[nozzlegear]

It seems like Apple just prefers that companies release software that they will actually maintain, instead of relying on Apple/Microsoft to bend over backwards to maintain backwards compatibility from now until the end of time.

[Rinzler89]

>It seems like Apple just prefers that companies release software that they will actually maintain

Maybe companies prefer their way, instead of what Apple imposes on them. After all, not all companies are tech companies, who can afford large teams of expensive devs to keep updating their SW. For non-tech companies, the less dev work they have to invest in SW, the better, as that frees up resources for their main business activity.

I for one if I'm the customer and the one spending the money I definitely want to be in charge, not be at the mercy of the manufacturer of product I spend money on to dictate how I should run my business, that I should invest more effort in keeping up with them.

Move fast and break things at the pace of their vendor, is not what most users and companies expect from their products and services.

[nebula8804]

They shouldn't advertise Mac support then. Canon specifically put a Mac logo on their boxes and uses that in their advertisements.

[nwellinghoff]

These printer companies could also open source their drivers after a number of years. The amount of landfill printers due to driver support is kinda sad. Just tossed my old cannon that had a perfectly good scanner due to driver support and the “need” for ink for the scanner to work. Booo!

[paulmd]

100%. Require that software be released at the end of the support lifecycle for all licensed customers to continue their use-case, and watch support lifecycles magically telescope outwards.

It would require modification to copyright law in certain aspects (requiring “pass-through licensing” so to speak) and there’s utterly no will to tackle this in the US.

But those sorts of issues are already problematic for, eg, music licensing for games/shows/etc. Some of these types of hyper-limited, time-gated, non-product-ownership-following licensing agreements need to just be outlawed as unconscionable when they’re gating hardware that ends up in landfills or cutting off the public’s access to cultural touchstones. Or just shorten copyright significantly in general.

[Rinzler89]

Canon doesn't develop MacOS. They advertise support for the version of MAcOS that existed when they launched the printer. If MacOS decides to break compatibility over time, it's not their fault. If they're not selling the printer today, they can't also provide up to date support for the OS of today. It's up to the OS developer to ensure a stable API for printers.

[acdha]

“Break compatibility” can cover a wide range of things, however, and that’s not always so clear cut. For example, if they were relying on lax permissions or a private interface then it’s a question of how much effort the OS vendor should spend on something they never promised would work.

[paulmd]

Imagine the IP camera vendors saying this :skull:

“What can you possibly be complaining about!? It was secure when we released it! Maybe you should just buy a new one with less vulnerabilities!”

EU isn’t wrong that people have an intuitive sense that appliances like printers should have a worthwhile lifecycle and for some classes of devices this lifecycle should be quite long. 10 years really isn’t unreasonable.

Also, just like everyone has to support usb-c charging regardless of whatever other proprietary alternative they design… vendors should have to support a couple generic standards (postscript/Ghostscript and CUPS) that relieve a lot of the ongoing maintenance. There are very few/no valid reasons you couldn’t implement cups/postscript if you really want.

[nozzlegear]

Hang on, let's pump our brakes and take a quick peek at the calendar. The comment thread we're in was talking about the Canon D530 which was released in 2012, which supposedly broke in MacOS Monterey released in 2021. It's a stretch to call 9 years "moving fast and breaking things".

[Rinzler89]

Hold on there buckaroo. Having a 9 year old printer at home is no big deal as consumers don't usually upgrade their printers if they still work and compatible ink cartridges are still available. My parents are still running a 20+ year old Canon, because it's easy to refill cheaply.

And things don't exist in a vacuum but in comparison to others. To wit, does that Canon printer from 2012 work in present day versions of Windows and Linux? If yes, then why is MacOS the odd one out here?

So what's stopping Apple from providing the same level of reliable printer support as Microsoft and Linux? It sure as hell aint lack of money.

[nozzlegear]

I don't work at Apple nor do I have much more insight into their philosophy than you, so I can only refer you to my previous speculation:

> It seems like Apple just prefers that companies release software that they will actually maintain

[callalex]

What has changed since 2012 in the document printing space that would make that perfectly good machine obsolete? Machines don’t grow on trees, they are created at terrible environmental cost.

[nebula8804]

Probably security vulnerabilities necessitating a change in the driver model.

[nozzlegear]

> What has changed since 2012 in the document printing space that would make that perfectly good machine obsolete?

I couldn't tell you to be honest, I don't even have a printer.