mwm%ucbopal@BERKELEY.EDU@caip.RUTGERS.EDU (02/02/86)
From: Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer <mwm%ucbopal@BERKELEY.EDU> Someone from Amiga noted the bug in the graphics driver for the Epson printer, and pointed out a one-line fix to a program that most of us probably don't have access to. To help us out, could someone who's installed and tested this fix post the entire source, along with instructions for installing it? Failing that, how about a file name, a list of offsets, old values and new values to install the patch in the binary? I'll even provide software to compare two binaries, and apply the resulting patch list to old binaries. Thanx, <mike mwm@ucbvax
wagner@utcs.uucp (Michael Wagner) (02/03/86)
Actually, there seem to be several bugs in the Epson drivers. One, mentioned here earlier and responded to by an AMIGA source, had to do with how much to increment the carriage in bit graphics mode. The second, which I've not seen mentioned here, has to do with a garbage character sent to the printer when it is first opened. On my printer, what prints is a K. I don't think it's my problem (although I could be wrong), since a program I have (Textcraft I think, but don't quote me) lists inproper treatment of Epson printers (and specifically garbage characters at open time) in a bug list, but refers to it as an OS bug rather than an application bug. The third (I suppose this could be a "feature") is that there doesn't seem to be any difference between draft and letter quality mode. I expected it would redraw the characters slighly offset, or something. It doesn't appear to. For reference, I don't have an Epson printer, but rather an IBM-PC graphics printer, which I am under the (mis-?)impression is code compatable. It is connected via a Microfazer Serial-to-Parallel buffer, which is in turn connected to the serial port. I kind of doubt the Microfazer is responsible, but the serial/parallel difference could be. Incidentally, does anyone know why the translation to printer-specific codes is done by code rather than tables+some interpretive code? I can't imagine that there would be a performance issue. Also, why doesn't any available software spawn printer tasks and let me get back to my work? At least nothing I've seen. Thank god for a 64K printer buffer, but why did I buy a multi-tasking machine if no one is going to use the multi-tasking?
andy@amiga.UUCP (Andy Finkel) (02/04/86)
In article <1079@utcs.uucp> wagner@utcs.UUCP (Michael Wagner) writes: > >Actually, there seem to be several bugs in the Epson drivers. >not seen mentioned here, has to do with a garbage character sent to the >printer when it is first opened. On my printer, what prints is a K. >For reference, I don't have an Epson printer, but rather an IBM-PC graphics >printer, which I am under the (mis-?)impression is code compatable. I don't believe that the IBM printer you have is completely Epson compatible...you'll have much better luck if you select the CBM-MPS1000 printer driver. That K is part of the initialization sequence that your printer is ignoring. Also, your printer may not support NLQ... does it do it normally ? > >Incidentally, does anyone know why the translation to printer-specific >codes is done by code rather than tables+some interpretive code? I can't >imagine that there would be a performance issue. The text processing portion of the printer specific driver was done as tables + some interpretive code. (the graphics portion was done as code; the printers were dissimilar enough to make that the most reasonable alternative). >Also, why doesn't any >available software spawn printer tasks and let me get back to my work? >At least nothing I've seen. I don't know...it is more difficult than to just print a file... maybe that's why. A print spooler shouldn't be that difficult for some enterprising person to write :-) andy finkel Commodore (Amiga) "disclaimer: I disclaim all responsibilities; all sizes, all shapes, all colors." disclaimer: my opinions often don't reflect those of my employer. I work for Commodore, and may be biased.
bruceb@amiga.UUCP (Bruce Barrett) (02/04/86)
In article <1079@utcs.uucp> wagner@utcs.UUCP (Michael Wagner) writes: (regarding epson printer bugs) >The third (I suppose this could be a "feature") is that there doesn't >seem to be any difference between draft and letter quality mode. I >expected ... The way the ASCII printer drivers were written they take advantage of the functions supported by the printer, they (almost??) never add features. So... If your printer has draft and letter quality modes then your output will too. > >Incidentally, does anyone know why the translation to printer-specific >codes is done by code rather than tables+some interpretive code? Most of the printer driver is done using table lookup. The code part was (I beleive) necessary for some of the more complex sequences,... Especially graphics rendering. >Also, why doesn't any >available software spawn printer tasks and let me get back to my work? A very good question! On a few of the products I am familiar with the specs say they must run in a 256k machine. An extra task for printing, the memory the print driver takes and making sure you don't modify the object you are printing all would add to the memory requirements. I think either: a) a product should detect that it has lots of room and multi-task itself or b) the 256k limiting spec should be dropped (in some cases). Please note in many cases (not Textcraft) you can run 2 copies of a program, print with one, work with the other (far from elegant but nicer than some machines). Disclaimer: If my opinions were those of Commodore things might be different, but then again might not.