Re: serial vs parallel port

>In any case,
>that's plenty fast enough for the job, with lots of room left over for global
>synching, and more. There are also networking versions, too.

I have no doubt that fast serials can handle the speed needed. My question
though was synchronized movement. IE I tell Axis X to go to Third and Vine
( serial instruction to that axis), I then tell the Y to go to second and
Grape ( another serial instruction), I also give another instruction to
the Z axis to lift from 3 inches to 4 inches ( a third serial
instruction). It seems to me that each axis will act independent of the
others to follow their instructions. They might not make the smooth turns
I wanted, but cut corners instead.

If the serial instructions parsed a move into many parts, calculating the
path in micro moves, it should work, but a three instruction move
could result in a path not intended.

It seem to me that the parallel port step/direction movement would be more
accurate.

Back in the late 60's I went to my first training on computers. I had
worked on the "unit Record"( electro/mechanical) card processing machines
before. Things moved fast, but not as fast as the solid state
computers. I made that jump in realizing how fast things could happen. It
may be possible I need to make another jump, but for now, I am having a bit
of a hard time seeing how gross moves can be synchronized with serial
commands unless they are parsed down into a step/direction on three or four
axis type movement.

Don