Misleading
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| vagabondo Feb 14, 2012 8:42 AM EDT |
This sort of article just spreads the myth that Linux is difficult/obscure/not-maninstream. All that is required to use a Canon Lide 100 scanner is to update or use a modern distribution. It is completely supported by "sane-backends-1.0.22" which was released in February 2011. |
| nikkels Feb 14, 2012 9:21 AM EDT |
Is Canonscan Lide 90 supported? They said 2 years ago.....never ! |
| JaseP Feb 14, 2012 11:48 AM EDT |
I have a Canon LiDE scanner of some model number that my father had given up for a multi-function printer. I wonder if this would work for that?!?!?!? By the way, vagabondo, I disagree that this kind of article makes Linux seem obscure. Stand alone scanners themselves are obscure, and the article just helps people get theirs working with simple instructions. The only myth it plays to is is the "have to compile your driver" myth. Someone with a PPA of a built, alternate driver, already packaged in a *.deb, using DKMS, would be better, but this is better than nothing. |
| Steven_Rosenber Feb 14, 2012 5:37 PM EDT |
I've had trouble recently with scanners in both Linux and Mac OS X 10.7. Yes, the Mac problem was worse. 10.7 threw out plenty of baby along with the bathwater in terms of support for new and old hardware (I'm talking printers and scanners here). |
| JaseP Feb 14, 2012 5:57 PM EDT |
Not if you'd bought it at the iStore©®™. |
| Steven_Rosenber Feb 14, 2012 6:01 PM EDT |
This was a client who bought from one of those Mac-focused online dealers -- Mac Warehouse? The salesperson insisted the HP scanner would work with OS X 10.7. Once it got over to tech support, they finally sent a driver and made it right. The problem is that CUPS is supposed to take care of printers and scanners w/o users needing to download drivers. And this was after an older HP scanner went from supported in 10.5 to orphaned in 10.7. Real nice, Apple (and HP for that matter). |
| BernardSwiss Feb 14, 2012 7:15 PM EDT |
Isn't Canon one of those manufacturers that we warn Linux newbies away from (at least for printers/scanners/fax/"All-In-Ones"), ... and isn't this precisely because the Canon is consistently and stubbornly quite resistant to Linux-compatible practices such as following standards, making driver/interface documentation available or even releasing Linux "binary blobs"? It's been a fair while since I went shopping for one of these peripherals, so I may be out of date. If anyone asks me, I just tell them that HP and Brother are pretty safe bets, but a little checking doesn't hurt (I think I recently heard of an HP printer that was difficult). + + + + + And though I haven't checked (or maybe I've just forgotten), my impression is that any Postscript-compatible (and likely any PCL (ie HP) compatible) printer should be a sure thing, and work easily (out of the box) with CUPS. If I'm wrong, please correct me. (Actually, if I'm right, let me know, too.) |
| nikkels Feb 15, 2012 12:19 AM EDT |
http://www.sane-project.org/sane-mfgs.html#SCANNERS for those interested |
| Khamul Feb 15, 2012 4:51 PM EDT |
I've been using a Canon CanoScan LiDE 25 scanner for ages in Linux. It really comes down to the chip used by the mfgr, not the brand name. Always check the hardware compatibility lists for things like this, because some models may be supported, while other models (or even HW revisions!) from the same mfgr may not be. |
| skelband Feb 15, 2012 7:13 PM EDT |
@Khamul: "..., while other models (or even HW revisions!) from the same mfgr may not be." That goes double for TV capture cards :D |
| Khamul Feb 15, 2012 7:17 PM EDT |
It also goes double for wireless routers that you want to install DD-WRT or other alternative firmware on. I had quite an experience trying to find a secondhand router on Ebay that would run DD-WRT for a wireless bridging project; you have to be very careful to get one that isn't a "work in progress", is a supported model, has the correct hardware revision (most Ebay sellers don't bother to include that information), etc. |
| skelband Feb 15, 2012 7:47 PM EDT |
@Khamul: Too true! Many of the Linksys revisions have different memory configurations and even entirely different incompatible chipsets. I had the same experience and was lucky to find a V2.0 in a Thift shop that can run the full DD-WRT rather than the strangled cut-don version. |
| Khamul Feb 15, 2012 8:40 PM EDT |
@skelband: In my case, I just wanted something that could run even a "mini" build of DD-WRT, as I was only using it for the wireless bridging functionality. It wasn't a problem with memory size, it was a problem with certain hardware revisions just plain not working for some reason or another. So, for one particular model X, v1 and v3 might work fine, but v2 would be unsupported. And of course, 95% of Model X being sold on Ebay are v2. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!