How can I install my old hp scanjet 2400 driver

That last Canon driver for that model was for 10.8. The scanner is no longer supported. You'll have to use a 3rd party app like VueScan in order to use the scanner with El Capitan.

You can try VueScan in demo mode to see how it works and if you like it. There are two versions, a 32bit and 64bit. My older Canon scanner requires the 32bit version to work so if the 64bit version doesn't work try the other one.

Most probably the scannerdriver is a separate driver, for example for Canon the drivers normally are printer only (and they are in OSX already like HP), the scanner drivers must be downloaded (or from the CD that came with it) separately and must run always (happens automatically) when installed.

Tell me if you find it.

oleg1990 wrote:

I have not find any driver for my old HP scanjet 2400 driver. Help, please.

HP hasn't supported your scanner on OSX since 10.8. You might be able to get it working by installing OSX 10.8 as a virtual machine in Parallels Desktop or VMWare Fusion or VirtualBox and install the software and driver in the guest.

Hi dial, the old driver even if not supported should run correctly, even when not supported, I guess...?

I have a lot of old, no longer supported, drivers that still work, but maybe there are also old drivers that don't and I do not notice because the equipment is no longer there. With Canon: I have two multifuncions for the time of the Celts, the drivers are no longer supported, but they still work, even the scanners inside...

Try downloading VueScan. It supports your scanner. https://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/hp_scanjet_2400c.html

PS you can't install 10.8 in a virtual machine unless the host OS is also 10.8. Running a 10.8 virtual machine under a different OS X version isn't allowed under the terms of the SLA.

Király wrote:

PS you can't install 10.8 in a virtual machine unless the host OS is also 10.8. Running a 10.8 virtual machine under a different OS X version isn't allowed under the terms of the SLA.

FWIW, the SLAs for most versions of OSX state you can run up to two copies of the currently running version of OSX in a virtual environment. I'm not a lawyer but that doesn't seem to address running earlier versions of OSX in a virtual environment. I believe the SLA for Snow Leopard only allows running the server version in a virtual environment.

It would seem to me that Parallels and VMWare would have to check to make sure you are only installing the current version of OSX you are running as a guest if it violated Apple's SLA without getting into hot water with Apple. They don't of course. Neither allows installing Snow Leopard other than the server version.

I suppose the only way to know for sure is to check with Apple's legal department.

You can run up to two copies of the currently running version of OS X in a virtual environment only on a Mac that is running the same OS X version. The term "the Apple software" is defined in the license as:

1. General.

A. The Apple software (including Boot ROM code), any third party software, documentation,

interfaces, content, fonts and any data accompanying this License whether preinstalled on

Apple-branded hardware, on disk, in read only memory, on any other media or in any other form (collectively the "Apple Software")

The part about virtual machines says:

iii) to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using OS X Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use.

A Mac running a different version of OS X isn't already running the Apple Software. It is running different Apple software covered by a different license agreement. If 10.8, for example was allowed to be installed in a virtual machine with any other OS X version as the host, the license would say this:

iii) to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using OS X Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use.

That part about "already running the Apple Software" is clearly in there.

The virtual machine companies don't block OS X installations to help Apple enforce end user license agreements. That's not the business they are in. Apple has always relied on the ethics and moral character of its end users to police themselves on SLA compliance. As for Snow Leopard client, its license terms actually do not prohibit installing it in a virtual machine on a Mac running 10.7. or later. The virtual machine companies block it for some other reason unrelated to the SLA, likely some separate licensing agreement they have with Apple.

To make it simple, what the SLA is saying in other words is, you can run up to two copies of OSX 10.8 on a machine that is already running OSX 10.8. That says nothing as I said about running anything earlier than 10.8. It doesn't address it at all. Apparently you decided to interpret the statement as saying you can only run a OSX 10.8 guest on a OSX 10.8 host. It doesn't say that at all.

And as I already stated, both companies do in fact preclude people from installing OSX 10.6.8 because it would violate the OSX 10.6.8 SLA. So apparently it is their business.

Lexiepex wrote:

You can not run higher OSX than what you have in your main partition, you can run lower, but the OSX must NOT be older than the one it was originally sold with.

Lex, I am running El Capitan on three of my Macs. Thank you for letting me know I can't run anything higher than 10.11 on them. The reason you can't install a lower version of OSX than what a machine was sold with, is because there's a very good chance it won't support the hardware you bought.

None of which has anything to do with license agreements.

dialabrain wrote:

To make it simple, what the SLA is saying in other words is, you can run up to two copies of OSX 10.8 on a machine that is already running OSX 10.8. That says nothing as I said about running anything earlier than 10.8. It doesn't address it at all.

You need to look in the terms of the license of the OS you want to run in the virtual machine, not in the license terms of the host OS. From 10.7 to 10.11, the Apple Software can only be run in a virtual machine on a Mac that is already running the Apple Software. Note that "the Apple Software" is defined as the OS and all of its component parts that accompany that license; it doesn't mean any and all software that Apple has ever or will ever release. A Mac running 10.11 isn't already running the Apple Software that the 10.8 license requires, in order to run 10.8 in a virtual machine on it.

And as I already stated, both companies do in fact preclude people from installing OSX 10.6.8 because it would violate the OSX 10.6.8 SLA. So apparently it is their business.

Installing 10.6.8 in a virtual machine does not violate its SLA. That's an urban legend. The VM companies block it for some other reason, most likely some separate licensing agreement they have with Apple.

As this is three times now I've tried to explain…

the Apple Software can only be run in a virtual machine on a Mac that is already running the Apple Software

The word only does not appear anywhere in the section on virtual machines. What appears is you can run up to two VMs of the version of OSX the host is running. If you can find the word "only" in that paragraph, please screenshot" it.

Installing 10.6.8 in a virtual machine does not violate its SLA. That's an urban legend. The VM companies block it for some other reason, most likely some separate licensing agreement they have with Apple.

It has nothing to do with "urban legend". It has to do with the fact there is verbiage in the Snow Leopard SLA that states you can only make one copy for backup purposes and there is no mention of virtual machines at all. Apple never changed the SLA so virtualization developers won't take a chance on being sued. I didn't mention it but VirtualBox also does not include a template for a Snow Leopard client. You can however create a Snow Leopard Server in all three. If you can come up with an explanation other than the obvious one be my guest. Just to add, I am intimately involved with one of the three.

Ciao.

dialabrain wrote:

The word only does not appear anywhere in the section on virtual machines. What appears is you can run up to two VMs of the version of OSX the host is running. If you can find the word "only" in that paragraph, please screenshot" it.

Straw man argument. The language is there. The terms under which you can run the Apple Software in a virtual machine require the host Mac to be already running the Apple Software. If it's running some other Apple software, then it's not running the Apple Software as defined by the terms of the license.

It has nothing to do with "urban legend". It has to do with the fact there is verbiage in the Snow Leopard SLA that states you can only make one copy for backup purposes and there is no mention of virtual machines at all. Apple never changed the SLA so virtualization developers won't take a chance on being sued. I didn't mention it but VirtualBox also does not include a template for a Snow Leopard client. You can however create a Snow Leopard Server in all three. If you can come up with an explanation other than the obvious one be my guest. Just to add, I am intimately involved with one of the three.

The 10.6.8 SLA allows you to run one copy of Snow Leopard on an Apple-branded computer. Running 10.6.8 in a virtual machine on a Mac that is running some different OS X version as the host satisfies that requirement. The SLA does not say it has to be directly running. The distinction between running directly and running within a virtual machine didn't begin until the 10.7 SLA.

Apple does not force the hand of third parties to help them enforce end user license agreements. That has always been between Apple and the end user. It seems that Apple did not want people running 10.6 client in virtual machines, but since the 10.6 SLA does not prohibit it, forcing the VM companies to block it is how Apple could effectively achieve that same result.

People have used the fact that the virtual machine companies block non-server 10.6 virtual machines to advance the idea that the 10.6 SLA prohibits it. But that's an incorrect assumption. There is some other reason, some reason that has never been made public, in some licensing agreement that we the end users are not party to and are not bound by.

You might be able to find a driver here.

Gimp - Print

HPIJS for Mac OS X

PrintFab

You can download the drivers and software here:

http://h20564.www2.hp.com/hpsc/swd/public/readIndex?sp4ts.oid=297430

instal the drivers according to the instructions on the site.