On December 30, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> > My understanding is that Centronics was the first to use this type of
> connector on its parallel printers, so
> > when it became the standard type connector the name stuck.
>
> No, Tony is correct. Just because a name is commonly (mis)used in a
> particular way, doesn't mean it's correct, especially in catalogues. This
> discussion has come up before in relation to "DB9" connectors etc. A
> Centronics connector is a specific size, 36pins. The other sizes (14, 20,
> 24, 50, etc) are NOT Centronics connectors. The 24-way is sometimes
> referred to as an IEEE-488 connector. Does that make all the other sizes
> IEEE-488 connectors too?
>
> The common misuse is fairly recent, too. 50-pin conectors in that shape
> have been around for a long time, as SCSI connectors, as telco connectors,
> and for datacomms. Only in the last 5-8 years have I seen them referred to
> as Centronics.
It has always been my understanding that the proper way to refer to
one of these is by the name "amphenol connector".
--
Dave McGuire
St. Petersburg, FL "Less talk. More synthohol." --Lt. Worf
Received on Sun Dec 30 2001 - 19:04:20 GMT