Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 20, 2007 19:38 UTC (Thu) by hitmark (guest, #34609)
Parent article: Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

hmm, i had surprising little trouble doing so using cups, kde and a hp network enabled printer ;)

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 21, 2007 14:19 UTC (Fri) by hmh (subscriber, #3838) [Link] (7 responses)

Indeed. That was nearly-FUD crap, and from an unexpected source, too. It makes me sad.

And any printer that requires binary drivers is just yet another second class piece of crap, IMO. One should either publish open drivers and specs, or have a strong, fast, built-in postscript level 3 *and* PDF (in its latest version!) interpertor inside, with proper PPDs so that we can set printer job options.

But this is not what many of the printer manufacturers want, especially some of the japanese ones. Remember to vote with your wallet *always* when it comes to printers. Never get one whose manufacturer is not providing an open driver, or a suitable firmware and PPD that does away with the need for a driver.

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 21, 2007 22:30 UTC (Fri) by rlk (guest, #47505) [Link] (5 responses)

So if the PDF interpreter is embedded in the printer, what happens when a new version of PDF is introduced? Does the printer become a brick? Do you have to download a new binary blob to the printer?

There are real advantages to having a host side printer driver, as I explained in my previous post. Host side printer driver doesn't have to mean proprietary binary driver.

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 23, 2007 19:07 UTC (Sun) by eklitzke (subscriber, #36426) [Link] (4 responses)

I think you would just need a tool to translate from the newer version to the old version. Mostly the new features in PDF have been things for interactive documents (or support for new esoteric image formats), and don't affect the printed output of the document. AFAIK most PDF tools, including printing drivers, are still using PDF 1.4 or thereabouts for this reason -- in general you can just ignore the new stuff and have the document print out correctl.

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 23, 2007 19:38 UTC (Sun) by rlk (guest, #47505) [Link] (3 responses)

There's no guarantee that that wouldn't change in the future, or that some new page description language wouldn't come along to supplant PDF. What happens if there's a bug in the firmware implementation of PDF, or some kind of back door (something that figures out what you're printing, say, and logs it)? Not that that couldn't happen with a dumb raster printer, but it would be a lot harder.

The issue really isn't where the RIP resides. It can be on the host just as easily as on the printer. If it's on the printer, what's more likely to happen is that manufacturers will distribute binary firmware blobs, which will still cause problems for free distributions (look at the popular HP LaserJet 1018 for an example of that). At least if the RIP is on the host we have a fighting chance of getting specs and writing a free driver.

BTW, the tool to translate from the newer version to the older version is simply a driver, whatever particular gloss you want to put on it. CUPS (and indeed all printing systems) are implemented as chains of drivers. To print a typical PostScript document, CUPS first translates from PostScript to a more limited version of PostScript (pstops), then from PostScript to CUPS raster (pstoraster), then from CUPS raster to whatever the printer needs (rastertogutenprint or whatnot), and finally a back end (USB, vendor-specific USB, IPP or LPD for a network printer, etc). The big issue seems to be the rasterto* layer.

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 27, 2007 10:51 UTC (Thu) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (2 responses)

I don't think PDF support in printers is a good idea either.

Anyways it's easy to translate PDF to postscript and visa versa. PDF is purposely designed that way.

And if anybody things printing in Linux is easy.. buy a cheap lexmark printer. (actually don't. it's a shitty printer that won't work with Linux unless you kill yourself trying first)

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 27, 2007 12:37 UTC (Thu) by rlk (guest, #47505) [Link]

Actually, PDF has a number of advantages over PostScript. For one, it's really designed as a page description language; PDF files should render identically on all such printers. Also, it's a lot easier for malicious PostScript to lock up a printer. There are other people here who can speak to all of this more authoritatively than I can...

Lexmark printers and Linux

Posted Oct 2, 2007 11:09 UTC (Tue) by pr1268 (guest, #24648) [Link]

Didn't I hear some time ago that Lexmark was a spinoff of IBM? Something to do with an antitrust suit or similar?

Ironic, really, seeing how IBM is a big supporter of Linux these days.

I convinced my dad (Windows-only user) to take my Canon S520 in exchange for his HP DeskJet 5150 right after I abandoned using Windows. He obliged, and I now have a printer that always Just Works™ with Linux and CUPS.

IMO setting up a graphics/video card is more difficult in Linux than setting up a printer.

Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 25, 2007 1:56 UTC (Tue) by hmh (subscriber, #3838) [Link]

Indeed. That was nearly-FUD crap, and from an unexpected source, too. It makes me sad.

I should apologise for this one. Upon a second reading of the article, I have to say that "nearly-FUD crap" was quite undeserved. It is true that printers from some manufacturers have been dead easy to set up and use for at least two years, but that's about the only point I disagree with in the article. And I do have to agree that's mostly because I consider printers with closed-source or missing drivers as a reason to never get any consumer products from that manufacturer, so I never have anything like that around, not even at work.

On the other hand, I still think binary drivers are a BAD idea, even if they come with the source and a proper license (i.e. a DFSG-compliant one, IMO). Frankly I don't expect open drivers to remain as necessary to printer manufacturers as they are now once binary blobs are easy to deploy.

There are precious few printer manufacturers with a very good track record on open drivers, and I don't want to see any of the binary-only-land happy ones get any more market share from those who like open, DFSG-compliant "free as in beer" drivers.