Windows 10 automatically installed itself.

On 03/15/2016 09:54 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

[snip]

I put Win 10 (IIRC it was 9926 at first) on a VM. I have started it for.

1. Check to see it it works.
2. Try to set it up properly
3. See if my website looks OK in Edge

Edge? Who cares?

It'd be OK with me if nobody used anything but Firefox. It works best.

I did a clean install of W10 and Edge doesn't even have a shortcut on
the Quick Launch, the Toolbar, the Start Menu ... nowhere to be found.

IIRC, I've done 6 clean installs (2 preview builds, one 10240, the
others the Nov 2015 version) plus several upgrades. I don't remember
even one that didn't have an Edge shortcut on the screen. I thought it
didn't once but that was because it looked so much like the MSIE
shortcut (it's still a 'e').

Click on the executable on C:? won't launch. Do you think I'm going to
worry about how my Web sites look an a browser I can't launch on a clean
install of an OS? I don't f*ing think so.

It's not a very good browser, but it has always launched.

W10 is so disfunctional it makes Arnie on LS Law look sane.

BTW, the word is "dysfunctional" (note the y).

Okay, sorry for the horribly outdated reference but I couldn't think of
a more recent analogy. Just watched like 5 episodes of The Leftovers
and my brain is still reeling.

Oh, and BTW, I did clean installs on two systems with the same results
vis-a-vis Edge. As I said: Who cares?

If Edge is standards compatible I'm okay because my sites are W3
compliant. If not? Well the 3 people who use Edge to surf? shrug

Actually, I think the only "Edge" USER-AGENT strings I've found in my
website logs are from me verifying that it works. There are MSIE
strings, but a lot fewer than Firefox of Chrome. Even Lynx (test-mode
browser) is more popular than Edge.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted
its data." [Henry Morris, Head of Institute for Creation Research]

Ed Mullen wrote:
On 3/15/2016 4:23 PM, Mark Lloyd's fingers rattled off:
On 03/15/2016 09:20 AM, Char Jackson wrote:

[snip]

I'm in general agreement with what you're requesting, so my primary
desktop
PC will stay on Win 7 SP1, while my work laptop will stay on Win 8.x,
which
is what it came with. No Win 10 digital entitlements for me, thank
you. I've
looked at Win 10 in a VM and wasn't impressed.


I put Win 10 (IIRC it was 9926 at first) on a VM. I have started it for.

1. Check to see it it works.
2. Try to set it up properly
3. See if my website looks OK in Edge

Edge? Who cares?

I did a clean install of W10 and Edge doesn't even have a shortcut on
the Quick Launch, the Toolbar, the Start Menu ... nowhere to be found.

Click on the executable on C:? won't launch. Do you think I'm going to
worry about how my Web sites look an a browser I can't launch on a clean
install of an OS? I don't f*ing think so.

W10 is so disfunctional it makes Arnie on LS Law look sane.

Okay, sorry for the horribly outdated reference but I couldn't think of
a more recent analogy. Just watched like 5 episodes of The Leftovers
and my brain is still reeling.

Oh, and BTW, I did clean installs on two systems with the same results
vis-a-vis Edge. As I said: Who cares?

If Edge is standards compatible I'm okay because my sites are W3
compliant. If not? Well the 3 people who use Edge to surf? shrug

The funny part of the thread here, is a suggested workaround.

You can ask Cortana to "start Edge" and Cortana can do it for you :-)

Otherwise, there is a whole pile of recipes in here, of one
sort and another. The old Powershell re-registration command.
I didn't see the "delete some Tile folder thing" in there.

https://social.technet.microsoft.com...in10itprosetup

I tried searching on the names of some of the built-in apps,
and I can't even find a table that maps stuff like this:

Microsoft.Windows.ShellExperienceHost = your Start menu

It would be really helpful to understand which one of these
piles of HTML and Javascript, makes the computer work.

And even if you have Internet Explorer and Edge uninstalled,
there still has to be a browser engine working in the OS,
for regular stuff to work.

Paul

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:03:14 -0700, mike wrote:

I'd be really disappointed to find out in December 2016 that
I had to pay $200 for an OS option that I'd let slip thru my
fingers.

What are you using now, and why do you think it won't be a viable option by
the end of the year? Or better yet, if what you're using now somehow
disappears in a puff of smoke toward the end of the year, why do you think
Win 10 will be your best option as a replacement?

I'm having trouble with that scenario.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 15:36:14 -0600, Albert wrote:

1st off I don't keep anything on my computer that I would not want
someone to see. I don't do any banking or any other personal business
on the Internet. I don't keep any photographs that would be construed
to be X-rated.

But I do resent knowing that someone would have access to my private
stuff. MS assures me that they don't and won't access any files of
that type because they have no interest in it.

Regarding that last sentence, I'd have a very hard time getting comfortable
with that. Which would you prefer, an organization that "don't and won't"
because they have no interest, or an organization that "don't and won't"
because they can't?

I'm not saying that earlier versions of Windows are brick fortresses, but
they kind of are when you compare them to Microsoft's current offering.

What's in Win 10 that makes all of the problems worth it? What am I missing?

On 3/15/2016 9:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:03:14 -0700, mike wrote:

I'd be really disappointed to find out in December 2016 that
I had to pay $200 for an OS option that I'd let slip thru my
fingers.

What are you using now, and why do you think it won't be a viable option by
the end of the year? Or better yet, if what you're using now somehow
disappears in a puff of smoke toward the end of the year, why do you think
Win 10 will be your best option as a replacement?

I'm having trouble with that scenario.

You seem to trust your crystal ball.
I don't trust mine. I also look at history.
I like to hedge where I can.

I'm using win7 on my primary computer and combinations of
android, wince, windows mobile (5,6,7,8.1), PALM OS, iOS, win7, XP,
VISTA, Win10 and several versions of linux on other
machines.
I update machines when it is ESSENTIAL to do something I can't do
with the incumbent OS AND if it's FREE. If I don't have a way to
get an existing license key to work, it ain't happenin'.

"Toward the end of the year" is a proxy for any time after the free
upgrade offer expires.
Best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
Needing to upgrade has happened on EVERY past version of every OS.

You have to look at what motivates people. The world will move in
the direction that they believe to be of best value to them.
Microsoft believes that it is in THEIR best interest to move me to
win10. MS is big enough to move the world.
It WILL happen, eventually. Notice that windows ME and windows 8 are
missing from my list above. I did try them, but they were so horrible
and gave no additional benefits and were rapidly replaced.

All it takes to switch me is ONE killer app that I simply MUST have
that's not working on my existing system. It is in MS's best interest
to make that happen as soon as possible.

My failing memory can't produce a concrete example, but, as I remember...
In the past MS tweaked their development tools so that developers had to
maintain two discrete versions of their app if they wanted to be
compatible with older OS versions. At some point, the maintenance
and customer support for an obsolete OS exceeds the benefit.
Poof, new versions of the app don't support older OS's.
Firefox did it. TurboTax did it. I'm sure there are lots of examples.
And look! Microsoft still supports older operating systems. It's
those lazy app developers who dropped support. Yeah, that's it.

Microsoft has ways to "encourage" developers to abandon older OS versions.

So, let's talk about alternatives.
What do YOU think will be your next OS?

The elephant in the room is that desktop linux is not an elephant.
It's a herd of cats. They've fragmented desktop linux into more
distros than you can count. Then each distro seems to throw everything
up into the air at each release and ship whatever falls back into the
bucket they call a distro. Let the users figure it out.
Managing desktop linux is a nightmare for newbies and a hassle for current
users. But the cats just love the chaos.

Desktop linux has most of the pieces already in place.
The missing part is empathy for users, especially new users.
There's a very steep learning curve at the beginning of desktop linux.
And a bunch of rabid cats guarding the entrance telling newbies to FOAD
and calling them names instead of helping them adopt desktop linux.
When you google a problem and get 200,000 hits spread over a decade,
maybe you should think
about wrapping a GUI around that issue so mortals can make it work.

It only takes one killer app to force me to upgrade my OS.
The other side of that coin is linux. It only takes one killer app
that's not supported by linux to stop my migration dead in its tracks.
If you believe the usage statistics, you might conclude that
there are issues. It's a PITA to have to learn new ways to do things.
But, no amount of pain can make it work if the functionality you need is
just not supported at all.

If desktop linux could standardize on something...anything...
they could fix the configuration nightmare and attract for profit
commercial hardware and software developers to provide FULL support.
There's enough wasted effort spinning distros to make all that happen
in a heartbeat if they could just decide to do it, pick a leader
and FOLLOW. "Just Works" is a state of mind. And it's missing.

It's a chicken/egg problem. Developers can't make a profit from the
chaos.
Users won't adopt because developers don't provide support.
Developers can't fix that individually. Only the linux community can
fix it.

If you want to build an appliance that can be preconfigured and just
used, linux may well be your best option. If you want something
that you can hand to a former windows user who needs to add stuff
to the distro and keep it all working without assistance, linux is
likely a poor choice. Check the usage statistics if you doubt.

History has given desktop linux many opportunities to wipe MS off the
face of the earth. ME, Vista, Windows 8, windows 10, to name a few.

If you want an example of what can be done with linux, look no further
than Android. It took over the world very rapidly. It has LEADERSHIP.
STANDARDIZATION, MANAGED evolution, for-profit vendors can make a
profit, and it can be used by mere mortals.

What's the best predictor of future performance? Say it with me,
"Past Performance!"

So, what's YOUR next OS gonna be?

| The other important reason is security. Newer versions are more secure
| than older versions, and they get more and better security updates.
|
| That cuts both ways. Win 10 lacks drivers for older hardware, and
| so forces unintended peripheral upgrades that are undesired. I
| don't want a new video card or scanner, thank you. And I don't want
| Win10 watching over me.
|

Also, security improvement is *greatly* overrated.

* Many attacks are "0-day", which means they're not
yet officially known or patched.

* Current Windows versions are more likely to be targetted
than older versions. Win10 has very little market share
at this point, but eventually it may, which will make it
a prime target.

* Older Windows versions often have some safety
advantages: One of the current attacks exploits a
bug in PowerShell, which is not even in XP by default.

* Most patches are for MS software and/or unsafe
network functionality. You can see this month's typical
list he

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/.../ms15-mar.aspx

Anyone really concerned with security should avoid
IE and MS Office (both of which have patches this
month, as usual). They should also avoid functionality
best reserved for safe intranets, such as remote desktop
(which also gets a patch this month) and inter-network
communication functionality like DCOM. And they should
limit javascript as much as possible in the browser.
Additionally, block iframes, don't install Flash or
Java, and don't allow PDFs to open in the browser.
Download them and open them in something like
Sumatra, without script functionality.

There are some inconveniences involved. That's the
cost of security. The security risks coming along are
due to two basic problems: Excessive browser functionality
and OSs designed to be corporate workstations, with
services set by default to favor vulnerability.

The rest of security is common sense. I got an attack
ZIP this morning in an email. Is there a patch for that?
I have no idea. I don't know offhand what the attack is.
It may exploit Windows ZIP functionality. That would
be nice, since I never use Windows for ZIPs. But I
can see from a glance that the email is a scam, so I
don't open the ZIP. Risk averted.

There was a discussion recently about blocked file
types in gmail. The list of blocked extensions was a
classic example of how problematic the common security
approach is. Google blocks all sorts of things that could
be risks. But they don't block the file types that are normally
used in attacks: DOC, ZIP, PDF. Why? It's a hassle for
business.

On 3/15/2016 11:58 PM, Paul's fingers rattled off:
Ed Mullen wrote:
On 3/15/2016 4:23 PM, Mark Lloyd's fingers rattled off:
On 03/15/2016 09:20 AM, Char Jackson wrote:

[snip]

I'm in general agreement with what you're requesting, so my primary
desktop
PC will stay on Win 7 SP1, while my work laptop will stay on Win 8.x,
which
is what it came with. No Win 10 digital entitlements for me, thank
you. I've
looked at Win 10 in a VM and wasn't impressed.


I put Win 10 (IIRC it was 9926 at first) on a VM. I have started it for.

1. Check to see it it works.
2. Try to set it up properly
3. See if my website looks OK in Edge

Edge? Who cares?

I did a clean install of W10 and Edge doesn't even have a shortcut on
the Quick Launch, the Toolbar, the Start Menu ... nowhere to be found.

Click on the executable on C:? won't launch. Do you think I'm going
to worry about how my Web sites look an a browser I can't launch on a
clean install of an OS? I don't f*ing think so.

W10 is so disfunctional it makes Arnie on LS Law look sane.

Okay, sorry for the horribly outdated reference but I couldn't think
of a more recent analogy. Just watched like 5 episodes of The
Leftovers and my brain is still reeling.

Oh, and BTW, I did clean installs on two systems with the same results
vis-a-vis Edge. As I said: Who cares?

If Edge is standards compatible I'm okay because my sites are W3
compliant. If not? Well the 3 people who use Edge to surf? shrug

The funny part of the thread here, is a suggested workaround.

You can ask Cortana to "start Edge" and Cortana can do it for you :-)


Not if, like me, you have Cortana turned off. :-)

But, I just did Start - Search - Edge. Clicked the found Edge button.
It launched, was on screen about two seconds and terminated. Which is
what it's always done since I updated to W10.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
How can you tell when the blue cheese goes bad?

Keith Nuttle elucidated thusly:
On 3/15/2016 10:52 AM, Bucky Breeder wrote:

Microsoft has the legal right to force you to use Windows 10 but they
are trying to be nice about it by advertising on television with little
kids and bugs in their ads to soften you up some. Windows 10, get used
to it!

Resistance is futile.

Please post some more nekkid pikktures of yer wife. TIA.
My biggest problem with Windows 10 is that MS controls when the update
occurs, not you. Most of the time this is not a problem, however when
it occurs when you are in the middle of something important is really
puts you off of MS.

Recent occurrences as I was sitting in a meeting ready to make a
presentation and the computer which the presentation decided it was time
to reboot. The most frustrating was on a recent Sunday morning
We use a computer to control the audio visual system for the church
series. Half way through the service MS decided it was time to update
the computer. The whole system was down for the rest of the service.

This is not a way to make friends and influence people.

Microsoft takes prisoners NOT makes friends and influences the minions.

Resistance is futile.

--

I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^;

Resolve conflicts the American way :

Rock - Paper - Scissors - Twitter War - Concealed Firearm

.... and I approve this message!

On 3/15/16 9:52 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 03/15/2016 09:54 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

[snip]

I put Win 10 (IIRC it was 9926 at first) on a VM. I have started it for.

1. Check to see it it works.
2. Try to set it up properly
3. See if my website looks OK in Edge

Edge? Who cares?

It'd be OK with me if nobody used anything but Firefox. It works best.

I did a clean install of W10 and Edge doesn't even have a shortcut on
the Quick Launch, the Toolbar, the Start Menu ... nowhere to be found.

IIRC, I've done 6 clean installs (2 preview builds, one 10240, the
others the Nov 2015 version) plus several upgrades. I don't remember
even one that didn't have an Edge shortcut on the screen. I thought it
didn't once but that was because it looked so much like the MSIE
shortcut (it's still a 'e').

It always shows up in the taskbar for me, too.

snip


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 44.0
Thunderbird 38.0.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

mike posted this via :

On 3/15/2016 8:44 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 3/15/2016 10:52 AM, Bucky Breeder wrote:
Microsoft has the legal right to force you to use Windows 10 but they
are
trying to be nice about it by advertising on television with little
kids
and bugs in their ads to soften you up some. Windows 10, get used to
it!

Resistance is futile.

Please post some more nekkid pikktures of yer wife. TIA.
My biggest problem with Windows 10 is that MS controls when the update
occurs, not you. Most of the time this is not a problem, however when
it occurs when you are in the middle of something important is really
puts you off of MS.

Recent occurrences as I was sitting in a meeting ready to make a
presentation and the computer which the presentation decided it was time
to reboot. The most frustrating was on a recent Sunday morning
We use a computer to control the audio visual system for the church
series. Half way through the service MS decided it was time to update
the computer. The whole system was down for the rest of the service.

This is not a way to make friends and influence people.

It's gonna be very interesting to see what happens when someone dies
because the emergency system was down for an unstoppable update.

We create draconian knee-jerk laws if a single kid gets run over by a
drunk driver.
Wonder what laws we'll get when baby Jessica's death can be blamed on a
MS computer incursion. The army of MS lawyers probably considers
that an acceptable risk.

Drunken updating lawyers? Mothers against drunken updating? Hmmmm...

Possible growth industry for the new millineum - if the small business
owners (aka, "doctors" and "lawyers") can get some tax exclusions and tax
breaks because they're "job creators".

--

I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^;

Resolve conflicts the American way :

Rock - Paper - Scissors - Twitter War - Concealed Firearm

.... and I approve this message!

On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 04:44:30 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
wrote:

Win 10 lacks drivers for older hardware, and
so forces unintended peripheral upgrades that are undesired.



Drivers are not a part of Windows 10, nor any other version of
Windows. Driver are written by the hardware manufacturer, and if a
driver doesn't exist for older hardware on a newer version of Windows,
it's because the manufacturer has decided that it's not worth his time
and effort to develop software for a product he's no longer selling.

On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 02:13:58 -0700, mike wrote:

On 3/15/2016 9:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:03:14 -0700, mike wrote:

I'd be really disappointed to find out in December 2016 that
I had to pay $200 for an OS option that I'd let slip thru my
fingers.

What are you using now, and why do you think it won't be a viable option by
the end of the year? Or better yet, if what you're using now somehow
disappears in a puff of smoke toward the end of the year, why do you think
Win 10 will be your best option as a replacement?

I'm having trouble with that scenario.

You seem to trust your crystal ball.
I don't trust mine. I also look at history.
I like to hedge where I can.

I'm using win7 on my primary computer and combinations of
android, wince, windows mobile (5,6,7,8.1), PALM OS, iOS, win7, XP,
VISTA, Win10 and several versions of linux on other
machines.

I see what you mean about hedging. You've got a little of everything, which
I think is silly and unproductive, but you have your reasons. You've made
some dubious purchasing decisions. ;-)

I update machines when it is ESSENTIAL to do something I can't do
with the incumbent OS AND if it's FREE. If I don't have a way to
get an existing license key to work, it ain't happenin'.

So what was your ESSENTIAL task that you couldn't do on any of the OSs
listed above?

"Toward the end of the year" is a proxy for any time after the free
upgrade offer expires.
Best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
Needing to upgrade has happened on EVERY past version of every OS.

I'm not arguing that there will never be a need to upgrade. I'm just saying
that that date seems to be quite a few years in the future, so I don't
understand why so many people (here in the newsgroups, not in real life) are
rushing to do it now. It's not like we don't have the Internet as a means to
share information. We can clearly see that Win 10 is a stinker. User
feedback so far has been quite clear on that.

You have to look at what motivates people. The world will move in
the direction that they believe to be of best value to them.
Microsoft believes that it is in THEIR best interest to move me to
win10. MS is big enough to move the world.

I didn't understand any of that. You jumped from motivating people to
Microsoft's best interests. Why should any of us care what Microsoft wants?

It WILL happen, eventually.

And there's the rub. To you, "eventually" means 'now'. To me, it means '4+
years from now'.

Notice that windows ME and windows 8 are
missing from my list above. I did try them, but they were so horrible
and gave no additional benefits and were rapidly replaced.

Well, that's a confusing statement. You ditched those two, but you kept
WinCE, Windows Mobile, Vista, and PalmOS? Even more confusing, you're
embracing 10? What happened to "so horrible and gave no additional
benefits"?

All it takes to switch me is ONE killer app that I simply MUST have
that's not working on my existing system. It is in MS's best interest
to make that happen as soon as possible.

What does that have to do with the current discussion? What does 10 do that
8 and 7 and other OSs don't do? And again, why should anyone care about
Microsoft's best interests? They are well equipped to look out for
themselves. They don't need help from me or you.

My failing memory can't produce a concrete example, but, as I remember...
In the past MS tweaked their development tools so that developers had to
maintain two discrete versions of their app if they wanted to be
compatible with older OS versions. At some point, the maintenance
and customer support for an obsolete OS exceeds the benefit.
Poof, new versions of the app don't support older OS's.
Firefox did it. TurboTax did it. I'm sure there are lots of examples.
And look! Microsoft still supports older operating systems. It's
those lazy app developers who dropped support. Yeah, that's it.

I know that was only meant as an example, but it's a bad one for me. I don't
chase the latest development tools. If I need to code something real quick,
I use VB6.

Microsoft has ways to "encourage" developers to abandon older OS versions.

Are you a developer? I'm not.

So, let's talk about alternatives.
What do YOU think will be your next OS?

I can't say. Ask me again in 3-4-5 years. I should have a much better idea
by then. So there you have it. The real question isn't WHAT will be my next
OS, but rather WHEN will be my next OS. I didn't jump on WinCE, WinME,
Vista, Win Mobile, WinRT, etc., and most recently, 10. Just because MS pulls
something out of their oven doesn't mean I have to use it.

[snipped the Linux stuff]

On 3/16/2016 9:47 AM, Char Jackson wrote:


I can't say. Ask me again in 3-4-5 years. I should have a much better idea
by then. So there you have it. The real question isn't WHAT will be my next
OS, but rather WHEN will be my next OS. I didn't jump on WinCE, WinME,
Vista, Win Mobile, WinRT, etc., and most recently, 10. Just because MS pulls
something out of their oven doesn't mean I have to use it.

I'd say it does. Sure, you don't have to use every iteration, but the
way the MS wind blows determines the direction we all move. There aren't
any viable desktop alternatives for most of us. Extrapolating from the
past,
it's not likely that we'll have a viable alternative any time soon.

It all boils down to:
You'd rather pay retail after you decide.
I'd rather get it while it's free and use it if/when I decide that
it's better than the alternatives.
My crystal ball says that we'll both be using
windows 10 eventually.
Same end point.
Your personal "protest" will leave you $200 (X the number of computers
you upgrade) less in your pocket.
To each his own.

On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:47:50 -0700, mike wrote:

On 3/16/2016 9:47 AM, Char Jackson wrote:


I can't say. Ask me again in 3-4-5 years. I should have a much better idea
by then. So there you have it. The real question isn't WHAT will be my next
OS, but rather WHEN will be my next OS. I didn't jump on WinCE, WinME,
Vista, Win Mobile, WinRT, etc., and most recently, 10. Just because MS pulls
something out of their oven doesn't mean I have to use it.

I'd say it does.

Your actions say otherwise. You skipped several. I may or may not skip 10,
but I sure as heck won't go willingly 4+ years before I have to, or before
it settles down into a usable and acceptable OS, whichever comes first.

Sure, you don't have to use every iteration, but the
way the MS wind blows determines the direction we all move. There aren't
any viable desktop alternatives for most of us.

There are a lot of people using 8, 7, Vista, XP, and even 98. Viability
decreases as you go down that list, but for almost every Windows 10 user 8
and 7 and even Vista are perfectly viable. Therefore, we can't use viable as
an excuse to upgrade. With so many better alternatives, there must be
another excuse.

Extrapolating from the
past,
it's not likely that we'll have a viable alternative any time soon.

Huh? We have a big handful right now.

It all boils down to:
You'd rather pay retail after you decide.
I'd rather get it while it's free and use it if/when I decide that
it's better than the alternatives.
My crystal ball says that we'll both be using
windows 10 eventually.
Same end point.
Your personal "protest" will leave you $200 (X the number of computers
you upgrade) less in your pocket.
To each his own.

I think you missed my points entirely, but thanks for the discussion.

On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 13:37:55 -0400, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2016-03-16 12:21, Ken Blake wrote:

Drivers are not a part of Windows 10, nor any other version of
Windows. Driver are written by the hardware manufacturer, and if a
driver doesn't exist for older hardware on a newer version of Windows,
it's because the manufacturer has decided that it's not worth his time
and effort to develop software for a product he's no longer selling.

As I understand it, a driver doesn't do much. It translates the file
into printable data and hands it over to the OS, which handles the
actual data transfer. Mfrs provide printers capable of high-quality
output, but it appears their methods are incompatible, so that the
printable data generated from a file has to be different for different
printers. The result is that a universal driver seems to be impossible.

But I don't think it is. There is no reason that the translation into
printable data has to be done outside the printer, by the computer or
mother device. A universal printer would have firmware that can accept
any kind of file, and translate it into printable data on-board. No
driver required, merely a channel for sending files to the printer.
Imagine! Send any file, with or without instructions such as "print to
highest quality", and let the printer do its thing. A true plug'n'play
machine, that could/would print anything from any connected source. Of
course, it would require collaboration between software and printer
mfrs, which is unlikely, given the paranoid jealousy surrounding
"intellectual property". Which is a whole 'nother thread.

Seems to me that shifting the driver's functions to the printer itself
would boost competition around the ancillary features such as double
sided printing, auto-collation, etc. Not to mention economy,
reliability, and such.


First, note that you are talking about *printer* drivers, not drivers
in general. Many other kinds of devices also need drivers.

The function of a driver is to provide an interface between the
hardware device and the version of the operating system. If you were
to build that functionality into the printer, you would have to have a
different model printer for every version of Windows. It would also be
far more difficult to update the printer should an error in that
functionality be found. And it would make it impossible to use the
printer should you upgrade to a new version of Windows.

So for all practical purposes it's next to impossible to do what you
suggest. If it were done, it would make printers *much* more expensive
and much less reliable; and hardly anyone would want a printer that
didn't work with the next version of Windows.