<div dir="ltr">On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Jeffrey Watts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jeffrey.w.watts@gmail.com">jeffrey.w.watts@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>Well, I don't think you've read what I've written, then. You seem to think that I'm taking the position that they are doing a good thing, or that I agree with it. I honestly don't really care, as I don't buy shitty printers that don't speak PCL or PostScript. The printers I use can use generic drivers.<br>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br>On the contrary, it is you who haven't read what I've written. <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br>My position is that it's _how things are_. That's not "short-sighted", as I'm not taking a positive position on it. </div></div></div></blockquote><div>
<br>I'm not calling your "position" (that large companies have a certain attitude) short-sighted. I'm calling THAT ATTITUDE ITSELF short-sighted. The company doesn't DIRECTLY collect a penny from resale of its products, but the expectation of either a resale value or continued long-term use value contributes to the price customers are willing to pay for those products. You'd think that MBAs would understand this, especially given that some advertising campaigns explicitly reference it, but unfortunately I must agree with your "position": Many, if not most, large corporations see no value to their bottom line from continuing to provide any kind of assistance to owners of discontinued hardware. <br>
<br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">Even if it's just leaving some moldy drivers on a web server for a few more years, along with a statement about how they no longer support those drivers, and provide them on an as-is basis as a convenience to customers who have had these printers for over a decade. A statement like that tells me that the hardware is tough enough to outlast the OS the drivers were written for, which inspires confidence in the new printers they're selling today.<br>
</div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>For jeebus' sake, this is a LINUX list. Why are folks complaining about Windows stuff? Or is it just about complaining for complaining's sake nowadays? <br>
</div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>Well, one point that has been made is that "Windows stuff" being EOLed, accompanied by legal threats, will actually encourage people to think twice about buying hardware that requires a driver tied to a specific OS version. <br>
<br>There are also situations in which Linux uses Windows drivers in a "wrapper" when native Linux drivers are either absent or inadequate (generally due to NDAs preventing our developers from getting complete HW specs). I don't know if that extends to WinPrinters, but there's no technical limitation of which I am aware, that would prevent it.<br>
<br><br><br><br></div>