Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #197336 > unrolled thread

Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) "Juan R. de Silva" <juan.r.d.silva@gmail.com> - 2018-07-08 04:20 +0200
    Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2018-07-08 04:50 +0200
      Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-07-09 17:30 +0200
    Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-07-09 17:20 +0200
      Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) "Juan R. de Silva" <juan.r.d.silva@gmail.com> - 2018-07-09 18:30 +0200
        Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-07-10 00:30 +0200
          Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-07-10 00:50 +0200
            Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-07-10 01:00 +0200
              Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-07-10 01:10 +0200
                Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-07-10 05:50 +0200
                  Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-07-10 16:10 +0200
                    Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-07-10 17:00 +0200
                    Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-07-11 16:50 +0200
                Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-07-10 20:00 +0200
                  Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-07-10 20:30 +0200
                    Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-07-10 21:00 +0200
                  Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-07-10 21:20 +0200
                  Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2018-07-11 14:10 +0200
                    Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-07-11 17:20 +0200
                      Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2018-07-11 18:40 +0200
                        Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-07-11 19:50 +0200
                        Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-07-12 23:30 +0200
                          Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-07-13 15:00 +0200
                            Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-07-13 19:10 +0200
            Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in  particular) Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2018-07-10 01:30 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#197336 — Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

On Sat, 07 Jul 2018 13:50:56 -0700, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:

> I know there are probably multiple places where such ratings can be
> found. Not knowing which are reliable, I'm sort of asking for ratings of
> the ratings, I guess.  Mostly, though, I want ratings of recent models,
> from a Linux/Debian/Ubuntu perspective as opposed to the usual Windows
> slant.  I'm presuming the few machines that I dual-boot will be able to
> work with whatever printer I have.
> 
> So, where to look?
> 
> ++ kevin

I switched from HP to Brother several years ago and never regreted. The 
quality of Brother All-in-One is way higher then HP crap. The Linux 
support is excelent. 

I used to own MFC 7460DN. I own currently HL-L2389DW wireless -e xcellent 
unit. Any of them work under Ubuntu, Debian (my current distro), Fedora, 
OpenSuse, etc. without a problem. Installation is a breeze. The drivers 
available on Brother website. 

Just check for support of a particular model on Brother Linux site before 
buying here http://www.brother.com/html/product_support/index.htm

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#197337

I use and recommend the Brother MFC-L2740DW wireless multifunction 
device (greyscale duplex laser and colour scanner). It works well for 
both Linux and Mac clients. You might not be able to get this exact 
model any more as it is over three years old. I suspect that the current 
equivalent is the MFC-L2770DW, not the MFC-L2713DW, which lacks PCL6 
emulation.

On Debian I am using:

cups 2.2.8-4
foomatic-db-compressed-ppds 20180604-1

Settings:

Driver:	Generic PCL 6/PCL XL Printer Foomatic/pxlcolor (recommended) 
(color, 2-sided printing)
Connection:	http://192.168.1.11/ipp
Defaults:	job-sheets=none, none media=iso_a4_210x297mm 
sides=two-sided-long-edge

Note that these settings use PCL6 emulation. Models that lack PCL6 
support may need proprietary Brother CUPS drivers. When I checked, these 
were only available for i386. When I switched to the foomatic PCL6 
driver, I was able to ditch the i386 drivers and my entire i386 arch 
support. This was a few years ago and the situation may be better.

For XSane scanning I use the the proprietary brscan4 0.4.4-2 amd64 
package from Brother, set up with (as root):

brsaneconfig4 -a name=Brother_MFC-L2740DW model=MFC-L2740DW ip=192.168.1.11

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197403 — Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

> Note that these settings use PCL6 emulation. Models that lack PCL6 support
> may need proprietary Brother CUPS drivers. When I checked, these were only
> available for i386. When I switched to the foomatic PCL6 driver, I was able
> to ditch the i386 drivers and my entire i386 arch support. This was a few
> years ago and the situation may be better.

Oh, so those drivers won't work on an Cubietruck, ESPRESSObin or other
little ARM boxes?
If so, I don't think "works under Debian" is applicable.


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197402 — Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

> I used to own MFC 7460DN. I own currently HL-L2389DW wireless -e xcellent
> unit.  Any of them work under Ubuntu, Debian (my current distro), Fedora,
> OpenSuse, etc. without a problem.  Installation is a breeze.  The drivers
> available on Brother website.

Wait, does that mean the printer is not supported directly by Debian
(contrary to HP's for example)?  Why not?  Are the drivers proprietary?
How do you make sure the drivers are kept up-to-date with Debian's
infrastructure?


        Stefan


PS: To me "works under Debian" should mean that I can make it work by
installing packages from Debian and nowhere else.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197405

On Mon, 09 Jul 2018 11:14:53 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:

>> I used to own MFC 7460DN. I own currently HL-L2389DW wireless -e
>> xcellent unit.  Any of them work under Ubuntu, Debian (my current
>> distro), Fedora,
>> OpenSuse, etc. without a problem.  Installation is a breeze.  The
>> drivers available on Brother website.
> 
> Wait, does that mean the printer is not supported directly by Debian
> (contrary to HP's for example)?  Why not?  Are the drivers proprietary?
> How do you make sure the drivers are kept up-to-date with Debian's
> infrastructure?
> 
> 
>         Stefan
> 
> 
> PS: To me "works under Debian" should mean that I can make it work by
> installing packages from Debian and nowhere else.

If by "installing packages from Debian" you mean Debian printer drivers 
collection then one would have to always limit himself to rather narrow 
aray of old or very old moddels of printers and very often to accept the 
support provided as it is, which more then often is limited.

If you meant hplip drivers, which are available from Debian repository, 
then I wonder what actually makes them so much "from Debian"? IMHO, their 
avalability from Debian repository does not really make them particulary 
"Debian". They are still developed by HP or their development is 
sponsored by HP, aren't they?

And BTW HP allegedly native to Debian support was always crappy in my 
personal experience (as HP printers themselves). Especialy if compared 
with Brother propriatory drivers, which are flawless.

While I appreciate your stand, to me as long as a manufacturer provides 
easily installable drivers and keeps them up to date is just fine. And 
this is the case with Brother. Escpecially considering that Brother cares 
to provide drivers for different major distros like Debian, Ubuntu, 
OpenSUSE in both .deb and .rmp format.

Again, I personaly never regreted the switch. You see I am not a 
purist. :-)

The interesting point is that Linux community is always and rightfully 
upset by the fact that manufacturers do not care to provide Linux 
support. IMHO we should then appreciate and support the manufacturer when 
it cares about Linux users, shouldn't we?

Thanks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197415 — Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

> If you meant hplip drivers, which are available from Debian
> repository, then I wonder what actually makes them so much "from
> Debian"?  IMHO, their  avalability from Debian repository does not
> really make them particulary  "Debian".  They are still developed by HP
> or their development is  sponsored by HP, aren't they?

The issue is not who writes the code.  The issue is whether the code is
available under a Free license such that it can be integrated cleanly
into the OS distribution I use, e.g.
- It works on all the architectures supported by Debian
- The Debian maintainers will take care of compatibility between
  different versions of packages.  So I won't have to choose between
  sticking to some old version of CUPS (for example), or having to buy
  a new printer, because the printer manufacturer stopped updating their
  driver for printers older than 5 years (say).
- I don't have to check the manufacturer's web-site for bug-fixes and
  security updates: `apt-get` does it for me.

> And BTW HP allegedly native to Debian support was always crappy in my
> personal experience (as HP printers themselves).  Especialy if compared
> with Brother propriatory drivers, which are flawless.

To each his own.  I find such software to be a maintenance hassle.

For that reason I do not have an opinion on HP-vs-Brother in terms of
technical quality of their drivers or their hardware: I haven't had the
opportunity to try Brother's drivers, and I won't as long as it's
proprietary (and IIUC they don't provide drivers that work on my
ARM-based CUPS server anyway).

> The interesting point is that Linux community is always and rightfully
> upset by the fact that manufacturers do not care to provide Linux
> support.  IMHO we should then appreciate and support the manufacturer
> when it cares about Linux users, shouldn't we?

I think it's stupid for a printer manufacturer not to provide its
drivers as Free Software and collaborate with the community.  It might
make sense not to provide drivers for GNU/Linux at all, but if they have
to go through the trouble of writing the driver, they might as well make
it Free Software.  It just makes a lot of commercial sense.


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197416

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:16:59PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > If you meant hplip drivers, which are available from Debian
> > repository, then I wonder what actually makes them so much "from
> > Debian"?  IMHO, their  avalability from Debian repository does not
> > really make them particulary  "Debian".  They are still developed by HP
> > or their development is  sponsored by HP, aren't they?
> 
> The issue is not who writes the code.  The issue is whether the code is
> available under a Free license such that it can be integrated cleanly
> into the OS distribution I use, e.g.
> - It works on all the architectures supported by Debian
> - The Debian maintainers will take care of compatibility between
>   different versions of packages.  So I won't have to choose between
>   sticking to some old version of CUPS (for example), or having to buy
>   a new printer, because the printer manufacturer stopped updating their
>   driver for printers older than 5 years (say).
> - I don't have to check the manufacturer's web-site for bug-fixes and
>   security updates: `apt-get` does it for me.
> 
> > And BTW HP allegedly native to Debian support was always crappy in my
> > personal experience (as HP printers themselves).  Especialy if compared
> > with Brother propriatory drivers, which are flawless.
> 
> To each his own.  I find such software to be a maintenance hassle.
> 
> For that reason I do not have an opinion on HP-vs-Brother in terms of
> technical quality of their drivers or their hardware: I haven't had the
> opportunity to try Brother's drivers, and I won't as long as it's
> proprietary (and IIUC they don't provide drivers that work on my
> ARM-based CUPS server anyway).
> 
> > The interesting point is that Linux community is always and rightfully
> > upset by the fact that manufacturers do not care to provide Linux
> > support.  IMHO we should then appreciate and support the manufacturer
> > when it cares about Linux users, shouldn't we?
> 
> I think it's stupid for a printer manufacturer not to provide its
> drivers as Free Software and collaborate with the community.  It might
> make sense not to provide drivers for GNU/Linux at all, but if they have
> to go through the trouble of writing the driver, they might as well make
> it Free Software.  It just makes a lot of commercial sense.

You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197418

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
>You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
>printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
>you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.

So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197419

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> 
> So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?

You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
thing as a "postscript scanner".

The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a 
bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197424

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 07:05:52PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
>> > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
>> > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
>> > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
>>
>> So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?
>
>You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
>thing as a "postscript scanner".

Well, the original question (see subject line) was about all-in-one 
printers, which implies more than just printing. It would be sad to see 
the point of the question lost in all the back and forth.

>The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
>though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
>FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a
>bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
>your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.

That's more of a document scan feature, not so great for scanning tasks 
where you want more control.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197443

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 11:38:41PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 07:05:52PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> > > 
> > > So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?
> > 
> > You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
> > thing as a "postscript scanner".
> 
> Well, the original question (see subject line) was about all-in-one
> printers, which implies more than just printing. It would be sad to see the
> point of the question lost in all the back and forth.
> 
> > The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
> > though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
> > FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a
> > bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
> > your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.
> 
> That's more of a document scan feature, not so great for scanning tasks
> where you want more control.

Yes. The all-in-ones are terrible at that, proprietary software
or not.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197449 — Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

On Tuesday 10 July 2018 10:09:04 Dan Ritter wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 11:38:41PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 07:05:52PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer,
> > > > > and you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> > > >
> > > > So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?
> > >
> > > You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
> > > thing as a "postscript scanner".
> >
> > Well, the original question (see subject line) was about all-in-one
> > printers, which implies more than just printing. It would be sad to
> > see the point of the question lost in all the back and forth.
> >
> > > The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
> > > though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
> > > FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a
> > > bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
> > > your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.
> >
> > That's more of a document scan feature, not so great for scanning
> > tasks where you want more control.
>
> Yes. The all-in-ones are terrible at that, proprietary software
> or not.
>
> -dsr-

In the case of the Brother AIO's not so, mine can do an xsane controlled 
scan in single sheet load mode any size and location on an 11x17 glass. 
It also has a document feeder but xsane does not do duplex except as 
single images. In the case of my MFC-J6920DW, I don't believe the scan 
mechanism can turn the page over but once, which it does by default as 
the ADF works. But you can pick the page up from the output table, and 
without turning it over, place it back on the input ramp, as it actually 
scans the top of the sheet as its fed thru, becoming the bottom on the 
output table. Typical of the ADF's, the scanner head remains fixed but 
the paper is pulled across it.

One thing I might point out is that when driven from an ethernet port, 
there is always a 7 second lag between the access transmission to it, 
and its actually waking up to respond. This is caused by a bad checksum 
of the first 6 commands sent at 1 second intervals, but then the driver 
sends good stuff, ANAICT, till the end of that job.  Verified by 
wireshark watching the net traffic. Why the bad tcp checksum, I haven't 
a clue, but except for the wakeup delay, it just works. Presumably not a 
problem with a usb drive, but the location of the usb plug within the 
housing precludes access with a recommended maximum usb cable length of 
5 feet, unless you put a hub within 15 inches or so of the MFC, the rest 
of the cable is in the machine, useing up the majority of the cables max 
length in the circuitous path inside the machine.

Would I buy another Brother? Yes.
-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197498 — Re: Looking for ratings of all-in-one printers for Linux (Ubuntu in particular)

> Yes. The all-in-ones are terrible at that, proprietary software or not.

FWIW, the XSane thingy worked fairly well for me with my last all-in-one
(using the HP driver bundled with Debian).  It definitely worked much
better than with the crappy software they provided for Windows (I got
the impression that in the Windows world, HP expected you to buy some
other scanner software in order to get anything but the bare minimum
functionality).  [ Note: that was more than 10 years ago, with
a cheap&slow all-in-one (including ADF for the scanner) which
nevertheless served me well while it lasted (5 years or so).  ]


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197453

On Mon 09 Jul 2018 at 19:05:52 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.

I'm not really interested in a PostScript printer per se, but in a
printer that handles PDFs natively. Is this the same thing?

> > So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?
> 
> You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
> thing as a "postscript scanner".

What I would understand by the expression "postscript scanner" is
something that scans a document and yields a PDF file. I think
a lot of scanners (most?) will also scan to a JPEG file.

> The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
> though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
> FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a 
> bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
> your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.

That's the sort of thing, but I'm used to it writing the files
onto a USB stick (and prefer that).

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197454

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:53:20PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Mon 09 Jul 2018 at 19:05:52 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> 
> I'm not really interested in a PostScript printer per se, but in a
> printer that handles PDFs natively. Is this the same thing?

No, but PDF is a simplified, compressed PostScript. It's very
little work for your Debian machine to take a PDF, decapsulate
it and send it off to a PostScript printer. (In this case, a
clone of PostScript.)



> That's the sort of thing, but I'm used to it writing the files
> onto a USB stick (and prefer that).

Most of them do that, too.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197458

On Tue 10 Jul 2018 at 14:20:50 -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:53:20PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > On Mon 09 Jul 2018 at 19:05:52 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> > 
> > I'm not really interested in a PostScript printer per se, but in a
> > printer that handles PDFs natively. Is this the same thing?
> 
> No, but PDF is a simplified, compressed PostScript. It's very
> little work for your Debian machine to take a PDF, decapsulate
> it and send it off to a PostScript printer. (In this case, a
> clone of PostScript.)

"decapsulates"? Please explain; it is a term I've not encountered in
relation to printers. (The query was about printers which *natively*
accept a PDF and just print it without any CUPS involvement).

> > That's the sort of thing, but I'm used to it writing the files
> > onto a USB stick (and prefer that).
> 
> Most of them do that, too.

Most printers on Debian do what?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197460

On Tue 10 Jul 2018 at 12:53:20 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Mon 09 Jul 2018 at 19:05:52 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> 
> I'm not really interested in a PostScript printer per se, but in a
> printer that handles PDFs natively. Is this the same thing?
> 
> > > So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?
> > 
> > You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
> > thing as a "postscript scanner".

The adjective refers to the printer not the scanner. So you are (in
your misunderstanding) are correct.
 
> What I would understand by the expression "postscript scanner" is
> something that scans a document and yields a PDF file. I think

An interesting thought.

> a lot of scanners (most?) will also scan to a JPEG file.

Only if the SANE frontend supports it.

> > The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
> > though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
> > FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a 
> > bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
> > your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.
> 
> That's the sort of thing, but I'm used to it writing the files
> onto a USB stick (and prefer that).

Try using a Brother aio on linux without the non-free Brother-provided
brscan-skey software. If that isn't a "driver" - what is?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197490

On 10.07.18 12:53, David Wright wrote:
> On Mon 09 Jul 2018 at 19:05:52 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> 
> I'm not really interested in a PostScript printer per se, but in a
> printer that handles PDFs natively. Is this the same thing?

So long as CUPS can translate for the printer what the app (even as
simple as lpr) hands over, then the only cost is a print delay if the
postscript is computation-intensive - but that has to be done either in
the printer or on the host anyway, and the host is probably faster.

I'm using a decade-old HP Laserjet 3050 all-in-one, and the hplip
drivers in CUPS sufficed during a recent software update.

> > > So you can use it as an all-in-one postscript printer/scanner?
> > 
> > You can use it as a printer. As far as I know there is no such
> > thing as a "postscript scanner".
> 
> What I would understand by the expression "postscript scanner" is
> something that scans a document and yields a PDF file. I think
> a lot of scanners (most?) will also scan to a JPEG file.

When arcing up my Epson Perfection V350 flatbed scanner in xsane or the
other image scanner, I tend to save as jpg. ISTRC that it's a smaller
file.

_But_ I wouldn't buy an all-in-one again. The scanner in that is useless
for books, and even magazines can be too valued to allow ripping out
pages. Only the flat-bed scanner has seen any use in the last half
decade. OK, the all-in-one has an integrated fax - but I've never used
it, and doubtless now never will.

> > The Brother all-in-ones tend to have "scan-to-network" abilities,
> > though, and that doesn't require a driver -- just an internal
> > FTP or SAMBA server to receive the files. My workplace has a 
> > bunch of these. Walk up, select Scan, select Network, and put
> > your document(s) in. You get PDFs or TIFFs in your filesystem.
> 
> That's the sort of thing, but I'm used to it writing the files
> onto a USB stick (and prefer that).

Both the Laserjet 3050 and Epson V350 are USB, but no sticks needed.

ISTM that quite a range of printers and scanners work with linux, and
the only thing I'd like to add is an A3 printer, but can't justify the
expense while I can drop into the local library with a usb stick and print
the very occasional large format page for negligible cost.

Erik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197499

On Wed 11 Jul 2018 at 22:03:57 +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:

> On 10.07.18 12:53, David Wright wrote:
> > On Mon 09 Jul 2018 at 19:05:52 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:53:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:39:29PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > > You're both missing the main point, which is that a Brother
> > > > > printer with BRscript/3 is essentially a Postscript printer, and
> > > > > you can treat it as one. No drivers needed.
> > 
> > I'm not really interested in a PostScript printer per se, but in a
> > printer that handles PDFs natively. Is this the same thing?
> 
> So long as CUPS can translate for the printer what the app (even as
> simple as lpr) hands over, then the only cost is a print delay if the
> postscript is computation-intensive - but that has to be done either in
> the printer or on the host anyway, and the host is probably faster.

The interest being expressed is one in printing a PDF directly to a
printer, so CUPS isn't (or needn't be) be involved. No conversion to
or from PostScript (which is no longer being developed) is undertaken.
Any delays would lie in transporting the file to the printer and what
takes place on it.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#197507

On 2018-07-11, Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>
> The interest being expressed is one in printing a PDF directly to a
> printer, so CUPS isn't (or needn't be) be involved. No conversion to
> or from PostScript (which is no longer being developed) is undertaken.
> Any delays would lie in transporting the file to the printer and what
> takes place on it.
>

That exists, it seems (pdf interpreter in the firmware of the printer).

https://okiprinting-en-gb.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/581/~/pdf-direct-printing

Some of the higher-end (at least) HPs apparently have a feature called HP Direct PDF, which
appears to be exactly what it says.

Maybe that isn't the question (if there's a question) and everybody knew that pdf 
printers existed but me.

To tell the truth (and why the hell not at this late date), I was fuzzy
up until recently (quite recently, like ten minutes ago) as to what a
postscript printer was precisely. Now I know. Seems obvious now. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web