Re: Any cheap postscript laser printers for linux ?

In article <rqafs4-lf3.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Rikishi 42 <skunkworks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

On 2007-09-21, Rod Smith <rodsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Of course, if this is important to you, you've got to be careful;
"PostScript support" in an ad could mean a Windows driver that converts
PostScript to PCL, much as Ghostscript does. I don't know if HP has ever
stooped to this sort of confusing terminology, but even if they haven't, a
retailer or eBay seller might.

I don't think you should apply a Linux way of thinking to a Windows
environment. The applications don't churn out PostScript. They print to this
virtual printer, using a set of API's. The Windows driver converts that to
Poscript / PCL / GDI / HPGL/2 / ... An approach used in OS/2, before it was
transposed to Windows.

You're correct on some level, but you're missing my point....

The only Windows applications that generate a direct printer language like
PostScript, are those ported from another OS. (ie Mac).
And those are known for their poor printing performances, under Windows.
(PageMaker is a good example)

For the benefit of these programs, some printer manufacturers have, at
least in the past (I haven't looked at this lately) sold "PostScript"
printers that are really non-PostScript models with drivers that can
accept PostScript output from programs and generate printouts on their
matched non-PostScript printers. My point is that if you want a PostScript
printer for use with Linux (or any non-Windows OS), you've got to be wary
of such marketing gimmicks. A non-PostScript printer that ships with a
Windows-based PostScript interpreter will be no better than any other
non-PostScript printer, assuming equally good support in Ghostscript. I've
heard of people who've bought such "PostScript" printers for use with
Linux, assuming they'd have no problems in Linux because they were sold as
PostScript models, only to discover that they've got poor or no
Ghostscript drivers and no built-in PostScript. I was simply cautioning
the OP (and anybody else who might need to know) that a printer that's
advertised as being a PostScript model might not actually be that, and
therefore might need explicit Linux driver support or be outright
unacceptable, depending on one's precise needs. Before buying, find out
where that PostScript interpreter exists -- in the printer or in Windows
software. The printer manufacturer may not make this distinction very
clear.

--
Rod Smith, rodsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: printers for UBUNTU?
    ... for basic printing. ... will likely print things wrong in Windows as well. ... certainly compatible as most of them do Postscript and IPP natively ... There are several files which seem to be parts of the Windows XP driver ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: The Death of Carbon
    ... But Windows had a PostScript driver too, ... You are nucking futs and are absolutely wrong once again: The font metrics ... Mac apps were written to do PostScript. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: OS/2 friendly printers
    ... >> seems to mean putting these printers on the LAN would prevent any OS/2 ... > Postscript capable printer work with OS/2 or anything else. ... completely useless without a running Windows eXPeriment or W2K. ... win driver, not in firmware. ...
    (comp.os.os2.misc)
  • Re: Printing problem with CUPS after FC3 upgrade
    ... I solved problem for Windows systems by using PostScript driver on ... other Linux boxes (configured to use IPP to connect to my Cups ... sounds like a bug in Cups somewhere. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: The Death of Carbon
    ... Classic Mac OS didn't have that, ... They confused application support for PostScript ... which offered less than Windows of the time. ... LaserWriter driver and the similar but different Adobe driver. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)