Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)
Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)
Posted Sep 23, 2007 19:07 UTC (Sun) by eklitzke (subscriber, #36426)In reply to: Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet) by rlk
Parent article: Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)
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.
Posted Sep 23, 2007 19:38 UTC (Sun)
by rlk (guest, #47505)
[Link] (3 responses)
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.
Posted Sep 27, 2007 10:51 UTC (Thu)
by drag (guest, #31333)
[Link] (2 responses)
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)
Posted Sep 27, 2007 12:37 UTC (Thu)
by rlk (guest, #47505)
[Link]
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.
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.Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)
I don't think PDF support in printers is a good idea either.Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)
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...Printing Trends in Linux (O'ReillyNet)
Lexmark printers and Linux