Slashdot Mirror


Patent Applications Hint Apple Wants To Eliminate Printer Drivers

An anonymous reader writes "Apple has filed two patent applications that describe an approach as well as file formats and APIs to eliminate the printer driver as a requirement for users to access a printer and print documents. If the company has its way, there will be three ways to access a printer in the future: The first will be via a conventional software driver. The second will be via a cloud service and the third will be via a driverless access method that supports 'universal' printing from any type device."

323 comments

  1. postscript by PineGreen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wasn't postscript supposed to solve these problems 20 years ago?

    1. Re:postscript by ModernGeek · · Score: 0

      Prior art!

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    2. Re:postscript by MBCook · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And it did a great job. Aren't the patents on PostScript expired by now? And the microprocessor and memory needed to run it is now dirt cheap.

      Years ago getting printers to work on Linux was a major pain, and often the output didn't look that great. But if you had a postscript printer, it was a 3 second setup. Quite a bit like configuring a real SoundBlaster for Linux compared to some no-name 3rd party piece of junk.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    3. Re:postscript by EyelessFade · · Score: 1

      and later pdf printers.

    4. Re:postscript by bosef1 · · Score: 1

      I wish I had some mod points, 'cause I said the same thing. Wasn't Apple's LaserWriter like the first mass-market printer with Postscript capability?

    5. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sort of. It was the old version of "universal" and this is the new. It solved the format problem but not really the access problem and it wasn't open or really bundle-able into the modern concept of a service in an open cross platform manner. The more worrisome things is if Apple is going for "universal" driverless printing then why the patent. I think the idea is great and could make all sort of things (mobile devices to computers to home appliances that might want to print out their manual or maintenance schedule) "just work" with any printer, any resolution, any technology, any color scheme, etc. However if Apple is just trying to control the connector and make money of licensing fees then it's worthless and will go nowhere.

    6. Re:postscript by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Postscript works fine if all you want to do is print, but the device specific drivers allow you to check on the ink levels, choose the paper tray, and whatever other special feature the printer-maker thinks will be useful.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:postscript by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      It was indeed the first commercially available printer to implement PostScript, and hit the market in 1985.

      Adobe began working on PS itself in 1982, and released it to market in late 1984, so if there was a patent on it, it's expired by now. Ahh, but Apple is talking about doing it bidirectionally over USB, so clearly it's a new technology.... we have stumbled on the reason they got rid of legacy ports!

    8. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well patents expiring helped a lot.

      But in reality, virtually every postscript printer came with a PPD, and that PPD was all you ever needed to get a postscript printer running on linux. A PPD file is non OS specific.

      But given Apple's overly litigagatory stance on any thing they (claim to) develop, I just don't see any of their suggestions getting accepted.
      I can't see anyone opening themselves up for that kind of lawsuit until or unless Apple puts it all under the GPL or some other free license.

      Postscript is free and everybody uses it. It pretty much renders page preparation a non issue, because virtually all postscript printers will use the default PPD in a pinch, albeit with somewhat more limited capabilities. Printers do have different capabilities and you must make allowance for that, but postscript handled that very nicely.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    9. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it was. But there's still a shitload of printers that have some weird ass-custom drivers...

    10. Re:postscript by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      and later Postscript Extreme, which converts all print jobs to pdf first.

    11. Re:postscript by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Given that they already open sourced CUPS, and don't have any profit in printers, it's more likely than not they would simply open source it like OpenCL, CUPS, Webkit, etc.

    12. Re:postscript by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      Given that they already open sourced CUPS, and don't have any profit in printers, it's more likely than not they would simply open source it like OpenCL, CUPS, Webkit, etc.

      This is Slashdot - if it's not released under the GPL, it doesn't count as open source and should be ridiculed.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    13. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 1

      Cups was already opensource when they bought it. The didn't have much choice. Webkit same deal. It was GPL when they grabbed it, and after a fairly long fight they decided to give their changes back to the KDE community from which it sprang.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    14. Re:postscript by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

      Given that they already open sourced CUPS,

      Actually, CUPS was developed before, and was open source before, Apple hired its creator (who is, BTW, the first inventor in the list in the patent application).

    15. Re:postscript by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Printers do have different capabilities and you must make allowance for that, but postscript handled that very nicely.

      How does it handle "the ability to interpret PostScript is not one of this printer's capabilities"? :-)

    16. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's just bad information. You can choose printing options -- tray, color, duplexing, etc. via PostScript. And all you need to present those options to the user is a platform-agnostic, plain-text PPD file. You can send arbitrary data via a PostScript file so all the host printer interface needs to do is present the options defined in the PPD file and copy the related PS command strings into the generated PS file when the user clicks print -- the host doesn't even need to know what the options do.

      You are right that you typically can't read supply levels via PostScript. It's not PS can't command the printer to tell you about them, but the printer->host comm channel is very limited and typically only handles exceptions, so you'd need to extend host-side support to get that kind of data back to the user. So the system can handle "out of paper" when you try to print but doesn't have a great method to handle "replace toner soon".

      However, I can't imagine why you *want* you printing protocol to try to send you supply levels. If you're setting up a monitoring system for a shared printer you'd probably prefer SNMP or some HTTP-based interface (like REST) or email so you can tie in your standard monitoring tools (and in fact most network printers support all three options). And if you're just talking about manually checking the levels you could provide an entirely separate interface, either via HTTP for network printers or via a dead-simple app that does nothing except send a USB command and parse the response, rather than conflating "printing" with "printer maintainence".

    17. Re:postscript by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      I don't know offhand - go on back to 1995 and ask someone? ;-)

    18. Re:postscript by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      I don't know offhand - go on back to 1995 and ask someone? ;-)

      Why not ask them now? There were non-PostScript printers then, and there are non-PostScript printers now (i.e., "everybody uses it", where "everybody" includes "printer vendors", is a false statement).

    19. Re:postscript by Goaway · · Score: 0, Troll

      They bought CUPS fair and square, so they own the copyright, and they could close it if they wanted. They didn't want to.

      And there certainly was never any "long fight" about giving any changes back for WebKit. Source was released, as required, as soon as it shipped. What KDE complained about was that they wanted more than the license required, which is feature-specific diffs. This is not trivial to provide, after re-writing so much of the original source. Apple was in no way required to provide this, but they did anyway.

    20. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. It was BSD-style licensed when they bought it. They changed to GPL after Apple owned it.

    21. Re:postscript by Larryish · · Score: 1

      tl;dr

      Postscript rules. Apple drools.

    22. Re:postscript by julian67 · · Score: 1, Informative

      Litigagatory?

      Ouch! Looks like the famous *gatory factory is working at full speed.

      In English there already exists a word for persons inclined towards litigation. It's litigious.

    23. Re:postscript by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Examples? Maybe I have just lucked out, but none of the printers I've bought (or even looked at purchasing) in the last 10 or 12 years have lacked PostScript support, and I've bought low-end, consumer-grade printers.

    24. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 1, Informative

      Your chronology and your facts are wrong.

      Apple stone walled KDE for a couple years until their own lawyers pointed out to them that they had to ad-hear to the GPL.

      Then they dumped their changes back to KDE in a way calculated to be unusable, unlike EVERY OTHER DEVELOPER who contributes diff, and patches with documentation. You DO know that such is the standard way to contribute don't you? (I'm guessing No.)

      Their submissions for the next couple years amounted to emptying a file cabinet on KDE's door step and wishing them luck.

      Finally Apple cleaned up their act, and spread the word that they were being good GPL citizens. Enough fanbois bought that act for people like you to get away with making the post above.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    25. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 1

      The beauty of english is the ability to create alternative forms, all of which are equally valid. In this case the gatory factory has been hard at work since 1860, even if it is a surprise to you.

      Litigatory actually predates litigious by well over a hundred years.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    26. Re:postscript by Surt · · Score: 1

      The rest of your post was so thoughtfully composed, I felt like you might want to know that it's just 'adhere'.
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/adhere

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    27. Re:postscript by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Not worth it.

      As an add on it isn't that bad, but if you require drivers to print then it's a huge step backwards. One of the reasons I went for the Mac version of my Laserjet was because FreeBSD was a lot easier to set up with a postscript printer. Printer companies don't typically release drivers for all possible platforms and Postscript was a god send for those not using a supported OS.

      Sure it's nice to be able to check levels and all that, but it's hardly essential, and not worth giving up the ability to use the printer on whatever OS one wants to use.

    28. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 1

      Good catch. I tend to save my best spelling for those that pay me. ;-)

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    29. Re:postscript by CAIMLAS · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wrong. Apple did no such thing. CUPS has been around as open source since 1997 - the GPL, to be precise:

      Michael Sweet, who owns Easy Software Products, started developing CUPS in 1997. The first public betas appeared in 1999.[3] The original design of CUPS used the LPD protocol, but due to limitations in LPD and vendor incompatibilities, the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) was chosen instead. CUPS was quickly adopted as the default printing system for several Linux distributions, including Red Hat Linux.[citation needed] In March 2002, Apple Inc. adopted CUPS as the printing system for Mac OS X 10.2.[4] In February 2007, Apple Inc. hired chief developer Michael Sweet and purchased the CUPS source code.[5]

      And you seem to be implying that Apple open sourced Webkit, etc. (BSD? anything else you'd like to make wild claims about?) as well? Bull fucking shit. Webkit originated in KDE (more or less, it may have heritage beyond that). OpenCL is indeed Apple, but it's not open source, either.

      Did Apple make Samba, Apache, and Postscript, too? (The answer is no.) Apple is no "proponent" of "open source"; they're a proponent of free software. There is a huge, huge difference, particularly when they are the sole financial benefactor involved.

      I'm so sick and tired of Apple fanboys saying "it was done on the mac, first!" when the reality is often quite different. Apple gets credit for improving upon CUPS, sure. But not much beyond that (and even that is tenuous to argue).

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    30. Re:postscript by Reverberant · · Score: 1

      Apple stone walled KDE for a couple years until their own lawyers pointed out to them that they had to ad-hear to the GPL.

      No. Safari (and what was to become Webkit) was announced at Job's 2003 Macworld keynote. The code was released the same day.

      You are correct that the form of the changes was unusable according to KDE developers (which was soon rectified) but Apple contributed code from day 1 (actually, before day 1 in the case of JavaScriptCore.)

    31. Re:postscript by julian67 · · Score: 1

      Negatory. Your response is welcome but mistaken and offers nothing genuinely mitigatory. Please read the following and consider it expurgatory. He didn't write litigatory, he wrote litigagogagig....I'll try again. He wrote litigagatory. Neither litigatory nor litigagatory are English words. They don't feature in normal dictionaries here on earth or in heaven, hell or purgatory.

    32. Re:postscript by MrNaz · · Score: 0

      How in the name of Obama's butthole do you manage to put a cloud service between your PC and the printer which is DIRECTLY ATTACHED to it via a USB cable which shouldn't even need to be connected to a network at all?

      --
      I hate printers.
    33. Re:postscript by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Maybe if you stopped to read before you started foaming at the mouth? No where did I claim that "Apple did it first". Apple owns the patents on these, and they open sourced them after acquiring the patents. Is there some inaccuracy to that statement? They could, and still can, close the source on any of the above.

      Webkit was forked from KHTML and became it's own implementation, developed by Apple. Are you going to claim that all Linux distributions are the 'same'? They have a common ancestor but they are by no means the same. The simple fact remains that Apple did open the source and they actively contribute to Webkit, and as a result the KHTML developers in turn incorporated many of the code changes from Webkit into KHTML.

      Apple also owns the patents to CUPS. They can close the source at any time, yet have failed to do so. They also own the patents to OpenCL and they also open sourced that as well.

      Kindly point out the inaccuracy in my previous post?

    34. Re:postscript by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      But in reality, virtually every postscript printer came with a PPD, and that PPD was all you ever needed to get a postscript printer running on linux. A PPD file is non OS specific.

      And these days ... surely there's a standard available to get the PPD from the printer by now?

      GET /ipp/ps/ppd HTTP/1.0

      or something? Find the printer via multicast-DNS and go on with your day?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    35. Re:postscript by MrNaz · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. The beauty (and the purpose) of language is its provision of a common syntax that everybody understands so that when you express something, everybody to whom you may be speaking can interpret your message. "Language evolves" and other related arguments are code for "I didn't pay attention in grade school, and am too dumb to learn spelling and grammar now." If language "evolved" the way most partly-literate kids these days claim, then within a decade nobody will be able to read anything written up until now.

      Face it. Not being able to spell cannot be hand waved away by saying "language evolves".

      Oh, and keep that reference to "litigatory" to yourself. I saw you spell "adhere" as "ad-hear" earlier.

      --
      I hate printers.
    36. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How in the name of Obama's butthole do you

      Whoa there! Which Obama has a named butthole, Barry or Michy? The people have a right to know! (Bonus: my iPhone kept trying to autocorrect butthole with birthing)

    37. Re:postscript by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Not only that but there are several other technologies which also facilitate this already. Anyone know PictBridge? This system allows pretty much any digital camera to connect to any printer and just run off photos without anything in between or worrying about installing the printer driver on the camera.

      Works quite well too on my 6 year old camera, my 1 year old mobile phone and my 2 year old printer.

    38. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They bought CUPS fair and square, so they own the copyright, and they could close it if they wanted. They didn't want to.

      1. Patent something similar to PostScript, but slightly different.
      2. Implement it in CUPS and release it under the GPL v2.
      3. Sue everyone who uses CUPS with patent violations
      4. profit.

    39. Re:postscript by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      They haven't anally raped us without lubrication after buying the Free Software we were using first.

      We should think of ourselves as lucky. [/sarc]

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    40. Re:postscript by suutar · · Score: 1

      Inkjets? While I would not doubt that there are PS-capable inkjets, I haven't run into one that I'm aware of...

    41. Re:postscript by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      You use middleware in between the printer and the end user tools.

      This was being done by Linux in the 90s and SunOS in the 80s.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    42. Re:postscript by Rennt · · Score: 1

      The beauty (and the purpose) of language is its provision of a common syntax that everybody understands so that when you express something, everybody to whom you may be speaking can interpret your message.

      I more or less agree with your... correctness, but "litigatory" easily passes the interpretation test.

      It's pretty weak to try to derail somebody's argument by pointing out mistakes in their use of language, especially when the speaker's meaning us perfectly clear.

    43. Re:postscript by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Not sure why you're bringing patents into this. Patents are pretty much orthogonal to copyright. E.g. whether or not they own the patents involved in CUPS has no bearing on whether they can "close-source" it, ie. release a version of CUPS with a different software license. They can do that, if they own all the copyright involved in CUPS; though this wouldn't affect any previous releases, which would remain open-sourced. Again, they could do that even if they did not own any patents and indeed even if someone else owned patents relating to CUPS.

      Furthermore, a version of Webkit/Webcore that was forked from KHTML is by definition not it's own implementation. They have no choice with respects to the license, they may only redistribute their fork under the same license (if they didn't redistribute, they could do whatever the hell they wanted). Of course, they could at a later have re-engineered a new version Webkit/Webcore completely from scratch, by different people, which they could license any way they want. I don't think that's what they did, though. Iteratively replacing stuff doesn't count, even if the Webkit/Webcore of today has no resemblance with the original KHTML, it remains a derived work bound by the original license for redistribution. (Webkit and Webcore were conflated in previous posts. Webkit is a superset of Webcore and JavaScriptCore, which are Apple's KHTML and KJS forks, respectively.)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    44. Re:postscript by Rennt · · Score: 1

      /facepalm

      ^us^is. Luckily the mistake is not bad enough to obscure my meaning. :)

      .

    45. Re:postscript by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      You use middleware in between the printer and the end user tools.

      This was being done by Linux in the 90s and SunOS in the 80s.

      I.e., you have a PostScript interpreter on the host, and have it emit rasters or PCL or whatever and send it to the printer? If so, it still needs to find out what you can send to the printer, so it knows what to generate - and that's one thing the patent application talks about.

    46. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 1

      Especially when litigatory IS a word, in common usage for over 150 years.
      http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1735&context=vulr

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    47. Re:postscript by bored · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you have been buying printers, but most of the low end ones have their own printer language. Samsung uses SPL which is a windows GDI based language. HP uses PCL etc...

      Last I checked most of the inkjets were what we used to call "win printers". In that the windows driver does all the rasterization.

      You can go to the HP or Samsung site, and "compare" printer models. The language used is listed.

    48. Re:postscript by sparkeyjames · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem with postscript is that there was a little known
      binary hook api built into the PPD system. This allowed printer manufactures to create drivers
      that were operating system dependent or even machine architecture dependent.
      This locked out many users of "other systems" from using advanced features of
      those printers/copiers. Sure you could throw a page at it and get it to print but if say you
      wanted a two sided book collated and stapled you were out of luck unless you
      had the correct system running in front of the printer/copier.

      Free doesn't mean crap if someone can shoehorn proprietary binary
      code into something that makes it useless to a segment of users.

       

    49. Re:postscript by milkmage · · Score: 1

      "If the company has its way, there will be three ways to access a printer in the future: The first will be via a conventional software driver. The second will be via a cloud service and the third will be via a driverless access method that supports 'universal' printing from any type device."

      1) traditional driver for wired connections as you describe.
      2) I'm over at my friends house and need to print something from my phone.. both have acces to the 'net so the cloud is within reach.
      3) standard vanilla 2 button mice and 101 key keyboards work on any computer with USB, why not printers?

    50. Re:postscript by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But to create postscript don't you need a printer driver that creates postscript?
      To print to the cloud, don't you need a printer driver that sends something to the cloud?

      The step in the flowchart that is "use driverless printing to GENERATE and send printer data to the selected printer" requires a driver to do the GENERATE part!!

      The only "no driver needed" approach is if you can just transport your document somewhere via standard communication protocols, ie, ftp or http to send a raw Word doc to a printer or server. And then once it gets there the receiving end still needs a printer driver. Even if it's a driver that's built into the printer. The whole concept of eliminating a printer driver seems nonsensical.

    51. Re:postscript by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Examples? Maybe I have just lucked out, but none of the printers I've bought (or even looked at purchasing) in the last 10 or 12 years have lacked PostScript support, and I've bought low-end, consumer-grade printers.

      Well, the specs on the HP OfficeJet 4500 only mention HP's PCL, not PostScript (and they do mention it, as well as HP PCL, for the HP DesignJet T2300). The HP DeskJet 1000 specs also don't mention PostScript. Epson doesn't mention PostScript as a language for the Epson Artisan 725 All-in-One Printer - Arctic Edition. Maybe you've just blown off the lowest-end printers.

    52. Re:postscript by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      I'm over at my friends house and need to print something from my phone.. both have acces to the 'net so the cloud is within reach.

      How many printers have access to the 'net? And if the printer is attached via USB to your home computer, isn't that kind of insecure to have a "cloud" service that can reach your home printer by going through your home computer? I suppose that if I have an Airport Extreme with a USB printer attached or a Wi-Fi printer... And who prints any more anyway? I ran out of ink about six weeks ago and haven't even missed it yet. I think the last package of paper I bought was sometime in 2009.

      And why does the back of my neck itch whenever I see the word "Cloud" in relation to computing? I'm probably just old-fashioned, I guess.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    53. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grand Central Dispatch

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Dispatch

      It was developed by Apple and open sourced.

      Neither you nor the grand parent are correct, but you both speak with full certainty that fools have.

    54. Re:postscript by jimicus · · Score: 2

      How many printers have access to the 'net?

      More and more of them these days - wireless networking is rapidly becoming the norm in even cheapie consumer inkjets. Apple aren't thinking about the printer you buy today, they're thinking about the printer you might buy in 2-3 years time.

    55. Re:postscript by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      If they make the OS be the driver and force all manufacturers to standardize their printers to the point that the OS can just say "print" in some MacOS-only way, then you'll at least *need* a Mac to print from the cloud (read, your future iPad 3 or 4 or whatever)

      I'm pretty sure the whole point isn't to make it a perfect solution; it's to sell more NEW MacOS copies, which for most of us always means *purchasing* at least one new Mac. The one benefitting the most is Apple, because they want to create a standard that they patent-control and therefore must be paid for the privilege of, um, having convenient "new features" that haven't YET been copied to other OSs, and that will require very volume-heavy licensing from MS as well (read "millions of OS copies sold means potentially millions in commissions for the cloudPrint API bundle.")

    56. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you understand what "Owns the source" means. Apple bought the patents for CUPS. They own it completely. Apple can close the source at any time. Once they do, anyone can continue to use what's out there, but any forward development would require that they do for themselves without access to the current source.

      Cups was already opensource when they bought it. The didn't have much choice.

      Apple has a long history of contributing to open source. The list is VERY long, and not something that should be scorned.

      http://www.apple.com/opensource/

    57. Re:postscript by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Not really. In general terms, printing consists of:

      1. Application generates printout in some sort of language that is suitable for describing printed images.
      2. OS converts the printout into something the printer can understand.
      3. OS sends the result to the printer.

      Under more-or-less any Unix, the language used in (1) is Postscript (though IIRC it's PDF in OS X - which is easy enough to translate to Postscript).

      So if you use a Postscript printer, the amount of work required in (2) is very little - and for all practical purposes can be said to be driverless. Doesn't work so well for inkjet printers, however, which seldom have the intelligence to handle Postscript.

    58. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is slashdot, where BSD licence is heresy and GPLv3 is god because it smites those who try to patent.

      Seriously. The GPLv3 has probably done a fair bit more damage for being a submarine legal landmine as much as software patents have been submarine legal landmines in the adoption of standards.

      We'd be better off creating new standards, even if based on old standards, when taking into account cheaper hardware and faster processing. For example ZLIB's 32KB dictionary makes it unusable on large data and not threadable, so LZMA2 fixes both of these, but the LZ algorithm itself still isn't threadable. There are no current lossless threadable compression algorithms because it always comes at the expense of compress-ability.

      This is the same problem with printer drivers, we have an existing implementation, Postscript. But postscript came before a lot of new innovations and even multifunction printers (many incorporate two-way communications like scanning and "out of toner/ink")

      Postscript itself has largely been replaced by PDF, as far as documents go. Being able to walk up to any printer that is WiFi/Bluetooth enabled and print is substantially more useful (particularly in the context of going to Staples, Kinkos, etc.)

    59. Re:postscript by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Did Apple make Samba, Apache, and Postscript, too? (The answer is no.) Apple is no "proponent" of "open source"; they're a proponent of free software. There is a huge, huge difference, particularly when they are the sole financial benefactor involved.

      Then what is the benefit of them releasing Darwin? Since Darwin is under BSD and not GPL, Apple is under no obligation to release anything.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    60. Re:postscript by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Huh. Well I'll be damned.

    61. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'm sick and tired of people arguing from the other side of things and being just as partisan, if not moreso. Two sides to everything, people.

      CUPS is Apple's- lock, stock and barrel. They now own it outright now. They also have the right close the source, if they want. Deal with it.

      That bit of revisionist history about people having to "fight" Apple to release WebKit's source is outright bullshit. The only noise was that the first relase of the code back to the KHTML people was that it was messy and uncommented- which Apple explained as better the real working code as soon as possible rather than delay to clean it all up all nice and tidy- and then went on to not only clean the code base and add comments, but set up distribution services. Also, please take note which of the forks is the one being used by most people nowadays.

    62. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      30 years ago we just did COPY MY.TXT PRN, we didn't need no stinking driver because they weren't invented yet.

    63. Re:postscript by dokc · · Score: 1

      Seriously. The GPLv3 has probably done a fair bit more damage for being a submarine legal landmine as much as software patents have been submarine legal landmines in the adoption of standards.

      Why is the GPLv3 Submarine legal mine (I will ignore lend part which doesn't make any sense)?
      If you think about GPLv3 as a naval mine, the more appropriate analogy would be the big colored flashy mine with sound effects and hundred of billboards flashing and pointing on mine.

      You can not accidentally bump into GPLv3 Code. It's clearly marked as such. If you use it in your proprietary software, in 99,99% you are doing it with the full knowledge of committing a copyright infringement. If you really accidentally incorporate GPL code in your proprietary software, nobody will sue you for millions of dollars, you will just be asked to remove the code.

      --
      In love, war and slashdot discussions, everything is allowed.
    64. Re:postscript by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Yes, the PPD file. I remember them often in fact being difficult to find, and buggy when I could. I recall one specific PPD file that caused at least one application to core -- I had to hack the thing to fix it. Everybody uses Postscript? Really? Where? I haven't seen a printer or app use Postscript in at least ten years.

    65. Re:postscript by milkmage · · Score: 1

      I should clarify - I didn't mean a print server on the internet (avoiding use of the c-word so you don't get a rash)

      i'm thinking something like this:
      my phone can see the printer via wifi and it detects make/model and sends a request to the internet, where my print job is magically turned into something recognized by the printer.. it's sent back to my phone which, in turn, relays it to the printer. (today, my apps look to the OS to see the drivers so they can print. in the future, they go to the clou.. i mean internet instead of the OS for printer instructions, and use local wifi to get the paper to come out)

    66. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you sound retarded. First of all, this very may well be the first CUPS patent, which may or may not have been granted. So I don't know where you get this, "Apple owns patents on these". And second, you can't "open source" patents.

      I highly doubt that Apple acquired any patents related to CUPS during the purchase of ESP, otherwise they wouldn't have been applying for a patent which basically describes what CUPS has been doing for 15 years. I highly suspect that Apple is applying for the patent as a chilling effect for Android and other similar systems.

    67. Re:postscript by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      my phone can see the printer via wifi and it detects make/model and sends a request to the internet, where my print job is magically turned into something recognized by the printer..

      OK, I like that. I like the driverless model too.

      Thanks for your explanation and patience with my dermatological abnormality.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    68. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't see anyone opening themselves up for that kind of lawsuit until or unless Apple puts it all under the GPL or some other free license.

      Just to be absolutely clear, software can be released under the GPL and still be covered by software patents with the expectation that royalties will be paid.

    69. Re:postscript by Atomic+Fro · · Score: 2

      The more worrisome things is if Apple is going for "universal" driverless printing then why the patent

      Because if they don't get the patent, the patent trolls will.

      --

      ==================
      Hippie Logger Jock
      ==================
    70. Re:postscript by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > my phone can see the printer via wifi and it detects make/model and sends a request to the internet,
      > where my print job is magically turned into something recognized by the printer.

      Someday.... Meanwhile today a Linux or Mac with CUPS works. Some printers even support it native. Imagine today you wander into a WiFi net with a CUPS server and you just see printers magically appear in your list. You get a PPD delivered automagically so you see all of its features, color, duplex, paper trays and finishing options, everything. It is beautiful.

      Sounds like we just need to get CUPS into the iCrap, Windows (think it can do IPP but it isn't installed normally) and most important a direct implementation hosted on the cheap WiFi capable printers.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    71. Re:postscript by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Likewise, I replaced an inkjet with a laser, not for the higher quality but simply because I was sick of printing handful of pages and then having to throw out a dried out cartridge.

      Printer drivers only exist because each printer manufacturer wanted control over their own device and the lucrative ink replacement business.

      Does this smell like Apple is trying to patent more universal print drivers as they exist in Linux and hence Android. Those shit heads are really getting into panic mode and thinking they call force the end users to buy their lock in, make them pay all the time for everything, junk. Continue does this path and they will create a consumer backlash, that will crush the company.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    72. Re:postscript by MrNaz · · Score: 1

      I was commenting on your *argument*, not the specific issue that caused it to occur.

      --
      I hate printers.
    73. Re:postscript by shentino · · Score: 1

      Kinda like MS's hyperv dump.

    74. Re:postscript by shentino · · Score: 1

      In order to close development you need to own the copyrights, not the patents.

      Patents only make other people gun-shy about contributing.

    75. Re:postscript by Draek · · Score: 1

      Webkit was forked from KHTML and became it's own implementation, developed by Apple. Are you going to claim that all Linux distributions are the 'same'?

      Would you claim Canonical open-sourced the Linux kernel, then?

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    76. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Slashdot - if it's not released under the GPL, it doesn't count as open source and should be ridiculed.

      CUPS is GPL dumbass. But by all means, keep wacking off your superiority complex e-penis.

    77. Re:postscript by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Sounds like we just need to get CUPS into the iCrap, Windows (think it can do IPP but it isn't installed normally) and most important a direct implementation hosted on the cheap WiFi capable printers.

      First off: "iCrap?" Was that really necessary? This was starting out to be an actual intelligent discourse (for once). Until that comment.

      Second: You do realize that Apple bought CUPS, right? And that OS X has used CUPS since day one. If I point my browser at localhost:631, guesss what I see? CUPS, that's what!

      Or are you talking about iOS? Your stupid "iCrap" comment makes it impossible to tell.

    78. Re:postscript by icebike · · Score: 2

      Well then I'm guessing 10 years ago was probably the last time you bought a printer then.
      You are hard pressed to find any modern printer that DOESN'T support postscript.

      Check the specs on what you have nearby. You' will probably be surprised.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    79. Re:postscript by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Printer drivers only exist because each printer manufacturer wanted control over their own device and the lucrative ink replacement business.

      You are an unmitigated moron.

      While that might be true for inkjets, you do realize that "printer drivers" have existed for quite a bit longer than inkjets, right?

      Does this smell like Apple is trying to patent more universal print drivers as they exist in Linux and hence Android.

      Um, since they BOUGHT CUPS a couple of years ago and yet LEFT IT OPEN, I'd say "No".

      More like they have already gotten tired of maintaining the clusterfuck that is CUPS, and, just like they did with launchd, have decided that they truly have a better idea.

      Hint: They do.

      Now go guard your bridge, you ignorant troll.

    80. Re:postscript by macs4all · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot - if it's not released under the GPL, it doesn't count as open source and should be ridiculed.

      ALMOST right.

      What you REALLY meant to say is "This is Slashdot - If it's Apple, it should be ridiculed."

      C'mon Linux Fanbois, prove me wrong. (Not referring to you, 93 Escort).

    81. Re:postscript by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Cups was already opensource when they bought it. The didn't have much choice.

      Boy, NOTHING says IANAL more clearly than THAT bit of drivel!

      If they BOUGHT it, they could have done ANYTHING with it. Now, I agree that it probably could have been forked; but that would have been ALL that the F/OSS community could do. They could no more tell Apple what to do with CUPS than I could tell Apache what to do with their webserver.

    82. Re:postscript by cthulhu11 · · Score: 2

      My Canon MP960 AFAICT does not natively do Postscript (or any page description language AFAICT). When last I had an office to work out of, ~2001, we had an HP LaserJet 4 of some flavor for which Postscript was a pay-extra (this was HP after all) option. All the desktop stuff generated PCL.

    83. Re:postscript by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Good catch. I tend to save my best spelling for those that pay me. ;-)

      Apparently, you have the same rule for your "best arguments", too.

      So, if Webkit is so unusable, then why does it form the basis of nearly every browser and nearly everything else that wants to renter HTML these days?

    84. Re:postscript by pbjones · · Score: 1

      sorry for the 'me too' post, but wasn't postscript supposed to do this? and failed because it had to be licensed. Actually, Adobe has Postscript, and Apple wants to side step it and other print technologies, Adobe has Flash and Apple wants to side step Flash and similar technologies, is there a pattern? What is more interesting is that both Flash and Postscript had there roots as early products for Mac.

      --
      There was an unknown error in the submission.
    85. Re:postscript by node+3 · · Score: 1

      But given Apple's overly litigagatory stance on any thing they (claim to) develop, I just don't see any of their suggestions getting accepted.

      "Overly litigatory [sic] stance"? Surely there must be an extensive list you can cite?

      As for "any thing they (claim to) develop", it's called patents. In the real world, companies understand these things. Companies other than Google, at least. Why wouldn't other companies use Apple's technology, if they were to make a reasonable implementation? Zeroconf is widely supported, and codeveloped with Apple. FireWire is patented and requires royalties to Apple, and it's widely supported. As is "Made for iPod". And AirPrint (don't know if it's patented) is used in a lot of current wireless HP printers.

    86. Re:postscript by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Finally Apple cleaned up their act, and spread the word that they were being good GPL citizens. Enough fanbois bought that act for people like you to get away with making the post above.

      What are you talking about? Apple released the code immediately upon distribution of Safari, as the license requires.

      Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to throw around a term like "fanboi", when you're clearly the one bending reality to fit your own personal preferences.

    87. Re:postscript by WillKemp · · Score: 1

      First off: "iCrap?" Was that really necessary? This was starting out to be an actual intelligent discourse (for once). Until that comment.

      Of course it was necessary! It's a good way to get modded up around here.

    88. Re:postscript by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The GPLv3 has probably done a fair bit more damage for being a submarine legal landmine as much as software patents have been submarine legal landmines in the adoption of standards.

      From where I'm sitting, it's done a lot of good. It's provided the push companies needed to ditch GPL'd software and fund the development of BSD licensed alternatives. I've had a few contracts this year to write permissively licensed replacements for GPL'd code. The linker is now the last stumbling block to having FreeBSD 10 completely GPL free.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    89. Re:postscript by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      How in the name of Obama's butthole do you manage to put a cloud service between your PC and the printer which is DIRECTLY ATTACHED to it via a USB cable which shouldn't even need to be connected to a network at all?

      To quote the first patent application:

      [0051] FIGS. 5A and 5B illustrate flow charts for alternative techniques for cloud printing in accordance with the disclosed embodiments. (These flow charts illustrate operations which take place during the driverless printing process which occurs in step 312 of FIG. 3.) Referring to FIG. 5A, mobile device 102 first sends a print job to cloud 104 (step 502). Next, a server within cloud 104 generates corresponding printer data for the selected printer and sends the printer data directly to the selected printer (step 504). Unfortunately, this technique may have issues with establishing channels through firewalls. The printer will generally not accept a print job from the cloud unless a channel is first established between a server in the cloud and the printer.

      [0052] To remedy this problem, the printer data can be returned to the mobile device so that the mobile device can forward the printer data to the printer. More specifically, referring to FIG. 5B, mobile device 102 first sends a print job to cloud 104 (step 512). Next, one or more servers within cloud 104 generate corresponding printer data for the selected printer and return the printer data to mobile device 102 (step 514). Finally, mobile device 102 forwards the printer data to the selected printer (step 516). Because a channel already exists between the mobile computing device and the cloud and between the mobile computing device and the printer, there is no need to set up an additional channel between the cloud and the printer.

    90. Re:postscript by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      But to create postscript don't you need a printer driver that creates postscript?

      No, you need an output back end for your drawing API that produces PostScript. On Windows, this is accomplished by installing a printer driver and printing to a file, but most UNIX apps generate PostScript directly. OS X allows you to generate PDF directly, which is trivial to convert to PostScript (it's also a better option for printers, because it's less processor-intensive to render - I've sent 10KB files to a PostScript printer that caused it to pause for 10 minutes while rendering them before now). On Windows, the printer stack takes GDI commands at the top, so it needs something that can convert them to PostScript. Most other platforms take something like PostScript at the top, so the only thing you need a driver for is controlling things like duplex printing.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    91. Re:postscript by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      So, if Webkit is so unusable, then why does it form the basis of nearly every browser and nearly everything else that wants to renter HTML these days?

      It doesn't.

      (Nevermind that that isn't what he said)

    92. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well said. I just set up my printers at work as PostScript they all work, the IT guys are amazed that I don't want to install the 100MB printer driver instead.

    93. Re:postscript by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Why should you be proven wrong, when you're entirely right? This is "news for nerds", after all. Nerds are all about tinkering with things, Apple is all about locking everything down. Apple is the antithesis of open source, and thus the natural enemy of nerds everywhere.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    94. Re:postscript by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      And the difference between this and a USB HID is.....what exactly? the whole point of HID was that you can write and submit pretty much anything to the USB-IF and once accepted it would "just work" without drivers. This is why you don't need drivers anymore for mice, keyboards, game controllers, even UPS units can have themselves declared under USB HID.

      So I don't really see how it would be a great stretch to add printers to that, certainly not enough to deserve a patent. After all the only reason why the printer companies haven't already done that is they are making piles of money off the crap they install with the printer drivers. The last one I installed for a customer had links to buy ink and photo paper, to send prints to anywhere in the USA, hell even digital photo frames.

      So unless there is a lot more to it than that I don't see the big whoop. The only reason why Apple is doing it first is unlike with WinPrinters Apple makes enough on hardware they don't have to try to hustle the customers to buy more junk after the sale.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    95. Re:postscript by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You ought to watch this video, from someone who knows far more about language than you ever will. It should change your mind.

      http://www.ted.com/talks/erin_mckean_redefines_the_dictionary.html

    96. Re:postscript by houghi · · Score: 1

      Postscript is free

      That is a problem for the majority of companies. They see something free or extremely cheap and they figure they must own it, so they can make a shitload of money. Bottled water anybody?

      If it is working for a long time, it MUST be changed as it can't be any good anymore. KDE or GNOME anybody?

      The rule of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Does not apply to the majority of people who deliver us things. They are not in the process of keeping things going. They are all about "innovation".

      That does not mean I want to live in a cage. It means I want innovation if it is innovative, not if it is just new for the sake of being new. Yes, that is much harder to achieve.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    97. Re:postscript by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Second: You do realize that Apple bought CUPS, right? And that OS X has used CUPS since day one. If I point my browser at localhost:631, guesss what I see? CUPS, that's what!

      I have a question about that. Because Apple bought CUPS and left it open, does that mean it has to stay open?

      And if they own CUPS why are they patenting this "driverless" model?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    98. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little off topic but interesting nontheless:

      http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/mimssbits/27060/

      It's Official: Apple Is Now More 'Open' than Google

      Google promised that Android would be open source ...

    99. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That list you point to does not list projects they support or worked on. That is a list of software they use.

    100. Re:postscript by MrNaz · · Score: 1

      That's an awful big assumption right there buddy. Not making any indication that you're wrong, but when appeals to authority by those who can't articulate the issue effectively themselves start coming out is usually when I withdraw from a discussion, because that's usually when it turns idiotic.

      --
      I hate printers.
    101. Re:postscript by milkmage · · Score: 1

      "3) standard vanilla 2 button mice and 101 key keyboards work on any computer with USB, why not printers?"
      WHY NOT PRINTERS (as in printers should work as well).. we agree on this point.

      "The only reason why Apple is doing it first is unlike with WinPrinters Apple makes enough on hardware they don't have to try to hustle the customers to buy more junk after the sale"

      what's a WIN printer? I'm pretty sure all of these printers are WIN compatible http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3669

      are you saying apple's margins are so high, they don't need the dollars associated with included bloatware, or are you suggesting Apples getting BACK into the printer business (I seriously doubt the latter; the former is reasonble)

    102. Re:postscript by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Cute. Thanks for the laugh.

    103. Re:postscript by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Not that hard. Mine doesn't support it -- Canon Pixma MP970.

    104. Re:postscript by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Oh, ESAD, printer ribbons for, duh, dot matrix printers were no different. Each manufacturer pushing there own, uniqueness but still largely driven by the consumables market. The consumbales market is as old as the spare parts market. Normally wouldn't bother with dead head insulters like you but sometimes the mood strikes, YUPOS.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    105. Re:postscript by hedronist · · Score: 1

      Litigagatory?

      Ouch! Looks like the famous *gatory factory is working at full speed.

      In English there already exists a word for persons inclined towards litigation. It's litigious.

      I think you're just being pedantagorically silly.

    106. Re:postscript by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      That's an awful big assumption right there buddy

      Let's face it, the odds of me being wrong, and you being a more accomplished linguist than her is certainly thousands to one. Probably millions to one. So it's not such a big assumption.

      I wouldn't say it was an appeal to authority. She changed my mind, in a way that was also very entertaining. Far better that I give you the same opportunity, than that I try to shoehorn my version of the message into a slashdot post. You get a better version of the message, and I save myself a lot of typing.

    107. Re:postscript by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      On POSIX systems, creating PostScript is not generally considered part of the driver.

      On Systems using CUPS, the application is responsible for creating PostScript. (Cups also has some support for converting other common formats, such as plain text or raster images, but PostScript (or equivalently PDF) is the platform's preferred format.)

      The application can Query CUPS about the printers capabilities, and produce optimized PostScript, but producing generic PostScript is also completely acceptable. One of the filter passes in CUPS should read the PPD file, and make some small tweaks to the file to help optimize it for the printer, such as cutting down the resolution of embedded raster graphics where they would significantly exceed the printer's DPI, utilizing of well known PostScript extensions if the printer supports them, and by embedding any fonts needed that the printer does not already have.

      At this point if the printer actually supports PostScript, CUPS simply sends it. If not, it goes on to use one of many PostScript to other format converters. These are are the equivalent of printer drivers.
      ---

      Now you might call CUPS a printer driver itself. That is fairly misleading though. If a Linux application knew the printer spoke PostScript, it could simply send the generic PostScript directly to the printer. Not being optimized for the printer means it would take a bit longer to send and longer for the printer to process, but it would work[1]. That is clearly driver-less, since the app simply sent its normal print format directly to the printer.

      Footnote:
      [1] Unless the PostScript required fonts not present on the printer, which were not embedded in the PostScript.
      ---

      Now one could argue that the PostScript interpreter in a printer is effectively a printer driver. But who cares. The printer is a black box. All I care about is that if I regularly print to 20 different printers that I don't need to have 20 print drivers on my computer, or that I don't need a full CUPS install on my phone, but can get away with a simple PostScript print queue, and perhaps a quick optimizing pass using a PDD file obtained by asking the printer directly.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    108. Re:postscript by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Neither you nor the grand parent are correct, but you both speak with full certainty that fools have.

      That fools have... what? Don't leave us hanging, I can't handle the suspense! What is it that fools have?!?

      You might be short a "the," wow those little suckers mean something after all. At least you're certain, though. lol

    109. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a list of the top ten laser printers for 2010:

      http://www.lasertekservices.com/blog/2010/12/top-10-best-selling-laser-printers-for-2010.html

      Only two of these printer's include PostScript.

      You'll be hard pressed to find a consumer inkjet that includes PostScript.

    110. Re:postscript by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      They haven't anally raped us without lubrication after buying the Free Software we were using first.

      We should think of ourselves as lucky. [/sarc]

      Or you could admit that they never intended to do that - yet you always do.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    111. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patent? Apple trolling again.
      What Apple wants is that manufacturers implement it in printers, but that only Apple devices and software can use it.
      Wouldn't it be better that they pushed for a royalty free standard that is more likely to get the printer mess solved?
      It would benefit CUPS as well....oh wait, maybe they want to restrict certain usages of CUPS to OSX and iOS.

    112. Re:postscript by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Mostly. As another poster commented, you still need a PPD file for your printer, to tell your computer what capabilities your printer has: how many trays, duplex, color, etc. This isn't a "driver", however, just a simple text file describing the printer's configuration.

    113. Re:postscript by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      This isn't true of everything, but is definitely causing a lot of problems in certain places (Gnome is the poster child of this; KDE is the poster child of what happens when you do a total rewrite and release the results years before they're ready for general usage).

      For instance, openssh is probably used on nearly every Linux system these days, but you don't see those guys constantly adding features and bloat to that package in the name of "innovation". It's been mature for some time now. I imagine it will change eventually, out of necessity, when Wayland becomes the standard in place of X, and they devise ways of making network transparency work on it the way it does with X now using "ssh -X", but for now I'm not seeing any significant changes in it, just the occasional security vulnerability patched.

      I think the openssh guys need to teach the DE guys about the value of stability and software maturity.

    114. Re:postscript by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Especially when litigatory IS a word, in common usage for over 150 years. http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1735&context=vulr

      A word that, at least in the example you give, is not used the way you used it. Inconceivable.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    115. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "free software" means freedom to study, modify, copy, and distribute, and protecting those freedoms. Proponents of free software include the FSF, Debian, Red Hat, Canonical, and so on.

      Which leaves little room for a shorthand for what Apple does. I guess you could say, a proponent of getting software for themselves for free.

    116. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because if they don't get the patent, the other patent trolls will.

      FTFY.

    117. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, ESAD, printer ribbons for, duh, dot matrix printers were no different. Each manufacturer pushing there own, uniqueness but still largely driven by the consumables market.

      I must be missing something. How in the name of fuck is this connected to the existence of printer drivers, as you originally asserted?

      oh wait, it isn't, you're full of shit. Unless you'd care to lay out the logic chain from "printer drivers" as a general concept to printer manufacturers wanting to sell supplies.

      The consumbales market is as old as the spare parts market. Normally wouldn't bother with dead head insulters like you but sometimes the mood strikes, YUPOS.

      Maybe you could try not being in the mood to post illiterate, illogical rants about printer drivers as the lynchpin of printer supplies totalitarianism. Or bugfucknutty BS about Apple being in a panic and trying to destroy Linux and Android through print drivers, of all things. I guarantee you that failing to post borderline crank material would result in fewer flames aimed in your general direction.

      (BTW, about those "more universal print drivers" in Linux and Android... do you know who employs the CUPS maintainer and pays a lot of money to enhance and develop it, to the benefit of the countless Linux distros which use CUPS? Yep, that's right, evil Apple. They already "control" your print drivers, fandroid. To the extent that anybody can truly "control" GPL-licensed software which can be forked, that is.)

      The reason Apple might be interested in moving beyond even the CUPS model is simple -- even with it, printer drivers are a giant pain in the ass for them. They used to be literally 1/3 (maybe more, memory's not exact on this one) of the total install footprint of MacOS X, if you chose to install all of them.

      Note that this was for better support than you get with just basic CUPS open source drivers, i.e. it included all the proprietary code blobs from printer manufacturers. Most consumer printers need custom rasterization software running on the computer to achieve full quality for their specific print head design, because they ruthlessly cost-reduce the printers to the point where they don't have enough local CPU and memory to do the job. You can't really address this problem in CUPS, you just have to hang a giant wedge of shitty vendor-supplied code off the side. If you can't get the vendor to supply that code, the only recourse is to pipe the output of a generic rasterizer through a thin layer of reverse-engineered "driver" which knows how to push the bits to the printer. This is how many of the open source CUPS drivers work, and you have to live with less quality of results than would be possible otherwise.

      If Apple can prod printer vendors into truly standardizing this shit, you should get up and cheer because it'll make your life a lot better too.

    118. Re:postscript by mjwx · · Score: 0

      Good catch. I tend to save my best spelling for those that pay me. ;-)

      Apparently, you have the same rule for your "best arguments", too. So, if Webkit is so unusable, then why does it form the basis of nearly every browser and nearly everything else that wants to renter HTML these days?

      Gekko (Firefox) does fine, Trident (IE) at a pinch, I haven't used Opera in a while but I'll bet it can still hold it's own..

      Webkit has a heap of problems with some sites that work fine on Firefox.

      The KDE foundation made KHTML, Apple that forked KHTML into Webkit but it was Google that made WebKit usable. That's why Chrome is over 5 times more popular then Safari, even with Apple shoehorning it onto everyone's system by forcing it to be installed with Itunes, more people choose Chrome.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    119. Re:postscript by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Apple makes enough on hardware they don't have to try to hustle the customers to buy more junk after the sale.

      What exactly is the business model for iPod, iPhone and iPad?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    120. Re:postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because if they don't get the patent, the other patent trolls will.

      FTFY.

    121. Re:postscript by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      A Winprinter, like a Winmodem, is a piece of hardware that doesn't know how to control itself. The Win- prefix indicates that the only drivers officially available are written for Windows. In the case of printers, it's a printer that can't rasterize.

    122. Re:postscript by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Apple adhered to their legal requirements. The GPL does not state that one must send diffs back upstream. It says that the source code used to compile any provided binaries must be released.

      The KDE developers wanted more than what their license required, so the GP is 100% correct when wrote "What KDE complained about was that they wanted more than the license required, which is feature-specific diffs."

      You do know that Google does not provide diffs, patches or documentation back to the Linus, right? Just because you're a narrow-minded idiot doesn't make you correct.

    123. Re:postscript by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Safari is essentially only available on OS X. The Windows port is not pushed (heavily), and I don't really know why Apple bothered. I think it may have had something to do with their initial push to get iPhone apps to be web-apps. They didn't want Windows developers to be left out. Chrome is available on every major desktop OS. So there's really no comparison between the two in terms of market share.

    124. Re:postscript by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Another gave a basic answer as to a Win(Insert device) but I'd add the key to a Win-Device is that nearly the entire thing is software with minimum control chips. If you have a softmodem (also called a WinModem) look at the amount of chips then look up pics of the first PCI modems and see the difference. in the case of a Win-device pretty much everything is being handled in software NOT hardware.

      As for Apple? Well duh there margins are so high they don't need to hustle extra crap! look up the numbers and you'll see that Apple has the highest margins in the biz. the nearest competitors aren't even close.

      By having margins as high as they do they can easily make shit like in TFA because they don't need the money and hustling would frankly go against Jobs style aesthetic. compare this to the guys like Epson and Lexmark where they are often making pennies if they don't sell for a loss and hope to make it up on ink. Do you know what the average profit is on a low end dell? $8. Hell Apple wouldn't package their trash and sell it to you for such a low margin!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    125. Re:postscript by Elbowgeek · · Score: 1

      And... ANSI? ASCII? Used to be that one could send an ASCII string to any printer; it was the best way to test a printer.

      --
      Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
    126. Re:postscript by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Yeah. It's a shame that we don't have decades of prior art in PnP mechanisms including some that were used by Apple themselves so long ago that any relevant patents would have expired by now.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    127. Re:postscript by Goaway · · Score: 1

      Your chronology and your facts are wrong.

      Yes, I guess I mistakenly explained what happened in reality and not what happened inside your head. Sorry.

      Thank you for posting a clarification about how the world inside your head works, though.

    128. Re:postscript by Goaway · · Score: 1

      Remember: If you want to show how evil Apple is, you don't need to refer to reality. You can just make up a story inside your head, and use that to prove how evil they are.

  2. mmmm by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

    So long as they sit on the patent and allow for a free-for-all licensing, this could prove to be wonderful. I never understood the need for 50 million printer drivers when the printer is now a computer-on-a-chip.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
    1. Re:mmmm by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      what i never understood was why was there never wide spread support for the USB printer class. I mean, HID did wonders for joypads and all sorts of other input devices. Why did printer vendors fore go sanity with their software support?

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    2. Re:mmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they are idiots and think their stuff is better than the other guys stuff and want to lock people in?
      The printer hardware industry has the maturity of a 5 year old to be perfectly honest.

      Don't get me started on the audio industry, holy hell.

    3. Re:mmmm by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      This might be one of those patents that a company like Apple files for defense purposes especially with their CUPS and Bonjour work

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:mmmm by sjames · · Score: 1

      How else are they going to cram 600MB of shovelware down your throat?

      Of course, this isn't really driverless printing, it's just a matter of where the driver lives. Eventually, either the printer has a driver built in or the computer that talks to it does (or both).

      This will likely end up being yet another one true universal data format that will be demanded by a minority of software. As long as a patent hangs over it, it will not reach 100%.

    5. Re:mmmm by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      This might be one of those patents that a company like Apple files for defense purposes especially with their CUPS and Bonjour work

      THEIR CUPS?

      Michael Sweet, who owns Easy Software Products, started developing CUPS in 1997. The first public betas appeared in 1999. The original design of CUPS used the LPD protocol, but due to limitations in LPD and vendor incompatibilities, the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) was chosen instead. CUPS was quickly adopted as the default printing system for several Linux distributions, including Red Hat Linux.[citation needed] In March 2002, Apple Inc. adopted CUPS as the printing system for Mac OS X 10.2. In February 2007, Apple Inc. hired chief developer Michael Sweet and purchased the CUPS source code.

      Cups was Open Source for 6 years before Apple supposedly bought it.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    6. Re:mmmm by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      Excuse me, but Apple didn't buy the Cups source code, which would be quite pointless because it is GPL licensed. Apple bought the copyright to the Cups source code. And not "supposedly" but really.

    7. Re:mmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and Apple purchased it, and kept it open source. Apple owns it, lock, stock, and barrel. Your point?

      They could have closed the source just as easily.

    8. Re:mmmm by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Michael Sweet, who owns Easy Software Products,

      ...and works for Apple Inc. on printing and has his name as the first inventor on the patent in question.

    9. Re:mmmm by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      "supposedly"

      What, is it not ok for the original owner of the code to sell it? I thought that was ok in the open source world, or is making money verboten?

      Apple sunk money and time into it because they appreciated its value, and the value of the guy who started it in the first place, in much the same way as they did with KHTML.

      Since they *did* buy the rights to the code, it is accurate to describe it as "theirs", although that doesn't mean "they did all the work".

    10. Re:mmmm by tepples · · Score: 1

      Apple didn't buy the Cups source code [...] Apple bought the copyright to the Cups source code

      "Purchased a work of authorship" can mean one of two things: buying a copy or buying an assignment of the copyright. In context, the latter interpretation appeared obvious to me, especially right after "hired chief developer".

    11. Re:mmmm by bhtooefr · · Score: 2

      USB printer class doesn't describe the language that the printer uses, only the way that print data is transported between the host and printer. It's designed to encapsulate any form of print data, be it PostScript, PCL, or something proprietary.

    12. Re:mmmm by icebike · · Score: 2

      Like I say, it was open source GPL in many different Linux distros for years before Apple got involved.
      Since it was GPL, just what did Apple buy? Oh, they bought the developer. Figuratively and Literally,
      and pretty much induced him to walk away from his own GPL declaration "Just for them"..

      Copyright 1997-2006 by Easy Software Products
      44141 AIRPORT VIEW DR STE 204
      HOLLYWOOD, MARYLAND 20636 USA
      Voice: +1.301.373.9600
      Email: cups-info@cups.org
      WWW: http://www.cups.org/

      Introduction

      The Common UNIX Printing System^TM, ("CUPS^TM"), is provided under the
      GNU General Public License ("GPL") and GNU Library General Public
      License ("LGPL"), Version 2, with exceptions for Apple operating
      systems and the OpenSSL toolkit. A copy of the exceptions and licenses
      follow this introduction.

      The GNU LGPL applies to the CUPS and CUPS Imaging libraries located in
      the "cups" and "filter" subdirectories of the CUPS source distribution
      and in the "cups" include directory and library files in the binary
      distributions. The GNU GPL applies to the remainder of the CUPS
      distribution, including the "pdftops" filter which is based upon Xpdf.

      For those not familiar with the GNU GPL, the license basically allows
      you to:
      * Use the CUPS software at no charge.
      * Distribute verbatim copies of the software in source or binary
      form.
      * Sell verbatim copies of the software for a media fee, or sell
      support for the software.

      What this license does not allow you to do is make changes or add
      features to CUPS and then sell a binary distribution without source
      code. You must provide source for any changes or additions to the
      software, and all code must be provided under the GPL or LGPL as
      appropriate. The only exceptions to this are the portions of the CUPS
      software covered by the Apple operating system license exceptions
      outlined later in this license agreement.

      The GNU LGPL relaxes the "link-to" restriction, allowing you to develop
      applications that use the CUPS and CUPS Imaging libraries under other
      licenses and/or conditions as appropriate for your application, driver,
      or filter.

      License Exceptions

      In addition, as the copyright holder of CUPS, Easy Software Products

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    13. Re:mmmm by Goaway · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you buy the copyright to a GPL'd work, it is yours. You can change the license to anything you want. You can't change the already released versions, of course, but anything from that point onwards is entirely up to you.

    14. Re:mmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't change the licence on third party contributions.

    15. Re:mmmm by robbak · · Score: 1

      Yes, their (cups ... work). They, as in their employees Michael Sweet and others, are working on CUPS. And in this ridiculous world, holding a junk patent that covers you work is a good idea: You can then tell the troll who gets a junk patent on it tomorrow "Hey, our patent applied for {{yesterday}} is word for word like your's, so shut up before we sue you out of existence."
      One would think that "There is an identical patent in our database" would prevent a second patent from being issued, but this is the real world we are in.

      --
      Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    16. Re:mmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beautiful job of out of context quoting. The parent used the conjunction "their cups and bonjour work", which obviously and clearly expands to "their cups work and their bonjour work". And you quoted it as if the parent asserted that CUPS was "theirs" in the posessive / ownership sense.

      I'm not sure whether to downvote for blatant dishonesty, or upvote for sheer chutzpah. You, sir, have tremendous career potential in politics.

    17. Re:mmmm by That+Guy+From+Mrktng · · Score: 1

      How would printer vendors SHOVE you the metric fuckton of NAGWARE that every 15 minutes reminds you that "everything is fine, see our logo.. oh wait black ink is unhappy, click here to buy puppy for black cartridge" ?

      Don't get me started on HP and their anuscolonmonitorware. Incredible how a piece of software can make you hate so much a company.

    18. Re:mmmm by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Apple has made the odd contribution to CUPS (not to mention employing Michael Sweet) since 2007. So yes, "their CUPS... work" is perfectly accurate.

      You've got quite the axe to grind hey?

    19. Re:mmmm by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You sure can, if the third parties signed the copyright over to you (or whoever you bought it from).

    20. Re:mmmm by SJ · · Score: 1

      Apple bought CUPS for 2 reasons;

      1. To have some control over a core component of their operating system.
      1a. To stop the possibility of CUPS moving to GPLv3 (see point 1)
      2. To hire someone who REALLY knows printing software.

      Nothing more, nothing less.

      Points of reference...
      http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html
      CUPS is still available under GPLv2

    21. Re:mmmm by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I was actually going to buy a copy of the closed CUPS in around 2007 but missed the window and it's not available for money or download anymore. There's still a few large format printers that were supported by it (worked with the demo version) that do not work with the free CUPS even after this time. I've got applications that can print directly to those beasts from solaris and linux, but nothing to translate general print jobs into obfiscated abandoned HP proprietry bullshit.

    22. Re:mmmm by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I'm with you. One of the office printers has been flashing "only XXX pages left!!!!" for six months now. It started counting down from a thousand, and we print maybe a couple dozen per week on average. Still haven't replaced the toner, though we may actually be gettinc close now.

      While we're complaining, I'd like to bitch about my HP inkjet which is designed to try to use up color ink at all times, even with black and white printing. I have to go through five extra clicks each time to tell it "yes, I really just want grayscale, and yes, I really want grayscale to mean you don't print colors on top of that grayscale because I can't see them anyway." After being fooled into replacing the color ink once and then having it all run out again after printing 100 or so grayscale pages (and we're talking text-only here, not images, truly just grayscale), I simply refused to put any more color ink in the printer, and it's been running okay on just black ever since, as long as I remember to tell it not to try to use the color cartridges. Still obnoxious, though.

  3. Patent != Product by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2

    As we're all aware, one of the problems with the patent system is that patents don't always equal products. How many times has an Apple patent made the news with no product to show for it? How many people missed the iPhone because they weren't paying attention to the right patents?

    That being said, this is WAY more plausible given Apple's work with CUPS and AirPrint.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Patent != Product by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Patents shouldn't always equal products sometimes a valid patent requires technology that nobody can get to work at the present. However, there should be a requirement that you're using it or are in the process of bringing a product to market. Just filing for a patent does benefit the public as it's then available for use when the patent expires.

      The main problem is folks that file papers with no intention of turning it into a real product and who sue without even attempting to produce anything.

    2. Re:Patent != Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seriously doubt Apple will attempt the printer market with their own hardware. But HP printers will be supporting URF and already do support AirPrint.

  4. So what? by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 1

    So... Option 1: Use a conventional driver.
    Option 2: Send it to the cloud, which just basically uses someone else's driver.
    Option 3: Standardize all printers to communicate in exactly the same way, making a "one-size-fits-all" driver.
    I don't really see the "elimination" part here. Maybe a "simplification" at best.

    --
    Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    1. Re:So what? by Firehed · · Score: 1

      PDF? Isn't that the general idea behind the "portable document format"? Send a PDF to the printer, call it a day. If they can print jpegs directly off memory cards that would seem like a relatively easy approach to a driverless system.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    2. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Plug printer into machine
      2. (omitted)
      3. Press print and get pretty piece of paper.

      Clear, now?

    3. Re:So what? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Option 4: let printers say what formats they accept (PostScript, PDF, JPEG, rasters, etc.) and send them the most appropriate format for the particular print job. Read The Fine Patent Application (for which I'll post a link in a comment).

    4. Re:So what? by tepples · · Score: 1

      If they can print jpegs directly off memory cards

      That involves resizing the picture to fit the paper, something that end users find acceptable for photographs, not so much for text.

    5. Re:So what? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      There is no elimination. It looks more to me like they're talking about a more expansive form of Postscript. In other words, they're moving some of the heavy lifting from the driver on the workstation/handheld/smartphone/whatever to the printer. Nothing terribly revolutionary. You still need to have some sort of driver on the client machine, it will just be more streamlined.

      This is as good an example as I can think of as to why software patents should be unlawful. I mean, fuck, would I violate their fucking patent if I sent straight ASCII through the bloody port as opposed to doing it nicely via a print subsystem?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:So what? by DavidRawling · · Score: 1

      No problem with fitting to paper - the printer knows what paper it has, and the PDF specifies a size. Match the two, or scale and fit to next size down.

      The problem with PDF printing in isolation from anything else is dealing with the other options... like force greyscale mode, force colour mode, first page on letterhead, print 2-up, print double-sided, text vs photo mode ... and so on. Since PDF is page description, not print job description, using PDF by itself is insufficient.

      I guess an option is have apps print to PDF as the intermediate format, but that still doesn't solve the paper selection, double-sided and finishing problems.

    7. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      PDF is a reasonable file format for low-end printers. But doesn't leave much room for printer options -- good luck indicating "duplex" or "monochrome" in your PDF file. And it has some other limitations that make it somewhat unsuitable for "real" printing, but those are mostly irrelevant at home.

      But I'm not sure why you'd choose PDF over PostScript, which does support those features (unless these was some patent/licensing concern, which I'm pretty sure is no longer the case). Adding PDF support to a printer is handy, but I'd start with PostScript as the lowest common denominator. Plus once you have a PostScript engine adding PDF support is pretty easy anyway.

    8. Re:So what? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

      Monochrome is pretty easy to do with PDF. Duplex might be a bit trickier.

    9. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Send it to the cloud, eh!?, THAT is to say that no printer will work unless it is connected to the internet? And what for, so 'homeland insecurity' can put their grubby gestapo fingers all over it before they 'allow' you to print it?....oor take data on everybody's print job to see if they are 'out of line'?

    10. Re:So what? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      PDF is a reasonable file format for low-end printers

      When I write a book, I send a PDF to my publisher. They send the same PDF to the printers. PDF is the de-facto standard for high-end printing. You can't indicate duplex in the PDF file (although you can indicate monochrome via the colour profile), but there are two important aspects of printing. Getting a dictionary of printer setting to the printer is trivial. This could just be a JSON dictionary or something equally simple. The more complex part is providing the ima

      But I'm not sure why you'd choose PDF over PostScript, which does support those features

      Two big reasons. First, PostScript doesn't actually support those features. They're added as printer-specific comments. You could add the same kind of comments to a PDF file, the problem in both cases is the lack of a standard. The second is that PostScript is Turing complete. This means that you can send code to generate fractals to the printer and have it spend a few hours rendering them before printing a single page. Somewhere I have a nice PostScript file that's under 100 bytes long but takes several hours to print a single page containing a picture of a tree on any PostScript printer I've tried sending it to. In contrast, PDF just describes how to present a document. The rendering time of a PDF file is always roughly proportional to its size, so a printer will never find complex programs that take ages to render. It also has better support for fonts (PostScript often renders glyphs by calling a small program that renders them, while a PDF renderer can just render each glyph once and composite it every time it's used).

      Your laptop has a 2GHz dual-core processor, while your printer has a 50MHz MIPS core. Which do you think is a more sensible place to do the processor-intensive stuff?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    11. Re:So what? by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 1

      The best anti-patent rant you can come up with here is a hypothetical you aren't even sure would infringe? Slashdot really is going downhill.

    12. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can set duplex mode in the PDF viewer attributes, and there is even an option to turn off paper size based tray selection. But there is no standard method if you want to set the exact paper tray, or use stapling or punch holes.

  5. Ironic timing. by jcr · · Score: 2

    So, Apple's setting out to solve the print driver problem right when they're making tablets so popular that we don't need hard copy anymore.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Ironic timing. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Paper is not one-product away from majorly dropping in popularity. It'll be around when we're buzzing planets in our flying saucers.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:Ironic timing. by bieber · · Score: 1

      right when they're making tablets so popular that we don't need hard copy anymore.

      Surely you jest. Even if tablets become absolutely, positively dirt cheap, they still won't be a proper replacement for paper documents.

      • Size. I can't fold up a tablet, put it in my pocket, and take it back out again when I need to look up a subway route. A tablet small enough to be pocketable is also going to be small enough that it will be a royal pain to read anything significant off of it. There's no way I can ever conceive of lugging a tablet around with me just going about everyday tasks, not so long as it has a readable surface large enough to be worthwhile.
      • Durability. If I drop a sheet of paper in water, or even let it go through a wash cycle it will still be readable afterwards. No such luck with electronics.
      • Archiving. Yes, digital archives are superior in almost every way, but for really important documents I want a paper backup that I can still access in case of a power outage.
      • Display. A lot of the things people print are meant to be displayed. This primarily applies to images, but it also goes for things like certificates. Why would I want to replace all the picture frames that just passively sit on my wall with tablets that would need to be powered, not to mention costing more?

      Easy distribution. I can very easily hand a person a paper copy of a document. With an electronic copy, we need some kind of digital device to accommodate the transfer, and we have to make sure the document is in some format that both of our devices understand. If you're face to face with another person and all you have are your (possibly different brand) tablets, sharing documents becomes a trickier problem.

    3. Re:Ironic timing. by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      I haven't done any of the things you mention by choice in over 4 years. The only time I print is when it is requested. I have printers at work of course and a multi function at home that gets used primarily to print out coloring pages for my kids ( one use I agree with).

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    4. Re:Ironic timing. by abundance · · Score: 1

      So, Apple's setting out to solve the print driver problem right when they're making tablets so popular that we don't need hard copy anymore.

      Well it isn't such an irony if you think about it - having widespread pocketable or portable devices may mean less need to print, but it also means that when users really need to print, they could very well be need to print from a device on which installing and managing third party drivers could be a pain, or downright not allowed; to whatever printer is near them at that time.

  6. xkcd is their inspiration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    1. Re:xkcd is their inspiration by mastermind7373 · · Score: 1

      Awww, beat me to it.

  7. never gonna happen by dltaylor · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nearly all consumers want CHEAP printers. That means that the translation from text/image to printer imaging codes is done in the computer, not the printer, which saves CPU power and memory in the printer. Look at the difference in price between the typical Windows printer and the Postscript ('specially color) printers. A Windows printer only has to buffer a few raster lines, using the processing power and memory of the host computer, while the Postscript printer has to buffer the entire page, since there could be a command at the end of the page that places something at the top.

    Add to this the insanity of any/all software and process patents and it is absolutely in the printer manufacturers' interest to tie the raster-defining codes into obscure and NDA-protected proprietary drivers to avoid tripping over some patent that says " a one bit in this field says put a green dot next on the page".

    1. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the price of a printer is nothing compared to its manufacturing cost. Printers are sold well below production cost, but they companies make up for it by spelling incompatible cartridges at insane markup.

    2. Re:never gonna happen by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nearly all consumers want CHEAP printers. That means that the translation from text/image to printer imaging codes is done in the computer, not the printer, which saves CPU power and memory in the printer. Look at the difference in price between the typical Windows printer and the Postscript ('specially color) printers. A Windows printer only has to buffer a few raster lines, using the processing power and memory of the host computer, while the Postscript printer has to buffer the entire page, since there could be a command at the end of the page that places something at the top.

      Add to this the insanity of any/all software and process patents and it is absolutely in the printer manufacturers' interest to tie the raster-defining codes into obscure and NDA-protected proprietary drivers to avoid tripping over some patent that says " a one bit in this field says put a green dot next on the page".

      You have a good point 10 years ago. Today, processors and memory are so cheap that you could build an entire computer into a printer and still sell it for $150. See also: netbooks, handheld gaming devices, mobile phones.

    3. Re:never gonna happen by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      I would consider the HP Color Laserjet 2025dn to be a cheap (for a duplex color laserjet) printer which supports HP's postscript 3 emulation.

    4. Re:never gonna happen by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Nearly all consumers want CHEAP printers. That means that the translation from text/image to printer imaging codes is done in the computer, not the printer, which saves CPU power and memory in the printer.

      Which means that, to quote the patent, "the information indicates the printer can only support RF", where "RF" means "Raster Format", and therefore that "the system uses RF to send data to the printer".

    5. Re:never gonna happen by Salvo · · Score: 1

      Just about all Consumer Printers now support PictBridge, which is practically a Driverless Printing Protocol (or a common-driver Printing Protocol).

      HP's ePrint Printers already Behave similar to this, and most of HP's non-ePrint Printers support PCL3 too.

      The main reason Drivers are required for printers currently is to gain mindshare on users computer. Snow Leopard's excellent native Driver Support and Windows 7's Device Stage reduce the annoying Product Ads the User is exposed to. Nowadays, the only reason a user needs to know what brand of printer they are printing to is so they know where to find their documents.

    6. Re:never gonna happen by demonlapin · · Score: 2

      you could build an entire computer into a printer and still sell it for $150

      You missed the part where he said "CHEAP", right? $50 or less.

    7. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which would be important if:

      A) PS memory/processing requirements were large by modern standards. They aren't. In 1987 you needed server-class CPU and memory to render PostScript. Today you need a 1987 server-class CPU and memory to render PostScript -- i.e. a 10 MHz processor and 8 MB of RAM. Neither of which has any significant cost even when you're talking about sub-$100 consumer equipment.

      B) If writing and maintaining driver software was free. It's not. If you sold PS-capable printers you could write *no* software and be compatible with every Windows/MacOS/Linux installation from the last 15 years and probably for the next 15 as well. HP and the like are starting to coming around to this fact, and have at least started to consolidate their own print drivers, but it's still a lot more software work than tweaking a PPD file to note the correct number of paper trays.

    8. Re:never gonna happen by dltaylor · · Score: 1

      Apple's printer support is pathetic.

      A printer (Xerox Phaser 6100) which had a Tiger driver, and is still supported quite nicely in CUPS elsewhere is NOT supported in Snow Leopard or Lion. Her MacBook is the last Apple my wife gets to use, since she relies on me for support, and I'll never do another for her.

    9. Re:never gonna happen by QuantumLeaper · · Score: 1

      I just wish the printer would last longer than the starter cartridge, my last two printers, didn't last 6 months or longer than the starter cartridge, both were around $120US. If the printer industry wants to be like the razor companies, I don't have a problem, but have the printer last for years, so you have to buy a cartridge.

    10. Re:never gonna happen by egr · · Score: 1

      If the printer industry wants to be like the razor companies...

      Don't you mean "to be like the razor company"?

    11. Re:never gonna happen by willy_me · · Score: 1

      Nearly all consumers want CHEAP printers. That means that the translation from text/image to printer imaging codes is done in the computer, not the printer, which saves CPU power and memory in the printer

      But consumers want more then just "cheap" printers. While cheap is good, they also want fast printers that they can print to wirelessly. They want interactive menus for configuration - like an iOS / Android device. They also want to be able to print from their camera / flash drive / SD card. And for those all-in-one devices, to operate as a photocopier or scanner.

      To provide these features a printer requires local CPU and memory resources. Considering that these resources are already present, why put the driver on the computer? The additional demands for CPU/memory resources are nothing considering their minimal cost. Spend an extra $1 on parts and allow for a snazzier user interface while reducing the cost of driver development on different operating systems - who wouldn't go for that. The vast majority of consumers would pay the extra $2. Just imagine how much would be saved from product returns / product support resulting from driver conflicts and other unexpected problems.

      Once the cost of additional resources is low enough, drivers are going back into the printers. It is just a matter of time - and it won't be long now.

    12. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but nowadays you can get a laser printer for $50 or an inkjet for $20. Brand new, in major stores.

    13. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the 2025dn is $400-500.. that's not cheap to most consumers.

      We're talking about the $39 inkjet printer at walmart. Now that's what consumers want. It's cheap. It prints stuff. On paper.

    14. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of the technology Apple is producing is the ability to send URF (universal _raster_ format) data from a device directly to the printer. Cheap hardware shouldn't have a problem processing an incoming URF job. So yes, it will, and is going to happen (I work in a lab that develops printer firmware, so take my word for it).

    15. Re:never gonna happen by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 1

      Still entirely possible.

    16. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's printer support is pathetic.

      A printer (Xerox Phaser 6100) which had a Tiger driver, and is still supported quite nicely in CUPS elsewhere is NOT supported in Snow Leopard or Lion. Her MacBook is the last Apple my wife gets to use, since she relies on me for support, and I'll never do another for her.

      You are blaming Apple because Xerox will not provide proper drivers for their product?
      http://www.support.xerox.com/support/phaser-6100/downloads/enus.html?operatingSystem=macosx&fileLanguage=en

    17. Re:never gonna happen by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      The printer itself may be cheap, but what does the ink cost, and how many pages does it last?

    18. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drivers are also required for printer specific options.
      Which tray has the letterhead you want to print on or do you need to specify a paper type in the bypass.
      Do you want it to be sorted? Stapled? Hole-punched? Duplexed?
      Do you have to enter an access code or hold the job in memory till you release it at the machine? Fax the document?

      I guess you don't need much for the crap people buy for their house though.
      On windows I never run the installer that comes with those little printers anyways, just pick the driver off the disk.

    19. Re:never gonna happen by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      You missed the part where he said "CHEAP", right? $50 or less.

      And YOU missed the part where I said "an entire computer". You don't need an entire computer's worth of parts in a cheap printer, and you can easily use extremely-low-end components and still have plenty of power to render a few pages for printing. But even still, crappy printers today are usually more than $50, and the rest of the cost is subsidized by ink that costs thousands of dollars per gallon.

    20. Re:never gonna happen by Rutulian · · Score: 1

      What the hell? Jesus, almost every Xerox printer natively supports Postscript 3 (ie: none of this "Postscript emulation" crap like HP has). That includes your Phaser 6100. What makes you think you need a special driver to get it to work? Just install the ppd and let it go.

    21. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > and the Postscript ('specially color) printers

      I am somewhat confused as to why you "abbreviated" especially to 'specially. Since the apostrophe needed an extra keystroke ( shift ) it was actually more work than just typing the original word.

    22. Re:never gonna happen by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      the killer here being the cost of the refills... £50 laser printer needs £99 black toner cartridge... and the one that comes with the printer is a demo cartridge good for no more than 50 pages... so basically you have to spend £150 to get a B&W laser printer.

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    23. Re:never gonna happen by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      look, you can get the parts for less than a tenner so you'll have more memory and more cpu on the printer than on your typical machine used to print in 1993.

      a much better point is that..uh.. apple shouldn't be granted patents on concepts they're just renaming from '80s and '90s.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    24. Re:never gonna happen by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Look at the difference in price between the typical Windows printer and the Postscript ('specially color) printers

      On the monochrome side a small Brother printer with postscript was probably the cheapest network printer I could find a few years ago. The colour ones I've looked at are lasers or wax, but at the bottom end of those they have postscript.

    25. Re:never gonna happen by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      My old PostScript laser printer had 4MB of RAM and a 50MHz MIPS chip. An A4 page is about 96 square inches. At 600dpi, with one bit per dot, that's about 4.35MB per page. For four colour, that's 16MB, maybe 24MB to be safe. You can get an ARM core that's much faster than the MIPS chip in my old printer for about $1, 24MB of RAM would probably add another $1. If you're buying in bulk, a company like Samsung will happily make you a SoC that has an ARM4 core and 24MB of RAM, enough Flash to store the driver, and a few GPIO pins to drive the print head, and they'll sell them for very little. All you need to do is add the software.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    26. Re:never gonna happen by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      .e. a 10 MHz processor and 8 MB of RAM

      You're being pretty optimistic there. My old laser printer had a 50MHz MIPS CPU and processing was the bottleneck when printing. It could print PCL (which is much simpler) at 3-4 times the speed it could print PostScript. 8MB of RAM is also a bit low. Unless you're printing at 300dpi colour or 600dpi mono, that probably isn't enough for the frame buffer. I'd want a 250MHz ARM core with 32MB of RAM in a modern printer. Not a huge requirement, but a lot more than you seem to require.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    27. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my printer cost ~ $35 and for the occasional sheet or two printed I wouldn't consider anything more expensive.

    28. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My old PostScript laser printer had 4MB of RAM and a 50MHz MIPS chip. An A4 page is about 96 square inches. At 600dpi, with one bit per dot, that's about 4.35MB per page. For four colour, that's 16MB, maybe 24MB to be safe.

      Several problems with this memory estimate: One, 1 bit per dot is probably much too low, especially for a lot of the modern ink jets which (IIRC) support variable-size dots. I think some lasers also support modulating dot width. Two, 600dpi is also somewhat low for a lot of modern color inkjets. Three, if you're going to rasterize something like PostScript, or even PDF, you need a lot more memory than just a buffer to store the dots that are going to be printed.

      You can get an ARM core that's much faster than the MIPS chip in my old printer for about $1, 24MB of RAM would probably add another $1. If you're buying in bulk, a company like Samsung will happily make you a SoC that has an ARM4 core and 24MB of RAM, enough Flash to store the driver, and a few GPIO pins to drive the print head, and they'll sell them for very little. All you need to do is add the software.

      No, Samsung will make you a SoC with an ARM core, peripheral interfaces like USB and ethernet (MAC only, PHY is likely to be external), and some GPIO or even a custom interface section for the print head. It won't contain the flash (can't mix flash with high performance logic) and it won't contain that much RAM (too much die area for a cheap chip). They'll be happy to throw in an interface for a single external DDRx DRAM chip though.

      That's why you see lots of printers which don't rasterize locally. A local controller beefy enough to handle the job does still cost enough to be very noticeable in the BOM for a product which might very well be sold at little to no profit in order to get the user to start buying ink.

    29. Re:never gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's printer support is pathetic.

      A printer (Xerox Phaser 6100) which had a Tiger driver, and is still supported quite nicely in CUPS elsewhere is NOT supported in Snow Leopard or Lion. Her MacBook is the last Apple my wife gets to use, since she relies on me for support, and I'll never do another for her.

      So basically you're a shitty husband, then? Glad we've got that settled.

      Seriously, if she likes Macs, Xerox's failure to support their printer beyond Tiger (one of their support docs detailing how to make the driver work on 10.6 makes it clear that they never even recompiled it for x86) is hardly a good reason for you to snottily declare that she should not "get to use" a Mac ever again.

      p.s. Generally speaking, if there's a generic CUPS driver out there, you can make it work in OS X as well. Because Apple does have a lot of vendor-supplied drivers better than generic CUPS, they don't include all CUPS drivers with the system. Looks like you fell in one of the cracks where the vendor nominally has a driver, but it's poorly supported and you'd be better off with CUPS.

  8. Airprint by bradgoodman · · Score: 2
    Apple HAS eliminated printer drivers* - It's called AirPrint.

    * With iOS

    1. Re:Airprint by Salvo · · Score: 2

      PictBridge eliminated Drivers years ago. If it hadn't Camera Firmware would have been bloated and would have needed updating constantly as new Printers came available.

      HP ePrint (which AirPrint uses) is based on PCL5 which is Page Description Language like PostScript and PDF.
      Rendering a Word or Pages document to a ePrint Printer still requires a driver to convert the RAW GDI of Windows, the PDF of Mac OS X or the PS of Linux to PCL5.

      I may be corrected, but either all ePrint-compatible devices (iOS, WebOS) have native PDF-PCL5 drivers, creating the illusion that the printers are driverless or ePrint Printers can also receive native PDF code, resulting in a pure driverless printing system.

      That said, iOS renders non-PDF content as PDF's natively; The Word Document you see on your iPhone has already been converted to Display-PDF for the iPhone Screen. I assume WebOS devices behave the same, but would like clarification from anyone more familiar with the second-best Mobile OS.

    2. Re:Airprint by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Just picked up a HP 1102w Wireless Laser B&W for $99. Works GREAT with AirPrint, ipad, Linux, OSX, Windows. Instant-on too, I was so happy with it i went out and bought one for the in-laws too.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:Airprint by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      That's not a driver, that's a converter. Like saving a Word document in PDF or RTF. If all printers spoke one or more of a half dozen protocols that would be no problem. The issue is that almost every printer has its own (usually multi megabyte) driver that must be used to talk to it.

    4. Re:Airprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misleading: iOS sends a PDF to print. AirPrint is just Bonjour(mdns) discovery and IPP. Printer or a CUPS service deals with rendering details.

    5. Re:Airprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misleading: iOS sends a PDF to print.

      The HP 1102w doesn't include PDF support so you must be wrong. iOS/AirPrint must be able to print without PDF in the printer.

    6. Re:Airprint by jrumney · · Score: 1

      I may be corrected, but either all ePrint-compatible devices (iOS, WebOS) have native PDF-PCL5 drivers, creating the illusion that the printers are driverless or ePrint Printers can also receive native PDF code, resulting in a pure driverless printing system.

      My money is on the latter, since the investigations into getting AirPrint working on CUPS have centered around getting correctly crafted mdns entries to advertise the PDF capabilities for printer queues. There was also application/urf, but that turned out to be unnecessary, and unused even when it was added to the mdns advertisement (a good thing, because the only known filter for it is an OSX binary that was released with some beta versions of OSX before Apple and HP made a deal to make AirPrint an exclusive feature to sell HP's latest line of networked printers).

  9. REST by wooptoo · · Score: 1

    Printing via REST. Shazam!

    1. Re:REST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Printing via REST: POST? And GET scanning and DELETE shredding too? How does PUT work though? Maybe only with an automatic bind/unbind attachment?

  10. Halloween strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you realize this ENTIRE mess is what the "Halloween Documents" from Microsoft years ago were all about. Microsoft and Intel colluded to keep Window's place in the world. Intel creates things like USB that make cheap hardware that requires complicated software. Microsoft was happy to oblige and that created an environment where every single item needed a driver... so if Microsoft could keep all the hardware makers fighting over constantly changing drivers for just WINDOWS... there was no room for anybody else.

    Either way, PCL also works just fine as well. But the support isn't uniform enough (see above) to get reliable printing.. and many printers are now "drivers only" even if they have wireless they still are just porting USB commands over the air.

    1. Re:Halloween strikes again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and nobody remembers the bit-banger serial printing port of the Tandy 'puters and CoCo?

    2. Re:Halloween strikes again! by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Then why do Macs work that way, too? They're not Windows, and they weren't Intel until recently - and didn't have to do Intel the way MS does.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  11. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by Pharmboy · · Score: 0

    Apple seems, in my mind, to go out of their way to sell devices that are extremely limited.

    Then you can make them do only the things in the bulleted brochure. Might explain why I haven't owned anything Apple brand since the 90s. On the other hand, wish I would have bought their stock back then, because of the other fools that bought their products.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  12. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

    Printer drivers are necessary in many cases because non-Apple printer vendors support a very wide and differing feature set.

    You are aware that the sets "non-Apple printer vendors", at least in the sense of "printer vendors other than Apple", and "printer vendors" are the same? I.e., there are no Apple printers.

  13. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ah yes, the late 90s, when the fools bought the products, and the stock, knowing people like you couldn't see the future value

  14. Printer Object by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    I don't know why the OS can't have a Printer superclass that apps all call with a single unified print API, but that the specific instance of attached printer overrides with a subclass implementing the same interface but in that printer's own ways. Printers are all USB, and can install their subclass when plugging in.

    Sure, that's a lot like a driver, but the users and programmers never notice anything but calling members of the Printer object. So the reasons for eliminating "drivers" are satisfied by doing it this way.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Printer Object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you want is BeOS / Haiku, which does just that. ;-)

    2. Re:Printer Object by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Printers are all USB

      No, they're not. They might be networked printers; the patent makes references to IPP.

      So the reasons for eliminating "drivers" are satisfied by doing it this way.

      The reasons for eliminating drivers as listed in the patent are

      In practice, the wireless computing device may not be configured with the requisite driver software. In this case, installing the appropriate printer driver can be bothersome, especially if the user of the mobile computing device only intends to use the nearby printer once or twice. Also, mobile computing devices have limited storage space, which makes it impractical for them to store a large number of printer drivers.

      which I don't see addressed by this. (I'm not sure I believe the "limited storage space" bit, even for "mobile devices" that are "smart phones" rather than laptops.)

    3. Re:Printer Object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you describe *is* a print driver, and *is* the way printing works on modern Windows, MacOS, CUPS, etc. They all provide a standard interface that collects data in a standard format and forwards it to the hardware-specific driver that handles the actual printer communication and any necessary data transformations.

      The problem with that model is that you still need a specific bit of software to print to a specific printer, and that bit of software needs to be maintained for compatibility with new platforms. Try finding a Win7 compatible print driver for a 5-year-old host-based printer and you'll see why users are not satisfied with this model.

      The cloud-based model Apple suggests is a bit of a cheat, as it still requires someone to run/maintain the driver, but at least that driver would be available for all Internet-connected platforms, rather then needed a separate one for each OS/hardware combination.

    4. Re:Printer Object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just described the concept of a printer subsystem, except using OOP terms. As the first sibling pointed out, operating systems where the user space is in fact in OOP style do exactly what you describe. Other OSes do something equivalent; all you have done is say that printing should be done using user-space print drivers.

    5. Re:Printer Object by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      TCP/IP printers should do the same thing, when the printing host connects to it the first time - respond with its ThisPrinter subclass.

      The Printer superclass in the printing host's OS would have the basic printing API implemented as clients to the remote printer's server, where the rest of the code is stored.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:Printer Object by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The device doesn't need to find a printer driver. When it is first connected to the printer, the printer hands its driver over the connection to the device.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    7. Re:Printer Object by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The difference is that what I described gives the device the connected printer's driver object when the device first connects to the printer. I described it in OOP terms because that's the best way to describe these things generically, in terms of the things and their interfaces. And because OSes are written in OOP - for that very reason.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    8. Re:Printer Object by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      The device doesn't need to find a printer driver. When it is first connected to the printer, the printer hands its driver over the connection to the device.

      Yeah, lets run random code downloaded from a random device when we connect to it. That sounds like a great plan.

      Even assuming that the printer includes a driver that the device can run.

    9. Re:Printer Object by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      It's not random. It's a device you're physically connecting to your machine, or connecting to over your network. If you don't trust it, you shouldn't be doing that - let alone accepting a driver from it, which is what we currently do (though from an install disk or download, which is even further more vulnerable to attack than code installed in a physical device).

      And of course we should assume the printer includes a driver that the device can run. That is the entire point of what I posted.

      Most of these security problems are solvable with Java and its sandbox. Accept a "thisPrinter" object that has no access to any host resources except reading the memory given it to print - memory that is never read again by the host, and deleted immediately after the thisPrinter object finishes executing.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  15. Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Torodung · · Score: 1

    I have mod points, but I won't spend them, because I can't mod you both +1 insightful and -1 flamebait.

    And if I could do so, the net mod would be +0:Ambivalent.

    You have some great points, truly, but it's completely neutered by the Apple hater verbiage at the end. Leave the "social rejects" out of it, and it's a cogent and insightful post.

    1. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see the GP's description as "Apple hater verbiage". That sounds like a pretty accurate description of many Apple users, in my opinion.

      Many IBM customers are often described as "suits", because they are indeed business execs wearing suits. It's not meant to be derogatory. It's merely a way to describe such people.

    2. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      Apple also sells a lot of stuff to pensioners (or "seniors" as I supposed they're referred to in America).

      My dad's laptop recently died and I ended up convincing him to get an iPad, which he loves. All he wants is web, email, maps, BBC iPlayer and the odd film. He hated it when his laptop was slow or had any sort of technical issue and never installed any applications on it, so the iPad is a perfect replacement.

      Apparently you can also buy blood pressure monitoring peripheral for it, which made my mum giggle as it's a bother to get him to see the nurse and get his pressure checked.

      I'm personally not interested in iOS devices: I find the arbitrary limitations (third party media players aren't allowed to use the GPU? That's should be the subject of an anti-trust probe on grounds of unlawful tying, they're clearly trying to create an iTunes lockin for HD video content) frustrating. Other people really like them though!

      --
      Nick
    3. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Cool, so it's totally ok to refer to all Linux users as parental-basement dwelling neckbeards with hygiene and attitude problems.

      Just checking, since it's ok to "accurately describe" Apple users as "trust fund babies and social rejects".

    4. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That says a lot more about you than it does about Apple users, you know.

    5. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a big difference there, though. Most Linux users aren't "parental-basement dwelling neckbeards with hygiene and attitude problems", as you describe them.

      A more accurate description would be, "highly-knowledgeable, freedom-embracing software developers and system administrators".

      If you want to include Android users, since Android is basically Linux, you can add "Average Joe" to the description, since it's used on millions upon millions of mobile devices.

    6. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Anybody can use the GPU.
      2. That's not tying.

    7. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by vakuona · · Score: 1

      I think third party media players access the GPU just fine. They can just use the built in player.

    8. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by node+3 · · Score: 1

      If you want to include Android users, since Android is basically Linux, you can add "Average Joe" to the description, since it's used on millions upon millions of mobile devices.

      And since more people use Apple products than use Android products (and Android most certainly is *NOT* "basically Linux", it just uses a highly customized Linux kernel), your argument works against you.

    9. Re:Sincerely, Frustrated Moderator by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      Really? I was investigating this and the fastest media player I could find was AVPlayer HD, which just uses both cores of the A5 and has occasional stutters with 720p video. The only media player I found that uses the GPU was xbmc. It requires a jailbreak but can apparently playback 720p video fine.

      So, which third party media player on the App Store uses the GPU with non-Apple formats?

      --
      Nick
  16. good news everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so like a standard Printer Control Language or maybe some sort of Script for Posting thins to a printer... I wish someone would have thought of that sooner.

    1. Re:good news everyone by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

      so like a standard Printer Control Language or maybe some sort of Script for Posting thins to a printer... I wish someone would have thought of that sooner.

      No, nothing like that. As noted in this comment, there are a lot of cheap non-PostScript printers out there; in the scheme described in the patent, a printer could say "hey, I do PostScript" and the print system could send PostScript to the printer, just as it could say "hey, I do JPEG" and, if what's being printed is a JPEG image, the print system could send the JPEG to the printer, or it could say "hey, I do PDF" and the print system could send a PDF to the printer, or it could say "hey, I only do raster images" and the print system could generate raster images and send them to the printer.

    2. Re:good news everyone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      So, rather than have a "driver" the computer has to know a new means of interrogating the capabilities of the printer, and then convert files to a format that the printer can handle... Right?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    3. Re:good news everyone by PPH · · Score: 1

      there are a lot of cheap non-PostScript printers out there

      So, the printer manufacturer's choice is:
      1. License PostScript from Adobe.
      2. License this new protocol from Apple.

      Either way, the result won't be 'cheap' anymore.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:good news everyone by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      So, rather than have a "driver" the computer has to know a new means of interrogating the capabilities of the printer

      Or an existing means of interrogating the capabilities of the printer (which they call out by name in the patent application).

      and then convert files to a format that the printer can handle... Right?

      Yup, or ask some server "in the cloud" to do it, as the patent application says.

    5. Re:good news everyone by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      So, the printer manufacturer's choice is:
      1. License PostScript from Adobe.
      2. License this new protocol from Apple.

      So where in the patent application do they mention a new protocol? They do mention an existing protocol....

    6. Re:good news everyone by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      So where in the patent application do they mention a new protocol? They do mention an existing protocol....

      In the other patent application they mention "a new document-format-preferred key (as a MIME media type), which enables the printer to specify a "preferred" document format out of all of the document formats that are supported by the printer", which is a new IPP key, and also mention "a new "URF-supported key" to a discovery protocol and a transport protocol. More specifically, some embodiments have added a new URF-supported key to the discovery protocol as part of a Bonjour(TM) TXT record, and have also added an analogous URF-supported key to the transport protocol as a new printer description attribute for the IPP protocol", where URF is presumably the Universal Raster Format mentioned in other comments. It also mentions "a new device-independent bitmap container for printer data".

      If the patent is granted, I suspect licensing it to put into your printer will be easy and cheap, to encourage lots of printers to support it, but licensing it to put into, for example, your smartphone OS might not be quite so easy or cheap.

    7. Re:good news everyone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      So all we've done is move the driver from the computer to the printer or an intermediary point - so you can still have problems with a driver, it'll just be more out of your own control to update them/correct them when you get a new OS...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  17. Does anyone actually use tablets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I keep hearing how popular tablets are, but I never actually see anyone using them.

    I work in industry at an office in the downtown core of a large American city, but I also get to travel as part of my job, and I lecture part-time at a local college. During a typical week, I'll see thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people, in all sorts of settings doing all sorts of activities. But I very rarely see anyone using an iPad, or any other tablet.

    Sometimes I commute by public transit, and I never see people there using them there. I never see people using them when I'm flying to other cities, even across the country. I never see people sitting outdoors using them. I never see people using them while eating lunch or drinking coffee. I never see people using them at my workplace. I never see people using them at the offices of the other companies I visit.

    I've only seen my students use them on two occasions before class, but both students put them away and used netbooks instead when the lecture started. The only other time I've seen people use them is at Apple stores.

    Tablet users are something that I actively keep an eye out for, but they just don't seem to exist. For all the hype that tablets get, I'd expect to see them actually being used. I mean, I see people using their cell phones. I see people using netbooks. I've even seen more people writing in paper notebooks with pens in the past week than I've seen tablet users in total, over all time.

    So I have to ask, does anyone actually use tablets?

    1. Re:Does anyone actually use tablets? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I live in the second largest city in Australia. I work in a building which houses several engineering firms and the state police. Tablets are everywhere. Go out for coffee and there will be a tablet on every fourth table or so. Though I think it is a bit of a fad. I think tablets will take a stable chunk of the light laptop use case in the long term.

    2. Re:Does anyone actually use tablets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come to San Francisco. They're everywhere.

    3. Re:Does anyone actually use tablets? by jcr · · Score: 1

      No idea where you are, but I've seen them all over the place in San Francisco, Chicago, New York and San Diego.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re:Does anyone actually use tablets? by unencode200x · · Score: 1

      All I can say is that I know about 20 people with tables, mostly through work and the iPad 2 that my wife has. Most go unused most of the time. My wife much prefers her 5-lb Dell Latitude to the iPad because it's not as fun to use Facebook if you can't type... I'd like those $800 back :P

      --

      Chance favors the prepared mind.
      Perfect is the enemy of good.
    5. Re:Does anyone actually use tablets? by VirginMary · · Score: 1

      I use my iPad2 for roughly 2 hours per day Monday through Friday on my bus commute. It is far more comfortable to use for reading and browsing than a laptop. Other than that I use it when I fly. Again, much more comfortable to use than the 15" laptop that I used in the past. It is also great during boring meetings that i am forced to attend once a week. I know a lot of clueless morons claim that netbooks are so superior but I have never seen anyone hold up a netbook to their face or even keep it on their lap to read an ebook for an hour on the bus. Hmm, I wonder why that is? Could it be that it is incredibly uncomfortable and awkward? I do see students use a laptop very briefly on the bus maybe once or twice a year. But, I have seen other people use a Kindle or an iPad for extended periods of time. I also use my iPad occasionally with Skype to communicate with friends or coworkers while I am on the bus. I have used an iPod Touch before to read but it just doesn't compare because of the tiny screen. Also browsing is an even better experience on my iPad than on my laptop. And it will only get better. The improvements that I am looking for are, a higher resolution screen, a lighter device, more battery life even though it is not really an issue for me, it just would be nice, and lots more storage because I love to fill the thing up with movies when I travel and more choice is always good and I just love to keep some shows like Cowboy Bebop and The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya permanently. I should add that I commute to and from a major US university where I work as a software developer. I am the stereotypical UNIX nerd: I am overweight, dress poorly, have long grey hair and generally couldn't give a rat's ass as to what others think about me. The operating systems I currently use are Linux, Mac OS/iOS and Solaris. I hate Windows!

      --
      When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
    6. Re:Does anyone actually use tablets? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Apple has sold the odd million of them.

      In my lab there are half a dozen, and they do very much replace paper. Reams of it. Filing cabinets full.

  18. Prior art? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The second will be via a cloud service"

    So, like HP ePrint?

  19. dont know whether to laugh or cry by FudRucker · · Score: 2

    it was a closed source printer driver that made Richard Stallman invent the GNU/FOSS software movement, if not for his nemesis GNU would never have been born...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:dont know whether to laugh or cry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was the spur to make him do it, but if it wasn't it is quite possible another proprietary blob would have acted as the spur instead.

  20. I was thinking College Humor by iYk6 · · Score: 1

    This is what I thought of when I read the summary: http://www.collegehumor.com/video/3915385/your-printer-is-a-brat

  21. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    yup, Apple is starting to do those dirty tricks only that evil company from Redmond Washington does:
    1.Embrace
    2.Extend
    3.Extinguish

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  22. Re:Cheap by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    I don't want a cheap printer, I want a printer that is cheap to operate. The cheaper the printer, the more the ink cartridges (or whatever) will cost you, the sooner it will break or be abandoned etc. I bought an Laserprinter years ago that would print something like 6000 pgs per laser cartridge. The carts cost $120 or so and the printer cost me $300 plus, but it was far cheaper than replacing the ink carts in a cheap printer continuously at $45-75 each (as with the current printer we have). The only reason I got rid of the old printer was that we bought a newer one that was colour. I would rather have the old one now mind you.

    Buying cheap printers and then spending more in the long run is for idiots.

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  23. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by tepples · · Score: 1

    there are no Apple printers.

    Tomorrow when I get home, please remind me to check whether my ImageWriter II (impact printer used with my Apple IIGS) and my Color StyleWriter 2500 (a rebadged Canon BubbleJet) are still in my basement, or whether they've evaporated. (References here)

    Serious mode: Apple printers still exist; they're just discontinued.

  24. To Read The Fine Patent Application... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's Patent Application 20110194140 ; here's the application.

    And, yes, that's Michael "Mr. CUPS" Sweet in the Inventors list.

    1. Re:To Read The Fine Patent Application... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

      It's Patent Application 20110194140 ; here's the application.

      And the other one is Patent Application 20110194124.

    2. Re:To Read The Fine Patent Application... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So apple patents printing... Will they now sue Microsoft because you can print form their OS aswell?
      Ofcause they will try and get Linux distributions shut down over it... That almost goes without saying.

      And BSD, never mind where they got their OS from in the first place, it is theirs now, so they can sue the original inventors for still using it!

    3. Re:To Read The Fine Patent Application... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      So apple patents printing...

      Nope. You obviously haven't Read The FIne Patent Applications.

  25. Wanna print? - have your credit card ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    apple will want to ask "30% of the revenue we generate for the printer - we think' that's fair"

  26. Partial reality distortion? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

    Given that they already open sourced CUPS, and don't have any profit in printers, it's more likely than not they would simply open source it like OpenCL, CUPS, Webkit, etc.

    Apple developed OpenCL and open-sourced it under the permissive GPL. Kudos for that.

    However, CUPS existed and was open-source for years before Apple adopted it in 2002 (they did not create it).

    Webkit is a fork of the KHTML library which is and was under the LGPL, and thus Apple had no choice over open-sourcing it and releasing it under a permissive license.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Partial reality distortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can also claim credit for LLVM and Clang.

      Overall I think Apple has one of the best track records of contributing to open source software. It doesn't stop them from also being megalomaniac control freaks though.

    2. Re:Partial reality distortion? by tyrione · · Score: 1

      Given that they already open sourced CUPS, and don't have any profit in printers, it's more likely than not they would simply open source it like OpenCL, CUPS, Webkit, etc.

      Apple developed OpenCL and open-sourced it under the permissive GPL. Kudos for that.

      However, CUPS existed and was open-source for years before Apple adopted it in 2002 (they did not create it).

      Webkit is a fork of the KHTML library which is and was under the LGPL, and thus Apple had no choice over open-sourcing it and releasing it under a permissive license.

      WebKit started as a fork and was completely rewritten. Nothing of KHTML/KJS is in WebKit. Apple took over sponsorship of CUPS and it's creator works for Apple. All but the interfaces within OS X have been released to the public.

    3. Re:Partial reality distortion? by makomk · · Score: 2

      I somehow doubt that, not least because totally rewriting Webkit would require breaking a lot of stuff for no good reason. (Also, Webkit and KHTML often have the exact same bugs...)

    4. Re:Partial reality distortion? by haruchai · · Score: 2

      Chris Lattner started LLVM while in university, at least 5 yrs before Apple hired him. I gave Redhat top marks for a company contributing to open source and they seem to be the only ones who have yet to descend into assholery.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    5. Re:Partial reality distortion? by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      So? Linux has been rewritten multiple times by now, there is not much code left from Linux 1.3.0 in Linux 3.0

      Still, WebKit clearly originates from KHTML. And multiple companies (including Google) have contributed in its development.

    6. Re:Partial reality distortion? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Webkit is a fork of the KHTML [wikipedia.org] library which is and was under the LGPL, and thus Apple had no choice over open-sourcing it and releasing it under a permissive license.

      Yes and no. Under the GPL, Apple is required parts of WebKit which were originally part of KHTML. However Apple developed parts that they released under BSD style licenses which are more permissive.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    7. Re:Partial reality distortion? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      CUPS was BSD licensed. Apple could have made a private fork and kept any of their contributions for themselves. They didn't.

    8. Re:Partial reality distortion? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      CUPS was BSD licensed.

      Before, or after, Apple hired Michael Sweet? If before, then it'd been changed to being GPLed before Apple hired him. If after, then Apple changed it to GPL after hiring him.

  27. and ink at 50%-200%+ mark up by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and ink at 50%-200%+ mark up

  28. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

    Serious mode: Apple printers still exist; they're just discontinued.

    Yes, I know about the LaserWriter, etc., so "there are no Apple printers any more", then. The point is that you can't rationally argue that Apple can solve this problem because the printers they design have limited capabilities, and thus need no drivers, as they haven't designed printers in ages (and the first one they designed was a PostScript printer, so you could send it arbitrary programs - hardly "very locked-down and limited to a small set of functionality".

  29. Smartphone by tepples · · Score: 1
    You make valid points, but some of them do have workarounds.

    There's no way I can ever conceive of lugging a tablet around with me just going about everyday tasks

    Let me guess: man who wouldn't be caught dead with "a purse". I have a bag for my netbook.

    for really important documents I want a paper backup that I can still access in case of a power outage.

    How long do you expect such outages to last?

    With an electronic copy, we need some kind of digital device to accommodate the transfer

    Such device could be a mobile phone. I'm under the impression that it has become customary to carry a mobile phone in case of needing to make an urgent call, such as car/bike trouble or notifying someone of one's impending arrival at the locked front door of a multiple-story apartment. The one wrinkle could be that one of the parties is a cheapskate like myself who carries a dumbphone because smartphone service is ten times as expensive as dumbphone service.

    and we have to make sure the document is in some format that both of our devices understand

    Apple iOS ships with a PDF reader, and several PDF readers are available for Android.

    1. Re:Smartphone by bieber · · Score: 1

      Let me guess: man who wouldn't be caught dead with "a purse". I have a bag for my netbook.

      I'll carry a backpack if I need to, but I see no compelling reason to carry a bag with me everywhere just to accommodate a computing device that I really don't need just on the offchance that it may at some point be useful as an alternative to a sheet of paper.

      Such device could be a mobile phone.

      Now I have to carry a smartphone which basically takes up an entire pocket and a separate bag for my tablet with me everywhere? Even when my pockets end up stuffed with relatively absurd amounts of paper, it's still less cumbersome than that.

      Apple iOS ships with a PDF reader, and several PDF readers are available for Android

      PDF is actually a pretty bad format for mobile devices, because it's page-based. If your PDF document was generated such that it's ideal to be printed on 8.5x11 paper, it's not going to render well on a device with a smaller screen. This is a huge problem with e-readers: I've spent entirely too much time trying to effectively strip PDFs of their page-based formatting to get them displaying well on my Kindle. The only really ideal use for PDF, imo, is preparing a document for printing.

      Of course, there are better solutions (heck, I'm a fan of plain text unless you really need advanced formatting), but the problem is getting people to use them. Unfortunately, we still live in a world where university professors distribute one-page assignments as Microsoft Word documents.

  30. Yet another obvious software patent. by edibobb · · Score: 1

    There is nothing novel or nontrivial about printing without a printer driver, and this has been done more than 25 years ago. We can expect this patent application to be approved straightaway.

    1. Re:Yet another obvious software patent. by PPH · · Score: 1

      In fact, wasn't it Apple that pioneered the adoption of PostScript? For both printing and screen rendering, IIRC.

      Perhaps they just forgot to patent it back then. Someone moved a filing cabinet and found the original application that had fallen behind it.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  31. Not quite accurate by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Apple really wants to move the printer driver from the computer to the printer...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  32. Screw the cloud by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    I say eff the cloud and everything about it. To me, it represents nothing more than a way to extract fees from you every month.

  33. Just imagine ...... by rust627 · · Score: 1

    Just Imagine for a moment that you run a large computer company that produces several different types of devices, some of these devices are static, like say a few different desktop devices, and (I know there are arguments about the validity of this claim) a server or 2, and several of differing styles of mobile devices. All of which can be used for accessing, moving, and even creating or altering data in one form or another. Sooner or later, your customers, due to the fact that they have to deal with non - customers and even due to the fact that they are human and thus not enlightened enough to be able to totally live without printing, will need to print some of this data (photos, emails, maps whatever).
    And what is more they may even want to print data in different places with different printers,their home, their office, their girlfriends house, great-aunt Maudes nursing home, their mothers house (and god forbid but one of these may be one of the unenlightened who does not own one of your companies products).
    Now there is a problem.
    All of these different printers have different drivers and some of them, will not be worth the hassle of installing the driver, with all of its extra functionality, just to print a picture of little billy falling off the swing.
    So you think about a universal driver, basic, able to be used by any device even (grudgingly) your oppositions devices (if they pay a suitable licensing fee, instant extra source of revenue, that will keep the accounting department happy).
    But a true universal driver is not practical because every printer has different functions and capabilities and really, all most people want to do is access the most basic of these,e.g. Print text and Print pictures, good quality or "I don't care" quality, without having to load drivers for every printer everywhere.
    The person in charge of each of these printers still needs or wants access to these higher functions, and for their home printer (and maybe their office one too) accessed from their desktop or your laptop, but they won't necessarily want all of that functionality from their phone, tablet, or ultralight netbook.
    So lets look at what you can sell to your customers
    1. Full function printing from a desktop/laptop or other device, needs full printer driver
    2. Some way of linking your portable device to your desktop/laptop or whatever to get a remote link to the full printer driver, lets call it "via the cloud", thats vague enough for a patent filing
    3. Some way of universally accessing any printer from any device, like say a basic universal printer driver, yes we know its been done before, but we might be able to rephrase it well enough to get it past the United States Patent Trolls Office.

    or as the summary put it
      "If the company has its way, there will be three ways to access a printer in the future: The first will be via a conventional software driver. The second will be via a cloud service and the third will be via a driverless access method that supports 'universal' printing from any type device."

    When you think of it in basic functionality like this, it is really very obvious and self evident, so now, there are only a couple more steps

    step one. Patent the concept
    step two. Licence the patent (very cheap or even free to the printer companies, so that it becomes ubiquitous)
    step three. Increase sales because of universal printer access - profit
    set four. Wait until it becomes so commonplace and the competition start to use this function, or want to use it
    step five. ????
    step six. PROFIT !!!!!

    --
    da da da dum indeed.
  34. I haven't used a USB printer in years by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    At home, I've got an Epson laser printer sitting on the network. At work, I've got a few different HPs and a Dell on the network. At school, there are quite a few different models.

    I can't recall the last time, if ever, that I used a USB printer.

    1. Re:I haven't used a USB printer in years by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The same driver transaction can happen over TCP/IP as over USB when the printing host first connects to the printer.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  35. No matter what it won't get rid of it by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

    While a standardization of features could make ti so you don't need a 3rd part driver for simple things, you still need a driver and you need a more complex one for full support.

    If you want to see an area where this has happened, look at audio on Windows. Microsoft laid out the specs for the Universal Audio Architecture. As the name implies, it is a set of audio standards. For Vista and later, to get the logo you need to have a sound card that complies with it to the extent that it can function with no drivers outside of the base UAA driver that comes with Windows.

    Works too, those Realtek HD chips that are so popular on motherboards just work as UAA devices right after install. These days, a good bit of after market cards do as well.

    However, for all that, Realtek still has drivers on their site. Why? Because the default UAA supports only a basic set of features. If you want support for everything, you have to get their driver.

    So it works and all that, and I'm not saying it is a bad idea to have standards such that you don't need additional drivers for basic support. But geeks at least do need to understand that there is still a driver, it is just one included with the OS, and that it is just basic support, you'll need custom stuff to fully support all features.

    1. Re:No matter what it won't get rid of it by dissy · · Score: 1

      Yup, this is basically like VESA mode for video cards.

      You load the basic VESA driver and can get text mode and basic 640x480 (or if y our lucky 800x600) graphics mode.
      To get any higher resolution, or any acceleration, you load the specific video card driver.

      But it at least works more than not at all before that specific driver is loaded.

      Most printers do support a basic ascii text mode, but sounds like they now want a basic pixel addressing mode as well, which in this day and age is long over due.

    2. Re:No matter what it won't get rid of it by bored · · Score: 1

      Uh the VESA BIOS extensions support mode setting, and most cards that supported it had a fairly complete list of common resolutions/color depths. The protected mode API's were actually really nice on most cards as they generally allowed flat mapped frame buffer access. The problem was that generally the native drivers did a much better job of accelerated drawing.

      I haven't tried running any of my code recently, but my understanding is that modern video cards may not actually support VBE >=2.0 anymore, which is sort of sad actually. Hence the nvidia frame buffer driver, etc in the linux kernel. As linux's fb device maps pretty well to the vesafb driver, which should have been sufficient to support nearly any card, if the cards actually had VBE.

    3. Re:No matter what it won't get rid of it by SJ · · Score: 1

      I haven't installed a sound driver for the better part of 3 or 4 years. My computer seems to play sound quite happily. What am I missing?

  36. telnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just telnet to the printer and send the postscript. Problem solved. Security? The beauty behind postscript is that it provides characters, shapes and raster. Seems like the web is finally getting its legs under the shapes bit.

  37. Re:Cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >

    Buying cheap printers and then spending more in the long run is for idiots.

    True, true. But for the many consumers who buy cheap printers and don't spend more in the long run, obviously not.

  38. The first would be via software driver by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

    So they're going to eliminate printer drivers by using printer drivers? Excellent summary!

  39. Pointless by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

    So if you're going to have to connect to the internet and send all of your data away, to have it reformatted and sent back, every time you want to print something then why not just connect to a printer driver website and and download a driver once, never to have this problem again? This doesn't seem to help any situation except that everything you print goes into the hands of a corporation briefly.

    1. Re:Pointless by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      This seems like a painful and uneccessarily complex way to avoid using CUPS.

      Cloud concepts are certainly handy and useful. They just need to local. A cloud over Arizona tends to be less useful to you if you are in Indiana.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  40. What about IPP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol

    CUPS is based on it...

    1. Re:What about IPP by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol

      You mean the Internet Printing Protocol to which both the first patent application and the second application refer?

      CUPS is based on it...

      You mean the CUPS that the first inventor in the inventor lists for both applications wrote?

  41. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by MrNaz · · Score: 1

    Could it be that filing patent applications relating to printers by a company that used to make printers could be a hint, that maybe, just maybe, they intend to start making printers again?

    --
    I hate printers.
  42. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by That+Guy+From+Mrktng · · Score: 1

    Makes sense since a lot of desktop publishing is done in Macs. But the focus of this patents make me think it's something more focused on con(pro)sumers.

    iPrinter - If you try to fill the cartridges/tonner by yourself they'll get your ass in a re-education camp.. because they're built in! yay innovation!

  43. Why not just put the drivers on the printer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put that software on a bit of rewritable memory on the printer itself, then standardize the text that get's sent to the printer. Then all that has to be done is plug the printer in and let the computer see "A printer"... Then when some XML is squirted over to it, the printer can figure out how to print it...

  44. they aren't getting rid of the printer driver by Nyder · · Score: 1

    If the company has its way, there will be three ways to access a printer in the future: The first will be via a conventional software driver. The second will be via a cloud service and the third will be via a driverless access method that supports 'universal' printing from any type device."

    Lets look at that quote.

    3 ways to access the printer in the future.

    1st way is a "software driver" which oddly enough, is what we call a Printer Driver.

    Doesn't seem to me they are trying to get rid of it.

    ya, ya, i know #2 is the "iCloud" which would have printer drivers on the computers connected to the "cloud", and #3 is the meat of the article, basicly printers built with a universal "api" inside, instead of having to have special drivers on the computer. ya, that would be nice, but I don't see it really happening.

    I just like how the summary and crap makes it seem like they are doing away with the printer drivers when it's listed as a way to access the printers in the future. Ya, i'd post that as anonymous also.

    --
    Be seeing you...
    1. Re:they aren't getting rid of the printer driver by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      basicly printers built with a universal "api" inside

      That universal API is called Postscript

  45. Prior Art by dave87656 · · Score: 1

    How does one notify the patent office of prior art? This is exactly how our print service works with our application: we create a print job from any device that supports one of three standard print formats: PDF, PS and text. The print job is given to a central repository with the only requirement that it be accessible over a network or internet connection. The system also allows the use of a local printer, if it supports the format. It's been in documented and provable use since 2003.

  46. Even better by MM-tng · · Score: 1

    And how long are we going to use printers?. I have one at home, I never use it anymore. Seems like they should have invented this 10 years ago.

  47. Can we do Network cards next? by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    It's easy enough to get updated drivers for everything else, if you have network access, but a number of times I've had a fresh OS install without a properly autodetected ethernet card. I'd like them to have some basic level of functionality with a truly generic driver.

  48. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by node+3 · · Score: 1

    yup, Apple is starting to do those dirty tricks only that evil company from Redmond Washington does:

    1.Embrace
    2.Extend
    3.Extinguish

    For example? For your statement to be relevant, there'd need to be at least a few, but I doubt you can even come up with one.

  49. Re:Apple sells limitations. Others don't. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

    Could it be that filing patent applications relating to printers by a company that used to make printers could be a hint, that maybe, just maybe, they intend to start making printers again?

    I rather doubt that it is. It's a patent application relating to printers by a company that makes machines that are, sadly, sometimes forced to send data to printers. The fact that, at one point, they made printers (or, at least, sold printers on which they did some design work), and then thought better of it, is probably particularly relevant here.

  50. Trolling? by Dthief · · Score: 1

    Or they just want this in their back-pocket, and have no plans of implementing it in the foreseeable future.

    --
    www.RacquetUp.org - Helping Detroit Youth
  51. Depends on the card/chip you have by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    For some of them, probably nothing, for others, additional controls. If you'd care or not is a different matter, but the Realtek HD chips have various controls you can only get at via their drivers, like delay correction for speaker position, microphone echo cancellation, and special effects.

    For other cards it can be things like a more advanced mixer, or ASIO drivers, or things like that.

    If your card does what you want, it isn't a big deal just to use the UAA drivers, that was the point of the UAA standard after all. However it is also not a big deal to install the drivers, they are provided free of charge by any manufacturer I am aware of.

  52. PDF sometimes as well by dbIII · · Score: 1

    There's a few printers even at the low end of network printers that will work if you send a PDF down the wire. Some (like the one I've had for 5 years) will even work if you send it by FTP.

  53. CUPS was never BSD licensed... by Sits · · Score: 1

    I'm not quite sure where the "BSD licensed CUPS" myth started... The very early beta releases (back in 1999) of CUPS were under the Aladdin Free Public License (you can read about Michael Sweet talking about the AFPL license choice in a comment) , a licence that is more similar to the GPL than to a BSD-esque licence. However, in version 1.0b3, CUPS switched from the AFPL to the GPL and has been distributed under the GPL ever since (and you can read Michael Sweet saying the CUPS API is under the GPL but perhaps this changed later?).

    This does not refute your point that Apple did _not_ fork the project closed after they obtained the copyright (CUPS always required copyright assignment so it was always possible for people to negotiate for it to be provided under terms other than the GPL).

  54. so let me get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple wants to patent what's essentially a universal printer driver? Way to go apple just keep on lighting the world on fire with "innovations" like this.

  55. Drivers do more than one thing by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    Drivers are more than just translating printer data into print outs. They have control panels for features in the printer. Multiple trays and the like.

    Getting rid of printer drivers would mean having to handle these device specific features and even if you added facilities to handle these unique features there may be a situation that can't be handled.

  56. Yes, Postscript by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Solution:

              0) Bonjour works fine, whatever you feel like to detect printers.

              1) Postscript. Companies have resisted it solely because they want to make printers with no smarts in the printer at all. Give it up, the CPU and RAM to run Postscript have got to run like a dollar these days.
    -OR-
              2) Ghostscript, cups, and friends to support all printers. If you think of Windows print drivers, which are in actuality a printer driver, a control panel, and whatever bloatware they decided to throw in, this sounds unreasonable. But the support for virtually every printer ever made for Ubuntu is about 16MB -- and a good 8MB of that is documentation and language templates (not printer languages, human ones) -- if the device doesn't support some languages, or replaces the UI with it's own, that's cut it all down to like 8MB. And if the files are stored in a compressed filesystem, well, these PPDs and stuff compress REALLY well. Flash filesystems often are compressed.

    ------ NOT CLOUD! Sorry, but sending print jobs out to the Internet somewhere, having page data sent back to the printer, is sheer madness.

  57. My kingdom for mod points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for the laugh.

  58. Plug'n'Pay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Plug'n'Pay, the Apple way.

    (Never needed printer drivers for my old Amiga)

  59. Points 1 don't have any rationale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Point 1 is bollocks since it's a way to print, naff all else. Point 1b is extreme bollocks. Since it's a separate program, GPL3 doesn't affect the rest of their system and the patent bit is pointless since they're supposed to be using patents defensively anyway, right? So all we're left with in GPL3 is the anti-tivoisation. This would only be useful if Apple wanted to close up the GPL product and make CUPS only possible for Apple-signed systems.

  60. Thats good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...considering i cannot find 64bit windows drivers for my laserjet 1000...