[Cartertonian]

...when it's not.



Can anyone advise on this? I've had this problem for years with various different computers and printers, but this time I can't seem to troubleshoot the problem.

I have a Win10 laptop (spare me the swap to Linux sales pitch) and a HP 2710 psc device. Was working fine but now my laptop obstinately insists it's offline. Printer is on, showing no errors and displaying that it's connected to my wifi. I suspected conflict between Windows and the HP software, so I uninstalled the HP software to let Windows run things, but still no resolution.

Any ideas?

[Potemkin]

Happens to me all the time. Switching the printer off and then back on again usually works.

[Cartertonian]

That used to work for me, but no longer.

On a broader note, I've heard all sorts of stories over the years that suggest this is a very common problem, so it begs the question why Microsoft haven't addressed it.

Is my hypothesis of a software clash between the OS and the printer app reasonable?

[Potemkin]

That used to work for me, but no longer.

Then I think it's time to sacrifice the goat....

On a broader note, I've heard all sorts of stories over the years that suggest this is a very common problem, so it begs the question why Microsoft haven't addressed it.

Microsoft not addressing a serious problem with their operating system? Inconceivable!

Is my hypothesis of a software clash between the OS and the printer app reasonable?

Dunno. Don't care. I just restart the printer, and that usually works.

[Rancid]

Another option is to uninstall everything related to the printer. Drivers and "helper" software. Then reinstall that stuff too. That will often clear out any software clashses with drivers.

[JohnRawls]

...when it's not.



Can anyone advise on this? I've had this problem for years with various different computers and printers, but this time I can't seem to troubleshoot the problem.

I have a Win10 laptop (spare me the swap to Linux sales pitch) and a HP 2710 psc device. Was working fine but now my laptop obstinately insists it's offline. Printer is on, showing no errors and displaying that it's connected to my wifi. I suspected conflict between Windows and the HP software, so I uninstalled the HP software to let Windows run things, but still no resolution.

Any ideas?

It is possessed so better call the exorcist.

1) Turn it off/on
2) Check the cabling
3) Update the firmware on the printer!!!
4) Update the drivers on your PC
5) Buy a newer printer :/

[Wels]

Printers HATE mankind.

[Robert Urbanek]

I believe in Retro Techno. I wish we would go back to printers with wires connected to your computers. We had a lot less problems. I would even endorse wired mouses to avoid the pollution involved in creating and disposing of batteries.

[Morgan Le Fey]

I use rechargeables in mice

[Rich]

(spare me the swap to Linux sales pitch)

Why? I think computing is one area where we could do with a good deal more moralising and virtue signalling. I say if you want to do one good thing, then don't buy Apple. A second is to avoid Nvidia. Call me ungrateful but the 4090 is not my answer to Europe's winter energy crisis.

I don't oppose commercial enterprise in computing. I support software copyright although I'd like to see them shortened, but leaving operating systems and other fundamental software in the hands of giant monopoly corporations, just strikes me as obviously bad. I wouldn't want to see roads rivers and sea lanes in private hands, why would anyone support an analogous set up with software. A third step on the path of righteousness is to dual boot Windows and Linux. And that reminds me I better get off PoFo for a bit as I've got a Kubuntu 22.04 LTS install to do for someone.

[Rancid]

Why? I think computing is one area where we could do with a good deal more moralising and virtue signalling. I say if you want to do one good thing, then don't buy Apple. A second is to avoid Nvidia. Call me ungrateful but the 4090 is not my answer to Europe's winter energy crisis.

I don't oppose commercial enterprise in computing. I support software copyright although I'd like to see them shortened, but leaving operating systems and other fundamental software in the hands of giant monopoly corporations, just strikes me as obviously bad. I wouldn't want to see roads rivers and sea lanes in private hands, why would anyone support an analogous set up with software. A third step on the path of righteousness is to dual boot Windows and Linux. And that reminds me I better get off PoFo for a bit as I've got a Kubuntu 22.04 LTS install to do for someone.

Open source doesn't really provide the freedom from corporate influence and control that many think it does. That is a complete myth. I always chuckle when non-industry people making this claim. They have no idea.

The dirty secret of open source is that most open source software that is worth a damn and useful, is almost always supported by large corporations. It is this corporate support that is the reason many of these open source projects are successful and endure. This includes Linux itself. Linux would be relegated to Universities at best without the likes of Red Hat, Susse, Canonical, and other corporate behemthos like Intel, Nvidia, google, etc.

Side point: University projects NEVER EVER EVER gain traction unless it gets corporate backing. NEVER EVER EVER. I am speaking from just knowing, but also from personal experience working with Universities. One of the big reasons is that Universities do not know how to commercialize their work (for mass adoption), nor do they know how to create maintainable and scalable code. University projects are usually a hot mess because you have 100 different PHD students working on the same code base with little to no oversight on standards and practices. Their mindset is often "Let me just get this working so that I can complete my thesis". Making it production quality is never a priority for them.

In short, University project code is usually complete shit... and i"m not even a top notch programmer, and I can see how shit it is. It usually takes a corporation with discipline and skill to take those projects and bring them up to production quality.

The other myth of open source is that we get to "see everything", and therefore it is better. However, that is not true either. Most/many open source projects that are deployed in production tend to have plug-in architectures. What this means is that what is open sourced is just the base functionality (the plumbing/infrastructure of the project). However, the special part of the project (secret proprietary code/algorithm) are kept closed. Corporations then plug their secret algorithm when they deploy the open source software. Android works this way, Kubernetes works this way, a lot of shit works this way.

There is no moral high ground in using open source software, really. This is a myth.

Corporations love open source because it allows them to outsource all the base level plumbing work that does not make them any money to the "community" (i.e. anyone willing to do the work for free). They can then focus their efforts on all the closed/secret stuff which is what really earns them their money.

[Unthinking Majority]

What about Firefox? I use that.

[Rancid]

What about Firefox? I use that.

I use firefox too. It is also backed by a corporation, but it appears to be the least "fucked around with" when compared to chrome, or edge, or safari.

I would say, firefox is the least of the evils (that's why I use it). I'm sure there are other less fucked with browser out there. I think duck duck go might have a browser (i heard it doesn't work well though)?

[Rich]

Open source doesn't really provide the freedom from corporate influence and control that many think it does. That is a complete myth. I always chuckle when non-industry people making this claim. They have no idea.

Who thinks it does? You seem to hang out with some remarkably stupid and ignorant people.

The dirty secret of open source is that most open source software that is worth a damn and useful, is almost always supported by large corporations. It is this corporate support that is the reason many of these open source projects are successful and endure.

How in God's name is this either secret or dirty? The problem is that open source projects are not supported enough by corporations governments and NGOs. Steps have now been taken to remedy this, but a few years back it was discovered that many significant parts of the world's software infrastructure were just hobby projects sometimes with just one active developer.

This includes Linux itself. Linux would be relegated to Universities at best without the likes of Red Hat, Susse, Canonical, and other corporate behemthos like Intel, Nvidia, google, etc,

Corporations love open source because it allows them to outsource all the base level plumbing work that does not make them any money to the "community" (i.e. anyone willing to do the work for free). They can then focus their efforts on all the closed/secret stuff which is what really earns them their money.

How is this bad? Corporations take huge advantage out of open source roads, rivers and sea lanes, what's wrong with that? Anyway speaking as the "outsider" you assume us to be, I can only say that if I had a modest open source project say in the tens of thousands of lines of code, not only would I not mind a large company profiting from my software, I might well consider actively going to a company or companies and encouraging them to use the software as a strategy of monetisation. And while it would be nice to be in the position of power of Linus Torvalds where the corporations pay him and he just does what he wants, I would even consider offering to give them a large say in new feature / enhancement / bug prioritisation, in return for financial support.

To put the record straight although I share Richard Stallman's that Steve Job's have a very bad effect on the evolution of software, Apple must be commended for their work on Clang, freeing C/C++ developers from their enslavement to the FSF. I admit I don't tend to mention this much on the forums, because I find a lot of people are not familiar with Clang. Come to think of it there's a few that are not even familiar with GCC.

[Rancid]

@Rich wait wait wait. You claimed there is a moral high ground to using open source. Do you believe that knowing (as you claim you already knew before my post) that open source isn't as free as people like to claim?

Just admit you didn't actually understand how open source works in practice. There is no shame in that, most people don't know.

In your post, you are attempting this "I already knew that" sort of response to me, but your initial claim would suggest you didn't really know that. If you did, you wouldn't have made the post you made in the first place.

I think you are trying to bullshit around this one.

Who thinks it does? You seem to hang out with some remarkably stupid and ignorant people.

Most people are remarkably stupid and ignorant. This comment is a deflection. A cheap round about ad hom attack on my intelligence. That is tangential to the point because you have nothing. That said, fuck you.

Own your previous claim. Either defend it, or back down and admit you don't understand how open source works in practice.

How in God's name is this either secret or dirty?

Oh god Rich... it's word play. Secret as in people just don't know, not that it's deliberately hidden from them. Dirty, because open source isn't as open or free as people like to claim. That is, it's not clean of corporate influence/control.

Lots of non-industry people believe open source is some sort of panecea from corporate control.

Aside from that, this is similar to how many cryptocurrency people believe crypto will end the petrodollar or whatever. Not gonna happen. Like it's some sort of communist revolution, it's just that the revolution has yet to spread around the world like the soviets had hoped their revolution would spread through the world.

So, you are now saying "I already know that", but many people don't already know that.

You should be proud that you already knew this... which, I think you didn't, because you wouldn't have made the claim open source is moral. IN concept, maybe, in practice, basically never.

How is this bad?

Didn't say it was bad. My point is, the general perception of what open source is, is incorrect.

However, you claimed it was good because it's more moral. More moral because there isn't corporate control. Yet... there clearly is corporate control, a lot. That is the main thing that makes the open source model sustainable. IN practice, all open source software that is useful/maintained/popular is controlled by corporations. How is this moral? This is your claim, that it is moral, is not?

You are doing this weird ducking and dodging thing with your posting.

Are you going to own the point you made, or are you going to continue to try and insult me?

[late]

If there's still a problem, try replacing the cable.

[Politics_Observer]

@Rich

The dirty secret of open source is that most open source software that is worth a damn and useful, is almost always supported by large corporations. It is this corporate support that is the reason many of these open source projects are successful and endure. This includes Linux itself. Linux would be relegated to Universities at best without the likes of Red Hat, Susse, Canonical, and other corporate behemthos like Intel, Nvidia, google, etc.

Side point: University projects NEVER EVER EVER gain traction unless it gets corporate backing. NEVER EVER EVER. I am speaking from just knowing, but also from personal experience working with Universities. One of the big reasons is that Universities do not know how to commercialize their work (for mass adoption), nor do they know how to create maintainable and scalable code.

@Rancid hit the nail on the head here with this post. I couldn't agree more. Aside from that, Firefox is the preferred browser if you want more privacy and security while browsing. However, if you want more performance and are developing web pages, Google Chrome is preferred given that most of the world uses Google Chrome, has good web development tools and is more lightweight than Firefox.

[Rich]

@Rich wait wait wait. You claimed there is a moral high ground to using open source. Do you believe that knowing (as you claim you already knew before my post) that open source isn't as free as people like to claim?

In your post, you are attempting this "I already knew that" sort of response to me, but your initial claim would suggest you didn't really know that. If you did, you wouldn't have made the post you made in the first place.

I think you are trying to bullshit around this one.

No, this seems to be a bit of a pattern, people thinking that I know nothing about subjects I actually know quite a lot about. Open sources is a matter close to my heart and has been for a number of years. For quite a number of years I have been a self identified Apache Licence Warrior. What you're talking about is the most basic knowledge, which anyone with the most passing knowledge of the software industry must be aware of. Facebook was built on the LAMP stack. Yes sure the average person in the street might not know that, but anyone who knows anything about the evolution of the 21st century big teck knows that.

I've used Linux as my work horse operating system for nearly a decade. I use Linux for servers both at home remotely. I've installed it for a number of people. i think I might have noticed the limitations of open source that its not a magic wand. You tell me about the many eye balls myth as if you're gifting me with some great insight. I'm well aware of it. its not just a problem that no one but the programmer knows what's going on in the code. often the person who wrote the code doesn't know either. I have written comments on my own code such as "No idea what this is for.", "Not sure why ...". So no I was quite aware of the many eye ball myth.

If you had paid proper attention to what I responded you would note I alluded to issues with GCC. The problems with GCC went even further than the no eye balls problem, and the even the person who wrote the code had forgotten how it worked problem. The problem with GCC was that the maintainers were deliberately trying to obfuscate the workings of the code to stop it being "stolen" by commercial interests. If you had paid attention you would have noted this clear allusion in referencing GCC, and you would also have spotted the allusion to the issue of make files, what does open source even mean, does it include build information and crucial run time requirements.

If you had paid proper attention you would have realised that its clearly a subject I know about and have spent significant time thinking about, and that I hadn't just googled up a few buzz words to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about. Far from being some nieve wide eyed open source idealist, there are few people who nurse such a fanatical hated of the FSF as me.

Anyway what I am trying to do is to give a few simple steps that people can take from evil on to the path of goodness and righteousness when to comes to computing. Knowledge of the complexities of software licensing and software engineering are just not necessary for people taking those first steps.

[XogGyux]

I believe in Retro Techno. I wish we would go back to printers with wires connected to your computers. We had a lot less problems. I would even endorse wired mouses to avoid the pollution involved in creating and disposing of batteries.

You mean the age that you used to have to find a compatible driver?
Honestly, I know this does not help the OP, but since I changed to a mac ecosystem, all those problems vanished.
I have a workhorse Brother 2170W that I had for a decade and a half. Back when I used to have my windows system, every time it would disconnect I had to perform this ritualistic dance of deleting everything from my computer, bring a USB cable, connecting it to the computer, installing shit, then try to do it wirelessly. Since the moment i bought my first mac, it just works.
I grew up with everything windows, the transition for me was not smooth, but ever since i got my first macbook over a decade ago, I have not been able to totally ditch macs because it is the one I can trust to just work and not surprise me with some nonesense error, blue screen of death or with a sneak restart, etc.
In the last decade, I have bought 2 Asus laptops, both of them in the upper range of price, so presumably higher quality. Guess what, both of them within the first year of use started to do weird shit in which they would refuse to power up intermittently and I had them to "let them rest" for a week or so. Something to do with their power management system or some weird shit (and yes I did research at the time, removed the onboard clock battery, tried to reset CMOS, and all the usual suspects). The reality is, I don't trust them anymore.

[Potemkin]

If there's still a problem, try replacing the cable.

I still recommend sacrificing the goat. It's really the only way to be sure.