". >>> >> >> A USB 1.1 device _is_ "USB 2.0 compatible" because a USB 2.0 >> will slow down and run at 1.1 speed. =A0Does the device say it's >> "high speed" USB? =A0"USB 2.0 compatible" generally means it's a >> USB 1.1 device. >> >> >>> It's not a cable problem because the cable is built right into >>> the webcam. =A0I'm not trying to get the webcam to go faster >>> back and forth to the controller, I just need to make sure I >>> don't have both webcams on the same OHCI (1.1) USB controller. >>> I would think buying a USB expansion card would work, but I >>> have an EHCI (2.0) controller on this system and a second OHCI >>> (1.1) controller. >>> >>> Does anyone have any idea on this. =A0It really doesn't make sense. >>> >> >> Sounds like it's a 1.1 device to me. >> >> > > Yep, that's what it sounds like to me too. > > Dale But that's OK isn't it? I don't need 2.0 speeds between each webcam and the controller, I just need the increased overall bandwidth of a 2.0 controller so one of the 1.1 webcams doesn't use all of it. I get the feeling I have a misconception somewhere along the line here. Could someone straighten me out? - Grant