[waldojim]

LiveBrianD, on 04 April 2013 - 04:21 AM, said:

I should've been more specific - I meant the lasers. And how is it unacceptable to expect decent driver support for an older, not cheap laser printer when competitors' printers that are just as old, if not older, are supported just fine? Needless to say, Canon obviously doesn't want more business, and it shows. Note that the D680 didn't support OS X 10.4 or 10.5 either, as I recall, and it wasn't even that old at the time. The equally old Epson, on the other hand, worked without me having to manually load a driver on Windows 2000 through 7 64-bit, and multiple versions of OS X.

Then you are right back to your usual apples to oranges comparison. A cheap inkjet does not a high end laser make.

[LiveBrianD]

The Canon I had was a laser that wasn't cheap. Needless to say, I find it unacceptable that Canon can't get it right when their competitors can. Isn't smax using a much older HP LaserJet 6MP or something with current OSes? (only parallel)

It's a bit unfortunate, because the hardware is perfectly fine. (it's now being used as a copier at a local school, and works fine there) Good hardware doesn't exactly mean a whole lot when you can't actually use the printer with a modern computer...

This post has been edited by LiveBrianD: 04 April 2013 - 01:32 PM

[smax013]

LiveBrianD, on 04 April 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

Isn't smax using a much older HP LaserJet 6MP or something with current OSes? (only parallel)

Yep, the LaserJet 6MP is still chugging along just fine. It is connected to my router by way of a parallel port to USB adapter cable.

And it works well be cause it is a Postscript printer. Thus, a generic Postscript driver will work if there is not a specific LaserJet 6MP driver.

And I paid for that "benefit" upfront as the 6MP was quite a bit more expensive than the 6P version. In my case, I got it because back then the 6P would not work for with a Mac, but the 6MP would.