On Wednesday 11 June 2008 22:53, *Gail Koontz* wrote
in /alt.os.linux.mandriva:/

> I keep meaning to post this but forgetting. Several weeks ago I got my
> Brother HL-4070CDW Color Laser Printer. I'm using it in Wi-Fi-mode. There
> is a Linux driver. (It's actually a wrapper, and if I understand that
> correctly, that means it is really using a Windows driver with means of
> connecting it up to Linux, which means all the features of the Windows
> driver are available?)

Hmm... Whether it supports all the features is something you must ascertain
with time, I'm afraid. The concept of a wrapper driver for
Windows-specific drivers in GNU/Linux normally only serves as a means to
get the Windows driver to communicate properly with GNU/Linux.

Whether the wrapper is able to convey all of the device's functionality to
GNU/Linux or not, or whether GNU/Linux can use the wrapper to send
UNIX-typical commands to the printer - by which I actually mean "non-GDI"
stuff, because Windows printers are typically GDI printers and do not
contain fonts and don't understand basic line printer commands - is another
matter and will show varying degrees of success depending on the printer
and the Windows-specific driver used.

> Anyway, installation was a breeze and the printer appears to work
> flawlessly. I don't really plan to do photos, but color printing for other
> uses works great. My favorite feature is the automatic duplexing, which I
> use really often. I love this printer, even if it is a great lump on the
> desk.

I myself have always used Brothers as well, albeit never a color version.
My first printer (under OS/2) was an entry level inkjet (HJ-400?), and then
I bought an HL-760 laser printer. Now I have a multifunctional, albeit
that I am yet to properly set that one up, as I got it secondhand (for
free) and it didn't come with a manual, and its toner cartridge is totally
depleted. :-)

--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Aragorn wrote:

> My first printer (under OS/2) was an entry level inkjet (HJ-400?)

OS/2? When I retired in 1991 I had been on the OS/2 team in Boca Raton for
several years. As much as I like Linux, I still miss OS/2 a bit.

--
Gail KoontzÂ*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Retired in my home state
836 Mallard Rd.Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*... and loving it!
Cocoa, FL 32926Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*gailkoontz@cfl.rr.com

On Thursday 12 June 2008 12:32, *Gail Koontz* wrote
in /alt.os.linux.mandriva:/

> Aragorn wrote:
>
>> My first printer (under OS/2) was an entry level inkjet (HJ-400?)
>
> OS/2? When I retired in 1991 I had been on the OS/2 team in Boca Raton for
> several years. As much as I like Linux, I still miss OS/2 a bit.

I only got into information technology pretty late - I was 27 at the time -
and my first experiences with computers were with TurboDOS and PC-DOS.

However, contrary to my late start, I found that I had a talent for (what
was then still very basic) IT, and within three weeks of my dabbling with
DOS, I was already writing very simple programs in BASIC and using DOS
batch files. ;-)

I also started reading a few books and magazines on IT, and soon I became
aware of the concept of an operating system, and how DOS was not the only
player on the block. At that stage, UNIX still seemed too complicated to
me because of the multitude of shell commands and options, and in DOS I
found that I could more easily memorize all the commands and their options
- considering that it was much more limited. ;-)

Then I read a book about OS/2 from one of the developers of the IBM PS/2
series of personal computers, and I was impressed by it. So I said to
myself "When I buy a computer of my own, I'm going to put OS/2 on it".

And then, late 1991, I bought my first PC, a Brother BCN3386, which was a
slimline desktop model with an i386DX CPU at 33 MHz, 4 MB of RAM, 1 MB of
video memory and a 52 MB hard disk (by Quantum). This machine came with
MS-DOS 5.0 and Windows 3.0. Pending the release of 32-bit OS/2, I used the
DOS and Windows combo for about six months, and then I purchased an OS/2
2.0 license, and had my computer upgraded to 8 MB of RAM and a 202 MB hard
disk (by Western Digital). A year later, I upgraded to OS/2 2.1, and I
kept on using it until mid-to-late 1997. :-)

I liked OS/2, but by that time I already had a bit more of UNIX experience
and I sort of got tired of the drive letters and other DOS legacies. Yet,
proprietary UNIX was expensive for private ownership, so I eventually
settled on NT 4.0 - which I considered to be "a more advanced OS/2" - for
my next PC, which was a Pentium II with 128 MB of RAM and a 5.6 GB Fujitsu
UDMA hard disk. (Worst hard disk I've ever had - it also broke down right
away and needed replacement under warranty - and its UDMA mode didn't work
under NT. Mandrake 6.0 enabled and used UDMA by default, though.)

About two years later - late 1999 - I discovered GNU/Linux (Mandrake 6.0)
and I was absolutely hooked. Finally I had a UNIX-like system, and the GPL
was absolutely in agreement with my political and philosophical ideas. I
have never regretted my decision to stick with GNU/Linux all this time, and
in fact I even regret that I hadn't gotten into using GNU/Linux a lot
sooner. :-)

With regard to OS/2, I must however add that my 2.0 and 2.1 releases were
quite bugridden and still often crashed. I also hated it that 2.0 didn't
allow any larger resolution than standard VGA 640 * 480, although 2.1 did
offer some solace there, but only inside the Workplace Shell. I think I
tried installing a Windows-specific video driver for the WinOS2 environment
offering me 800 * 600 there, but this only worked in 2.0.

Designwise, OS/2 had some great and revolutionary features, but I'm
certainly not going to praise it into the heavens now that I know more
about operating system technology and now that I am familiar with
GNU/Linux.

I will however say that as an evolutionary step, it was a far saner choice
as an operating system for (early) 32-bit x86 processors than Microsoft's
decision to stick with the "let's pretend this is 32-bit" DOS-based
Win95/98/ME junk until the turn of the millenium. ;-)

--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Aragorn wrote:

> On Thursday 12 June 2008 12:32, *Gail Koontz* wrote
> in /alt.os.linux.mandriva:/
>
>> Aragorn wrote:
>>
>>> My first printer (under OS/2) was an entry level inkjet (HJ-400?)
>>
>> OS/2? When I retired in 1991 I had been on the OS/2 team in Boca Raton
>> for several years. As much as I like Linux, I still miss OS/2 a bit.
>
> I only got into information technology pretty late - I was 27 at the time
> - and my first experiences with computers were with TurboDOS and PC-DOS.
>
> However, contrary to my late start, I found that I had a talent for (what
> was then still very basic) IT, and within three weeks of my dabbling with
> DOS, I was already writing very simple programs in BASIC and using DOS
> batch files. ;-)
>
> I also started reading a few books and magazines on IT, and soon I became
> aware of the concept of an operating system, and how DOS was not the only
> player on the block. At that stage, UNIX still seemed too complicated to
> me because of the multitude of shell commands and options, and in DOS I
> found that I could more easily memorize all the commands and their options
> - considering that it was much more limited. ;-)
>
> Then I read a book about OS/2 from one of the developers of the IBM PS/2
> series of personal computers, and I was impressed by it. So I said to
> myself "When I buy a computer of my own, I'm going to put OS/2 on it".
>
> And then, late 1991, I bought my first PC, a Brother BCN3386, which was a
> slimline desktop model with an i386DX CPU at 33 MHz, 4 MB of RAM, 1 MB of
> video memory and a 52 MB hard disk (by Quantum). This machine came with
> MS-DOS 5.0 and Windows 3.0. Pending the release of 32-bit OS/2, I used
> the DOS and Windows combo for about six months, and then I purchased an
> OS/2 2.0 license, and had my computer upgraded to 8 MB of RAM and a 202 MB
> hard
> disk (by Western Digital). A year later, I upgraded to OS/2 2.1, and I
> kept on using it until mid-to-late 1997. :-)
>
> I liked OS/2, but by that time I already had a bit more of UNIX experience
> and I sort of got tired of the drive letters and other DOS legacies. Yet,
> proprietary UNIX was expensive for private ownership, so I eventually
> settled on NT 4.0 - which I considered to be "a more advanced OS/2" - for
> my next PC, which was a Pentium II with 128 MB of RAM and a 5.6 GB Fujitsu
> UDMA hard disk. (Worst hard disk I've ever had - it also broke down right
> away and needed replacement under warranty - and its UDMA mode didn't work
> under NT. Mandrake 6.0 enabled and used UDMA by default, though.)
>
> About two years later - late 1999 - I discovered GNU/Linux (Mandrake 6.0)
> and I was absolutely hooked. Finally I had a UNIX-like system, and the
> GPL
> was absolutely in agreement with my political and philosophical ideas. I
> have never regretted my decision to stick with GNU/Linux all this time,
> and in fact I even regret that I hadn't gotten into using GNU/Linux a lot
> sooner. :-)
>
> With regard to OS/2, I must however add that my 2.0 and 2.1 releases were
> quite bugridden and still often crashed. I also hated it that 2.0 didn't
> allow any larger resolution than standard VGA 640 * 480, although 2.1 did
> offer some solace there, but only inside the Workplace Shell. I think I
> tried installing a Windows-specific video driver for the WinOS2
> environment offering me 800 * 600 there, but this only worked in 2.0.
>
> Designwise, OS/2 had some great and revolutionary features, but I'm
> certainly not going to praise it into the heavens now that I know more
> about operating system technology and now that I am familiar with
> GNU/Linux.
>
> I will however say that as an evolutionary step, it was a far saner choice
> as an operating system for (early) 32-bit x86 processors than Microsoft's
> decision to stick with the "let's pretend this is 32-bit" DOS-based
> Win95/98/ME junk until the turn of the millenium. ;-)
>
My Brother MFC has a LPR driver and a "wrapper" for CUPS. "Wrapper" in your
context may mean that, rather than a wrapper around the Windows driver.

I had to download 3 RPMs - the LPR driver, the wrapper and a separate driver
for the scanner function. I recently downloaded updated drivers which
fixed the slow printing under Linux. Linux now prints at the same speed as
WinXP, although KDE still barfs and says that it can't parse the .ppd file,
which is apparently binary.

Doug.

On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 06:32:26 -0400, Gail Koontz wrote:
> Aragorn wrote:
>
>> My first printer (under OS/2) was an entry level inkjet (HJ-400?)
>
> OS/2? When I retired in 1991 I had been on the OS/2 team in Boca Raton for
> several years. As much as I like Linux, I still miss OS/2 a bit.

I first took up OS/2 (2.1) in 1990 after walking away from Win 3.1. I
stuck with it for 10 years or so. But, its abandonment by the pin-heads
at IBM forced me to migrate to linux. I started up with a pre-installed
Red Hat 6.2 box from Indelible Blue and it's been flounder and grope
ever since. :-)

I, too, miss OS/2 - a lot. I still have a higly tricked-up Warp Connect
box here on the desk (The Warp 4.0 box was retired a couple of years
ago.) I still read the OS/2 ng's -- but, the traffic there is so low
that even the spammers don't bother to post anymore. :-)

Regards,
Jonesy
--
Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux
38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2
*** Killfiling google posts:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 01:36:04 +0000, Allodoxaphobia wrote:

> I, too, miss OS/2 - a lot

As do I. I was in the OS/2 development team at Hursley, UK until early
retirement (due to late wife's health) in 1989.

I stuck with OS/2 -WARP until 3 years ago, then moved over to Linux (SuSE
9.0), then - last year - to Mandriva (PCLinuxOS being a close contender).

It was a big shift to cope with, and in several ways - as has been
visible in this newgroup - I still struggle at times, but I am am glad to
have made the move, thanks to the tremendous level of support in thie
newsgroup.

--
/\/\aurice
(Retired in Surrey, UK)
(Remove "removethis." to reply by email...)

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:08:25 +0200, Aragorn wrote:

> Since Microsoft had started to make deals
> with computer hardware vendors to include Windows 3.1 and DOS 6.22 with
> the hardware, IBM already started selling some of their own personal
> computer platforms with GNU/Linux pre-installed.

I think you need to check your timelines there...3.1 and DOS6.22 preceded
the first Linux kernel by several years. I don't know of any vintage IBM
microchannel machine that came with Linux pre-installed.

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:19:29 -0500, mister b wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:08:25 +0200, Aragorn wrote:
>
>> Since Microsoft had started to make deals with computer hardware
>> vendors to include Windows 3.1 and DOS 6.22 with the hardware, IBM
>> already started selling some of their own personal computer platforms
>> with GNU/Linux pre-installed.
>
> I think you need to check your timelines there...3.1 and DOS6.22
> preceded the first Linux kernel by several years. I don't know of any
> vintage IBM microchannel machine that came with Linux pre-installed.

Windows 3.1: released March 18, 1992.

Linus' announcement in c.o.minix: August 25, 1991.

So Windows 3.1 precedes Linux by a few months, and only if time runs
backwards.

On Friday 13 June 2008 21:19, someone who identifies as *mister b* wrote
in /alt.os.linux.mandriva:/

> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:08:25 +0200, Aragorn wrote:
>
>> Since Microsoft had started to make deals
>> with computer hardware vendors to include Windows 3.1 and DOS 6.22 with
>> the hardware, IBM already started selling some of their own personal
>> computer platforms with GNU/Linux pre-installed.
>
> I think you need to check your timelines there...3.1 and DOS6.22 preceded
> the first Linux kernel by several years.

Apart from what Mark Madsen has replied to your post, DOS 6.22 and Windows
3.1 ran for quite a few years still before Windows 95 was eventually
released, and Windows NT 3.1 was adequately dubbed "Windows Not There" in
the press because it was way behind schedule.

By the time Windows 95 (Windows 4.0) was released, OS/2 was already on its
way out as far as IBM was concerned, because OS/2 3.0 Warp didn't sell as
well as hoped for, and IBM then began selling machines with GNU/Linux -
RedHat, if I'm not mistaken. This was around 1996-1998, if I'm not
mistaken, so yes, I may have compressed my timeline a bit too much in my
previous post. ;-)

> I don't know of any vintage IBM microchannel machine that came with Linux
> pre-installed.

That is correct. The Microchannel architecture was available with DOS (plus
Windows), OS/2 and AIX.

--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 02:20:02 +0200, Mark Madsen wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:19:29 -0500, mister b wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:08:25 +0200, Aragorn wrote:
>>
>>> Since Microsoft had started to make deals with computer hardware
>>> vendors to include Windows 3.1 and DOS 6.22 with the hardware, IBM
>>> already started selling some of their own personal computer platforms
>>> with GNU/Linux pre-installed.
>>
>> I think you need to check your timelines there...3.1 and DOS6.22
>> preceded the first Linux kernel by several years. I don't know of any
>> vintage IBM microchannel machine that came with Linux pre-installed.
>
> Windows 3.1: released March 18, 1992.
>
> Linus' announcement in c.o.minix: August 25, 1991.
>
> So Windows 3.1 precedes Linux by a few months, and only if time runs
> backwards.

I sit corrected...I don't know why I had 93-94 in my head as the intro
for Linux...I remember trying out SLS and then Slack around that time