I read through most postings on the writelog reflector daily and I
understand how not everyone would be happy with the way WriteLog supports
the LPT ports, especially on Windows XP. But I have not chosen to invest
any time changing WL to address those particular requests, even though it
is possible.
There IS a solution that works well on Windows XP, but its $29.00:
http://www.direct-io.com. The freeware UserPort described at
http://www.writelog.com/support.htm is not reliable in the sense that it
doesn't appear to work on all possible XP systems, but, on the other hand,
I have yet to hear of anyone installing direct-io and failing to make it
work with WriteLog. I have updated the WriteLog support web page to
reflect this information.
Its OK, of course, to request that WriteLog do what direct-io does
(reliably support LPT output on Windows XP),and its OK to request that
WriteLog do that at no extra charge. But its also OK for me to decline,
which I do. Why would I do something stupid like decline to do what
customers obviously demand? It comes down the fact that I don't have time
to accomplish everything that everyone in my life would like for me to do,
and I am willing to accept the lost customers for whom $29.00 is
unreasonable. I do recognize that lack of information has caused some
customers to lose something probably even more valuable--their
time--trying to make LPT ports work. I have updated the web page hoping
that need not be repeated.
Wayne, W5XD
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
|