If Vista is made backwards compatible with all older hardware and software,
we might as well call it Windows 3.1 and be satisfied with the speed that it
manages to reach ie snail pace. At some point, one must move forward. What
was so wrong with your old PC that you required a new one? Did you perhaps
consider repairing or upgrading it before you purchased the new one? As far
as I'm aware, no one is forcing you to change to a new PC with Vista.
If you want to run at a high speed with today (and tomorrow's) technology,
you must accept that some old hardware and software will NOT be compatible
with it. If you want to keep this old hardware, then use your older PC.
And it's not when you purchased the printer, it's the date when the printer
was first manufactured. Lexmark are going back to 2003 with their Vista
drivers. Far enough to cover most printers still in service (according to
their records and research). It may have been a popular low end printer,
but apparently most of them are no longer working.
--
Cari (MS-MVP)
Windows Technologies - Printing & Imaging
http://www.coribright.com/windows
"Greg" <noway> wrote in message
news:%230E3iwoaHHA.2172@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> My Z25 is not a ten year old printer. It was manufactured in February 2003
> and I bought it sometime that year. It is four years old. The Z25 was a
> popular low end printer.
>
> Besides, my point is that regardless of whether a manufacturer of a
> printer decides to write Vista drivers for it, Microsoft should write
> their new operating system so that it can use the drivers of the old
> operating system. Is that too much to ask? Why on earth can't such a
> 'so-vista-cated' program use the drivers employed by its less
> sophisticated previous incarnation? Why should we have to buy new
> printers?
>