Although I agree that I see what appear to be contradictory comments
about the base system (high end printer vs printer preceded by server
vs hardware not able to implement), and I see some unlikely statements
($150 printers are still rated as personal printers, not workgroup
printers), Jay's base premise frightens me.
The notion that IPP is *just* for internet printing (as distinguished
from intranet or intra-enterprise printing) is a very frightening one.
Granted that internet printing has a certain pizzas right now, I would
still expect 90% of the printing will be within a company. I strongly
question whether there is any rational in developing a protocol just
for internet printing. Indeed, since one of the intentions is to
provide a substantial improvement over LPR, I would certainly expect
that intra-enterprise printing is the major target.
Similarly, the notion that the IPP must avoid the complexities and
inconveniences of addressing the desktop printer seem again to
missing the major part of the market.
Perhaps it would be appropriate to reaffirm the objectives of the IPP
Bill Wagner, Osicom/DPI