Grant wrote: > > You seem to be right on here Dale. usbview showed my printer > connected to the 2.0 controller and a webcam connected to the 1.1 > controller, so I unplugged the printer and plugged the webcam into > it's slot and it still showed up under 1.1. So there doesn't appear > to be any slot/controller correlation. > > This is a problem for me though. My webcams can't both operate on the > 1.1 controller at the same time due to the bandwidth limitation of the > 1.1 controller. I need them both on 2.0 or one on each controller, > but they are always grabbed by the 1.1 controller. Even worse, I > disabled support for 1.1 in the kernel so only 2.0 was supported and > the webcams didn't show up at all. Could they be USB 1.1 only? > Shouldn't a 1.1 device operate on a 2.0 controller? > > - Grant > > >
This is how I understand it. Any 2.0 device should work with the older 1.0 version, just slower. Backwards compatible. However, like with my camera, if the device is a version 1.0, it will only work in 1.0 mode. If you recently purchased this, you may want to exchange it and make sure you get a 2.0 version. That is if there is such a creature. The reason behind this is the chip inside the camera/webcam itself. The cable can cause this if it is not made for the new higher bandwidth or is crappy but if the chip in there is the old 1.0 version, it can't go any faster. Another idea, you may be able to get a card to expand your USB ports and see if that will help. Each card has its own chip as well. Put one device on the card and one on the mobo port. That way they are seen and controlled by separate chips. That should help with the bandwidth problem at least. Dale :-) :-)
