FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 day agoToo reallemmy.worldimagemessage-square72fedilinkarrow-up1786arrow-down19file-text
arrow-up1777arrow-down1imageToo reallemmy.worldFoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 day agomessage-square72fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareJcbAzPx@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·8 hours agoPrinter companies keep them bad on purpose so you’ll buy new printers hoping they fixed it (or at the high end pay for their maintenance contract).
minus-squareHonytawk@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-23 minutes agoNo, it is just really difficult to go from digital yo analog. In analoge, it doesn’t matter if something is misaligned by a milimeter. The tollerance is pretty big. But digital is always exact. It doesn’t have the leeway to go off the exact path. So if something is misaligned even slightly, the mismatch grows exponentially. And that is when the conversion from digital to analog breaks down. Meaning, printers will always suffer until we can make analog as exact as digital, which is a very big ask we are currently unable to reach.
Printer companies keep them bad on purpose so you’ll buy new printers hoping they fixed it (or at the high end pay for their maintenance contract).
No, it is just really difficult to go from digital yo analog.
In analoge, it doesn’t matter if something is misaligned by a milimeter. The tollerance is pretty big.
But digital is always exact. It doesn’t have the leeway to go off the exact path.
So if something is misaligned even slightly, the mismatch grows exponentially. And that is when the conversion from digital to analog breaks down.
Meaning, printers will always suffer until we can make analog as exact as digital, which is a very big ask we are currently unable to reach.