1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

HP LaserJet 3380 driver only works at low resolution

Discussion in 'Windows 7' started by Win7, Feb 27, 2010.

  1. Win7

    Win7 Flightless Bird

    The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works at
    600dpi resolution

    - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed the
    printer to work at 1200dpi.

    HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say MS
    has already provided one.


    Please fix this MS.
     
  2. Trev

    Trev Flightless Bird

    "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works at
    > 600dpi resolution
    >
    > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed the
    > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >
    > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say MS
    > has already provided one.
    >
    >
    > Please fix this MS.
    >


    Use the XP one then Right click the setup exe . Compatibility tab , install
    in compatibility mode pick XP sp 3
     
  3. SC Tom

    SC Tom Flightless Bird

    "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works at
    > 600dpi resolution
    >
    > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed the
    > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >
    > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say MS
    > has already provided one.


    This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so why
    should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?

    >
    > Please fix this MS.


    It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.
    --
    SC Tom
     
  4. Alias

    Alias Flightless Bird

    SC Tom wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    > news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >> The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works
    >> at 600dpi resolution
    >>
    >> - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed
    >> the printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>
    >> HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say
    >> MS has already provided one.

    >
    > This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so
    > why should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
    >
    >>
    >> Please fix this MS.

    >
    > It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.


    No, it's the OP's. Neither MS nor HP give a shit.

    Course, the real cost of printing is the ink, not the printer.

    --
    Alias
     
  5. GlowingBlueMist

    GlowingBlueMist Flightless Bird

    SC Tom wrote:
    > "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    > news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >> The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only
    >> works at 600dpi resolution
    >>
    >> - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which
    >> allowed the printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>
    >> HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they
    >> say MS has already provided one.

    >
    > This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works,
    > so why should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
    >
    >>
    >> Please fix this MS.

    >
    > It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.


    Try the Vista drivers either 32 or 64 depending on your Win7 install.
    Others have found they can clear many incompatible printer problems by using
    Vista drivers when true Win7 have not been developed.
     
  6. Alias

    Alias Flightless Bird

    GlowingBlueMist wrote:
    > SC Tom wrote:
    >> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >> news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>> The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only
    >>> works at 600dpi resolution
    >>>
    >>> - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which
    >>> allowed the printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>>
    >>> HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they
    >>> say MS has already provided one.

    >> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works,
    >> so why should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
    >>
    >>> Please fix this MS.

    >> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.

    >
    > Try the Vista drivers either 32 or 64 depending on your Win7 install.
    > Others have found they can clear many incompatible printer problems by using
    > Vista drivers when true Win7 have not been developed.
    >
    >


    What with Windows 7 really being Vista SE, it makes complete sense.

    --
    Alias
     
  7. Frank

    Frank Flightless Bird

    On 2/27/2010 2:57 PM, Alias wrote:
    > GlowingBlueMist wrote:
    >> SC Tom wrote:
    >>> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>>> The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only
    >>>> works at 600dpi resolution
    >>>>
    >>>> - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which
    >>>> allowed the printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>>>
    >>>> HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they
    >>>> say MS has already provided one.
    >>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works,
    >>> so why should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
    >>>
    >>>> Please fix this MS.
    >>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.

    >>
    >> Try the Vista drivers either 32 or 64 depending on your Win7 install.
    >> Others have found they can clear many incompatible printer problems by
    >> using Vista drivers when true Win7 have not been developed.
    >>

    >
    > What with Windows 7 really being Vista SE, it makes complete sense.
    >

    you are really incensed, in a rage and foaming at the mouth over the
    apparent success of Windows 7 aren't you, troll!
    Too bad asshole, you'll just have to live with it!...LOL!
     
  8. Ken Blake, MVP

    Ken Blake, MVP Flightless Bird

    On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote:


    > "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    > news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works at
    > > 600dpi resolution
    > >
    > > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed the
    > > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    > >
    > > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say MS
    > > has already provided one.

    >
    > This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so why
    > should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?



    Exactly right!


    > > Please fix this MS.

    >
    > It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.



    Exactly right! Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware
    manufacturer, not Microsoft.

    --
    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
    Please Reply to the Newsgroup
     
  9. paul_36

    paul_36 Flightless Bird

    On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
    > On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >> news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works at
    >> > 600dpi resolution
    >> >
    >> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed the
    >> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >> >
    >> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say MS
    >> > has already provided one.

    >>
    >> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so why
    >> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?

    >
    >
    > Exactly right!
    >
    >
    >> > Please fix this MS.

    >>
    >> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.


    Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
    and why are some drivers have m$ as the one who did the driver in the
    details?

    If m$ claims the driver is "good", then m$ is responsible as the
    checker.
    >
    >
    > Exactly right! Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware
    > manufacturer, not Microsoft.
    >
     
  10. SC Tom

    SC Tom Flightless Bird

    "paul_36" <guest@this.site.is.invalid> wrote in message
    news:hmem86$c7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
    > On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
    >> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works
    >>> > at
    >>> > 600dpi resolution
    >>> >
    >>> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed
    >>> > the
    >>> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>> >
    >>> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say
    >>> > MS
    >>> > has already provided one.
    >>>
    >>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so
    >>> why
    >>> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?

    >>
    >>
    >> Exactly right!
    >>
    >>
    >>> > Please fix this MS.
    >>>
    >>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.

    >
    > Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
    > and why are some drivers have m$ as the one who did the driver in the
    > details?
    >
    > If m$ claims the driver is "good", then m$ is responsible as the
    > checker.
    >>
    >>
    >> Exactly right! Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware
    >> manufacturer, not Microsoft.
    >>


    Is m$ the variable in the question? What's the rest of the formula?

    The driver may have been digitally signed by *Microsoft* for Windows XP (or
    another version), but that doesn't mean that the signature is "good" for
    Windows 7.
     
  11. paul_36

    paul_36 Flightless Bird

    On 2010-02-28, SC Tom <sc@tom.net> wrote:
    >
    > "paul_36" <guest@this.site.is.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:hmem86$c7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
    >> On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
    >>> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >>>> news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>>> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works
    >>>> > at
    >>>> > 600dpi resolution
    >>>> >
    >>>> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed
    >>>> > the
    >>>> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>>> >
    >>>> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say
    >>>> > MS
    >>>> > has already provided one.
    >>>>
    >>>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so
    >>>> why
    >>>> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Exactly right!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> > Please fix this MS.
    >>>>
    >>>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.

    >>
    >> Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
    >> and why are some drivers have m$ as the one who did the driver in the
    >> details?
    >>
    >> If m$ claims the driver is "good", then m$ is responsible as the
    >> checker.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Exactly right! Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware
    >>> manufacturer, not Microsoft.
    >>>

    >
    > Is m$ the variable in the question? What's the rest of the formula?
    >
    > The driver may have been digitally signed by *Microsoft* for Windows XP (or
    > another version), but that doesn't mean that the signature is "good" for
    > Windows 7.
    >

    If the Microsoft signed driver is supplied with windows 7, then it
    it should be "good" for win7. Also doesn't the microsoft logo
    indicate that the hardware/software will work with windows?
     
  12. SC Tom

    SC Tom Flightless Bird

    "paul_36" <guest@this.site.is.invalid> wrote in message
    news:hmf94j$lfu$1@news.eternal-september.org...
    > On 2010-02-28, SC Tom <sc@tom.net> wrote:
    >>
    >> "paul_36" <guest@this.site.is.invalid> wrote in message
    >> news:hmem86$c7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
    >>> On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
    >>>> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:iY5in.10153$pv.3548@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>>>> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only
    >>>>> > works
    >>>>> > at
    >>>>> > 600dpi resolution
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which
    >>>>> > allowed
    >>>>> > the
    >>>>> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they
    >>>>> > say
    >>>>> > MS
    >>>>> > has already provided one.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works,
    >>>>> so
    >>>>> why
    >>>>> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Exactly right!
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> > Please fix this MS.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.
    >>>
    >>> Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
    >>> and why are some drivers have m$ as the one who did the driver in the
    >>> details?
    >>>
    >>> If m$ claims the driver is "good", then m$ is responsible as the
    >>> checker.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Exactly right! Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware
    >>>> manufacturer, not Microsoft.
    >>>>

    >>
    >> Is m$ the variable in the question? What's the rest of the formula?
    >>
    >> The driver may have been digitally signed by *Microsoft* for Windows XP
    >> (or
    >> another version), but that doesn't mean that the signature is "good" for
    >> Windows 7.
    >>

    > If the Microsoft signed driver is supplied with windows 7, then it
    > it should be "good" for win7. Also doesn't the microsoft logo
    > indicate that the hardware/software will work with windows?


    The driver is not written by Microsoft; it is written by the hardware
    manufacturer then specs of what it is supposed to do is submitted to
    Microsoft for certification. Read here for further info
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHQL_Testing . The article is by no means the
    complete story, but a good place to start if you really want to know.
     
  13. Win7

    Win7 Flightless Bird

    "SC Tom",

    all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.

    At least Trev has provided a workaround...
     
  14. SC Tom

    SC Tom Flightless Bird

    "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    news:8OLjn.11114$pv.10099@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > "SC Tom",
    >
    > all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.
    >
    > At least Trev has provided a workaround...
    >
    >
    >


    I'll promise not to whinge any more if you'll tell me what it means :)

    Glad you got it fixed.
    --
    SC Tom
     
  15. C

    C Flightless Bird

  16. relic

    relic Flightless Bird

    "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote in message
    news:hmohen$i3b$1@speranza.aioe.org...
    >
    > "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    > news:8OLjn.11114$pv.10099@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >> "SC Tom",
    >>
    >> all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.
    >>
    >> At least Trev has provided a workaround...
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > I'll promise not to whinge any more if you'll tell me what it means :)


    Keep this link:
    http://www.translatebritish.com/
     
  17. Dave

    Dave Flightless Bird

    "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    news:8OLjn.11114$pv.10099@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > "SC Tom",
    >
    > all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.
    >
    > At least Trev has provided a workaround...
    >
    >


    Mind sharing what the workaround is so all the people who tried to help you
    can benefit too?
    Thanks,
    Dave
    >
     
  18. SC Tom

    SC Tom Flightless Bird

    "Dave" <davidj92@wowway.com> wrote in message
    news:dN-dnd5iFctMPwzWnZ2dnUVZ_hidnZ2d@sigecom.net...
    >
    >
    > "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    > news:8OLjn.11114$pv.10099@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >> "SC Tom",
    >>
    >> all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.
    >>
    >> At least Trev has provided a workaround...
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Mind sharing what the workaround is so all the people who tried to help
    > you can benefit too?
    > Thanks,
    > Dave
    >>


    " Use the XP one then Right click the setup exe . Compatibility tab ,
    install
    in compatibility mode pick XP sp 3 "

    --
    SC Tom
     
  19. Dave

    Dave Flightless Bird

    "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote in message
    news:U4skn.24679$sx5.24056@newsfe16.iad...
    >
    > "Dave" <davidj92@wowway.com> wrote in message
    > news:dN-dnd5iFctMPwzWnZ2dnUVZ_hidnZ2d@sigecom.net...
    >>
    >>
    >> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >> news:8OLjn.11114$pv.10099@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>> "SC Tom",
    >>>
    >>> all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.
    >>>
    >>> At least Trev has provided a workaround...
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Mind sharing what the workaround is so all the people who tried to help
    >> you can benefit too?
    >> Thanks,
    >> Dave
    >>>

    >
    > " Use the XP one then Right click the setup exe . Compatibility tab ,
    > install
    > in compatibility mode pick XP sp 3 "
    >
    > --
    > SC Tom
    >
    >

    Thanks, I made a note of that. I have an HP printer I'm having trouble with
    but I managed to get HP to send me a disc with latest software and drivers.
    Hopefully when it gets here it will solve my printer problems.
    Dave
     
  20. SC Tom

    SC Tom Flightless Bird

    "Dave" <davidj92@wowway.com> wrote in message
    news:x8-dnRYHmM1y3A7WnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@sigecom.net...
    >
    >
    > "SC Tom" <sc@tom.net> wrote in message
    > news:U4skn.24679$sx5.24056@newsfe16.iad...
    >>
    >> "Dave" <davidj92@wowway.com> wrote in message
    >> news:dN-dnd5iFctMPwzWnZ2dnUVZ_hidnZ2d@sigecom.net...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Win7" <Win7@theinternet.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:8OLjn.11114$pv.10099@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >>>> "SC Tom",
    >>>>
    >>>> all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.
    >>>>
    >>>> At least Trev has provided a workaround...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Mind sharing what the workaround is so all the people who tried to help
    >>> you can benefit too?
    >>> Thanks,
    >>> Dave
    >>>>

    >>
    >> " Use the XP one then Right click the setup exe . Compatibility tab ,
    >> install
    >> in compatibility mode pick XP sp 3 "
    >>
    >> --
    >> SC Tom
    >>
    >>

    > Thanks, I made a note of that. I have an HP printer I'm having trouble
    > with but I managed to get HP to send me a disc with latest software and
    > drivers. Hopefully when it gets here it will solve my printer problems.
    > Dave


    Are the drivers on the disc going to be different than the downloadable
    ones?
    --
    SC Tom
     

Share This Page