Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 10th Jun 2010 12:53 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 429505
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Why are Lexmark incompetent?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 10th Jun 2010 15:01
in reply to "Why are Lexmark incompetent?"
RE[2]: Why are Lexmark incompetent?
by gedmurphy on Thu 10th Jun 2010 15:10
in reply to "RE: Why are Lexmark incompetent?"
I read it right, I just didn't post the full snippet. Here it is
Like every other printer manufacturer, Lexmark is incredibly incompetent and doesn't support Linux in any way, shape, or form.
Unless you're very pedantic about the actual wording (which can be interpreted in different ways), this suggests that printer manufacturers are incompetent due to their lack of linux support.
If this isn't the reason then what did you mean? I've always found printer manufacturers to be very competent. They sell printers which unless faulty, do the job they are supposed to do.
I'm not being picky here, I just think linux guys get mad a little unfairly when manufacturers don't provide them with free support as per Windows.
RE[2]: Why are Lexmark incompetent?
by kittynipples on Thu 10th Jun 2010 17:04
in reply to "RE: Why are Lexmark incompetent?"





Member since:
2005-12-23
Lexmark is incredibly incompetent and doesn't support Linux in any way, shape, or form
Just because hardware manufacturers don't support linux doesn't make them incompetent. They have no obligation to support any OS other than the one they advertise for.
Their choice not to support linux is surely driven by a market share / development and support ratio.
Maybe the incompetent ones are the people who buy hardware and expect it to work across all available operating systems without doing prior research.