imageCLASS Drivers ARM Compatibility

[dexman335]

With the upcoming release of Windows computers that are powered by new ARM chips/processors, the compatibility of drivers for imageCLASS and other Canon products comes to mind.

Some of these new computers look interesting, but if the Canon drivers won't work with these newer computers, then that is problematic.

So, I'll ask the $50k question. Are the drivers compatible? If not, will new drivers be introduced shortly to make the transition from x86 to ARM as seamless as possible? 🤔
If new drivers are required, how far back in the Canon office printer line will Canon go with rolling out the new drivers? 🤔

[shadowsports]

Good morning,

Microsoft has been making ARM based Surface laptops for years.  I'm not sure what the answer is, but for the time being I advise others not to invest in this technology since both hardware and software compatibility issues exist.  

[dexman335]

Morning Rick!

That was what I thought the suggestion was going to be. I'm a Microsoft Surface user. Their newest consumer facing units (Surface Pro 11 and Surface Laptop 6) are ARM powered, while the business facing versions use familiar Intel processors.

My Surface Laptop 1 will be due for a replacement (works well but is stuck with Windows 10 unless I hack the registry).

Looks like I'll be trying to order from the business lineup. 😐

Paul

[shadowsports · Accepted solution]

Hi Paul,

ARM based printer support is still limited at this time.  Even this doc is probably slightly out of date.

Canon Knowledge Base - PIXMA / MAXIFY Products: Windows 10 / Windows 11 on ARM-Based Computers  

[dexman335]

Hi Rick,

Hopefully printer manufacturers will begin releasing firmware to accommodate upcoming Windows on Arm computers. 🙂

Paul

[mattbender]

I am testing Lenovo ThinkPad T14s G6 Snapdragon laptops in a business environment with Canon ImageRunner Copiers.  So far everything works fine expect Canon drivers.  I repeat - EVERYTHING other than Canon drivers works fine with ARM64 CPU architecture.  I have found a basic work-around of manually installing using the built-in Microsoft PCL6 ARM64 driver, but that only provides basic print functionality and doesn't play nice with a corporate print server setup or GPO deployment.  It is fine for our testing, but I wouldn't want to deploy this to mainstream users.  

I hope Canon addresses this, if not we may need to re-evaluate our copier vendor.  I haven't followed up with my sales rep or support contacts on this topic yet, but will be checking to see if ARM drivers are on their development roadmap - hope so.

I was using a new Intel based ThinkPad X1 Carbon previously.  I personally am way happier with the Snapdragon ARM based ThinkPad.  Boot times, battery life, heat levels/fan noise, responsiveness/productivity.  This isn't a hardware forum, but just basic feedback for anyone considering.

[TechMeister]

I just finished installing a Surface Pro 11 with an ARM processor. Like another comment said, I got ALL of our business apps and devices to work on ARM - except our Canon copiers. Surface laptops with ARM have now been out for 3-4 years, and Canon doesn't even have a basic/generic driver for their business devices that supports ARM64? That's unacceptable, actually. We took a chance on the Surface hoping everything would work - and it almost did. Not only is Microsoft putting these CPUs in more and more new systems, now Dell and other OEMs are following suit. This issue is about to become MUCH more widespread. So, it's past time for Canon to add ARM support. I may see if we can still return the Surface for a refund. But l'm also contacting our leased copier/printer vendor to see if all of our Canon devices can be picked up and replaced with another make that offers ARM64 support - if any major brand does.

[dexman335]

I'm not familiar with what is required to add ARM compatibility to auxiliary devices such as printers, but, I'm wondering if such manufacturers are going to need to do a complete overhaul of their devices to accommodate Windows on ARM? 🤔

Would it possibly come down to manufacturers having to offer new SKUs for devices optimized for Windows on ARM while also selling duplicates that interact with Intel & other legacy processors? 🤔 

If anything, Canon would likely first roll out changes first to the imageRUNNER platform (given the nature of the product line) and then move to update the imageCLASS and other consumer-facing product lines. 😐

[DarrenDa]

Going to be a little more blunt - I have been using Surface Pro Arm devices as a primary device for almost 4 years now. The speed, battery life, and connectivity (first LTE now 5G) has been phenomenal. I almost always win the "how long does the device last on battery" game whether it is Teams meetings or just getting work done.

Except when it comes to using my Canon ImageClass devices. I finally gave in an purchased a more current ImageClass model (I was completely out of toner, so the extra cost was not as bad) to enable the inbox IPP driver to at least allow basic print functionality from Arm devices.

I don't want to sound inappropriate or impolite - but this is definitely the last time I will consider a Canon solution unless Arm support improves. I would rather look to other printing solutions then continue to lose out on the benefits of Windows Arm performance and battery life.

[iieeann]

Just bought a Surface Pro 11 weeks ago.  Everything i need for my work is working, except for the Canon imagerunner copier.  Since no Arm64 driver is available, I have to use the Microsoft PCL6 driver.  One of the most important features i need is duplex printing, but the Microsoft PCL6 driver simply cannot detect the duplex function.  An ARM 64 driver from Canon is needed.

I always read in this forum a standard reply from Canon to refer to the dealer since imagerunner is not directly supported.  I don't understand if the Canon personnel really knew what he was talking about.  How the heck can a dealer make the driver, that can only be done by the manufacturer and noone else.  I strongly believe the reason behind why no action from Canon was because our request did not reach the technical team.  The moderator here just copy paste the standard answer to refer to the dealer and yay his job is done.