PDA

View Full Version : Apple Acquired CUPS




MacRumors
Jul 12, 2007, 09:49 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

A new posting at Cups.org (http://www.cups.org/) reveals that Apple has purchased CUPS and hired its author:
In February of 2007, Apple Inc. acquired ownership the CUPS source code and hired me (Michael R Sweet), the creator of CUPS. CUPS will still be released under the existing GPL2/LGPL2 licensing terms, and I will continue to develop and support CUPS at Apple.

CUPS stands for Common Unix Printing System and was adopted by Apple (http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L68+I10+T+P1+Qapple) in 2002 for Mac OS X.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/12/apple-acquired-cups/)



MIDI_EVIL
Jul 12, 2007, 09:51 AM
A happy ending for that guy.

Rich.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 12, 2007, 09:53 AM
so wait, that means they could finally use him to make the iPhone more accessible to developers?? Maybe? eh, what am i dreaming for...

HiRez
Jul 12, 2007, 09:54 AM
It still sounds like some kind of supermodel SWAT team to me, but good for him. I love it when people who write some boring, unassuming utility get a payday.

mkrishnan
Jul 12, 2007, 09:54 AM
Good for him! Sounds like an excellent situation.

I wonder... with Apple purchasing CUPS, and getting so cozy over the past few years with GIMPPrint / Gutenprint, and then also with them pushing Rendezvous/Bonjour out into the PC world... is this all part of some single underlying strategy regarding simplifying printing? I find printing, particularly network printing, vastly simpler on Macs (as long as the hardware is supported) than on Windows. CUPS is so much nicer than the hodge podge of annoying hacks that the industry calls printer drivers on Windows.

But in terms of the overall simplicity of printing... it still has a ways to go. In principle, non-network printing doesn't really need to be any more complex than hooking up a monitor (which could also be simpler gaah), and network printing via Bonjour ought to be much simpler, too, a la the level of complexity of finding information on websites using Google, etc.

SimonTheSoundMa
Jul 12, 2007, 09:55 AM
I hope they carry on support for other UNIX/*nix OS as well.

Mad River Engr
Jul 12, 2007, 10:01 AM
I use a variety of printers and paper sizes on both Macs & Windoze - I'd like to see the print dialog allow switching of sizes & orientation with closing & switching to the printer setup, then back. I hate to say it, but for me printing to Windoze is more flexible...

Aggamemnon
Jul 12, 2007, 10:07 AM
I use cups on a mixed Linux / OS X network and it is far superior than a windows print server in those circumstances. Don't confuse the underlying print server with the dialogues presented to you by your OS / application.

xUKHCx
Jul 12, 2007, 10:08 AM
How does this affect people like me who just plug in a simple printer to print out normal text/graph documents.

Aggamemnon
Jul 12, 2007, 10:10 AM
Probably not at all.

BKKbill
Jul 12, 2007, 10:14 AM
So this move seems to help Apple integrate document management and computer graphics for Apple, UNIX and Microsoft Windows. Getting to be one big family. Although they had the license now they also have the company.

jdechko
Jul 12, 2007, 10:16 AM
But in terms of the overall simplicity of printing... it still has a ways to go. In principle, non-network printing doesn't really need to be any more complex than hooking up a monitor...

Unfortunately, it seems that as the devices themselves become more complex, so does the setup. Setting up an all-in-one device or a photo-printer in Windows is a chore (don't know about OS X). There's just too much software (in addition to the driver itself) to install. It's aggravating.

thejadedmonkey
Jul 12, 2007, 10:19 AM
Unfortunately, it seems that as the devices themselves become more complex, so does the setup. Setting up an all-in-one device or a photo-printer in Windows is a chore (don't know about OS X). There's just too much software (in addition to the driver itself) to install. It's aggravating.

I had to download and install 2 drivers to get my printer/scanner that I bought with my macbook pro working. It wasn't too bad, and I could have easily just popped the CD into the computer, but the point is there were 2 drivers that I had to install to make the thing work right. Very un-appleish.

mkrishnan
Jul 12, 2007, 10:20 AM
I had to download and install 2 drivers to get my printer/scanner that I bought with my macbook pro working. It wasn't too bad, and I could have easily just popped the CD into the computer, but the point is there were 2 drivers that I had to install to make the thing work right. Very un-appleish.

It is kind of funny (and very nice) that when you even have to install any drivers on a Mac, it feels like an unnatural experience. ;)

iMeowbot
Jul 12, 2007, 10:26 AM
How does this affect people like me who just plug in a simple printer to print out normal text/graph documents.
The biggest potential change is in the license exceptions (http://cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+TFAQ+M10+P1+Qapple). This allows Apple and third-party developers (on Mac OS only) to integrate closed source features. Printer makers who have previously offered only half-baked support on the Mac may be more willing to provide those currently Windows-only features, now that they aren't under pressure to reveal quite as many details about how their stuff works.

jholzner
Jul 12, 2007, 10:30 AM
I had to download and install 2 drivers to get my printer/scanner that I bought with my macbook pro working. It wasn't too bad, and I could have easily just popped the CD into the computer, but the point is there were 2 drivers that I had to install to make the thing work right. Very un-appleish.

Yeah, things not made by Apple tend to be that way.

QuarterSwede
Jul 12, 2007, 10:32 AM
I hate to say it, but for me printing to Windoze is more flexible...
Same here. I don't know about the underlying architecture of the printing service but Apple's implementation of it is the worst in the industry if you ask me. They don't even offer the user the ability to print a selection of text which my family and I (used to) use a lot.

MacNemesis
Jul 12, 2007, 10:32 AM
I had to download and install 2 drivers to get my printer/scanner that I bought with my macbook pro working. It wasn't too bad, and I could have easily just popped the CD into the computer, but the point is there were 2 drivers that I had to install to make the thing work right. Very un-appleish.

Because it wasn't Apple that made you do that. It was the printer manufacturer.

Teddy's
Jul 12, 2007, 10:33 AM
It is kind of funny (and very nice) that when you even have to install any drivers on a Mac, it feels like an unnatural experience. ;)

Compared to all the "stuff" you have to install on a PC just to get a printer working... I think it's ok :D

Drivers x and y, Toolbars, Quick launch, Start up Icons, Desktop icons, Your little Print App and Image Editor app Trial, etc...

matthemercyless
Jul 12, 2007, 10:34 AM
I don't get it.

How can Apple have purchased a system that Chandler invented as a way of giving Joey money?

xUKHCx
Jul 12, 2007, 10:36 AM
The biggest potential change is in the license exceptions (http://cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+TFAQ+M10+P1+Qapple). This allows Apple and third-party developers (on Mac OS only) to integrate closed source features. Printer makers who have previously offered only half-baked support on the Mac may be more willing to provide those currently Windows-only features, now that they aren't under pressure to reveal quite as many details about how their stuff works.

Well this must be a good thing and i am assuming it will help all those who use much more advanced features then me.

Compared to all the "stuff" you have to install on a PC just to get a printer working... I think it's ok :D

Drivers x and y, Toolbars, Quick launch, Start up Icons, Desktop icons, Your little Print App and Image Editor app Trial, etc...


Tell me about just installed an all in one on an xp machine and boy was that painful.

I don't get it.

How can Apple have purchased a system that Chandler invented as a way of giving Joey money?

Wondered why i thought it was funny when i first read the title but now i remember it, what a game but it isn't as good as go johnny go go go go (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_Johnny_Go_Go_Go_Go).

pieman02
Jul 12, 2007, 10:36 AM
Because it wasn't Apple that made you do that. It was the printer manufacturer.

...and I don't know about you guys but the first thing I do when I get a new Mac is to reinstall OSX to get rid of the 2 gigs of printer drivers and languages or whatever is on there OFF!

JeffDM
Jul 12, 2007, 11:01 AM
...and I don't know about you guys but the first thing I do when I get a new Mac is to reinstall OSX to get rid of the 2 gigs of printer drivers and languages or whatever is on there OFF!

It's quicker to go into /Library/Printers and remove the brands you don't use.

Anyway, I really haven't had much problem installing printers in Windows. I just installed a networked color laser printer and it's pretty easy. Apple's Bonjour found it, but it wouldn't let me turn on the printer's duplexing.

I think the biggest thing is to not get USB printers or to not use the USB mode.

cliffjumper68
Jul 12, 2007, 11:10 AM
Good for him! Sounds like an excellent situation.

I wonder... with Apple purchasing CUPS, and getting so cozy over the past few years with GIMPPrint / Gutenprint, and then also with them pushing Rendezvous/Bonjour out into the PC world... is this all part of some single underlying strategy regarding simplifying printing? I find printing, particularly network printing, vastly simpler on Macs (as long as the hardware is supported) than on Windows. CUPS is so much nicer than the hodge podge of annoying hacks that the industry calls printer drivers on Windows.

But in terms of the overall simplicity of printing... it still has a ways to go. In principle, non-network printing doesn't really need to be any more complex than hooking up a monitor (which could also be simpler gaah), and network printing via Bonjour ought to be much simpler, too, a la the level of complexity of finding information on websites using Google, etc.
I think this might be a move to integrate and streamline printing standards. Apple has been great at doing the same for video codec's in order to standardize platforms under H.264. Hopefully this will move us towards some sanity in global print standards across platforms.

peters438
Jul 12, 2007, 11:19 AM
With all of the iPhone hype, it's easy to overlook some of Apple's subtler plans for PC world domination. They've been stepping up their efforts in the enterprise lately. The calendar/collaboration server features in Leopard server are one example.

Apple's network printing is a weak point in that strategy. Windows has a very elegant and powerful network printing architecture. Clients automatically pull down drivers from print servers. Print servers can hold drivers for any OS version (95,98,2000/XP,Vista, etc.). Queue administration is a snap and can be done from any computer. Permissions are fine-grained.

It would be great to see Apple's acquisition of CUPS translate into a much better implementation of network printing for mid and large sized networks. There is much to be improved in this area, and Apple has the opportunity to bring their user experience touch to network printing.

nuckinfutz
Jul 12, 2007, 11:20 AM
so wait, that means they could finally use him to make the iPhone more accessible to developers?? Maybe? eh, what am i dreaming for...

Non sequiturs like this don't do anyone any good. This thread is about CUPS. If you want to create a thread and bitch about iPhone development do so there.

peters438
Jul 12, 2007, 11:21 AM
Anyway, I really haven't had much problem installing printers in Windows. I just installed a networked color laser printer and it's pretty easy. Apple's Bonjour found it, but it wouldn't let me turn on the printer's duplexing.

I think the biggest thing is to not get USB printers or to not use the USB mode.

Very true. Even with USB printers on Windows, it's often possible to download the "network" version of the driver, which won't include all of the system tray junk that gets installed with the typical consumer-level printer.

foneschlomo
Jul 12, 2007, 11:27 AM
Now they just need the saucers and the gravy bowl to complete their Lennox collection. Maybe they can register for them if they have a big merger soon.

ajhill
Jul 12, 2007, 11:28 AM
Okay, you got the printing utility. How about buying something useful like Parallels? It's a lot cheaper than buying EMC at $40-50 Billion dollars.

mdriftmeyer
Jul 12, 2007, 11:39 AM
I hope they carry on support for other UNIX/*nix OS as well.

The source tree license is GPL/GPL2. It will continue to be used by the greater Unix/Linux/*nix communities.

sebastianlewis
Jul 12, 2007, 11:41 AM
Okay, you got the printing utility. How about buying something useful like Parallels? It's a lot cheaper than buying EMC at $40-50 Billion dollars.

Or how about letting Parallels be Parallels and Apple doesn't need to bother buying them because having great 3rd party software like Parallels around only helps, not hinders Mac OS X.

Sebastian

ChrisA
Jul 12, 2007, 11:42 AM
This is very good news. I'm pretty sure Apple will be able to add some more resources to CUPS development. I used CUPS on Linux long before I used it under Mac OS.

Cups has made printing easier than it used to be in the old days when we had to install filters in /etc/printcap files but Cups still has a long ways to go. (for example what happens if i move a print job that is set up for A4 paper and double sided at 600DPI to a printer that lacks one of those specs?. Also we must have 20 printers here and half are still no usable with Cups except in the most basic way.

So it will be good not just for Mac OS but for all UNIX based systems if Apple puts some money into this.

nuckinfutz
Jul 12, 2007, 11:43 AM
With all of the iPhone hype, it's easy to overlook some of Apple's subtler plans for PC world domination. They've been stepping up their efforts in the enterprise lately. The calendar/collaboration server features in Leopard server are one example.

Apple's network printing is a weak point in that strategy. Windows has a very elegant and powerful network printing architecture. Clients automatically pull down drivers from print servers. Print servers can hold drivers for any OS version (95,98,2000/XP,Vista, etc.). Queue administration is a snap and can be done from any computer. Permissions are fine-grained.

It would be great to see Apple's acquisition of CUPS translate into a much better implementation of network printing for mid and large sized networks. There is much to be improved in this area, and Apple has the opportunity to bring their user experience touch to network printing.


Yes I'm pleased that they are focused on improving printing in OS X. I've seen improved print dialog boxes in Leopard and this further solidifies Apple's focus on printing.

slothrop
Jul 12, 2007, 11:45 AM
Years ago (OS 10.0 I think...) I was trying to get and old Epson FX-880 dot matrix printer working with OS X. I had been running it using some old classic software, which came with a USB to parallel cable, I wanted to avoid classic. There is a CUPS driver for the old dot matrix printers (several), but the driver had a problem, when I printed more than one page the next pages got more and more off line. I had a back and forth via email with Sweet, and we figured it out (you can see it all at the CUPS website), he was incredible. I'm probably the only person on the planet using the driver, but he responded right away and stayed with it until it was fixed. He deserves every penny.

jdechko
Jul 12, 2007, 11:46 AM
Very true. Even with USB printers on Windows, it's often possible to download the "network" version of the driver, which won't include all of the system tray junk that gets installed with the typical consumer-level printer.

Hmmm, that's pretty interesting. My next printer will hopefully be a Brother 2040 (nice simple laser printer) or the Brother 2070N which is essentially the same printer but with network capabilities. I'm hoping that without all of the extras, there won't be any software fluff that I have to install to get it working.

Peace
Jul 12, 2007, 11:47 AM
The source tree license is GPL/GPL2. It will continue to be used by the greater Unix/Linux/*nix communities.

The only BIG difference is if Microsoft wants to use it and try to change it they need Apple's permission.

Almost all flavors of Linux uses CUPS. With M$ joining up with all the different Linux companies this could cramp the M$ style.;)

fsckus
Jul 12, 2007, 11:47 AM
The source tree license is GPL/GPL2. It will continue to be used by the greater Unix/Linux/*nix communities.

It should be noted that the real reason Apple purchased the code, trademarks, and developer was because they didn't want to risk CUPS being licensed under GPL3. GPL3 is particularly insidious in its patent licensing and "tivo clause" requirements, the former requiring Apple essentially to license software patents and the latter requiring Apple to give up a great deal of control over hardware.


GPL2 was very nice, and Apple has played along and contributed back to the community. GPL3 was unacceptable to them so they've preemptively bought out the printing system. It's likely Apple will try other avenues to get around GPL3 in areas like gcc (apple is contributing heavily to work on non gpl compilers) et etc.

brooker
Jul 12, 2007, 12:05 PM
Printing has been the ugly step-child in the closet of OSX for too long now. I'm thrilled it will get more attention.

Really, i'm just glad MS didn't think to buy CUPS first, to wrench Apple.

Sabon
Jul 12, 2007, 12:11 PM
Unfortunately, it seems that as the devices themselves become more complex, so does the setup. Setting up an all-in-one device or a photo-printer in Windows is a chore (don't know about OS X). There's just too much software (in addition to the driver itself) to install. It's aggravating.

It doesn't HAVE to be this way. Unfortunately in a lot of companies the bosses think you are doing a lot more if there is a lot more to install. That used to drive me absolutely batty when I was a programmer and why I got out of it in the early 90s. Just got tired of the BS from idiot project managers.

My idea was always to program so that it was best for the people using it. Simplify, simplify, simplify while packing in as much power as you can. Power doesn't have to mean complicated as we all know. That's why Apple gets in and so many companies don't.

Sabon
Jul 12, 2007, 12:19 PM
...and I don't know about you guys but the first thing I do when I get a new Mac is to reinstall OSX to get rid of the 2 gigs of printer drivers and languages or whatever is on there OFF!

I'd rather have them on there then have to install the drivers for each and every bloody thing I buy like you do on Windows. Like someone said, just go into the drivers and delete the brands that you know you will never buy and keep the ones you probably will.

One of the things I tell people is that with Macs the computers already know about most hardware so you don't have the hassle that you do with Windows having to install the drivers off of CDs or downloading.

rob@robburns.co
Jul 12, 2007, 12:28 PM
With all of the iPhone hype, it's easy to overlook some of Apple's subtler plans for PC world domination. They've been stepping up their efforts in the enterprise lately. The calendar/collaboration server features in Leopard server are one example.

Apple's network printing is a weak point in that strategy. Windows has a very elegant and powerful network printing architecture. Clients automatically pull down drivers from print servers. Print servers can hold drivers for any OS version (95,98,2000/XP,Vista, etc.). Queue administration is a snap and can be done from any computer. Permissions are fine-grained.

It would be great to see Apple's acquisition of CUPS translate into a much better implementation of network printing for mid and large sized networks. There is much to be improved in this area, and Apple has the opportunity to bring their user experience touch to network printing.

As much as I hat to admit it, printing is one of those rare areas where Windows has had some longtime advantages over Mac. The driver installation, the closer integration of page setup and print dialogs, the greater flexibility in expressing page ranges. These won't come from simply acquiring CUPS, but I think it shows an indication (along with Leopard enhancements) that Apple's going after fixing its shortcomings.


Print servers can hold drivers for any OS version (95,98,2000/XP,Vista, etc.).

Please don't say it that way. I hate to see the phrase "any OS version" followed by a list like that. ;-)

Fukui
Jul 12, 2007, 12:52 PM
It should be noted that the real reason Apple purchased the code, trademarks, and developer was because they didn't want to risk CUPS being licensed under GPL3. GPL3 is particularly insidious in its patent licensing and "tivo clause" requirements, the former requiring Apple essentially to license software patents and the latter requiring Apple to give up a great deal of control over hardware.


GPL2 was very nice, and Apple has played along and contributed back to the community. GPL3 was unacceptable to them so they've preemptively bought out the printing system. It's likely Apple will try other avenues to get around GPL3 in areas like gcc (apple is contributing heavily to work on non gpl compilers) et etc.

And the evidence for this is what...?

jdechko
Jul 12, 2007, 12:54 PM
It doesn't HAVE to be this way...

I completely agree. Why should it have to be all or nothing with these devices. I really only do 2 things on my printer anyway, print and use the card reader. Yet my HP insists on installing the photo management system, for which I already use Picasa, and the photo-editing software, for which I already use Photoshop. Why can't I just use the very basic drivers for printing and accessing the card reader--for that matter, why is there even a driver/software/stupid tray icon for the card reader? Most (if not all) USB card readers automatically appear in both OS X and Windows without drivers.

I'd really like to see some universal USB printer standards that make it possible to do basic printing without any drivers--like the way a keyboard/mouse/monitor will work. Sure you don't have access to all the programmable buttons, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a simple I/O printer language.

QuarterSwede
Jul 12, 2007, 12:58 PM
Please don't say it that way. I hate to see the phrase "any OS version" followed by a list like that. ;-)
I was thinking the same thing.

travvy49423
Jul 12, 2007, 12:59 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't CUPS open source? How can Apple "buy" software that essentially belongs to everyone? Or was it just freeware? In either case, if I were a linux user, I'd be pretty pissed right now. (Thankfully, I'm not.)

Headrush69
Jul 12, 2007, 01:00 PM
I use a variety of printers and paper sizes on both Macs & Windoze - I'd like to see the print dialog allow switching of sizes & orientation with closing & switching to the printer setup, then back. I hate to say it, but for me printing to Windoze is more flexible...
Isn't that what profiles are for or am I misunderstanding what you are after?

Headrush69
Jul 12, 2007, 01:01 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't CUPS open source? How can Apple "buy" software that essentially belongs to everyone? Or was it just freeware? In either case, if I were a linux user, I'd be pretty pissed right now. (Thankfully, I'm not.)

Open source doesn't mean that there are no copy rights.

Headrush69
Jul 12, 2007, 01:06 PM
Very true. Even with USB printers on Windows, it's often possible to download the "network" version of the driver, which won't include all of the system tray junk that gets installed with the typical consumer-level printer.
From my experience I have found this is more the exception than the norm.

rob@robburns.co
Jul 12, 2007, 01:07 PM
I'd really like to see some universal USB printer standards that make it possible to do basic printing without any drivers--like the way a keyboard/mouse/monitor will work. Sure you don't have access to all the programmable buttons, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a simple I/O printer language.

Well, if I understand you correctly that's basically what CUPS is (but for any sort of connection, e.g., network or direct).

The way it looks to me, Apple went with CUPS originally because it was a great solution for that very problem. It was open source under GPL, but I think Apple figured that wouldn't be a problem because only the most inane printer manufacturer would think the print driver was the source of their value-added. Apparently inane, was the standard, so Apple has now acquired CUPS so that it can alter the license to not scare away the inane printer manufacturers.

Its a great project and I'm sure it has a great engineer (or team) behind it. But there probably wasn't a reason to own CUPS if it weren't for those license issues.

rob@robburns.co
Jul 12, 2007, 01:14 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't CUPS open source? How can Apple "buy" software that essentially belongs to everyone? Or was it just freeware? In either case, if I were a linux user, I'd be pretty pissed right now. (Thankfully, I'm not.)

Apple already owns lots of open source software. The trick with GPL licensed software though is the dual license approach. Much of the GPL projects have a dual license where the originator of the project claims complete control over the source for their own licensing purposes. That means CUPS could gather together the contributions from the community and sell them under a completely different license. With Apple acquiring CUPS now, they could turn around and do what the GPL community has been doing to the BSD community for a long time: make it alll BSD (well Apache Software License now I guess). :-) The "Darwin Printing System"

iMeowbot
Jul 12, 2007, 01:24 PM
That means CUPS could gather together the contributions from the community and sell them under a completely different license.
Sort of. What happened with CUPS to date is that outside contributors were asked to sign over copyrights in order to allow that kind of thing. FSF does much the same, actually. If contributors have a problem with the Apple ownership, they are always free to fork existing GPL releases and not hand their rights back over to Apple. (Apple could still use changes from any potential forks, but only under GPL terms).

jellomizer
Jul 12, 2007, 01:57 PM
It should be noted that the real reason Apple purchased the code, trademarks, and developer was because they didn't want to risk CUPS being licensed under GPL3. GPL3 is particularly insidious in its patent licensing and "tivo clause" requirements, the former requiring Apple essentially to license software patents and the latter requiring Apple to give up a great deal of control over hardware.


GPL2 was very nice, and Apple has played along and contributed back to the community. GPL3 was unacceptable to them so they've preemptively bought out the printing system. It's likely Apple will try other avenues to get around GPL3 in areas like gcc (apple is contributing heavily to work on non gpl compilers) et etc.


Yes that TiVo clause is the real Hiprocicry in the GPL 3 were such actions by IBM are Good but By TiVo and Apple it is Bad. Apple doesn't have a history of playing nice with groups that make their life difficult. So if the free software changes the rules so they can't play the same game that apple wants Apple will swich, even if it is a major undertaking.

zv470
Jul 12, 2007, 01:58 PM
Since he works for Apple now... hope he's eligible for a free iPhone :) congratulations. :)

Sabon
Jul 12, 2007, 02:00 PM
Since he works for Apple now... hope he's eligible for a free iPhone :) congratulations. :)

Maybe that's why he did it. lol

jellomizer
Jul 12, 2007, 02:10 PM
Printing has been the ugly step-child in the closet of OSX for too long now. I'm thrilled it will get more attention.

Really, i'm just glad MS didn't think to buy CUPS first, to wrench Apple.

There is no Profit in it for Microsoft to do so. They already have a good printing system of there own. In there next update there would just be apples own version of the software. The current version before it was bought out was still GPL 2 so that version would stay GPL 2 giving Apple pleanty of time to make their version, or fork. It will make Microsoft look bad like they Need CUPS for their printing sytem, and the Linux Folks would jump on that and point out that Linux and Windows uses the same printing system, even if it is untrue.

Besides the ability for OS X to print isn't what Microsoft is worried about it is Apples GUI, QuickTime, iPod, iLife software not some little thing like printing. It would be a tough sell to say your OS Prints better then the Other Guys.

Dasmo
Jul 12, 2007, 02:16 PM
Apple's network printing is a weak point in that strategy. Windows has a very elegant and powerful network printing architecture. Clients automatically pull down drivers from print servers. Print servers can hold drivers for any OS version (95,98,2000/XP,Vista, etc.). Queue administration is a snap and can be done from any computer.

Dude, are you on crack? I have to manage the way the printers are installed in the company I work for and I can't tell you how much I hate windows machines and network printers. They just don't work. I've ended up installing bonjour printer wizard on all the windows machines just to simplify the process. However, if a printer's IP address changes, the windows machines never know where the printer has gone. Luckily bonjour is easy enough to train sales guys to use, so they can reinstall their printer if it isn't working.

The macs in the office have no printer issues that don't relate to drivers or the printers themselves. Hell even the linux desktops have less trouble than windows.


Edit: figured I might mention these are network printers, not printers connected to Mac OSX server. I tried that, and I found that it's less painful to jam hot needles in my eyes.

Wayfarer
Jul 12, 2007, 02:40 PM
HORRAY! :D :apple:
http://images.appleinsider.com/CUPS-logo-071207.gif

peters438
Jul 12, 2007, 03:55 PM
Dude, are you on crack? I have to manage the way the printers are installed in the company I work for and I can't tell you how much I hate windows machines and network printers. They just don't work. I've ended up installing bonjour printer wizard on all the windows machines just to simplify the process. However, if a printer's IP address changes, the windows machines never know where the printer has gone. Luckily bonjour is easy enough to train sales guys to use, so they can reinstall their printer if it isn't working.

The macs in the office have no printer issues that don't relate to drivers or the printers themselves. Hell even the linux desktops have less trouble than windows.


Edit: figured I might mention these are network printers, not printers connected to Mac OSX server. I tried that, and I found that it's less painful to jam hot needles in my eyes.

I'm guessing that your office doesn't have printers shared through a Windows Server then. Bonjour's auto discovery of printers is great--it's a strong point in Apple's favor for printing. It's especially nice on a small network.

Now, on a larger network (the mid to large size enterprise that I was referring to in my post), printers are usually shared through a server queue. In that scenario, if your printer or your server IP addresses are changing, you've got big problems.

In fact, even in a small network, there's just no reason for printer or other network device addresses to change. That's what static IP assignment is for. Do it on the printer, or do it in the DHCP server (a reserved address). Make your network administration life simpler.:)

VaDor
Jul 12, 2007, 05:06 PM
Same here. I don't know about the underlying architecture of the printing service but Apple's implementation of it is the worst in the industry if you ask me. They don't even offer the user the ability to print a selection of text which my family and I (used to) use a lot.

Same feeling here.. For Leopard I don't care the 3d dock.. I just want printer utility/setup better.. with print selection and stuff more user-friendly.

It's the only thing that I dislike in Mac Os X

aspro
Jul 12, 2007, 05:30 PM
More Open Source at Apple can only be a good thing in my opinion.

This move will hopefully also bring even better printing support in OS X (not that I have any problems with it at the moment).

MikeTheC
Jul 12, 2007, 06:31 PM
While it may not (probably) be as bad as if Microsoft had bought up CUPS, there's still something unsettling for me about any company acquiring any OSS/FSF development or project.

Hopefully it will be a way for Apple to give us better software and, at the same time, ultimately prove they aren't another member of "big corporate".

We'll see...

rob@robburns.co
Jul 12, 2007, 06:38 PM
While it may not (probably) be as bad as if Microsoft had bought up CUPS, there's still something unsettling for me about any company acquiring any OSS/FSF development or project.

Hopefully it will be a way for Apple to give us better software and, at the same time, ultimately prove they aren't another member of "big corporate".

We'll see...

That bit that's unsettling for you is already happening. Its a big part of the FSF movement (though many in the movmenet don't like it). MySQL, KDE and Qt, CUPS, etc: these are all owned by companies. CUPS owned the CUPS project. Now Apple owns the CUPS project. This has been the route of many GPL project. Its a different thing than with Apache and their projects or Darwin as a project in that everyone has the same relationship to the open source in the project. No one can own it anymore than anyone else.

andrewag
Jul 12, 2007, 06:49 PM
I wonder why?

pengu
Jul 12, 2007, 08:17 PM
Very true. Even with USB printers on Windows, it's often possible to download the "network" version of the driver, which won't include all of the system tray junk that gets installed with the typical consumer-level printer.

the "network" version is usually just the same driver, but the admin who setup/manages the print server (be it Windows Server, Novell NDPS/iPrint, etc) actually has a clue, and doesnt just run "setup.exe" on the driver disc/downloaded driver dir.

nothing to stop every joe schmoe @ home taking the same steps when they setup their own printer.

shawnce
Jul 12, 2007, 09:13 PM
I wonder why?

...maybe...

Apple depends on CUPS, Apple has a good relationship with Mr. Sweet, Apple already had special licensing with Mr. Sweet, so Apple hired Mr. Sweet and purchased the rights to CUPS.

msandersen
Jul 12, 2007, 09:14 PM
I noted on the CUPS FAQ page it reads:
178 How Is CUPS Licensed?
The Common UNIX Printing System, ("CUPS"), is provided under the GNU General Public License ("GPL") and GNU Library General Public License ("LGPL"), Version 2, with exceptions for Apple operating systems and the OpenSSL t.
so I guess that means on OSX it is under an Apple license and allows Apple to incorporate proprietary elements, or has been stated, for 3rd party printer manufacturers to provide confidential details. I expect it will be incorporated into the Darwin project and use its licensing terms.

shawnce
Jul 12, 2007, 10:06 PM
I noted on the CUPS FAQ page it reads:

so I guess that means on OSX it is under an Apple license and allows Apple to incorporate proprietary elements, or has been stated, for 3rd party printer manufacturers to provide confidential details. I expect it will be incorporated into the Darwin project and use its licensing terms.

Note that the Apple exception has been in place since 2002.... so Apple buying the rights to source didn't result in that exception... Apple had already work that our with Mr. Sweet long ago.

See: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/05/msg00033.html

bmpwe
Jul 12, 2007, 11:02 PM
I thought CUPS was OSS. I understand how Apple hire the guy, but what about the code?

If I'm thinking about this right, theve simply hired the devloper. The code will stay OSS.

blackdir
Jul 13, 2007, 04:55 AM
Maybe I'm dreaming, but it would be nice if apple follow a similar approach for scanners... by adopting the SANE project as the scanning infrastructure, they could get access to thousands of drivers to be used out of the box with OSX...

janey
Jul 13, 2007, 05:00 AM
I thought CUPS was OSS. I understand how Apple hire the guy, but what about the code?

If I'm thinking about this right, theve simply hired the devloper. The code will stay OSS.

some part of me thinks this was because of the issues caused by gplv3.

Not sure if this is a good thing or what, but companies everywhere are doing all sorts of things as a result...like Apple with CUPS, Microsoft+Novell with their dumb deal..

twoodcc
Jul 13, 2007, 10:56 AM
sounds like good news to me

mdriftmeyer
Jul 13, 2007, 01:52 PM
While it may not (probably) be as bad as if Microsoft had bought up CUPS, there's still something unsettling for me about any company acquiring any OSS/FSF development or project.

Hopefully it will be a way for Apple to give us better software and, at the same time, ultimately prove they aren't another member of "big corporate".

We'll see...

What are you talking about? Google, IBM, Novell, etc., have dumped tons of Code into the OSS/FSF movement and acquired tons of it while acknowledging the LGPL/GPL, etc.

If you think the OSS/FSF movement is all about not working with Corporations then that movement would have died on the vine. It's a balance.

MikeTheC
Jul 14, 2007, 08:49 AM
What are you talking about? Google, IBM, Novell, etc., have dumped tons of Code into the OSS/FSF movement and acquired tons of it while acknowledging the LGPL/GPL, etc.

If you think the OSS/FSF movement is all about not working with Corporations then that movement would have died on the vine. It's a balance.

MD:

I understand what you are trying to say, and clearly the majority of instances of commercial involvement with the FSF/OSS developer community have (thus far) been helpful and beneficial. OSS itself has been a marvelous conduit for various companies to introduce improvements that anyone else external to their company can (either actually or in principle) benefit from. For that matter, a friend of mine works for a major U.S. ISP as a senior software engineer. He and a number of his fellows have had to do their own revisions (sometimes forking, sometimes not) of various bits to accommodate their server environment needs, amongst other things.

And these changes have then been released "back into the wild" for any other company to make use of and benefit from, and even individuals like us, should the need ever arise.

The thing is, I don't have a problem with business involvement with OSS, but what I am troubled by is when private enterprise decides to buy up portions of Linux. Now, perhaps Apple isn't the first company to do this kind of thing, and I'll fully well plead ignorance if such is true, but nevertheless there's something -- unsettling -- about Apple buying up CUPS. And I guess the thing which troubles me the most is what this means for the future of FSF/OSS. I'm concerned that this might set up a slippery slope precedent which could lead to either the effective neutering of OSS, or worse.

I'm certain you'll probably say I shouldn't worry about such things, and I sincerely hope you're right. It's just that I have this sort of sickening, sinking feeling, and more often than not when I get one of those, I turn out to be unfortunately right (sometimes more right than even I know.)

I hope that ultimately this isn't the case here.

sguk
Jul 14, 2007, 07:35 PM
It still sounds like some kind of supermodel SWAT team to me, but good for him. I love it when people who write some boring, unassuming utility get a payday.

What do you mean "write some boring, unassuming utility"

Do you actually know what it does?
Have you actual used it?
Have you ever needed to print something in accurate colour or do you just print pictures of your grannys socks

Don't slate something which you so obviously never use yourself and have no idea of the benefits of Gutenprint.

I have an Epson printer R1800 which does not print accurate colour from any postscript graphics applications. Like many reasonable priced printers these days they are all photo printers.

But it even struggles with photos in certain apps. Gutenprint solves that, it is a fully customisable print plug in/app whatever you want to call it, which controls colour.

It gives excellent results on my Epson and I say well done to the guy who invented an app which can control any printer without the need for numourous drivers and settings.

So stop slating it, shut up and speak when you are clear of what you are speaking about and have your facts straight.

janey
Jul 15, 2007, 02:19 AM
...nevertheless there's something -- unsettling -- about Apple buying up CUPS. And I guess the thing which troubles me the most is what this means for the future of FSF/OSS...
CUPS is still open source though, and if Apple ever decides to close it, you can always fork from the last release.

And there's plenty of companies out there dual-licensing or doing these kinds of things. Many of whom are dealing with gpl3 related headaches right now. Apple's decision was probably partially influenced by the impending release of gpl3 and also by the appeal of having partially closed derivatives now that they have control.

Personally, I think RMS can kiss my ass.

gnasher729
Jul 20, 2007, 04:34 PM
Makes sense, buy the thing and keep it under (L)GPL2. With the ownership they can basically prevent it going under v3 which would make using it in OSX extremely difficult.

There is one problem with this theory: Since 2002, Apple has had a license that allowed it to use CUPS in MacOS X any way they like, without any GPL restrictions.

iMeowbot
Jul 20, 2007, 07:32 PM
There is one problem with this theory: Since 2002, Apple has had a license that allowed it to use CUPS in MacOS X any way they like, without any GPL restrictions.

The current exception is now fundamentally different. "as the copyright holder of CUPS, Easy Software Products grants…" was changed to "as the copyright holder of CUPS, Apple Inc. grants…" The latter state reflects an assurance that Apple will continue to enjoy their exceptions on all future versions of CUPS. The former does not.

Billy Boo Bob
Jul 23, 2007, 01:55 AM
Hmmm, that's pretty interesting. My next printer will hopefully be a Brother 2040 (nice simple laser printer) or the Brother 2070N which is essentially the same printer but with network capabilities. I'm hoping that without all of the extras, there won't be any software fluff that I have to install to get it working.

I just got a 2040... Went pretty easy... Installed the driver that came on the CD, but I don't know if I would have needed to if I had left the Brother drivers that came with Tiger... At the time of install I only put on Epson drivers, since that's the only printer type I had at the time...

Other Macs on the network picked right up on it with simply selecting it from Shared Printers. No driver fuss, no missing features (not that the printer is loaded with them). Prints nice... Fast for a 99 dollar laser.

Kawasaki
Aug 8, 2007, 11:37 AM
Interesting news