Yeah, the wax transfers aren't ideal for our application. We're producing folded booklets on demand from a PDF rendered by a web app, and handing them to people who will then proceed to abuse them. Laser produces the most durable output.
So, yeah. Hardware==cool. Drivers==lousy. Hence my conundrum.
We'd love to use Tektronix, since my org likes to patronize local businesses when possible. Unfortunately, a) we've got a big install of these HPLJ's already, and b) the hardware is supportable and well-proven. It's just...the crappy...drivers. Argh.
Windows is no prize, that's for sure. However, the problem doesn't occur with the Ricoh multi-function printers I support. Only HP's. And we're not talking junky little inkjets...I'm talking about LJ4600DTNs.
If Ricoh made an attractively-priced color laser printer, that'd be sweet. Unfortunately, they don't seem to. I've played with a few Dell color lasers (Fujitsu engines, I think?), but their procurement system for buying more toner sucks (in that you can't buy it from our office supplies dealer, only direct from Dell). Oh yeah, and you can't use them as a line printer for an RS6000. (somebody explain that one to me...)
"special drivers besides those already included in XP?"
Um, those are the ones I'm talking about. The Win2k drivers are pretty awful as well. They need to be uninstalled and reinstalled for no apparent reason every once in a while. Great fun!
OK, so are you going to come train all my users how to prepend some text to the front of their print jobs? That'd be great. Perhaps you could also tell them that the system is really not kidding when it tells them to change their password.
I'm sure that, if not-Windows were a viable option, I'd have lots of viable options. Until then, HP printer drivers it is. And they suck. Hence my point.
"wouldn't the average iMac buyer get better value if the monitor was a seprate unit? "
Clearly, they don't think so, because they're an iMac buyer, not a Mac Mini buyer. What an utterly astounding revelation! It's almost like different people can have different sets of needs and values!
"Interestingly, game developers tend not to focus on visuals to the exclusion of gameplay. "
Snort. Where do YOU work?
"Assuming the game is fun, wouldn't you rather have one that looked better?"
Ah, it's the first part of your assumption that is so problematic. If a game is fun, it doesn't really matter if it looks "better". Eye candy is nice and all, but it sure doesn't sell me a game.
Like where? How do I know if it's credible? I don't have a couple hundred grand of grant money and a climate lab. All I've got is an Internet connection and a pretty good brain. How do I know if somebody's talking out of their ass or not?
"abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy blah blah."
Yep. Or it could be that this is a tempest in a teapot. Remember the uproar about freon and MTBE? Those wound up being great environmental wins, huh?
One thing I'm sure of: If both "sides" of the political spectrum think it's advantageous for me to be misled about the state of the planet, I'm not going to be able to draw a sound conclusion. I'm not trying to guess the middle from two extremes. I'm simply not swayed by any of these arguments.
I think it's a good idea to be a responsible steward of our resources. I think using less foreign oil is a good idea. I think energy efficiency is smart policy. I do NOT think the sky is falling.
You're not doing your argument any favors with your sarcasm.
That's crap. There is no airliner operating in the US that is not required, by law, to search people. That law is a secret, and we don't get to read it. This is not acceptable.
The free market is not in play here. I can't just "not fly". That won't get the problem solved.
OK, so the "Union of Concerned Scientists". Sounds all scientific. If I had the chops to evaluate their data, I would not "not know", I would "know". I don't know if the Union of Concerned Scientists is, in fact, a spontaneously organized group of scientists, or a politically motivated special interest group.
Basically, I don't trust anybody other than myself, because both sides of this issue (insofar as the issue has only two sides, which is the first of a large number of bad assumptions that get made on the topic) have crazy, shrill, not-awfully-credible proponents of various data sets which lead one to different conclusions.
I am a skeptic. I don't trust the parties who speak on this subject. I don't know how to gather enough data to draw sound conclusions, so I'm left with "I don't know."
Make of that what you will. Just try to tone down the holier-than-thou rhetoric, OK? It's not doing anybody any good.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, the wax transfers aren't ideal for our application. We're producing folded booklets on demand from a PDF rendered by a web app, and handing them to people who will then proceed to abuse them. Laser produces the most durable output.
So, yeah. Hardware==cool. Drivers==lousy. Hence my conundrum.
We'd love to use Tektronix, since my org likes to patronize local businesses when possible. Unfortunately, a) we've got a big install of these HPLJ's already, and b) the hardware is supportable and well-proven. It's just...the crappy...drivers. Argh.
This is gonna totally blow your mind, but....here goes.
Two different people might have two different opinions.
[neo]WHOA![/neo]
Windows is no prize, that's for sure. However, the problem doesn't occur with the Ricoh multi-function printers I support. Only HP's. And we're not talking junky little inkjets...I'm talking about LJ4600DTNs.
If Ricoh made an attractively-priced color laser printer, that'd be sweet. Unfortunately, they don't seem to. I've played with a few Dell color lasers (Fujitsu engines, I think?), but their procurement system for buying more toner sucks (in that you can't buy it from our office supplies dealer, only direct from Dell). Oh yeah, and you can't use them as a line printer for an RS6000. (somebody explain that one to me...)
"special drivers besides those already included in XP?"
Um, those are the ones I'm talking about. The Win2k drivers are pretty awful as well. They need to be uninstalled and reinstalled for no apparent reason every once in a while. Great fun!
OK, so are you going to come train all my users how to prepend some text to the front of their print jobs? That'd be great. Perhaps you could also tell them that the system is really not kidding when it tells them to change their password.
I'm sure that, if not-Windows were a viable option, I'd have lots of viable options. Until then, HP printer drivers it is. And they suck. Hence my point.
"The internal differences are significant."
For varying values of "significant", this can mean whatever you want it to mean.
And what the heck would Apple want with a machine they could sell a lot of? Heaven forfend!
There are people who whine that the mini is too expensive. Apple cannot and should not be all things to all people.
Look, there's lots of fish in the sea. Buy a Mac, or don't. You are the only person who can make the determination for what suits your needs.
Well, we know that YOU know best, so we'll just check with you. Could I please have your home phone number? That'd be great.
"wouldn't the average iMac buyer get better value if the monitor was a seprate unit? "
Clearly, they don't think so, because they're an iMac buyer, not a Mac Mini buyer. What an utterly astounding revelation! It's almost like different people can have different sets of needs and values!
"up until the PC world catches up and beats them at their own game (which will always happen)"
When has that ever happened?
DVI or VGA on the Dell panels at work?
"Maybe Apple could even build it so the screen can be powered independently from the internals. Why not?"
Well, I think it should have a smoothie maker! For making real fruit smoothies!
Do you want a hug?
How nice for you. Tell me...in a Windows environment, how do you specify whether you'd like the document duplexed without using a driver?
I'd love to not have a Windows environment. That'd be great. However, until that happy day arrives, I'm stuck with HP's crappy drivers.
"they still make good business-class laser printers" ...with loathsome drivers.
"In fact, they're not necessarily experts in everything/anything."
If they're not experts on anything, and don't know how to listen to people who are, what are they for?
Hmm. I'd rather be in a relationship with somebody who trusts me, and can take me at my word. And vice versa.
Oh wait! I am! COOL!
"Interestingly, game developers tend not to focus on visuals to the exclusion of gameplay. "
Snort. Where do YOU work?
"Assuming the game is fun, wouldn't you rather have one that looked better?"
Ah, it's the first part of your assumption that is so problematic. If a game is fun, it doesn't really matter if it looks "better". Eye candy is nice and all, but it sure doesn't sell me a game.
Stupid apple with their OPTIONS. They should just not give them to people.
Yes, those are my eyes rolling at you.
You and your stupid FACTS.
You let me know what that something was, and I'll be sure to not have it anymore. The guys at security sure couldn't.
It's bullshit. It is security theater. It does not keep us safer. It needs to stop.
"For example, The Washington Post would be an especially credible source, as would be the Pentagon."
:-)."
Or they might be pandering to the environmental lobby in a spurious attempt to seem reasonable.
"Surely you trust some source of information about the world."
The world? Yes. This issue? Not so much. I have a very hard time separating the wheat from the chaff on this particular subject.
"What are they doing that you aren't?"
Thinking about systems that are vastly less complex than the atmosphere.
"I'll marshall my arguments as it suits me, sir
And I'll assign you credibility as I see fit, sir.
"to them and look elsewhere for your information"
Like where? How do I know if it's credible? I don't have a couple hundred grand of grant money and a climate lab. All I've got is an Internet connection and a pretty good brain. How do I know if somebody's talking out of their ass or not?
"abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy blah blah."
Yep. Or it could be that this is a tempest in a teapot. Remember the uproar about freon and MTBE? Those wound up being great environmental wins, huh?
One thing I'm sure of: If both "sides" of the political spectrum think it's advantageous for me to be misled about the state of the planet, I'm not going to be able to draw a sound conclusion. I'm not trying to guess the middle from two extremes. I'm simply not swayed by any of these arguments.
I think it's a good idea to be a responsible steward of our resources. I think using less foreign oil is a good idea. I think energy efficiency is smart policy. I do NOT think the sky is falling.
You're not doing your argument any favors with your sarcasm.
What made you think it was the only criterion? You must be one of those binary thinkers. Either A, or B.
Guess what: The world is a complicated place. Nuance is important.
"If you don't want to get searched, don't fly."
That's crap. There is no airliner operating in the US that is not required, by law, to search people. That law is a secret, and we don't get to read it. This is not acceptable.
The free market is not in play here. I can't just "not fly". That won't get the problem solved.
OK, so the "Union of Concerned Scientists". Sounds all scientific. If I had the chops to evaluate their data, I would not "not know", I would "know". I don't know if the Union of Concerned Scientists is, in fact, a spontaneously organized group of scientists, or a politically motivated special interest group.
Basically, I don't trust anybody other than myself, because both sides of this issue (insofar as the issue has only two sides, which is the first of a large number of bad assumptions that get made on the topic) have crazy, shrill, not-awfully-credible proponents of various data sets which lead one to different conclusions.
I am a skeptic. I don't trust the parties who speak on this subject. I don't know how to gather enough data to draw sound conclusions, so I'm left with "I don't know."
Make of that what you will. Just try to tone down the holier-than-thou rhetoric, OK? It's not doing anybody any good.