J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/24 13:40:32, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-07-24 14:34, micky wrote:[]
So the mapping command was
net use lpt1: \\Laptop-Dell2025\Brother /persistent:yes
And the print command was
copy "C:\Data\Jack\Whatsapptest.txt" lpt1
I was going to say "have you tried with a colon on the end (i. e.
'LPT1:')", but ...
No, this kind of command can no longer work. Rather, open the file in
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now
complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to
be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer >driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
some editor that shows it complete, then tell it to print choosing what >> > printer to use.That's what, in effect, most of this thread has been about :-)
I can't get a text file to print completely.
What editor would force everything to print? win11 Pro, fully updated,
but I'm pretty sure the problem will be the same in win10. (I'll send
the file to my win10 computer and try it.)
Different variables and comments in reference to language and special
....
Notepad, PDF).
Please try to follow along.
I can't get a text file to print completely....
Carlos E. R. wrote:
I just copy paste.
Tell me two sample links to pages that show both types of text, and I
will try to copy paste in my way.
Unicode:
<https://gist.github.com/jpassaro/bf400b0410810a071a7fb3509ef6c2c3>
<https://www.unicode.org/charts/nameslist/n_2000.html>
Ascii:
<https://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ascii.html>
<https://www.asciitable.com/>
If you mean that some places use "quotes" while other sites use
?quotes, I might bother to change to the second type, which is the
modern style recommendation. Possibly LibreOffice might have macros to
do this.
Yup. First you used straight quotes & then curly quotes.
I know it's a test, but my point is that it's inconsistent.
Everything nowdays handles Unicode correctly.
Almost everything.
But the inconsistency will remain if you copy from multiple sources with different punctuation characters.
I was taught to select a grammatical style and stick to it.
a. For example, I deplore the Oxford comma.
b. And I don't use em dashes when a comma would suffice.
c. And I put my periods (full stops) outside the ending quotes.
etc.
Worse, I don't mix curly punctuation with straight punctuation.
Especially in source code that I write (it confuses programs).
On 2026-07-25 17:15, Maria Sophia wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
My solution is to run all my copypasta thru a normalizer which makes all >>> the inconsistent text consistent, before I edit the results for posting. >>Your problem is of your own creation: you use software that doesn't
handle unicode.
I don't have any problem copy pasting stuff from anywhere.
Hi Carlos,
I never disagree with a logically sensible statement, and, on the other hand, I often disagree with statements which are illogically phrased.
Yours is both. :)
On the one hand, you're completely correct that my "software" doesn't handle Unicode well, so that is certainly a creation of my own doing.
But, on the other hand, even if the software handled Unicode gracefully, mixing Unicode with ASCII would still make it an inconsistent mess.
Why would I mix? I only use unicode.
The normalizer solves both problems.
But back to Paul's issue, what he's talking about is real.
I was simply confirming that Paul's statements are exactly what I also see.
On 2026/7/25 11:26:46, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now
complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to
be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
Is your "Exactly" because they don't know what to do with plain ASCII,
or because you are agreeing with the routing suggestion (by which I
meant USB, wifi, network etc. ports)? I _think_ you meant the former.
So what _would_ a modern printer do if sent some plain ASCII (including newlines, and perhaps a Ctrl-Z at the end) - assuming the routing via
USB or whatever was handled?
In alt.comp.os.windows-11, on 25 Jul 2026 10:26:46 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/24 13:40:32, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-07-24 14:34, micky wrote:[]
So the mapping command was
net use lpt1: \\Laptop-Dell2025\Brother /persistent:yes
And the print command was
copy "C:\Data\Jack\Whatsapptest.txt" lpt1
I was going to say "have you tried with a colon on the end (i. e.
'LPT1:')", but ...
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
No, this kind of command can no longer work. Rather, open the file in >>
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now
complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to
be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer >driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
Well, 4 years ago I used a USB cable to connect and used
copy filename lpt1 (perhaps with a /b. I don't remember) to
print to a very nice, fairly large, seeemingly recent printer, and it
worked fine. It was the printer I found in the room I rented. It might
have been a laser printer. Yes, I wwent back to my downloads file from
Spring of 2022, April, and found the owners manual. It was a Samsung SCX-4x24 or 4x28. I dowoloaded the manual looking for help, but never installed the software because I was trying not to fill my drive with
extra stuff, and I just used copy.
The owners manaul knows about win7 and Server 2008, but doesn't mention anything later.
I wrote the file in some windows program. I'm not sure the line breaks
were at the same spot as on the screen but the paragraph breaks were and
the reult looked fine.
some editor that shows it complete, then tell it to print choosing what >> > printer to use.That's what, in effect, most of this thread has been about :-)
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/25 11:26:46, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now
complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to >>> be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer >>> driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
Is your "Exactly" because they don't know what to do with plain ASCII,
or because you are agreeing with the routing suggestion (by which I
meant USB, wifi, network etc. ports)? I _think_ you meant the former.
Yes, I mean(t) the former.
So what _would_ a modern printer do if sent some plain ASCII (including
newlines, and perhaps a Ctrl-Z at the end) - assuming the routing via
USB or whatever was handled?
As you wrote elsewhere, a modern printer *could* theorically handle a plain ASCII input stream, providid it had the logic/processing
capability do do the neccessary work, especially for laserprinters and
inkjet printer (which are normally bi-directional).
But that's theory. In practice, I think they will just fail.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/25 11:26:46, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now
complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to
be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer >>> driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
Is your "Exactly" because they don't know what to do with plain ASCII,
or because you are agreeing with the routing suggestion (by which I
meant USB, wifi, network etc. ports)? I _think_ you meant the former.
Yes, I mean(t) the former.
So what _would_ a modern printer do if sent some plain ASCII (including
newlines, and perhaps a Ctrl-Z at the end) - assuming the routing via
USB or whatever was handled?
As you wrote elsewhere, a modern printer *could* theorically handle a
plain ASCII input stream, providid it had the logic/processing
capability do do the neccessary work, especially for laserprinters and
inkjet printer (which are normally bi-directional).
But that's theory. In practice, I think they will just fail.
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-11, on 25 Jul 2026 10:26:46 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/24 13:40:32, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-07-24 14:34, micky wrote:[]
So the mapping command was
net use lpt1: \\Laptop-Dell2025\Brother /persistent:yes
And the print command was
copy "C:\Data\Jack\Whatsapptest.txt" lpt1
I was going to say "have you tried with a colon on the end (i. e.
'LPT1:')", but ...
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
No, this kind of command can no longer work. Rather, open the file in >>>>
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now
complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to
be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer >>> driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
Well, 4 years ago I used a USB cable to connect and used
copy filename lpt1 (perhaps with a /b. I don't remember) to
print to a very nice, fairly large, seeemingly recent printer, and it
worked fine. It was the printer I found in the room I rented. It might
have been a laser printer. Yes, I wwent back to my downloads file from
Spring of 2022, April, and found the owners manual. It was a Samsung
SCX-4x24 or 4x28. I dowoloaded the manual looking for help, but never
installed the software because I was trying not to fill my drive with
extra stuff, and I just used copy.
As Google shows (search on "define: lpt1"), LPT1 is the first (hence
1), *parallel* (i.e. a parallel interface) 'Line Printer'.
So you must have either used a parallel port or some hardware or
software which emulates a parallel port.
For example I used a USB-to-parallel cable (with built-in electronics)
to connect an old parallel HP LaserJet to a USB port of my laptop. I
just used that printer with the Windows Printer Spooler, but it might
have also worked as LPT1.
The owners manaul knows about win7 and Server 2008, but doesn't mention
anything later.
I wrote the file in some windows program. I'm not sure the line breaks
were at the same spot as on the screen but the paragraph breaks were and
the reult looked fine.
some editor that shows it complete, then tell it to print choosing what >>>>> printer to use.That's what, in effect, most of this thread has been about :-)
I posted two days ago about this scenario by testing it. My laserjet
prints text (not ascii) if sent directly to it. It is using the latin-1
aka 850 codepage, 8 bits.
It is a modern printer of about 10 years of age.
Why does it have this feature, no idea, I see no practical use to it.
On 2026/7/26 21:3:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
[]
I posted two days ago about this scenario by testing it. My laserjetIt allows you to print text from anything that can send data to it,
prints text (not ascii) if sent directly to it. It is using the latin-1
aka 850 codepage, 8 bits.
It is a modern printer of about 10 years of age.
Why does it have this feature, no idea, I see no practical use to it.
without needing a driver. Useful if, for example, you've got some text
you need to print, but have no internet to get a driver, or if the manufacturer has gone out of business or stopped (or never started) supporting the combination of that printer model and your OS.
On Sun, 7/26/2026 2:42 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-11, on 25 Jul 2026 10:26:46 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/24 13:40:32, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-07-24 14:34, micky wrote:[]
So the mapping command was
net use lpt1: \\Laptop-Dell2025\Brother /persistent:yes
And the print command was
copy "C:\Data\Jack\Whatsapptest.txt" lpt1
I was going to say "have you tried with a colon on the end (i. e.
'LPT1:')", but ...
... I suspected that was the case. Does it not work because modern
No, this kind of command can no longer work. Rather, open the file in >>>>>
printers don't know what to do if fed plain ASCII, or because the now >>>>> complex routing is a lot more, well, complex than a parallel (or
serial!) port used to be? Or both?
Exactly. A 'modern' (read: last two decades or so) printer expects to >>>> be fed PCL (Printer Command Language) or some such protocol by a printer >>>> driver. The LPT device does not have such a protocol.
Well, 4 years ago I used a USB cable to connect and used
copy filename lpt1 (perhaps with a /b. I don't remember) to
print to a very nice, fairly large, seeemingly recent printer, and it
worked fine. It was the printer I found in the room I rented. It might
have been a laser printer. Yes, I wwent back to my downloads file from
Spring of 2022, April, and found the owners manual. It was a Samsung
SCX-4x24 or 4x28. I dowoloaded the manual looking for help, but never
installed the software because I was trying not to fill my drive with
extra stuff, and I just used copy.
As Google shows (search on "define: lpt1"), LPT1 is the first (hence
1), *parallel* (i.e. a parallel interface) 'Line Printer'.
So you must have either used a parallel port or some hardware or
software which emulates a parallel port.
For example I used a USB-to-parallel cable (with built-in electronics)
to connect an old parallel HP LaserJet to a USB port of my laptop. I
just used that printer with the Windows Printer Spooler, but it might
have also worked as LPT1.
The owners manaul knows about win7 and Server 2008, but doesn't mention >>> anything later.
I wrote the file in some windows program. I'm not sure the line breaks
were at the same spot as on the screen but the paragraph breaks were and >>> the reult looked fine.
some editor that shows it complete, then tell it to print choosing what >>>>>> printer to use.That's what, in effect, most of this thread has been about :-)
The USB print adapter, only works with printers, and is not a
general purpose parallel port (four modes). Just in case you were thinking that was the case, the hardware is missing the software to do that.
It supports one specific mode, supported by the class-driver for
the purpose of printing.
If you want a real parallel port (different driver), you'll have to work a bit harder
to get it. Oxford Semiconductor (UK), known here as OxSemi, made a fine
PCIe chip for the job, with two serial ports, one parallel port, and
various chip part numbers (where one of the port types could be turned
off, or both port types were turned on), offered an easy way to have
a parallel port. I have one, which only does parallel, and it was
to be used with my FPGA kit and JTAG programming adapter (which plugs
into a parallel port). OxSemi was "bought and crushed" as a strategy,
so they're not available any more, and best case, you'd be looking for
a chip from an Indian fab as a replacement for it. And after COVID
and tariffs, who knows what plugin card companies still exist. A lot
of smaller Chinese semi companies (fabless ones) were also wiped out
by recent events. If you're looking for semiconductors, you'd better
be an AI Techbro these days. Like, try and find even a decent SATA
adapter, and the pickings available are pretty weird (lots of stuff
that isn't full-bandwidth, which I hate).
As an example of the esoteric, the Meinburg NTP software, now
has an interface, to use a real parallel port and some signal
on it, to pick up the 1PPS signal from a GPS. The "normal" interface
on the GPS, is a serial port at 9600 baud (TX,RX,GND). The 1PPS signal
is tightly synchronized to the one second pulse determination, and
going through the parallel port card, is considered to be a "fast path"
to reaching the driver. And for that, you can't use a USB printer adapter,
as it doesn't support that mode (and the latency through the print
adapter would be too high), and you have to dig through your
junk pile to find a PCIe parallel port (four modes) to plug into your desktop.
Paul
On 2026-07-26 22:32, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/7/26 21:3:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
[]
I posted two days ago about this scenario by testing it. My laserjetIt allows you to print text from anything that can send data to it,
prints text (not ascii) if sent directly to it. It is using the latin-1
aka 850 codepage, 8 bits.
It is a modern printer of about 10 years of age.
Why does it have this feature, no idea, I see no practical use to it.
without needing a driver. Useful if, for example, you've got some text
you need to print, but have no internet to get a driver, or if the
manufacturer has gone out of business or stopped (or never started)
supporting the combination of that printer model and your OS.
If I wanted to print plain text directly from the computer, raw, I would
not choose a laser, a one page at a time printer. It would be an inkjet
or a ribbon printer. Even a thermal printer. Anything that can print a
line at a time. Even better, a char at a time.
On 2026/7/26 21:48:46, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-07-26 22:32, J. P. Gilliver wrote:I agree. However, if stuck somewhere without access to anything but the
On 2026/7/26 21:3:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
[]
I posted two days ago about this scenario by testing it. My laserjetIt allows you to print text from anything that can send data to it,
prints text (not ascii) if sent directly to it. It is using the latin-1 >>>> aka 850 codepage, 8 bits.
It is a modern printer of about 10 years of age.
Why does it have this feature, no idea, I see no practical use to it.
without needing a driver. Useful if, for example, you've got some text
you need to print, but have no internet to get a driver, or if the
manufacturer has gone out of business or stopped (or never started)
supporting the combination of that printer model and your OS.
If I wanted to print plain text directly from the computer, raw, I would
not choose a laser, a one page at a time printer. It would be an inkjet
or a ribbon printer. Even a thermal printer. Anything that can print a
line at a time. Even better, a char at a time.
laser - for example, if you're in a business facility that provides a printer, but your laptop/tablet/whatever has no driver for the provided printer. Yes, ideally, you'd prefer a line - or even character - at a
time printer, especially if you are wanting to type; however, if you had
the text already in a file ...
On 2026/7/26 21:48:46, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-07-26 22:32, J. P. Gilliver wrote:I agree. However, if stuck somewhere without access to anything but the
On 2026/7/26 21:3:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
[]
I posted two days ago about this scenario by testing it. My laserjetIt allows you to print text from anything that can send data to it,
prints text (not ascii) if sent directly to it. It is using the latin-1 >>>> aka 850 codepage, 8 bits.
It is a modern printer of about 10 years of age.
Why does it have this feature, no idea, I see no practical use to it.
without needing a driver. Useful if, for example, you've got some text
you need to print, but have no internet to get a driver, or if the
manufacturer has gone out of business or stopped (or never started)
supporting the combination of that printer model and your OS.
If I wanted to print plain text directly from the computer, raw, I would
not choose a laser, a one page at a time printer. It would be an inkjet
or a ribbon printer. Even a thermal printer. Anything that can print a
line at a time. Even better, a char at a time.
laser - for example, if you're in a business facility that provides a >printer, but your laptop/tablet/whatever has no driver for the provided
printer. Yes, ideally, you'd prefer a line - or even character - at a
time printer, especially if you are wanting to type; however, if you had
the text already in a file ...
On 2026/7/20 18:6:34, micky wrote:
[]
I read that line a few minutes ago and didn't even notice a problem. The
sentence made me think about a hex editor that I dl'd and installed a
couple hours ago.
(Was it the one I gave you a link to?)
Since you've got the thing printed anyway (Windows 10 rules!) the.
problem is "solved", but just out of curiosity, have you had a look at
the problem file with the hex editor, to see what's in it at the problem >point? I think several of us here would be interested to hear what is there.
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 497102:28:38 |
| Calls: | 182 |
| Files: | 744 |
| D/L today: |
69 files (10,000K bytes) |
| Messages: | 73,659 |