On 13 Sep 2004 at 12:36, Mariposa Symphony Orchestra wrote: > I previously used HP scanners, printers and even (in the now-seemingly > distant past) an HP Pavilion. . .
HP's consumer line of PCs was always a pile of crap. Indeed, I never thought their business lines were any good, either. I used to see lots of HP PCs when I still worked for Corporate Solutions, and the HP PCs were quite unreliable, even though they were quite expensive. > . . . I was running that old equipment at > various times in Windows 98 and/or 2K and found that when I wished to > move to any sort of non-HP equipment, or even to exchange data from > one networked HP computer within my home to another non-HP machine > running the same op system -- there were instances in which I was not > allowed to do so and even began to get regular and increasing errors, > crashes, etc. Upon doing a little research, I discovered references > to an apparently common problem predicated upon HP's (my blunt term) > 'encouragement' that you continue using their products. Deliberate or > accidental? I can't say. I don't know what you're talking about. In any event, you seem to be describing problems with HP's PCs, not with their scanners or printers. I was responding only to the issue of scanners, which I've seen work perfectly well in any number of environments, easily being moved from one PC to another (as long as HP provided drivers for the relevant OS). With printers, HP has an even better track record (though I'll tend to use the Windows- provided drivers for any printer that's old enough to have them). > My own experience, nothing more. . . . Well, you seem to be letting bad experiences with HP PCs pollute your statements about scanners. I am in the business of taking care of people's PCs, and I see *lots* of PCs and scanners and printers. HP's scanners and printers are the best. > . . . But I have been told of similar > experiences by friends and other associates. . . . Compaq was far worse than HP before HP absorbed them. Their PCs were extremely proprietary and non-expandable in any number of ways. Maybe some of this was taken into the HP-branded PC lines once Compaq was absorbed by them. But I've seen no evidence of this Compaq proprietariness in HP's scanners or printers. > . . . My Epson 1260 has been > remarkably idiot-proof, which is always a big plus in my case. But > we're into two issues: ease of scanner use and my experience of > incompatibility when interfacing HP with other products. And like > all else in the e-world, I'm fully prepared to allow for veracity only > in the case of my own experience and to accept any other dreadful HP > horror stories as apocrypha... I see nothing in what you report that fingers anything other than HP PCs. That has zilch to do with the quality and interoperability of HP's scanners and printers. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
