Question:

We recently transitioned from UNIflow to Printix due to the age of our equipment and the government’s procurement process. With an upcoming building remodel, we aim to offer printing services to other organizations housed in our facility. Initially, it seemed feasible with guest users, but we’ve encountered an issue that seems unsolvable. Before conceding to management, I’m seeking a final solution.

The crux of the problem is that some guest organizations already use Printix, and their clients are configured for their systems, not ours. They’ve reported successful printing at another host organization, which I discovered shares a Printix supplier and tenant with them, unlike our distinct supplier and tenant.

Is there a workaround for this issue? We’d prefer a Mail2Print feature, but Printix lacks this functionality, unlike UNIflow. If anyone has insights into achieving our goal through alternative means, I’d appreciate it. The system’s implementation has been challenging, and this issue has only recently emerged. Our tender required multi-tenant capabilities, and while we can add non-Printix users, we’re committed to Printix for the next few years.

Answer:

Transitioning to a new printing management system can be a complex process, especially for government entities with specific procurement protocols. The shift from UNIflow to Printix, prompted by the need to update aging equipment, is a case in point. The goal was straightforward: to provide seamless printing services to various organizations within a newly remodeled government building. However, the reality proved to be more challenging than anticipated.

The primary obstacle emerged when attempting to integrate guest organizations that already employed Printix within their operations. Their Printix clients were tailored to their existing systems, which led to compatibility issues with the host organization’s setup. This predicament was further complicated by the discovery that successful printing at another host organization was possible because they shared the same Printix supplier and tenant, a luxury not afforded in this scenario.

The question at hand is whether there is a feasible workaround to this multi-tenant printing conundrum. Ideally, a Mail2Print feature would resolve the issue, but this is not supported by Printix, unlike its predecessor, UNIflow. This leaves the organization in a bind, seeking alternative solutions to fulfill their multi-tenant printing needs.

One potential solution could involve establishing a separate guest network specifically for printing purposes. This network would allow guest organizations to connect to printers without interfering with their existing Printix configurations. Another approach might be to explore third-party software solutions that can bridge the gap between different Printix tenants, allowing for a unified printing experience.

It’s crucial to engage with Printix support and other user communities to share experiences and solutions. There may be others who have faced similar challenges and found innovative ways to overcome them. Additionally, reaching out to the supplier for insights and potential updates to the Printix system that could accommodate such multi-tenant scenarios might prove beneficial.

In conclusion, while the transition to Printix has introduced unforeseen challenges, it is not an insurmountable task. With a combination of creative problem-solving, collaboration with the supplier, and leveraging the collective knowledge of the Printix community, a solution that satisfies the multi-tenant printing requirements of the government building remodel is within reach. The commitment to Printix for the coming years necessitates a proactive approach to ensure that all organizations within the facility can access reliable and efficient printing services.