Is it time to retire the scanner ?

Gerard Seibert carmel_ny at
Sat Oct 22 21:39:26 UTC 2016

On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 22:47:54 +0200, Polytropon stated:

> On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 20:13:33 +0000, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 10:09:01 -0700, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk stated:
> >   
> > > For that try to buy single purpose devices : printer , scanner ,
> > > etc. , not in combination .  
> > 
> > Logistically, that can become a nightmare. If you are employing
> > cables, then that doubles, or triples or more the number of cables
> > you need. Also, you need to increase the space needed to
> > accommodate these multiple devices.  
> Devices supporting network connections make things much
> easier, be it Ethernet or WLAN. As soon as you don't have
> to rely on USB, that's one big "black box" less.
> Of course the "all in one" mentality fails as soon as you
> want to upgrade a "component" which typically ends in
> buying a whole new device, discarding all "components"
> and increasing your "garbage footprint".

I am not sure why I would want to upgrade a single component.
> > I have a printer/scanner/FAX/copier all in one and love the fact
> > that I don't have devices all over my office.  
> It's useful as soon as _one_ part breaks. Out of ink?
> You now cannot scan anymore. Paper jam? No sending a fax.
> New "Windows" version? Sorry, no driver for you. Go away
> and buy something new. ;-)

Serious logic problems here. You don't need ink to scan, unless you are
scanning and printing the document(s) simultaneously, in which case you
would be screwed in either case. Using your model, a user would be
forced to have ink on hand for both a scanner and printer. I sure hope
they use the same ink.

Personally, I have not run into a problem with getting drivers for
Windows products. I still have an old Panasonic Dot Matrix printer that
is 20 years old and originally worked under Windows 95. It is still
humming away today under Windows 10. I rarely use it, but it still
works. In any case, at least Windows HAS a driver for the device.

I have to try and create a paper jam and see if I can FAX. Two separate
paths, so I don't see why it would matter, but since it has never
happened, I cannot say for sure. Again, if your FAX machine suffered a
paper jam, you could not FAX for sure, so I fail to see your point.

> > The problem here is that you are being forced to "dumb down" your
> > system to accommodate FreeBSD's inability to support multi-function
> > devices. That is like enabling a drunk. I refuse to follow that
> > path.  
> Depends. If you are lucky to buy the "right" hardware,
> you get excellent results. For example, the Deskjet F380
> works flawlessly on FreeBSD (both printer and scanner),
> and it's super easy to setup via CUPS.

I didn't check, but aren't the Deskjet series "ink pee" printers? From
what I have been told, drivers for "ink pee" printers are pretty
generic. My Brother printers are all Laser printers. Far better printing
quality. And no, CUPS does not have a driver for it. Brother does have
a *.nix driver, and a scanner driver, but they have never been ported
to FreeBSD. I don't have the time, inclination or probably the ability
to do so either. Time to me is money, and I am not about to waste it on
porting a driver for something that works just fine for me the way it


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list