Need Help With Installing HP 950 PSC AllInOne

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

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 understand what was explained to me, now that Microsoft has withdrawn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