At 2003-08-25T03:26:10Z, "Joseph I. Davida" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If that is the case, how is it that the protocol can work over direct > connection to USB port and not over ethernet? I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "protocol", but I think you're referring to the stream of printing codes sent from the computer to the printer. > This area needs a little clarification. All we are changing is the > physical interface, but keeping the rest of the filters, which do the > printer specific conversion to bitmaps (or whatever that format is) the > same. So the only change would be in the physical connection. Not even close. A computer needs a special driver to communicate with a USB printer connected to it. Since this is commonly part of the OS, you don't usually think of it, but it's there nonetheless. The computer needs a different driver to communicate with a network adapter. In reverse, your printer has drivers to decode the incoming signal from your computer. It has no idea of how to decode the incoming signal from a network adapter. As a simple example of that lack of functionality, how would you tell your printer to set an IP address on the network adapter attached to it? Short answer: you can't. Your printer has no concept of a network stack. -- Kirk Strauser _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"