HP LaserJet 3380 driver only works at low resolution

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.

"Win7" <> wrote in message
news:iY5in.10153$...
> 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

"Win7" <> wrote in message
news:iY5in.10153$...
> 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

SC Tom wrote:
> "Win7" <> wrote in message
> news:iY5in.10153$...
>> 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.

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <> wrote:


> "Win7" <> wrote in message
> news:iY5in.10153$...
> > 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

On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <> wrote:
>
>
>> "Win7" <> wrote in message
>> news:iY5in.10153$...
>> > 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.
>

"paul_36" <> wrote in message
news:hmem86$c7v$...
> On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "Win7" <> wrote in message
>>> news:iY5in.10153$...
>>> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works
>>> > at
>>> > 600dpi resolution
>>> >
>>> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed
>>> > the
>>> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
>>> >
>>> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say
>>> > MS
>>> > has already provided one.
>>>
>>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so
>>> why
>>> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
>>
>>
>> Exactly right!
>>
>>
>>> > Please fix this MS.
>>>
>>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.
>
> Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
> 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.

On 2010-02-28, SC Tom <> wrote:
>
> "paul_36" <> wrote in message
> news:hmem86$c7v$...
>> On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Win7" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:iY5in.10153$...
>>>> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only works
>>>> > at
>>>> > 600dpi resolution
>>>> >
>>>> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which allowed
>>>> > the
>>>> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
>>>> >
>>>> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they say
>>>> > MS
>>>> > has already provided one.
>>>>
>>>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works, so
>>>> why
>>>> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly right!
>>>
>>>
>>>> > Please fix this MS.
>>>>
>>>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.
>>
>> Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
>> 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?

"paul_36" <> wrote in message
news:hmf94j$lfu$...
> On 2010-02-28, SC Tom <> wrote:
>>
>> "paul_36" <> wrote in message
>> news:hmem86$c7v$...
>>> On 2010-02-28, Ken Blake, MVP <> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:48:53 -0500, "SC Tom" <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Win7" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:iY5in.10153$...
>>>>> > The driver that Windows7 downloads for the HP LaserJet 3380 only
>>>>> > works
>>>>> > at
>>>>> > 600dpi resolution
>>>>> >
>>>>> > - compare this to the driver HP provided for Windows XP which
>>>>> > allowed
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > printer to work at 1200dpi.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > HP will not provide a Windows7 driver for the LJ 3380 because they
>>>>> > say
>>>>> > MS
>>>>> > has already provided one.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is HP's way of saying that Win7 has a generic driver that works,
>>>>> so
>>>>> why
>>>>> should we be bothered to write one for a 5+ year old printer?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly right!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> > Please fix this MS.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not Microsoft's problem; it's HP's.
>>>
>>> Then why the "warning" that a driver hasn't been signed? by m$?
>>> 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.

"SC Tom",

all you've done is whinge and provide excuses.

At least Trev has provided a workaround...