In article <46930e26$0$8027$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>MICROSOFT IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS IN ANY WAY.
>
HP uses as its very reason for deleting the old drivers the excuse that since
MS doesnt support the old OS's, neither will HP
So "YES", MS's actions directly affected HP's
>GMAN wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Its a piece of trash when "I" say it is, not some shitstain at microsoft!!!!!
>>
>>
>> As long as its usefull to me, its none of their business.
>>
>>
>>>> Bob Headrick wrote:
>>>>> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:468a7695$0$14970$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>>>> Jethro wrote:
>>>>>>> I have a HP 950 PSC AllInOne (Print/Scan/Fax) that I want to install
>>>>>>> on a new machine with WXP SP2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can't find the CD that came with it. I've looked & looked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I tried DriverGuide.com, but all they seem to have are print-drivers
>>>>>>> for this printer under the various OS's.
>>>>>> Drivers for all HP products can be downloaded from the HP web site.
>>>>>> You won't get "value added software" (generally that means 3rd party
>>>>>> OCR software), but you will get full functionality, including the
>>>>>> scanner.
>>>>> You can download drivers for the PSC 950 from HP at
>>>>>
>>>
> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/s...us&dlc=en&prod
>>> uct=60259&lang=en
>>>>>
>>>>> There is also a link on that page to order a replacement CD, in the
>>>>> US it is ~$10 with shipping included.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Bob Headrick, MS MVP Printing/Imaging
>>>>>
In article <VZFki.102580$NV3.11132@pd7urf2no>, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>As "nice" a conspiracy theory as this is, there is absolutely no
>credibility to it.
>
>Microsoft has no power to "force" companies to remove older drivers. If
>indeed the drivers were removed, the decision was HPs, unless they
>violated some copyrighted code and were told to remove them due to a
>legal matter.
>
>Art
Its quite possibly some flexing of muscles by MS affected HP's decision to not
support the old OS's. They could have been told that if they wanted future
consideration or contracts on future MS products, they had to tow MS's line
and help to eliminate the support completely for legacy OS's. According to MS,
they dont want anyone running the old OS's anymore period according to their
plans.
>
>GMAN wrote:
>
>> In article <46925743$0$16561$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Barry Watzman
> <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Did anyone notice that on July 1st, HP removed ALL drivers for any OS'
>>>before Windows 2000? You can no longer get drivers for any NT or 9x
>>>systems, even ones which were posted online as of 6/30. You also cannot
>>>any longer order CDs with these drivers. Either you have the driver
>>>already (on CD or saved download), or you know someone else who has it,
>>>or you are screwed. This was applicable to ALL HP products, across the
>>>board, not just printers.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Most likely its Microsoft demanding that noone support the older OS's to
> force
>> people to buy new hardware/New OS etc...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Bob Headrick wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:468a7695$0$14970$4c368faf@roadrunner.com. ..
>>>>
>>>>>Jethro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I have a HP 950 PSC AllInOne (Print/Scan/Fax) that I want to install
>>>>>>on a new machine with WXP SP2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I can't find the CD that came with it. I've looked & looked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I tried DriverGuide.com, but all they seem to have are print-drivers
>>>>>>for this printer under the various OS's.
>>>>
>>>>>Drivers for all HP products can be downloaded from the HP web site.
>>>>>You won't get "value added software" (generally that means 3rd party
>>>>>OCR software), but you will get full functionality, including the
>>>>>scanner.
>>>>
>>>>You can download drivers for the PSC 950 from HP at
>>>>
>>>
>>>http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/s...=us&dlc=en&pro
>d
>>>uct=60259&lang=en
>>>
>>>>
>>>>There is also a link on that page to order a replacement CD, in the US
>>>>it is ~$10 with shipping included.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Bob Headrick, MS MVP Printing/Imaging
>>>>
In article <VdGki.102197$1i1.23693@pd7urf3no>, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>That quote is very telling, thank you for providing it. To me, this
>shows that HP is up to no good and is trying to bury their older
>products and make them unusable. Hopefully, someone will take it upon
>themselves to offer these drivers. I'd love to see HP try to shut them
>down.
>
Yet you chided me for saying the exact thing that you just quoted about HP
not supporting 98 because MS wont.
>The way this statement below is written, is, IMHO, about as sleazy as it
>gets. They imply in some manner that the fact that Microsoft no longer
>makes or supports those OSs somehow obligates HP to no longer provide
>the already written and proven drivers.
>
>HP loves to claim how GREEN and environmentally aware and concerned they
>are, but this shows what they are really about. Yeah, for a fee they
>will take their old products (and even those of other manufacturers) and
>"recycle" them for you, but it would appear they are doing anything they
>can to force obsolescence of their older products.
>
>It's one thing (although I don't respect it) to no longer directly
>support older equipment with new drivers or driver updates, but to then
>pull the old drivers which are already written and were working is a
>real slap in the face to the owners of their products and to the
>environment.
>
>Question for HP... if Microsoft is no longer "providing resources" to
>certain OSs, that should mean there will be no further changes made to
>those OSs, meaning the drivers should work as they are within the
>environment of those OSs - so why remove them?
>
>Fine. HP now has another consultant who can no longer recommend their
>products with a clear conscience. I don't know if HP has any idea how
>much undercurrent is developing regarding their product lines and
>customer service, but eventually it will come back to bite them in the
>butt. Sooner would be better than later IMHO.
>
>Art
>
>
>
>
>Airman Thunderbird wrote:
>
>> My old, we talking old, 7700 series laptop's still supported, with OSes
>> from 3.1 to 2000. Maybe just printers, or maybe they just ain't got
>> 'round to dumping everything yet.
>>
>> Quote from HP:
>> " Microsoft discontinued Windows 98/ME shipments in June 2002/2003
>> respectively.
>> HP’s Windows 98/ME driver discontinuance is directly related to the
>> fact that there is no longer Microsoft resources allocated to issue
>> management."
>>
>> Don't know why they couldn't have left the old stuff available for
>> download, though.
>>
>>
>>
>> Barry Watzman wrote:
>>
>>> Did anyone notice that on July 1st, HP removed ALL drivers for any OS'
>>> before Windows 2000? You can no longer get drivers for any NT or 9x
>>> systems, even ones which were posted online as of 6/30. You also
>>> cannot any longer order CDs with these drivers. Either you have the
>>> driver already (on CD or saved download), or you know someone else who
>>> has it, or you are screwed. This was applicable to ALL HP products,
>>> across the board, not just printers.
>>>
No, I'm afraid you have chosen to misread what I have written. I chided
you for implying MS was behind this. This was a decision, assuming the
quoted material is accurate, by HP, not MS. Although the companies
partner each other, they aren't the same company.
I do not believe there is a MS conspiracy to have all earlier OS drivers
removed from access. What I do believe is that if the information
quoted is accurate, that HP is trying to imply that because MS is no
longer placing resources into certain OSs that HP feels they can or
should withdraw all the drivers written for those OSs.
Art
GMAN wrote:
> In article <VdGki.102197$1i1.23693@pd7urf3no>, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>>That quote is very telling, thank you for providing it. To me, this
>>shows that HP is up to no good and is trying to bury their older
>>products and make them unusable. Hopefully, someone will take it upon
>>themselves to offer these drivers. I'd love to see HP try to shut them
>>down.
>>
>
>
> Yet you chided me for saying the exact thing that you just quoted about HP
> not supporting 98 because MS wont.
>
>
>>The way this statement below is written, is, IMHO, about as sleazy as it
>>gets. They imply in some manner that the fact that Microsoft no longer
>>makes or supports those OSs somehow obligates HP to no longer provide
>>the already written and proven drivers.
>>
>>HP loves to claim how GREEN and environmentally aware and concerned they
>>are, but this shows what they are really about. Yeah, for a fee they
>>will take their old products (and even those of other manufacturers) and
>>"recycle" them for you, but it would appear they are doing anything they
>>can to force obsolescence of their older products.
>>
>>It's one thing (although I don't respect it) to no longer directly
>>support older equipment with new drivers or driver updates, but to then
>>pull the old drivers which are already written and were working is a
>>real slap in the face to the owners of their products and to the
>>environment.
>>
>>Question for HP... if Microsoft is no longer "providing resources" to
>>certain OSs, that should mean there will be no further changes made to
>>those OSs, meaning the drivers should work as they are within the
>>environment of those OSs - so why remove them?
>>
>>Fine. HP now has another consultant who can no longer recommend their
>>products with a clear conscience. I don't know if HP has any idea how
>>much undercurrent is developing regarding their product lines and
>>customer service, but eventually it will come back to bite them in the
>>butt. Sooner would be better than later IMHO.
>>
>>Art
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Airman Thunderbird wrote:
>>
>>
>>>My old, we talking old, 7700 series laptop's still supported, with OSes
>>>from 3.1 to 2000. Maybe just printers, or maybe they just ain't got
>>>'round to dumping everything yet.
>>>
>>>Quote from HP:
>>>" Microsoft discontinued Windows 98/ME shipments in June 2002/2003
>>>respectively.
>>> HP’s Windows 98/ME driver discontinuance is directly related to the
>>>fact that there is no longer Microsoft resources allocated to issue
>>>management."
>>>
>>>Don't know why they couldn't have left the old stuff available for
>>>download, though.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Barry Watzman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Did anyone notice that on July 1st, HP removed ALL drivers for any OS'
>>>>before Windows 2000? You can no longer get drivers for any NT or 9x
>>>>systems, even ones which were posted online as of 6/30. You also
>>>>cannot any longer order CDs with these drivers. Either you have the
>>>>driver already (on CD or saved download), or you know someone else who
>>>>has it, or you are screwed. This was applicable to ALL HP products,
>>>>across the board, not just printers.
>>>>
Funny, though, the 98/ME drivers for my 2600 laserjet are there, though
the ones for our laserjet 1300 are gone. Interesting.
BTW, this might be a good time to scrounge up those driver CDs that came
with your stuff and find a central depository somewhere. Don't think HP
can make those disappear? :/
Arthur Entlich wrote:
> No, I'm afraid you have chosen to misread what I have written. I chided
> you for implying MS was behind this. This was a decision, assuming the
> quoted material is accurate, by HP, not MS. Although the companies
> partner each other, they aren't the same company.
>
In article <iQJki.102661$1i1.51739@pd7urf3no>, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>No, I'm afraid you have chosen to misread what I have written. I chided
>you for implying MS was behind this. This was a decision, assuming the
>quoted material is accurate, by HP, not MS. Although the companies
>partner each other, they aren't the same company.
>
>I do not believe there is a MS conspiracy to have all earlier OS drivers
>removed from access. What I do believe is that if the information
>quoted is accurate, that HP is trying to imply that because MS is no
>longer placing resources into certain OSs that HP feels they can or
>should withdraw all the drivers written for those OSs.
>
>Art
>
Potatoe , Potato. We are basically looking at the same thing but just in a
different way. I do feel strongly that Microsoft wishes that all
manufacturers would stop supporting the old OS's. Dont put that past them.
>GMAN wrote:
>> In article <VdGki.102197$1i1.23693@pd7urf3no>, Arthur Entlich
> <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>>
>>>That quote is very telling, thank you for providing it. To me, this
>>>shows that HP is up to no good and is trying to bury their older
>>>products and make them unusable. Hopefully, someone will take it upon
>>>themselves to offer these drivers. I'd love to see HP try to shut them
>>>down.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yet you chided me for saying the exact thing that you just quoted about HP
>> not supporting 98 because MS wont.
>>
>>
>>>The way this statement below is written, is, IMHO, about as sleazy as it
>>>gets. They imply in some manner that the fact that Microsoft no longer
>>>makes or supports those OSs somehow obligates HP to no longer provide
>>>the already written and proven drivers.
>>>
>>>HP loves to claim how GREEN and environmentally aware and concerned they
>>>are, but this shows what they are really about. Yeah, for a fee they
>>>will take their old products (and even those of other manufacturers) and
>>>"recycle" them for you, but it would appear they are doing anything they
>>>can to force obsolescence of their older products.
>>>
>>>It's one thing (although I don't respect it) to no longer directly
>>>support older equipment with new drivers or driver updates, but to then
>>>pull the old drivers which are already written and were working is a
>>>real slap in the face to the owners of their products and to the
>>>environment.
>>>
>>>Question for HP... if Microsoft is no longer "providing resources" to
>>>certain OSs, that should mean there will be no further changes made to
>>>those OSs, meaning the drivers should work as they are within the
>>>environment of those OSs - so why remove them?
>>>
>>>Fine. HP now has another consultant who can no longer recommend their
>>>products with a clear conscience. I don't know if HP has any idea how
>>>much undercurrent is developing regarding their product lines and
>>>customer service, but eventually it will come back to bite them in the
>>>butt. Sooner would be better than later IMHO.
>>>
>>>Art
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Airman Thunderbird wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>My old, we talking old, 7700 series laptop's still supported, with OSes
>>>>from 3.1 to 2000. Maybe just printers, or maybe they just ain't got
>>>>'round to dumping everything yet.
>>>>
>>>>Quote from HP:
>>>>" Microsoft discontinued Windows 98/ME shipments in June 2002/2003
>>>>respectively.
>>>> HP’s Windows 98/ME driver discontinuance is directly related to the
>>>>fact that there is no longer Microsoft resources allocated to issue
>>>>management."
>>>>
>>>>Don't know why they couldn't have left the old stuff available for
>>>>download, though.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Barry Watzman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Did anyone notice that on July 1st, HP removed ALL drivers for any OS'
>>>>>before Windows 2000? You can no longer get drivers for any NT or 9x
>>>>>systems, even ones which were posted online as of 6/30. You also
>>>>>cannot any longer order CDs with these drivers. Either you have the
>>>>>driver already (on CD or saved download), or you know someone else who
>>>>>has it, or you are screwed. This was applicable to ALL HP products,
>>>>>across the board, not just printers.
>>>>>
GMAN wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>
> Its quite possibly some flexing of muscles by MS affected HP's
> decision to not support the old OS's. They could have been told
> that if they wanted future consideration or contracts on future
> MS products, they had to tow MS's line and help to eliminate the
> support completely for legacy OS's. According to MS, they dont
> want anyone running the old OS's anymore period according to
> their plans.
I don't want to pay over 27 cents per gallon for gasoline. So
what? In MSs case, they sold (or licensed) the systems, and got
paid for that. The end.
--
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
<http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423>
<http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html>
cbfalconer at maineline dot net
I recently made several postings regarding the removal of printer and
other drivers from the HP website, in which I referred to HP's actions
in some strongly worded negative terms based upon my misguided belief
that this decision was of their own doing.
Further, in the same threads I indicated that Microsoft had no
responsibility in this matter, and should not be held in any manner
responsible.
At the time I wrote those postings, I thought the information I wrote
was an accurate portrayal of events.
I recently received some "clarity" on this matter. I place the word
clarity in quotes, because things are less than clear, and less than
black and white, but I still need to retract my earlier statements on
both sides, and apologize for targeting and maligning HP unfairly.
Apparently, there is a strong Microsoft connection in this matter. As I
understand what was explained to me, now that Microsoft has withdrawn
all support for Windows 98 and ME, any code that they own which was
incorporated into 3rd party product is also without support. Part of
the agreement MS has with 3rd party vendors is that once a MS product is
no longer supported their code can no longer be distributed.
Microsoft's reasoning is apparently that if their code continues to be
distributed, there is an implication that they will stand behind it, and
take responsibility to correct and update it should issues develop.
There may also be legal liability issues involved.
Now, here's where it gets more complicated. There are apparently
several methods of creating printer and other drivers, and each company
can choose to use the method they prefer. One method is to have the
drivers call to different sub-programs already provided in the operating
system. By doing so, the driver remains a "pure" product of the 3rd
party vendor. Another method is to include certain parts of the OS code
within the driver. I am not technically knowledgeable enough to weight
in on the advantages and disadvantages of each method.
At this point, I must speculate, because of yet I have not received an
answer, but it is likely HP used the later method with their printer
drivers, that being, they included some Microsoft driver components
within their drivers. Again, I must speculate, because I have been
unable to get a exact answer to date, but it is likely that HP's
agreement/license with Microsoft on the use of this code doesn't allow
them to continue to distribute it once it is no longer supported by
Microsoft.
So, to try to clarify, no one is required to use MS code directly in a
driver. Instead, the driver can call to the internal code within the
operating system, and some companies will have written their drivers in
this fashion. Others, who did incorporate the MS code within their
driver may not be allowed under license to continue to distribute their
drivers as they stand, due to MS not allowing distribution of
non-supported components from their OSs.
WHAT ARE THE MECHANISMS BEHIND THIS:
There are a LOT of issues here, and it is not easy to determine who can
or should take responsibility in this matter.
We do not yet know if HP did use the MS code in their drivers, but it is
likely they have under the current circumstances. If they did, one
question is if they were aware or could they have predicted that using
the code within their drivers would eventually lead to this problem.
Other questions are: Is HP correctly interpreting their agreement and
licensing with MS, and do they have to remove the drivers from
distribution as they stand as a result?
Could or would HP consider recoding their drivers to remove those
offending parts?
If HP pulled the drivers because of the MS redistribution agreement,
could MS change their policy and wording in the agreement/license to
allow the code to be used with a clear understanding that the code
stands without any MS support. After all, these are legacy products
which should have been bug-fixed some time ago, and new problems would
likely be a result of introduction of other products' updates, which
neither MS or HP should be held responsible for.
Is it legal for another website to hold and distribute these drivers?
(I imagine, strictly speaking, that it would violate several copyrights).
It seems to me that this is a matter that needs to be resolved so that
millions of pieces of equipment that are otherwise usable could continue
to be used, sold, or redistributed in such a manner that drivers would
be accessible when needed. At a time when we are continually being
reminded of global climate change and resource limitations, people
should be encouraged to use older equipment as long as possible, and
this goes against that ethic.
CALL TO ACTION:
If people care about this matter, and people should, because this is the
thin edge of the wedge, because there are new OSs coming down the road
and others will become unsupported over time, if this matter is ignored
now, it will become an established precedence and could even be
manipulated to design more obsolecense in an industry which already has
a poor record in this area.
Both HP and MS need to be told this is not acceptable. HP needs to make
sure they are writing drivers that they have full ownership of, so they
can be responsible for their distribution without secondary licensing.
We, as purchasers, should have the right to know if such drivers contain
code that is not within the vendors ownership and control. HP is not
totally without responsibility in this matter and as such, they should
be told so by owners of their products. They are a major partner with
MS, and they can also exert pressure to make changes in the agreement.
We need to let MS know that this is not acceptable. It is
understandable that at a certain point they may no longer support an OS,
and it is bad enough that new OSs break drivers and manufacturers often
do not issue new drivers to allow for upgrade, but now we are losing
access to the old drivers being used on older OSs, as well. Win (*
particularly, and to a lesser extent Win ME, and certainly Win 2000 are
still heavily in use throughout the world. MS needs to rewrite the
redistribution agreement to allow for their code that is integrated into
drivers to continue to be used for redistribution in an non-warranted
and without liability fashion.
I will do some research over the next several days to find the proper
contacts for directing comments and concerns within HP and MS about
these matters. If people become aware of other peripherals of other
brands which are suffering the same fate, please email me me privately
about them.
I apologize to you for my recent responses. Although we were both
speculating, I thought I was doing so from a more informed position
regarding MS and their policies, since I have direct contact with the
printer driver division. Apparently not! I know MS is often pointed to
as the bad guys, and sometimes this is done unfairly, and personally, I
expect better of MS, but it may indeed be that you are closer to the
mark than I in this case. Please read my "open apology to HP" regarding
this matter for more details regarding what I have been able to find out
to date.
I'm relatively mortified by this, and I am disappointed in what appears
to be MS's involvement in this process.
Art
GMAN wrote:
> In article <iQJki.102661$1i1.51739@pd7urf3no>, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>>No, I'm afraid you have chosen to misread what I have written. I chided
>>you for implying MS was behind this. This was a decision, assuming the
>>quoted material is accurate, by HP, not MS. Although the companies
>>partner each other, they aren't the same company.
>>
>>I do not believe there is a MS conspiracy to have all earlier OS drivers
>>removed from access. What I do believe is that if the information
>>quoted is accurate, that HP is trying to imply that because MS is no
>>longer placing resources into certain OSs that HP feels they can or
>>should withdraw all the drivers written for those OSs.
>>
>>Art
>>
>
>
>
> Potatoe , Potato. We are basically looking at the same thing but just in a
> different way. I do feel strongly that Microsoft wishes that all
> manufacturers would stop supporting the old OS's. Dont put that past them.
>
>
>
>
>
>>GMAN wrote:
>>
>>>In article <VdGki.102197$1i1.23693@pd7urf3no>, Arthur Entlich
>>
>><e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>>
>>>>That quote is very telling, thank you for providing it. To me, this
>>>>shows that HP is up to no good and is trying to bury their older
>>>>products and make them unusable. Hopefully, someone will take it upon
>>>>themselves to offer these drivers. I'd love to see HP try to shut them
>>>>down.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yet you chided me for saying the exact thing that you just quoted about HP
>>>not supporting 98 because MS wont.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The way this statement below is written, is, IMHO, about as sleazy as it
>>>>gets. They imply in some manner that the fact that Microsoft no longer
>>>>makes or supports those OSs somehow obligates HP to no longer provide
>>>>the already written and proven drivers.
>>>>
>>>>HP loves to claim how GREEN and environmentally aware and concerned they
>>>>are, but this shows what they are really about. Yeah, for a fee they
>>>>will take their old products (and even those of other manufacturers) and
>>>>"recycle" them for you, but it would appear they are doing anything they
>>>>can to force obsolescence of their older products.
>>>>
>>>>It's one thing (although I don't respect it) to no longer directly
>>>>support older equipment with new drivers or driver updates, but to then
>>>>pull the old drivers which are already written and were working is a
>>>>real slap in the face to the owners of their products and to the
>>>>environment.
>>>>
>>>>Question for HP... if Microsoft is no longer "providing resources" to
>>>>certain OSs, that should mean there will be no further changes made to
>>>>those OSs, meaning the drivers should work as they are within the
>>>>environment of those OSs - so why remove them?
>>>>
>>>>Fine. HP now has another consultant who can no longer recommend their
>>>>products with a clear conscience. I don't know if HP has any idea how
>>>>much undercurrent is developing regarding their product lines and
>>>>customer service, but eventually it will come back to bite them in the
>>>>butt. Sooner would be better than later IMHO.
>>>>
>>>>Art
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Airman Thunderbird wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>My old, we talking old, 7700 series laptop's still supported, with OSes
>>>>
>>>>>from 3.1 to 2000. Maybe just printers, or maybe they just ain't got
>>>>
>>>>>'round to dumping everything yet.
>>>>>
>>>>>Quote from HP:
>>>>>" Microsoft discontinued Windows 98/ME shipments in June 2002/2003
>>>>>respectively.
>>>>>HP’s Windows 98/ME driver discontinuance is directly related to the
>>>>>fact that there is no longer Microsoft resources allocated to issue
>>>>>management."
>>>>>
>>>>>Don't know why they couldn't have left the old stuff available for
>>>>>download, though.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Barry Watzman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Did anyone notice that on July 1st, HP removed ALL drivers for any OS'
>>>>>>before Windows 2000? You can no longer get drivers for any NT or 9x
>>>>>>systems, even ones which were posted online as of 6/30. You also
>>>>>>cannot any longer order CDs with these drivers. Either you have the
>>>>>>driver already (on CD or saved download), or you know someone else who
>>>>>>has it, or you are screwed. This was applicable to ALL HP products,
>>>>>>across the board, not just printers.
>>>>>>
Re: An open apology to HP and others (driver issues)
Just to correct one typo in my posting, "Win (*" was supposed to read
"Win 98".
Arthur Entlich wrote:
> access to the old drivers being used on older OSs, as well. Win (*
> particularly, and to a lesser extent Win ME, and certainly Win 2000 are
> still heavily in use throughout the world. MS needs to rewrite the
Re: An open apology to HP and others (driver issues)
On 07/10/2007 06:15 PM, Arthur Entlich wrote:
> I recently made several postings regarding the removal of printer and
> other drivers from the HP website, in which I referred to HP's actions
> in some strongly worded negative terms based upon my misguided belief
> that this decision was of their own doing.
>
> Further, in the same threads I indicated that Microsoft had no
> responsibility in this matter, and should not be held in any manner
> responsible.
>
> At the time I wrote those postings, I thought the information I wrote
> was an accurate portrayal of events.
>
> I recently received some "clarity" on this matter. I place the word
> clarity in quotes, because things are less than clear, and less than
> black and white, but I still need to retract my earlier statements on
> both sides, and apologize for targeting and maligning HP unfairly.
>
> Apparently, there is a strong Microsoft connection in this matter. As I
> understand what was explained to me, now that Microsoft has withdrawn
> all support for Windows 98 and ME, any code that they own which was
> incorporated into 3rd party product is also without support. Part of
> the agreement MS has with 3rd party vendors is that once a MS product is
> no longer supported their code can no longer be distributed. Microsoft's
> reasoning is apparently that if their code continues to be distributed,
> there is an implication that they will stand behind it, and take
> responsibility to correct and update it should issues develop. There may
> also be legal liability issues involved.
>
> Now, here's where it gets more complicated. There are apparently
> several methods of creating printer and other drivers, and each company
> can choose to use the method they prefer. One method is to have the
> drivers call to different sub-programs already provided in the operating
> system. By doing so, the driver remains a "pure" product of the 3rd
> party vendor. Another method is to include certain parts of the OS code
> within the driver. I am not technically knowledgeable enough to weight
> in on the advantages and disadvantages of each method.
>
> At this point, I must speculate, because of yet I have not received an
> answer, but it is likely HP used the later method with their printer
> drivers, that being, they included some Microsoft driver components
> within their drivers. Again, I must speculate, because I have been
> unable to get a exact answer to date, but it is likely that HP's
> agreement/license with Microsoft on the use of this code doesn't allow
> them to continue to distribute it once it is no longer supported by
> Microsoft.
>
> So, to try to clarify, no one is required to use MS code directly in a
> driver. Instead, the driver can call to the internal code within the
> operating system, and some companies will have written their drivers in
> this fashion. Others, who did incorporate the MS code within their
> driver may not be allowed under license to continue to distribute their
> drivers as they stand, due to MS not allowing distribution of
> non-supported components from their OSs.
>
> WHAT ARE THE MECHANISMS BEHIND THIS:
>
> There are a LOT of issues here, and it is not easy to determine who can
> or should take responsibility in this matter.
>
> We do not yet know if HP did use the MS code in their drivers, but it is
> likely they have under the current circumstances. If they did, one
> question is if they were aware or could they have predicted that using
> the code within their drivers would eventually lead to this problem.
>
> Other questions are: Is HP correctly interpreting their agreement and
> licensing with MS, and do they have to remove the drivers from
> distribution as they stand as a result?
>
> Could or would HP consider recoding their drivers to remove those
> offending parts?
>
How would they justify the expense of writing new drivers for the old
printers?
> If HP pulled the drivers because of the MS redistribution agreement,
> could MS change their policy and wording in the agreement/license to
> allow the code to be used with a clear understanding that the code
> stands without any MS support.
Since it's Microsoft intellectual property we're talking about, of
course they could change the wording, but why would MS want to do this?
> After all, these are legacy products
> which should have been bug-fixed some time ago,
Most software developers fix bugs by releasing new versions of their
software. For example, thousands of bugs in WinME were fixed by the
release of WinXP.
> and new problems would
> likely be a result of introduction of other products' updates, which
> neither MS or HP should be held responsible for.
>
> Is it legal for another website to hold and distribute these drivers?
> (I imagine, strictly speaking, that it would violate several copyrights).
>
I suspect you're right.
> It seems to me that this is a matter that needs to be resolved so that
> millions of pieces of equipment that are otherwise usable could continue
> to be used, sold, or redistributed in such a manner that drivers would
> be accessible when needed.
Resolved by whom--the parties that have decided that support of the old
OSes will go away?
> At a time when we are continually being
> reminded of global climate change and resource limitations, people
> should be encouraged to use older equipment as long as possible, and
> this goes against that ethic.
>
That is right, but how much money does HP make from an eleven-year-old
HP Laserjet II that has already been sold versus a modern HP model
that's sitting in Best Buy?
> CALL TO ACTION:
>
> If people care about this matter, and people should, because this is the
> thin edge of the wedge, because there are new OSs coming down the road
> and others will become unsupported over time, if this matter is ignored
> now, it will become an established precedence and could even be
> manipulated to design more obsolecense in an industry which already has
> a poor record in this area.
>
> Both HP and MS need to be told this is not acceptable.
By whom--the same people who are buying Windows Vista--which has the
most onerous license agreement for a general purpose O/S in Microsoft's
history?
> HP needs to make
> sure they are writing drivers that they have full ownership of, so they
> can be responsible for their distribution without secondary licensing.
> We, as purchasers, should have the right to know if such drivers contain
> code that is not within the vendors ownership and control.
We should read the license agreements.
> HP is not
> totally without responsibility in this matter and as such, they should
> be told so by owners of their products. They are a major partner with
> MS, and they can also exert pressure to make changes in the agreement.
>
What happened to Gateway 2000 when it started standing up to Microsoft?
Hint, Gateway was one of America's premier computer manufacturers at the
time.
> We need to let MS know that this is not acceptable. It is
> understandable that at a certain point they may no longer support an OS,
> and it is bad enough that new OSs break drivers and manufacturers often
> do not issue new drivers to allow for upgrade, but now we are losing
> access to the old drivers being used on older OSs, as well. Win (*
> particularly, and to a lesser extent Win ME, and certainly Win 2000 are
> still heavily in use throughout the world. MS needs to rewrite the
> redistribution agreement to allow for their code that is integrated into
> drivers to continue to be used for redistribution in an non-warranted
> and without liability fashion.
>
> I will do some research over the next several days to find the proper
> contacts for directing comments and concerns within HP and MS about
> these matters. If people become aware of other peripherals of other
> brands which are suffering the same fate, please email me me privately
> about them.
>
I hope that your and other people's efforts will be successful at
resurrecting support of the older Windows OSes, but I doubt that a few
usenet denizens will be able to change policy at Microsoft.
The issues you've discussed are of significant importance--not just
because of the threat to older hardware, but also because of the threat
to older software.
We as consumers make choices. We often choose the most popular and
simplest operating system--even though it may be proprietary. And that
can be a fantastic choice for a long time. But sooner or later, the fact
that the OS (and all its drivers) are the proprietary intellectual
property of a corporation will come back to bite us.
This is one of those situations.
This is why some people want to create and maintain a free operating
system and free drivers. This is why some people want hardware
manufacturers to publish openly the interfaces to their hardware--so
that third party software developers can legally write drivers for that
hardware.
> I can be reached at:
>
> e-printerhelp(at)mvps(dot)org
>
> (at) = @
> (dot) = .
>
> Thanks.
>
> Art
measekite wrote:
>
> Properly run businesses do not run W98. It is not and never really was
> stable. And they certainly do not run games. And if they need to run
> legacy software that old they are at a competitive disadvantge.
Re: HP Removed Drivers ..... exact text of HP message
The message that they put up implied that it was a policy decision and
that the drivers would not return.
The exact text of the message .... which appears on virtually every
single product if you try to download Windows 9x drivers .... is:
*****beginning of exact quote
"As of July 2007, HP will no longer be able to offer software driver
downloads or replacement CD ordering for Windows 98, 98 Second Edition
(SE), or Windows Millennium (Me) for your HP printer, all-in-one,
camera, or scanner. Microsoft has stopped providing and supporting
certain files related specifically to Windows 98 SE, and this change
affects all technology companies. HP, along with other technology
companies, is no longer able to use selected components in support of
Windows 98SE, which has an impact on our software strategy for Windows
98, Windows 98 SE, and Windows Me.
Although the software drivers for Windows 98, 98 Second Edition, and
Windows Me will no longer be supported by HP, your HP product will still
work with these operating systems with the software provided to you on
the CD that shipped with the product. Also, if you have previously
received a software CD that lists any of these operating systems on the
CD label, or downloaded a driver for one of these operating systems,
please maintain these files. These files will no longer be available in
the HP online support Web site or in any other HP support options (such
as e-mail, chat or phone support) after the date mentioned above."
*****end of quote
And I have to take back my previous comment that Microsoft was not
involved, however, I think that this is still an over-reaction on HP's
part. Contrary to what HP implies, I'm not aware of any other
manufacturer that has taken such drastic action, and I really don't
believe that this is a Microsoft issue, but rather an HP policy decision.
Arthur Entlich wrote:
> Is it possible they are reconstructing the website and moving things
> around? You might want to send HP a little note and see if they can
> tell you what's going on. Also, if they did intend to remove it
> permanently, maybe if people indicate the need, they will return it.
>
>
> Art
>
>
> Barry Watzman wrote:
>> Did anyone notice that on July 1st, HP removed ALL drivers for any OS'
>> before Windows 2000? You can no longer get drivers for any NT or 9x
>> systems, even ones which were posted online as of 6/30. You also
>> cannot any longer order CDs with these drivers. Either you have the
>> driver already (on CD or saved download), or you know someone else who
>> has it, or you are screwed. This was applicable to ALL HP products,
>> across the board, not just printers.
>>
>>
I totally agree with your assessment. I think that HP is trying to make
it look as if MS is behind what is really a totally HP policy decision
when, in fact, that is not the case.
Arthur Entlich wrote:
> No, I'm afraid you have chosen to misread what I have written. I chided
> you for implying MS was behind this. This was a decision, assuming the
> quoted material is accurate, by HP, not MS. Although the companies
> partner each other, they aren't the same company.
>
> I do not believe there is a MS conspiracy to have all earlier OS drivers
> removed from access. What I do believe is that if the information
> quoted is accurate, that HP is trying to imply that because MS is no
> longer placing resources into certain OSs that HP feels they can or
> should withdraw all the drivers written for those OSs.
>
> Art
>
Re: An open apology to HP and others (driver issues)
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:15:22 GMT, Arthur Entlich
<e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>Apparently, there is a strong Microsoft connection in this matter. As I
>understand what was explained to me, now that Microsoft has withdrawn
>all support for Windows 98 and ME, any code that they own which was
>incorporated into 3rd party product is also without support. Part of
>the agreement MS has with 3rd party vendors is that once a MS product is
>no longer supported their code can no longer be distributed.
>Microsoft's reasoning is apparently that if their code continues to be
>distributed, there is an implication that they will stand behind it, and
>take responsibility to correct and update it should issues develop.
>There may also be legal liability issues involved.
>
This is extremely unlikely, that HP would be allowed to use
MS closed source code within the driver and would do so with
the limitation of having to abandon it on a whim from MS'
decision to end support for the OS involved.
Note also that this is withdrawl date did not coincide with
MS' withdrawl date, it would certainly not have occurred
this far after MS' widthdrawl date if it were an obligation
on HP to do so.
It seems more likely that HP had coded it's drivers to use
installation routines that needed operating system updates
in order to work (reliably, if at all), and without the
right to distribute the OS components themselves (these OS
updates were purely OS related, patches and feature
inclusions for example), they could only expect the drivers
to work an acceptible % of the time if MS was still
supporting these dependent files.
It is also more likely (than that HP had embedded the MS
code preventing further use past a certain date), that HP
simply decided it didn't want the support costs for older OS
anymore, or is redoing the 'site design to some extent,
archiving some older files to be presented in a different
way than newer files.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 13:43:41 -0400, Barry Watzman
<WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>Who said anything about "businesses"?
>
Is it not implied that businesses would be a substantial
portion of the HP printer userbase? The conversation
shifted to businesses when /m/ wrote "nobody should be using
those archaic operating systems anyway," overlooking that
business needs are not always the same as a home multimedia
gamer/etc needs.
There are a heck of a lot of business that still use MS DOS, simply becaus
they have very expensive special purpose software that runs faster better
using MS Dos than it will running under windows. A graphic interface has a
serious impact on preformance. Windows, with all it's extra baggage, esp. on
the later versions (Vista) takes OPS system required resources and loading
to a new high.
Remember a business golden rule is "just good enough".
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:469516d6$0$4717$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Who said anything about "businesses"?
>
> measekite wrote:
> >
> > Properly run businesses do not run W98. It is not and never really was
> > stable. And they certainly do not run games. And if they need to run
> > legacy software that old they are at a competitive disadvantge.
There are a heck of a lot of business that still use MS DOS,
That depends on what you call a business. Maybe a 1 woman non competitive proprietorship that cannot afford to buy a computer.
simply becaus they have very expensive special purpose software that runs faster better using MS Dos than it will running under windows. A graphic interface has a serious impact on preformance.
Not if you use a real computer.
Windows, with all it's extra baggage, esp. on the later versions (Vista) takes OPS system required resources and loading to a new high. Remember a business golden rule is "just good enough".
Real customers do not want to buy from a source with that philosophy. Sounds like a relabeler to me.
Who said anything about "businesses"? measekite wrote:
Properly run businesses do not run W98. It is not and never really was stable. And they certainly do not run games. And if they need to run legacy software that old they are at a competitive disadvantge.
Chuck wrote:
>> There are a heck of a lot of business that still use MS DOS,
measekite wrote:
> That depends on what you call a business. Maybe a 1 woman non
> competitive proprietorship that cannot afford to buy a computer.
There's nothing wrong with using hardware and software that does just
what you need, even if it's fifteen years old. Incidentally, that's
exactly how old you sound when you make remarks like the above.
Chuck wrote:
>
> There are a heck of a lot of business that still use MS DOS, simply becaus
> they have very expensive special purpose software that runs faster better
> using MS Dos than it will running under windows. A graphic interface has a
Quite true. In fact. If you use condoms they are made using a dos 5.0 PC
to operate the latex dipping machine.
Re: HP Removed Drivers ..... exact text of HP message
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote
> The exact text of the message .... which appears on virtually every single
> product if you try to download Windows 9x drivers .... is:
>
> *****beginning of exact quote
>
> "As of July 2007, HP will no longer be able to offer software driver
> downloads or replacement CD ordering for Windows 98, 98 Second Edition
> (SE), or Windows Millennium (Me) for your HP printer, all-in-one, camera,
> or scanner. Microsoft has stopped providing and supporting certain files
> related specifically to Windows 98 SE, and this change affects all
> technology companies. HP, along with other technology companies, is no
> longer able to use selected components in support of Windows 98SE, which
> has an impact on our software strategy for Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, and
> Windows Me.
>
<snip>
> *****end of quote
Just out of curiosity, I went to the Epson printer driver download site- no
trouble getting Win 98 drivers there.....
hmmm...........
<me thanks the god of printers that my last HP printer died some time ago>
Re: HP Removed Drivers ..... exact text of HP message
It may just be a matter of time, or that they didn't incorporate the MS
owned parts into their drivers. It's a good question.
Art
Gripper wrote:
> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote
>
>
>>The exact text of the message .... which appears on virtually every single
>>product if you try to download Windows 9x drivers .... is:
>>
>>*****beginning of exact quote
>>
>>"As of July 2007, HP will no longer be able to offer software driver
>>downloads or replacement CD ordering for Windows 98, 98 Second Edition
>>(SE), or Windows Millennium (Me) for your HP printer, all-in-one, camera,
>>or scanner. Microsoft has stopped providing and supporting certain files
>>related specifically to Windows 98 SE, and this change affects all
>>technology companies. HP, along with other technology companies, is no
>>longer able to use selected components in support of Windows 98SE, which
>>has an impact on our software strategy for Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, and
>>Windows Me.
>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>*****end of quote
>
>
> Just out of curiosity, I went to the Epson printer driver download site- no
> trouble getting Win 98 drivers there.....
>
> hmmm...........
>
> <me thanks the god of printers that my last HP printer died some time ago>
>
>
Re: HP Removed Drivers ..... exact text of HP message
Barry Watzman a écrit dans le message
<469f714a$0$16605$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>...
>Re: "it's in there best interest to have folks continue to BUY their
>printers. After that, they don't give a squat ..."
>
>Not true.
>
>With printers (unlike, say, scanners) there is ongoing revenue from ink
>cartridges. In fact, the printers themselves are reportedly often sold
>at a loss, and the older cartridges have a higher profit margin than the
>newer ones (because they are less stocked, less promoted and less
>discounted all with less competition).
>
>
>Noozer wrote:
>>> Well, at least two people in this group that have more knowledge about
the
>>> details have already disagreed with you. HP really has no reason to
want
>>> to do this on thier own, it is in thier best interests to have folks
>>> continue to use thier printers.
>>
SNIP
I think that your basic assumption is correct however it appears to me
that the printer manufactors try to force their customers to buy new
printers and new ink systems by upping the price of their cartridges. When
I acquired my Epson printer the combined price of the four cartridges needed
was near 19 Euros. The last time I checked the black cartridge along was
45 euros and the color ones were not in the stores.
I bought a device to reset the chip and a refill kit.
Now (until the cartidges wear out) I can refill all for about 4.50 Euros.
Re: An open apology to HP and others (driver issues)
On Jul 10, 4:15 pm, Arthur Entlich <e-printerh...@mvps.org> wrote:
---snip---
>
> Is it legal for another website to hold and distribute these drivers?
> (I imagine, strictly speaking, that it would violate several copyrights).
>
---snip---
Hi Art
Although, I'm sure a lawyer could argue different but I see this
as a clear case of "fair use". The person that has the printer
has a right to the driver. It is part of the product. The driver has
no other conflicting use with some other companies product
( or at least shouldn't ) so it is only useful for the original
application.
If it was distributed at no cost, there should be no copyright issue.
Just my non-legal opinion.
Dwight
Re: HP Removed Drivers 