IPP Mail Archive: Re[2]: IPP> Does the world need a robust host-to-device netw

Re[2]: IPP> Does the world need a robust host-to-device netw

Robert McComiskie (RMcComiskie@xionics.com)
Thu, 12 Feb 1998 18:37:20 -0500

Seems to me that applications care more about the printer driver API
in the host OS rather than the protocol. The printer vendor will
create the driver, the app writer just prints to the API.

Bob.

*********************************************************************
** Bob McComiskie Voice: 781-229-7021 **
** Product Line Manager Fax: 781-229-7119 **
** Xionics Document Technologies, Inc **
** 70 Blanchard Road rmccomiskie@xionics.com **
** Burlington, MA 01803 USA http://www.xionics.com **
*********************************************************************

______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re: IPP> Does the world need a robust host-to-device network
Author: walker@dazel.com at Internet
Date: 2/12/98 5:02 PM

Jay Martin wrote:
>
> ...
>
> Exactly. Again, people's comments to me come out as: >
> "When compared to existing (proprietary/defacto) network printing
> protocols, IPP adds so little that it does not provide the impetus
> to change existing infrastructures in the Intranet environment."

I think that this is the nut. If a print hardware vendor is only going
to embed *one* more protocol into their printer, would it be IPP? Is
it enough of a good thing to build it? If you build it, will they come?

To say it another way, is this *the* protocol that all of the print
vendors are going to implement so that, now, I, an application writer,
can migrate to this one protocol to drive all the latest and greatest
print hardware.

On the other hand, if you, Mr. printer vendor, are happy as a clam
to keep embedding protocols until the cows come home, then it does
not matter.

...walker

--
Jim Walker <walker@dazel.com>
System Architect/DAZEL Wizard
DAZEL Corporation, Austin, TX