Canon refused to develop a (ubuntu) linuxdriver for hospital

[newbie2]

Canon refused to develop a linuxdriver for the 500 hospital-scanners in a Ubuntu oriented Dutch hospital .. :
http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/30385/
The hospital has released the ubuntu driver under the opensource license
:popcorn:

[DrMelon]

That doesn't look like a very reliable news source - it's a forum post, and a badly-written one at that. More sources please.

[newbie2]

More sources please.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.computable.nl%2Fartikel%2Fict_t opics%2Fopen_source%2F3269714%2F1277105%2Fcanon-weigerde-linuxdriver-te-ontwikkelen.html&sl=nl&tl=en

[Johnsie]

There's a link in the post to:

http://www.computable.nl/artikel/ict_topics/open_source/3269714/1277105/canon-weigerde-linuxdriver-te-ontwikkelen.html

As this happened in Holland it's in Dutch. Here's the translation:

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.computable.nl%2Fartikel%2Fi ct_topics%2Fopen_source%2F3269714%2F1277105%2Fcano n-weigerde-linuxdriver-te-ontwikkelen.html&lp=nl_en&btnTrUrl=Translate

[Warpnow]

That doesn't look like a very reliable news source - it's a forum post, and a badly-written one at that. More sources please.

Actually, the forum post is not the source. The source is linked, but its not in english.

[juancarlospaco]

Canon allways refuse to develop a (ubuntu) linux drivers.

[Shpongle]

well i for one will not be buying any canon products !

[Giant Speck]

Canon allways refuse to develop a (ubuntu) linux drivers.

That's a lie. I just bought a printer from them and I was able to download drivers for it from their website in .deb form. The drivers were also available in .rpm and .tar.gz.

[MMKOneEyedMike]

Wow thats not cool on Cannon's part

[Tibuda]

Why Canonical refused to do it?

edit: misread the title, sorry, but it was funny

[mkvnmtr]

This is not a post about Canonical it is about Canon. I believe there is a difference.

[Tibuda]

This is not a post about Canonical it is about Canon. I believe there is a difference.

there is, i misread the thread. sorry. i have edited my post.

[Penguin Guy]

Why Canonical refused to do it?
Canon, not Canonical.

EDIT: Never mind, I see you've changed it now.

[mkvnmtr]

On second thought maybe it will be more fun to blame Canonical.

[blur xc]

That's a lie. I just bought a printer from them and I was able to download drivers for it from their website in .deb form. The drivers were also available in .rpm and .tar.gz.

I found this- http://canon.codehost.com/ but may I ask what printer it was and could you provide a link to the download page for that driver?

Thanks,
BM

[click4851]

That's a lie. I just bought a printer from them and I was able to download drivers for it from their website in .deb form. The drivers were also available in .rpm and .tar.gz.

I believe it was scanner drivers the article referred to, I have had trouble finding linux drivers for scanners from Canon in the past.

[doas777]

That's a lie. I just bought a printer from them and I was able to download drivers for it from their website in .deb form. The drivers were also available in .rpm and .tar.gz.

thats a pretty rough way to put it. theres plenty of grey area between "incorrect" and "lying". no need to be a jerk.
I never could get linux drivers for my cannon from them. they do offer them for a few models, but only a few. so who's lying now? or are you just incorrect?

[Giant Speck]

thats a pretty rough way to put it. theres plenty of grey area between "incorrect" and "lying". no need to be a jerk.
I never could get linux drivers for my cannon from them. they do offer them for a few models, but only a few. so who's lying now? or are you just incorrect?

I'm not going to sit here and discuss word usage with you; his claim that Canon not only refuses to make drivers for Linux but always refuses to make drivers for Linux is flat-out wrong.

The best resource available for finding printer drivers is Open Printing (http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/openprinting), provided by the Linux Foundation. If you take a look at their databases, you will see that there are numerous Canon devices that are either compatible with existing printer drivers or work with drivers provided by Canon itself. The website even features a forum in which you can ask for help with a specific printer.

As for finding and downloading drivers from Canon itself, it is more likely that you will find such drivers on Canon's global websites, such as Canon Europe, Canon Asia, and Canon Australia. I found the drivers for my Canon PIXMA MX330 on Canon Australia's website.

[Zoot7]

Maybe the hospital should have considered the consequences of using an OS with <1% marketshare before they moved over to it.
I'm all for FLOSS but sheesh, use what works. :rolleyes:

[Kdar]

How terrible! I am not satisfied with Canon now :D

[newbie2]

Maybe the hospital should have considered the consequences of using an OS with <1% marketshare before they moved over to it.
I'm all for FLOSS but sheesh, use what works. :rolleyes:
So...with that 'attitude' in mind... everybody should stick with windows ???:rolleyes:

[Queue29]

So...with that 'attitude' in mind... everybody should stick with windows ???:rolleyes:

Somebody in charge of something with the magnitude of responsibility involved in running a hospital should know better than to assume that some free-as-in-beer operating system is going to work correctly with all of the hardware they need to work with it. Canon has absolutely zero responsibility for developing drivers they don't want to waste money developing, so it's entirely the hospitals fault for the situation they put themselves in. Should the hospital have used Windows in the first place? Not necessarily. Had they bought Brother printers instead of Canon, they wouldn't have this issue. But they didn't They didn't do their research.

[Tristam Green]

Somebody in charge of something with the magnitude of responsibility involved in running a hospital should know better than to assume that some free-as-in-beer operating system is going to work correctly with all of the hardware they need to work with it. Canon has absolutely zero responsibility for developing drivers they don't want to waste money developing, so it's entirely the hospitals fault for the situation they put themselves in. Should the hospital have used Windows in the first place? Not necessarily. Had they bought Brother printers instead of Canon, they wouldn't have this issue. But they didn't They didn't do their research.

This, I am in complete agreement with. Now, who's to say they didn't purchase the full support from Canonical, but I'm willing to wager they didn't - if they were going to actively spend money, they'd have probably gone with RHEL or SuSE even.

If this were a free clinic or something, then still the title is misleading - funding structures are completely different between hospitals and free clinics.

[m4tic]

Somebody in charge of something with the magnitude of responsibility involved in running a hospital should know better than to assume that some free-as-in-beer operating system is going to work correctly with all of the hardware they need to work with it. Canon has absolutely zero responsibility for developing drivers they don't want to waste money developing, so it's entirely the hospitals fault for the situation they put themselves in. Should the hospital have used Windows in the first place? Not necessarily. Had they bought Brother printers instead of Canon, they wouldn't have this issue. But they didn't They didn't do their research.

you're right, i won't be surprised if they got convinced by some enthusiastic ubuntu user, I get carried away introducing it to people too

[ali bongo]

That's a lie. I just bought a printer from them and I was able to download drivers for it from their website in .deb form. The drivers were also available in .rpm and .tar.gz.
There are 37 listed printer model drivers on Canon E.U. website. The later models are in .deb files which although designed for i386,it is possible to install into 64bit under Ubuntu Karmic. I am 65 years old and as thick as two planks ...If I can do it anyone can!
Although the extra Canon programs they supply for windows are not included.Bit of a downer that, but I am still trying to recode them. Mp540 =everything works to spec.With the .deb files =64 bit. converted from i386. Solution found on this forum.
As for the original article regarding the hospital scanner driver issue,would not Sane work?
The printer driver issue should have been marked as a priority in the Ubuntu repositories to get right. Still trying to find a code converter as if I or anyone purchases a printer to use with a computer there is an expectation that it will work,a reasonable expectation that all functions will work and that preference is not given to M/Soft or Mac with supplied disks.
There got that off my chest,now where are my pipe and slippers....