Re: brother printer/scanners
On Mon 02 Jan 2017 at 02:05:47 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 02 January 2017 00:51:11 Jape Person wrote:
>
> > On 01/01/2017 09:29 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > >
> > > For a far less secure way than I do it.
> >
> > For a far less secure way than you do what? Scanning? You're stating
> > that you know for a fact that using the WPA-secured wifi connection
> > between a smartphone and an applet on the smartphone for getting a
> > scan from an MFC is less secure than installing proprietary software
> > on your computer to accomplish the scan? Is that really what you're
> > stating? I wouldn't care to spend the time and energy that would be
> > required to prove the point one way or another.
> >
> Neither do I, and the choice of printers you use, or scanners, becomes
> considerably more limited when you eliminate the linux drivers supplied
> by the devices maker, and which I feel I bought as part of the deal when
> I dropped my card on the counter to pay for the device. That choice is
> for you and I to make isn't it? I did think for a spell that epson was
Debian doesn't force anyone down the path of installing or not
installing proprietry software so the choice is indeed up to the
user. The pragmatic view is as sustainable as the opposing view
until examining what is provided for your money. Your card has
got you a good printer but it comes with printing software which
hardly deserves the label "Linux" and which has resisted any
attempt to have the free portions packaged for Debian. To quote
https://lists.debian.org/debian-printing/2016/12/msg00082.html
> * Brother makes it really complicated by bundling various files in
> various licenses in literally hundreds of different packages with lots
> of overlap and no publicly accessible source repository;
The Brother drivers install in /opt for a start and assume everything
is located there. The cups wrapper isn't up to scratch and is supposed
to be run as root. Many PPDs are not distributed directly but embedded
in shell or C-shell scripts. Temporary printer filters are written.
64-bit drivers and drivers for other architectures do not exist. These
are some of the things we know about. What don't we know?
Finally, there is the matter of LPD. Isn't software based on it
abandoned? CUPS is the well-maintained printing system of choice; why
have proprietary LPD core drivers and a wrapper script to make them work
with CUPS?
Would you pay good money for printer drivers which are badly designed,
technically substandard and which come with little or no support? Your
card, your money, your choice.
--
Brian.
Reply to: