Strange behaviour of networked printers

[ChrisGreaves]

(Strange to me)
(Also, I'm not sure whether this should be in "Hardware" or "Networking")

I spent part of last week installing the HP2600N color laser on the networked laptop, then cloning ("Add printer") several copies for 2-up, 4-up, 6-up and 9-up printing.

This morning I started to clear up the mess on the (networked) Big Beige Box, which is supposed to be the print server.

I started off by deleting the two (!) copies of the HP2600N on the Big Beige Box.
As I deleted the second copy, Windows announced that since the default printer had been deleted, it was establishing the (laptop!) 9-up printer as the default.
Great! I've got rid of 2 printers and been saddled with a 3rd I didn't want.
Delete that one!
"OK", sez Win XP, "since the (new) default 9-up has been deleted, I'm making the (laptop!) 6-up the default."
Delete that one!
Then I thought to check the laptop, in case I was unwittingly deleting printers from there by (default) remote control.
Nope.

I am puzzled that Win XP decides to make a networked printer the default, when the Big Beige Box has other printers installed, to wit a Citizen 180D dot-matrix and a generic text printer.

I am greatly relieved that when I tell Win XP to delete a networked printer, it deletes only the reference to it - the shortcut link if you will - rather than the original item.

My plan today is to re-install the HP2600N on the Big Beige Box where it is supposed to be, and then to delete the copies on the laptop anyway.

[HansV]

Perhaps Windows simply makes the next (or previous?) printer in the list the default, without taking into account whether it's a local or network printer?

[ChrisGreaves]

Perhaps Windows simply makes the next ...?

Yes, Hans.
Obviously there has to be an algorithm that decides where to settle. I'm puzzled that it should settle on a printer-across-the-network.
It boils down to how one thinks of the user, I suppose.
My thinking is that when a user is deleting a printer, it's because of "problems somewhere", and that seems to call for a fall-back to a safe and secure local device.

[JoeP]

But, who's to say a locally attached device is safe, secure, & functional? In today's computing world that a locally attached device no more reliable than a network attached device.

Joe

[DaveA]

BUT, when deleting a printer, cannot one see that they are deleting their default printer?
Therefore one should just change the default to the one, one wants, or not get upset because some other printer was chosen.

[ChrisGreaves]

But, who's to say a locally attached device is safe, secure, & functional? In today's computing world that a locally attached device no more reliable than a network attached device.Joe

Good point, especially in a large organization. I should trust the boys-in-the-basement over the guy-in-the-next-cubicle.

[ChrisGreaves]

BUT, when deleting a printer, cannot one see that they are deleting their default printer?

NOT when one has already all their years ago!
Yup.
It was a hasty decision, me thinking "let's just get rid of all these cloned printers (del, yes, del, yes, del, yes...)
It was a surprise to me to see Phoenix-like new printers popping up like dandelions; it certainly got my attention.