Bill, at 15:03 on Dec 20 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

BG> You may recall our discussion about the slack canon 
BG> bj-300/330 drivers for native os/2. 

How could I forget?  And yes, I'm still using my BJ-300 here.

BG> There was talk they would be fixed in os/2 v4. Well, I've 
BG> just upgraded, and guess what? No new bj300/330 driver! :(

So why am I not the least bit surprised?

BG> I looked in the supplementary driver cd-rom. The driver 
BG> supplied is the old v1.11 'third party' 'software 2000' 
BG> driver from the uk, which we have been using under os/2 v3 
BG> for 12-18 months. 

It's just not good enough.  I know it's easy to blame Canon for OS/2's lack
of a decent BJ-300 driver, but if MS can supply their own driver with Win95
(and quite a decent driver it is, too), IBM are no less capable of doing
the same.

BG> Still no printer driver option to control the dual bins on 
BG> my bj330, let alone any serious implementation of other 
BG> functions. I didn't bother to install it. I'll stick with the 
BG> ibm execjet 4072.

Same here, although it's really only "adequate" at best.

BG> Your praise of the w95 drivers led me to add it via bootmanager. You are 
BG> right, W95 has superior print functionality.

Pity about the rest of Win95 though...

BG> Canon, and IBM (forget canon! - they are still on my 'pass over' list) need 
BG> to look at windoze to see how to do it. 

How hard can it be to port a Win95 driver to OS/2?  Just a thought.  :)

BG> They make it hard for me to 'totally' love os/2. It was my 
BG> only os. But, I've installed W95 as well, and will give that 
BG> a going over.

After 5 years of OS/2, it's not easy to like Win95 (and I still don't), but
as MS Word 7 won't run under WinOS2, I sometimes have no choice but to use
it.

BG> Pity, as os/2 is a top os.

Agreed, but WinOS2 really needs the ability to run Win95-specific apps,
otherwise many people will have no option but to change to the vastly
inferior (albeit far better supported) Win95.

Regards, Bill

--- MsgedSQ/2 3.50