You know, if there's one thing that Linux needs way above anything else, it needs to have better printing. The problem is that Linux works best with Postscript-style printing, and that unfortunately means that printer manufacturers must pay a tax to Adobe for the licensing of the latest version of that protocol, right? That brings the cost up, and thus you don't see so many Postscript-ready printers in the low-end of the market. It also takes a pretty darn sophisticated printer chip to be able to print that. So, they come up with a cheap, proprietary protocol that gets the job done, minus some features that Postscript gives people. But then the problem is that the Linux guys have to jump through hoops to "clean room" this logic (of sorts) and get a working driver that won't land them in jail.
Therefore, I'd like to propose two initiatives to the Linux community:
- Create a new printing protocol not even remotely based on Postscript so there's no chance of copyright or software patent infringement. Work with the Linux-friendly guys at IBM to make this happen and to get widespread support for it. IBM can then lean on their relationship with Lexmark to get those guys to support it too.
- Figure out how to reprogram the circuitry on many of the popular printer brands so that they run the other half of this new printing protocol (the other half being on your PC). Share the plans with people on the web so that they can reprogram their own printers. Because you can purchase a cheap inkjet printer for like $35 USD these days, it seems like an easy thing to experiment with and yet not be an expensive bit of experimentation as well.
3 comments:
I'd like to propose an idea to you: do some research before sounding like an idiot:
1) PostScript is an open standard. The only licensing fees that Adobe collects from PostScript are for use of Adobe's PostScript interpreter. There are several, third-party interpreters that don't have this problem.
2) This is why GhostScript was invented - to take PostScript output and translate it to a format that a non-PostScript printer can support.
3) There is already hugs support for PostScript in many already deployed printers. Why break this backward compatibility?
4) In many cases, printers cannot be reprogrammed to use a different language, especially the cheap ones. There's no interface to reprogram them, short of taking out the chips, hoping that they are EEPROMs, and reverse engineering the system to make it work.
For all of these reasons, I think your solution is unworkable. Have a nice day.
P.S. You're an ass.
1. What about the interpreter in the chipset in the printer, fucktard.
2. But you see, that's the problem. They do this terribly. Why not have something pure that both Linux and the printer speak, not hindered by mistakes and needs of the past, prepared for the future?
3. It's huge, not hugs. Besides, name a Postscript-ready printer in the low end below $70. Few exist.
4. Exactly. Reverse engineer the system to make it work. We did it with XBoxes and all kinds of things. Why not with printers as well? So what if we one has to purchase a reprogrammed replacement chip off a website and press it into a $40 printer? Big whoop.
Have an even nicer day, dick-in-the-ass.
To repeat anonymous' first point, PostScript is an open standard. Printer manufacturer's don't need to pay Adobe licensing fees to have an interpreter in the chipset used by the printer.
And do you really think that reverse engineering every single printer manufacturer's printers, assembling new chipsets for them, then requiring linux users to void their warrantees to install them is really a viable option, much less better than the current state of printing on linux?
Post a Comment