Strange support politics of FreeEdition

[avs]

Hello!

It is not a secret that TurboPrint is a cool software (I understood it when saw it for the first time)! And it is a great idea to make a FreeEdition version of it for personal uses.
But what really annoys me is that for some printers TurboPrint anyway adds its logo to printed pages in all resolutions (obtained there).
I don't ask you to remove this restriction (but, of course, it might be a good step forward). I'd just like to ask you: why did you choose those models of printers not to make them free of the banners? Why namely them?

I won't go so far: I tell you a real case. I have a cool Canon i250 (it is one of the cheapest models; its cartridges are economic enough; it is good for student's purposes!). But to remove TurboPrint's banner on the printed pages I have to pay about $40 for the license. But cost of this printer here is about $50 -- do you feel the ratio? It means for me: it is easy to collect some money and buy another new one which is fully supported by *free* drivers in Linux. Why not to make for such printers an exception in the FreeEdition?

I don't expect an answer, but if you react in any way to this message, it'll be good!

Thank you for your attention.

P.S. sorry, English isn't my mother tongue.

[zedonet]

Hello,

thank you for your feedback!

The development of the drivers you named was more effort than for any other Canon drivers, so we decided to release those drivers only in the commercial version. This may be handled differently in future TurboPrint releases.

[william]

I am not clear about the free version: is the free version just for the purposes of a thirty day trial or is there a free version for home and personal use?

If the free version is for home and personal use does it have full functionality?

I am currently running the thirty day trial and find it most useful.

[zedonet]

Hello,

it is a thirty day trial version.

(a limited version of the older TurboPrint 1.x was available for home and personal use)