Slashdot Mirror
A Buyer's Guide to Inkjet Printers
An anonymous reader writes "CoolTechZone.com has posted a good writeup on how to select an inkjet printer without falling prey to many of the common marketing gimmicks."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
how to select an inkjet printer without falling prey to many of the common marketing gimmick
The first of which is that you should buy an inkjet printer in the first place.
And so the point of actually reading this guide was ... ?
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Ads by google-
11X17 Laser Printer (link)
Printer Cartridges - Save (link)
Photo Printers Reviewed (link)
Photo inkjet printers (link)
It could be worse, it could be Monday.
You shouldn't. Not unless you want to print your photos out, but even then it's probably cheaper to sign up with some place online.
Inkjet printers are a scam, played on a public that doesn't know any better.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I can't get the article, but from experience I know:
Find a supplier of ink before you buy the printer.
(Ink that works and is cheap.)
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
The biggest curse with inkjet/bubblejet printers is that when you want one, they all but give the thing to you, but then charge you 50+ for an ink refill which will run out within a few hundred pages (or less). The companies really pretty much stay in business based on the ink sales.
Buying a "cheap" laser printer is actually much more cost effective. You save a lot more in the long run if you don't mind printing only in B&W. 5000+ pages per toner at about $100 for the toner is a much better deal than $50 for the ink which will likely last you only around 100 pages give or take.
Here's the issue with small-profile 'good writeups': As soon as they appear in Slashdot, they vanish from the face of this Earth. Even the mirrors to /. do not appear to work, so what's the point. News that matter, but where's the news?
My Linux - (L)ove (I)s (N)ever (U)tterly eXPensive
How to select an inkjet printer where the cartridges are not more expensive then the printer itself!
10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then
This is the site that last week, had an op-ed up arguing that "loving" Microsoft is OK, and Linux is just the product of some nefarious cabal of hypesters and PR men. Yeah, uh, I don't see me caring about this review of inkjet printers either. One of the things that matters to me is whether I can print to it in Linux, which I kind of doubt they'll be able to handle.
--Matthew
Buy a used or re-conditioned HP Laserjet 4* or 5.
Work it like a rented mule and pass it on to your grandkids.
Don't! Color laser printer are getting cheaper as we speak, and the cost/page is much smaller.
People are conned into thinking that they are cheap because the initial outlay is low, and then they realise later that they will keep paying for it. Maybe for very low volume printing they are good (except that if you use them infrequently the ink in the heads dries up and you have to replace both the print-head and the ink), but for everything else they are a very expensive way of transferring data to paper.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
There are only very few situations where I would consider an Ink-Jet-Prineter:
1. mobile printing
2. ???
Well there seems to be only one situation. Everyone else shoud either buy a laserprinter or go to some printing-service. If you print only a few pages per month it will be cheaper to have them printed instead of buying new cartriges every time you want to print.
Even color-laserprinters are dirtcheap these days.
It is not possible to use technology to solve social problems
Somehow, cooltechzone managed to stay up throughout the "Is it wrong to love Microsoft?" article, but they can't handle the traffic generated by their inkjet printer buyer's guide. Maybe people are RTFA this time.
how to select an inkjet printer without falling prey to many of the common marketing gimmicks.
Buy a color laser printer. Here is why:
Many prints for low cost (mine was ~US$400 and has 7k page black toner and 5k page color toner for each of C, Y, and M).
If all you want is a printer (i.e., not multi-function do everything device). Laser is the best way to go. I bought my Samsung CLP-550N from NewEgg (I am not affiliated with either Samsung or NewEgg) and have been exceptionally happy. There were cheaper versions, but here is why I got the one I did:
Seriously, just the built in duplexer and laser alone would be a deal at US$400. The builtin ethernet and extra CPU and RAM were basically a bonus. Not only that, but the quality is better than that of other inkjets I have seen.
THe only down side: you need to purchase special laser quality photopaper. Inkjet photo paper can melt when it hits the the 180 degrees C drum (or so I am told).
There are now many ink jet printers on the market that cost $49, which is cheaper than the ink replacement cost.
One way to stick it the manufacturers would be to throw away the printer after it runs out of ink, and buy a new one. This would wreck their business model, since they typically sell the printers at a loss.
I bet if enough people started doing this, the manufacturers would relent on ink cartridge prices.
My SOP for buying a printer is to just go to www.linuxprinting.org and see what is fully supported and then check local stores to see if any of them are carried.
For me, a major inkjet selection criterion is a printer's ability to be adapted to use continuous inking (without major hacking/drilling/etc.). Screw the printer manufacturers and their stupid ink-based business model.
- ink-system-review.html
Linky linky:
http://www.nomorecarts.com/
http://www.brandonstaggs.com/epson-r200-continous
http://www.atlascopy.com/cfs/
We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
- IJPs is an anagram for "jips"!
- If you're like me and only want to print out "The Onion", in color, once a week: by the time the next week rolls around, the inkjet heads have clogged. You waste a sheet or two of expensive paper in finding this out again for the galumpty-umph time.
- If you use the "control panel" to clean the heads you have to put up with 5 minutes of Grandpa-getting-out-of-a-Miata-type groaning coming from the printer. And it wastes a whole boatload of ink in the process.
- If you instead take the printhead to the sink and give it a Sitz bath, you get your fingertips all colored in the process, as you forgot how indelible the ink is.
- Some of the HP IJPs require a 59MB download to install one 37k driver. And 39MB of slow, clunky, and unreliable "Print management" admin software doodads. Which do not want to uninstall themselves.
- The HP installer hasnt heard of virtual LPT ports-- it bombs out if you don't have a real, live, 378h hardware LPT port, even if you wanted to use a USB virtual port.
- Don't buy even slightly past their expiration data ink cartridges-- I thought I was a real winner buying a bunch of HP ones for $1 each cause they were a bit expired. The red ink had magically turned into dark brown, like overnight. Not good if you're printing skin, er, I mean job-related bar-graphs.
- Don't buy one of those refilling kits, just don't.
Instead scarf up some lightly used color laser printer at some local auction. You won't regret it. Oh wait, you will if it needs a new photoconductor belt, $350.Do Not ask me how I learned these things.
A couple years back I bought an HP all in one deal for about $300.00 and paid an additional $50.00 for the extended warranty through CompUSA.
Well, after about a year and a half, it starts messing up.
So I have it run down to the store and they give me a brand new one for free and sold me Yet Another Extended Warranty for $50.00.
So for an inital deposit of $350.00 and $50.00 installments every year or so, you get a free laser printer replacement.
Not bad if you ask me.
I print out about 50 pages/yr.
I want colour.
I want a printer at home.
At $1/page, it's still cheaper to buy an inkjet then a laser printer.
If it isn't rated for industrial use, don't buy it.
.jpg files and display them on the TV. Even if the person hasn't got a DVD player, you should be able to connect your DVD player to your VCR with a simple SCART to SCART cable. Just running out of screen space? Increase your number of virtual desktops.
If it's rated for industrial use, but it either doesn't have Linux drivers, or the Linux drivers aren't under an OSI-approved licence, don't buy it -- even if you don't want to use it with Linux today.
If the Linux drivers for your industrially-rated printer were written by a third party, it might be worth buying -- after all, it's a good sign that somebody actually thought it was worth bothering to support.
Bear in mind that you have already managed up to now without an inkjet printer. Investigate all alternatives fully before you buy one. Can you e-mail your files, or host them on some web space somewhere? If you want to show off some photos, try burning them onto a CD-R -- most DVD players will read CD-Rs of
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
--------
It's really no harder than that.
Buy a laser instead. IME lasers are hassle free and the toner lasts forever.
Contrast this with ink jet printers that clog if you don't use them every day, and that need new ink all the time.
If you want trouble, buy an ink jet. If you want printouts, buy a laser.
Installed the Bubblemon yet?
The best for linux are usually Epson or HP, which is ok because those are usually the best for Windows, too.
HP has GPL'd deamons to work with their printers and Epson generally supports Linux, too thru releasing PPD files and documentation and such.
Lexmark, Canon, and Brothers are usually worse then trash.
See
http://www.linuxprinting.org/suggested.html
Also check out specific models before you purchase them.. there are a odd few epson or HP printers that may not work or have full features for Linux.
I've owned my little black and white Okidata 10ex LED printer (basically a LASER printer) for more than 5 years and I've replaced the tonor cartridge a couple of times. By now the cost of this printer is a fraction of the cost of buying and maintaining an inkjet printer.
With budget Laser printers on the market these days, even if you have to pay twice the cost of an inkjet printer, for 99% of your printing needs the Laser is the far far better deal. You can get the Samsung 1710ML, for example, at less than $100 on some sales.
I do sometimes need color, and a color laser would be nice, although the colors from such a printer are not good enough for some applications such as photo printing. Photo printing is the one last domain of the ink jet, and probably always will be. But I do that so rarely that taking my photos to walmart to print is the best deal for me.
The question is, are you someone who prints off a page from Google Maps once/twice a month, and an occasional photo, or are you someone who prints off huge online novels to read later?
Sure, cost-per-page is much lower for a laser - *over the long haul*. Personally, I print less than 100 pages per year. I am lucky if I even go through one color ink cartridge before the ink inside just dries out from non-use.
I don't print enough that I would *ever* be able to recover the much higher initial investment of a laser printer. By the time my cost per page savings would recover the $350 more it would cost me (in say, 10 years), the printer would liekly not even work with the computer anymore.
My all-in-one HP inkjet / scanner / copiter cost only $69 CDN, and has HP supported Linux drivers. I have been using it now for 8 months, and the cartridges are both still 75% full. I am extremely satisfied with my purchase and doubt I would have had any better luck with another printer (although I wish I had splurged and gotten the one with the built in memory card reader, that would be handy).
HPs doodahs turn it brown overnight. Why do you think they need a 59MB doodah?!
200k for the driver, 10MB for currency detection/distortion, 40Mb for printer ink DRM algos to detect and degrade printouts using non HP ink.
Fixyourownprinter.com has downloadable technician manuals for just about every printer out there. If you ever have any trouble with your inkjet (ya think?), their manuals will be indispensable.
Found it on del.icio.us/popular a while back.
There is no way to purchase a good inkjet. They are slow, unreliable, and the ink is more expensive than gold on a /weight basis. If you do any amount (change cartridges every two months)of printing, a color laserjet is cheaper to own. The exception to this is if you need a multifunction device (fax/copier/printer) in which case a brother ethernet enabled multifunction device is available for $200.
This is to say, if you replace your ink cartridges on 1x/month basis - an inkjet is more expensive than a laserjet. I have several clients who change both the black and color cartridges on a monthly, or bi-monthly basis: $25/chartidges (bulk) x 2 x 6x/yr = $300/year for cartridges. This is the cost of a color laserjet.
Based on the duty cycle of the $100 high capacity cartridges in my Konica Minolta 2430DL, an inkjet cartridge with a capacity of 300-800 pages will cost between $830 and $300. (If we assume that black is 800 pages, and colour 300 pages, you are paying between twice and three times as much for ink)
Further, you get to escape the duties of changing the cartridges and making a mess on a (bi)monthly basis.
If you need a color copier, and a fax - then a multifunction inkjet makes sense. Otherwise, anyone who prints often should get a laserjet.
OH, almost forgot: Yes, Epson inkjets are wonderful for printing photos. However, if you are really serious about printing pictures - a color correction system (~$200) is required and can match your screen to any printer. And some (my)laserjet printers do have pictbridge so you can print directly from the camera. (Without proofing, why?)
In case you had as much trouble as I did:
When readying to buy a printer, you must first decide not only upon the kind of usage you will be putting it through but also on the type of usage.
Type of usage could be text, images or a combination of both. Now once you have identified your type of usage, as mentioned, the other factor is the volume.
Printers are differentiated on two broad technologies: Laser Printers and Inkjet Printers. As a thumb rule, Laser printers are generally much more expensive than Inkjet printers but have duty cycles of around 3-4000 pages per cartridge. Obviously, there are printers that have heavier duty cycles but they are accordingly priced.
Inkjet printers, on the other hand, are extremely cost effective to purchase. You can get one for as low as $50 but the catch is the cartridges. Compared to the cost of a printer, the cartridges are extremely expensive. In fact, if you replace three cartridges, you will probably be paying more than what you paid for the printer.
Now if you are on a tight budget but really want to buy a printer and don't expect your volume to be more than a couple of hundred pages per month (of text, less if you are into imaging) then we suggest you look at Inkjet Printers seriously.
Buying Guide: Inkjet Printers
Before you rush out to buy a printer, sit again and think about your kind of usage. If you want a lot of text but not much imaging or graphs, then any entry level printer will suffice, but if you want to print photographs from your digital camera or from the Internet, print company presentations then you should look at a higher-end printer.
Now for text printing you really don't need to worry about the other features, but there are some features which will come in handy if you care to look for them.
What to look for and Why?
The Interface: The first and foremost thing you should look at is how it will connect to your PC. It is preferable to have a USB interface and you should certainly insist upon a USB 2.0 based printer. The difference will be visible when you print large files, as they would take significantly longer to be transferred to your printer over a Parallel or USB 1.1 port as compared to USB 2.0.
Types of Cartridges: A good way to find out if a printer is really a photo printer or a normal color printer is to check for the number of cartridges it comes with. Regular color printers normally come with a black and a color cartridge whereas photo printers come with at least four cartridges (Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black and is thus called CMYK) and a maximum of six cartridges. The additional two cartridges are for Light Cyan and Light Magenta. Together these 4/6 cartridges try to give you all the varied colors and shades in your document.
The quality of picture is dependent on the size of the ink droplet that is measured in Pico litres; the smaller the droplet size, the more accurate the colour reproduction. Printers today come with droplets the size of one Pico litre. If you are into printing images and need to get highly accurate results, check for this property.
Paper Input Tray: The paper tray is important as it would get irritating if you have to keep topping it up after every 50 printouts. Go for a printer with a higher tray capacity, say somewhere around 150 to 200 pages at least.
Additional Tray: Some of the printers will let you add an extra tray and some already come with two trays. These are better than those with single trays for two reasons. One is obvious in terms of increased paper capacity but the 2nd reason is just as important. If you do printing on different kinds of paper (say you take rough drafts on cost-effective quality paper and the final drafts on high quality paper) then you can keep these two separately in the two trays and simply change the input tray in the settings. This will lead to increased efficiency and will cut the need to manually put in the superior paper every time.
Paper Output Tray: The concept is similar to the
Err, going to the printing service to print like 2 pages a month is pretty useless. It takes you at ~ an hour to go there and back, and they charge you several inktjet printers a year for that. Just have a inktjet printer sit on your desk is a lot more convenient and cheaper. And if you already print so little, just try to cut back even more, and the whole dilemma will be over.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
I have a Samsung ML-1430 laser printer that I use for 95% of my printing and a Canon I-860 inkjet that I use for the occasional color print or photo. Both were reasonably priced. The laser will print for nearly a year on one cartridge before it needs to be replaced, and the inkjet will print a ton of photos before running out of ink. What's the big deal?
For those who are saying that replacement inkjet carts are too expensive, my Canon brand carts cost me about $11 each. As Ben Stein would say, "Wow".
Inkjet printers are a scam, played on a public that doesn't know any better.
See, that's not always true. First, like you say, inkjets are much better for photos unless you drop $1000, and many people aren't willing to wait days for prints from an online place. Second, not all companies go for the expensive, tiny, DRM'd cartridges like Lexmark does. Third, many low-end lasers are complete pieces of crap. Fourth, many people want the convenience of a printer but won't ever print enough to make back the initial outlay of a laser.
If you do your research and get a good laserjet, they make financial sense. If you get the $29 job from Lexmark, and you print a lot, you will end up paying a lot for that printer.
I am seeing alot of comments on how inkjet printers "suck", and that laser is the way to go. Well I am sorry, this is not always the case. Sometimes people need quality, and by quality I mean something a laser printer are incapable of providing. I have yet to see a laser printer that can provide the quality of say... even an Epson stylus 2200. I mean sure, if all you're doing is printing 72 dpi webpages, by all means get a cheap laser printer. But don't snuff off inkjet because you're not taking advantage of it's true worth: print quality. Now as far as inkjet printers go, I am a huge fan of the 4000 7600 9600 stylus lines (they have recently upgraded these using another tone of gray, but I haven't used them yet). Throw in a good RIP, like Colorbyte's Imageprint and you have some absolutely stunning prints. Now of course these printers are... considerably more expensive than what most folks are willing to spend on a printer, but they are out there and they print beautifully. So ya, high end? Epson definitely.
As a student I'm allowed to write exams on my own equipment. So I use a laptop and for the moment the cheepest printer from HP. This works fine, though I only use the printer for exams. At home I got a nice HP LaserJet.
I don't mind spending some money on a more handy printer - sort of laptop size if possible. The HP one is annoying to transport.
Does the slashdot crowd have any suggestions for a good travel printer?
Right on... I got the 1710ML for under $100 and have been happy with it so far. However, it's kind of a laser printer with the inkjet business model -- it comes with a "starter" toner that is only good for 1500 pages or so, then you get to buy expensive toner cartridges that are good for 3000-5000 pages (I think). The 1710 replaced my old NEC consumer laser printer (don't remember the part number) on which the paper handling system gave out before I ever had to replace the toner. That lasted about 5 years, including a lot of printing while I was working on my Master's thesis.
It's the same author who, a couple of days ago, wrote the Microsoft butt kissing, ass licking blog entry.
My old DeskJet 9xxc was junk, complete crap...my new DeskJet 6220 All-in-one is great. Seems to be much easier on the ink, paper feeding problems are gone, color copies are very very quick, networking built in, you can find them for $200...only downside is the *huge* software install, over 70M for the "minimal" config, don't bother with the all the extraneous stuff.
One thing I learned with the old printer: never, ever will I use parallel printing with Windows again. That was horrible...USB or the net all the way.
For photo printing, you cannot match the economy or the quality of the Fuji Frontier at your local lab.
If you need proofs right this minute, or if your material is going to be embarrassing or create liabilities if it's seen by another party, you have a strong argument for having your own color printer.
The 6- and 8- ink Canon printers are outstanding, and very conservative with ink.
But I get my 4x6 prints for 20 from Ofoto, 8x10's for $4.00, and the occasional 20x30" for about $20. The quality is great.
"And some (my)laserjet printers do have pictbridge so you can print directly from the camera. (Without proofing, why?)"
If your application has a requirement where you need the pictures *NOW*, and it's not an artistic endeavor, it makes a lot of sense. Don't think like an artist or portrait photographer, think like a building inspector.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Inkjet printers suck. Don't buy one.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
I am incredibly surprised that they didn't even remotely talk about things that people are actually confused about-- like whether or not you can replace the ink TANKS without replacing the ink cartidge. Or how long a ink cartidge lasts when NOT printing.
My problem was always that I would not print for 3-4 weeks, then go to print and find out that the head had dried out.
Finally went to laser and haven't been happier.
They should also write an article titled 'How to select a GOOD webserver'. It seems they could use one...
When I purchased my HP Deskjet 1125C, it read on the box: "Two-sided printing" and "Excellent photographic quality", or something like that. After the purchase I learned what these meant.
The "two-sided printing" means that after you print one side of a paper stack, you can turn the stack over (manually) and print the other halves. The windows driver helps with this by printing only even/odd pages. Of course that doesn't work in reality, because the printer jams about every 20 page, or feeds two pages instead of one, so after that the sides of the pages will be in wrong sequence and you'll have a pile of shit. So, I've been printing everything by turning and refeeding each paper one page at a time, for five years now.
The "excellent photographic quality" was actually horrible. Well, it's hard to describe it with words, so I'll leave it at that. On photographic paper, the black color forms droplets because it uses too much ink. Perhaps it should use less ink on photographic paper? Setting the driver to "Photographic paper" doesn't help. Oh, and the printer has "automatic detection of paper type". Cool.
Not to mention that the Linux driver is horribly slow in printing text.
On plus side, this printer uses 42 ml catridges that print about 1000 pages for some 40 euros ($50), so it's cheaper than with the cheapest printers. And it's an A3 printer.
I'll take the chance to do an 'Ask Slashdot' in the comments section since it actually pertains to the topic:
I'm going off to college very soon, and need some sort of printer with a very small footprint. I don't care if it's laser or inkjet, although I'm pretty sure I'll have access to a laser for high-volume stuff.
The low-end HP models are perfect for this task, but as I've found out by owning one, you get gouged on the ink. Cartridges are low-capacity, cost a mint, and have no generic equivalent. Replenishing ink is actually more costly than replacing the printer and using the ink that's bundled with it.
So what I am asking --- are there any good small printers that don't cost a bundle for ink?
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
It's only a matter of time.
I happen to own a Samsung CLP-500 (color laser), an HP 4MVP (wide format monochrome laser), and a Canon BJC-8200.
The Canon is probably the cheapest of the bunch to operate. Why? Because I don't pay $10 for each of the six cartridges to replace them. I pay about $1.25. So can you. Finding people that sell cheap ink-jet cartridges on the net is *easy*. Heck, I used to get 10 spam messages a day selling the stuff.
The CLP-500 cartridges are about $120 each (rated 5,000 pages) vs. $1.25 for the inkjet cartridges (which I get about 100 pages out of, but this is with higher than average coverage as I'm doing photos). 1% of the price for 2% the number of output pages. Not bad. Of course, this doesn't include the drum replacement cost on the Samsung (not that I've had to do this yet, heck, I've not even gone through my 1/4-fill sample toner cartridges yet). To my knowledge, none of the 3rd-party vendors have toner cartridges for the Samsung yet.
The HP unit (mono only) is comparable in operational costs, largely because I bought the unit used. Toner cartridges are in the $100+ range, IIRC (expensive because of the 11x17 format, I've yet to find cheap, refilled toners).
Ultimately, TOC isn't the choice for these printer purposes. I can't print photos (of decent quality) or t-shirt transfers on the lasers. I can't print waterproof labels on the ink jet. And I'm not willing to wait for listing printouts, or ebook print-outs on the ink jet.
And one thing cool about the canon printer. I've let it sit around for a month or two at a time without being used, and the print heads have never clogged (even using the cheap ink that I buy). With HP and Epson, letting the printer sit around was the kiss of death.
BTW, I noticed that Samsung recently released a CLP-510 color laser (duplex) that was selling at the local Fry's for $199. Toner cartridges are $79. But they're good for only 2,000 copies. The CLP-500 cartridges at $120 (5,000 copies) are still a better deal. Fear not, laser printers are the new razors and toner cartridges are the new razor blades. You didn't think that the ink jet economic model wouldn't find it's way to color lasers, did you?
"Right on... I got the 1710ML for under $100 and have been happy with it so far. However, it's kind of a laser printer with the inkjet business model -- it comes with a "starter" toner that is only good for 1500 pages or so, then you get to buy expensive toner cartridges that are good for 3000-5000 pages (I think)"
In principle, that is correct. However, I bought a similar Samsung printer about 18 months ago. It has been in storage at some time for three weeks; I attached it to the computer, printed a page and it just printed. I know that the Canon inkjet printer that I threw away would have needed new cartridges at that point.
I just started the second pack of 500 pages of copier paper (probably saved £10 on the paper alone because it is cheap photocopier paper), and for my needs this printer will print at least for one or two more years. And it just prints, no cleaning, no new cartridges, just works.
For home users who print a few pages from time to time, these cheap Samsung printers are absolutely excellent. For £50 I expect to print everything I need for about three years. When the cartridge is empty, I'll have to decide if I want a new, better printer with another 1000 page cartridge, or my old printer with a 3000 page cartridge, both for about the same price.
Actually, the starter cartridge might last so long that they don't make that cartridge anymore when it runs out!
They even look decent when you hook up the computer to a regular TV. At which point you ask, what's the point of going through the cost and hassle of printing them ?
Recently, I needed a USB cable. I was aghast to discover pricing of $25 to $40 for a simple cable!!!! UG. Best Buy, Circuit City, even Sears had these prices. I know from my cable-making days (Good 'old RS-232 hand-soldered connections!) this was wrong.
Turned out http://hp.com/ had the cheapest ones, at about $3 each. http://pricegrabber.com/ did that for me. Don't get fooled.
Best as I can figure, the chain stores know you need a cable and can gouge you because usually you need it right now, and lots of people don't know how to shop online (yeah, sad, ain't it?).
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
Buy an old injket instead.
I have an HP DeskJet 832C (which was made in 1999) that still works beautifully. It prints pages at about 2-3 times the rate of the brand new colour inkjet one of my friends bought recently. I've not had to change the ink in at least two years, if not longer.
If you go this route, your only problem will being finding someone who's willing to part with one.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
Mod parent up!
I have been using an Epson 1520 for about 5 years now. Very good at printing photos, and being a 4-color unit (not 7 or 15 color), it is cheap to get ink, and continuous ink supplies are available REALLY cheaply.
With people complaining about inkjets, you have to realize that this is the cheapest possible printing technique. Unfortunately, most manufacturers don't pay attention to what people want in a printer, and make their products to sell units -- not to last, or work great, etc.
This is why I bought a used HP 8000N laser printer. Now, I can print all the documents I want, and use my Epson for color photos. I have the best of both worlds!
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
Buy an old injket instead.
Damn typo. Should be "old inkjet", not "old injket".
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
I bought an NEC Superscript way back in the day, for $119. The cartridge must have been good for a couple thousand pages, since I never ran low on toner. When I saw that the replacement cartridges were $129, I gave it to my cousin to do her homework on. I told her, "when it runs out of toner, just throw it away."
"If you can't afford $150 for a printer than you're either too young to post, or should get back to your college classes and quit reading slashdot."
I mean really. It could be that the idea of spending $150 on a printer just to print pictures just doesn't work for some people. I mean how many printers does one need? Should a home user have laser for black and white, a dye sublimation for photos, and maybe a large format inkjet for really big prints?
Give me a break. A color laser or a cheap ink jet is "good enough" for a lot of people. For nice photos you can always use snapfish or even Walmart. There is a huge difference between what a photo enthusiast wants or needs and what the average person does.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Reading the posting on this topic, I can see that few- if any- of the posters do much more than dump text to a printer or print the occasional low resolution image they've grabbed from the web. They sound more worried about volume than anything else. They certainly don't seem to worried about the quality of their printing. I work in an industry that lives and breathes it.
Sorry. but unless you're willing to invest in something like a Fiery system or lease an imagesetter, your "cheap" lasers would be laughed out of any decent graphics house. They do run a lot less expensively in volume- and also a lot faster- than an inkjet, but none but the top-end systems come close to quality of output. Even dye sublimation technology has been left far behind- especially when it comes to large-format printing. Try proofing full color tabloid sized images on one of your "better solutions" and see where your investment winds up.
Those expensive inks and ludicrously priced paper stocks nowadays produce a level of quality that amazes any of those that grew up with the first inkspitters. I doubt any of them thought they'd ever produce anything near the near-photographic quality that they do nowadays at the relative pittance of price.
The bad-old-days of film, darkrooms and expensive photo stocks are long gone. Expensive in the long run or not, the inkjets give more value for buck than all but the most expensive, high end equipment, and I doubt you'll see anyone in the graphics industry that will balk at the price of an ink cartridge when they consider the alternatives.
You want to bang out lots of halfway decent printing? Go with the cheap laser printer of your choice. They churn out passable stuff at a much more reasonable per print price. However, don't expect me to feel sorry for you when the color printout of the images you took on your digital camera turn out like crap or the art director at your company laughs at your "printer ready" documentation.
Of course, all this only holds until the next great thing comes out.
Quote: "When readying to buy a printer, you must first decide not only upon the kind of usage you will be putting it through but also on the type of usage."
You must decide
The kind of usage
but also
The type of usage
OK... what is the difference between kind and type here? Sounds like the same thing to me! hehehe
I rarely ever print. About the sole exception is that I print Photo's. For that I use an older Epson Photo 700 series, with elcheapo inks (Less then 5 for a set of cartridges) and an Epson 2200 with premium inks.
All non-photo stuff, either is stored in my PDA cell phone, or printed off in quickie draft mode on the Epson 700.
For these uses I find Inkjets fine. The printers are calibrated and print prints which I sell or hang around the house. If I need more then a 13x19 print, then I send it off to a print lab. Usually I am more please with the rendition from Epson more then the labs. (Camera 16.7 Mpixel)
For less then the special printing, I'll stick with my inkjets.
Gator/Claria is Spyware.
I just bought a photoprinter from HP that claims to print 4x6 prints at a rate "as fast as" about 20 pages per minute. However, a photo (4x6 inches) will print at a rate of one print in about 1 to 3 minutes, based on whether I choose Best or maximum DPI for printing. (How can maximum DPI be better than best?) Even after research, I had to buy based on brand name and advertised specifications, because it is difficult to find evaluations of printers on the internet that actually give useful comparisons.
Before buying the printer I decided against Epson based on the fact that if the printer is not used for a few days (maybe a week or two) the print head can dry and cause extensive cleaning before it works properly.
Also, Epson cartridges have a microchip that may cause the printer to stop operation when it decides the cartridge is empty, even if it is not. (A completely stopped up print head does not allow ink to flow, even during a cleaning cycle.) Printers with the print head attached to the cartridge should be more expensive, but are only slightly so, so even if you should damage the head, they are replaced.
Some companies sell Epson cartridge chip "reset" devices. I have not tried one yet.
If your Epson printer will not clean, you have to discard it or have it repaired at a price that probably is at least half the cost of a new printer. I have found that by filling an old cartridge with water, using a hypodermic syringe (break off the sharp point first) and then running a few cleaning cycles over the period of a few days, the printer can be recovered. Takes time, but seems to always work.
Went to buy cartridges for it about a year ago - two each high-capacity color and black cartridges ran me about ten bucks less than the printer did. Grrr.
Went back to eBay and bought a refurbished Laserjet clone that prints about a dozen pages a minute and has been running off the starter toner cartridge for about a year. I figure some day the starter cartridge will get empty, it'll cost me about $90 to replace it and I shouldn't have to buy consumables for that printer ever again.
I do exercise the HP photo printer once every couple weeks to keep the ink flowing, but I believe I've bought my last inkjet ptinter.
Haven't confirmed this, but a friend got one of those free printers with her new Dell computer - and she tells me the only place you can get ink for her printer is *from* Dell.
we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin
I brought this printer a while back and it has two very annoying features aimed at making you spend as much money as possible on ink you are not using.
The first is that the printer will not print at all with a missing or empty colou cartridge (there are three), even if you just want black prints.
This could be quite annoying on it's own however the real killer is the next one.
I put a brand new set of colour cartridges in to satisfy the printer, and no small cost. I then printed about 150-200 pages of pure black text pages ensuring the special option in the driver had "black only" set.
The printer ran out of ink and I promptly replaced the black cartridge. The printer however was now telling me all three colour cartridges were empty despite me not printing a single dot. A quick shake of the cartridges revealed they were still full.
Apparently the cartridges contain a chip that is supposed to keep an eye on the ink level.
It would seem it intentionally decreases the amount per page, regardless of whether it was used in a vain and stupid attempt to exert more money for overpriced ink.
I think I'll go for a laser.
[)amien
In my opinion, the first thing you should check for is how much it will cost to buy new ink. For some inkjet models, there's actually 3rd party replacements that can be had at acceptable prices. That said, I'd buy a laser unless you want color and don't print enough to justify the expense of a color laser. I'm in this situation, so I got a dirt cheap Epson inkjet.
If you want programming examples, just buy a PostScript printer and download a PostScript manual from the Adobe website. As for quality, the text quality of my LaserJet1200 at a nominal 1200dpi, driven entirely by PostScript-based open source drivers, seems to be better than any 600dpi stuff I have ever seen.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
unless you have an actual photo machine yourself. In the day of $0.29 photos ($0.16 if you go to costco or walmart) Why the heck are you getting a printer that does photos? between paper and ink, you're going to be spending probably about $0.50 for a 3.5x5, more if its larger... When you can go to costco and get a 9x11 for 2.50, throw the price of a printer on top of that and you can see that the inkjet market is for chumps... Everything that I honestly need to print in life and death situations is black and white, no color.... sure, color is flashy, but does it get the job done when you have clogged jets that make it look trashy, or makes the paper wrinkle up from getting it wet? I'll stick to my laserjet 5 that I took off someones hands because it had a fuser roller that had gotten damaged. $20 later, I have a moderately fast laser printer that will probably live longer than me.
Warm
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
One advantage of inkjets that has been pointed out by many on this story is their photo quality compared to color lasers.
This is like saying a port-o-john is better than a pit toilet because it has deodorant in it. Technically true, but it still smells strongly like crap.
If you are a typical consumer that just wants to shove out prints from a digicam, just take your CF, CD-R, SD, whatever to your local drugstore, Wal-Mart, Target, random one-hour photo place, pay them 19 cents a piece, and they will do a much better job than ANY consumer-level inkjet printer.
The photos from a minilab will be more consistent, free of dithering, mostly waterproof, light resistant, and also guaranteed.
The photos from an inkjet mostly fade in sunlight (a few exceptions), are not waterproof, suffer from nasty dithering, and if you screw up, you just flushed your money down the toilet.
If you REALLY want to print out prints at home, then use a home dye-sub. Sony, Kodak, and Olympus make fine dye-sub printers. The prints only cost a little more than inkjet, and they are waterproof, UV resistant, and far higher quality (no dithering).
For non-photo printing, Lasers are superior in every way. Sharper text, cheaper supplies, faster, more reliable, etc.
SirWired
Financially I'd definately be better off to print at Kinkos.
However when I have 15 minutes, and I want mapquest directions to somewhere I've never been, I like my home inkjet printer.
It's the cheapest way to get a small number of printouts at home. I do go through a lot of ink cartridges (or run the cleaning program waaaayyy to often.)
I want a cheap printer for occasional use, inkjets fufil that need.
I have a Canon i560. It cost me about $100 when an equivilent lexmark would have been half that.
But the third part ink works great and costs virtually nothing. A black cartridge for $1.50 makes printing dirt cheap, probably comparable to many lasers.
Surprise, Suprise, the link is slashdotted. Why the hell didn't someone, hell the poster, coralize this link?
JOhn
Campaign for Liberty
Even the infrequent printer like me likes to be able to print off a color picture once in awhile. And a color map is much easier to follow than a B+W one.
I'm too late to get modded, but hopefully you'll still read this.
Most universities have several labs where students can print (n)pages per quarter (semester). UC Davis, for example allowed 1,000 pages a quarter on their lasers, IIRC. Freshmen got it even better, getting virtually unlimited printing rights at the print labs that were in every dorm.
There is even a media lab on campus for those occasional color jobs.
Basically... save your money. Print the big jobs at the labs, print the emergency jobs with your roommate's printer.
Did anyone else think this article was sub-par? Here are a couple of my complaints... If you need to worry about multiple paper trays or tray capacity then you shouldn't be buying an inkjet printer. Period. This article makes it seem like that is an important buying factor. Also, the droplet size does not affect the color accuracy. It affects the resolution of the printed image. Also the maximum number of ink cartridges is not 6. Last I checked, Epson was pushing beyond the 8 already present in the R800. Additionally, the "extra two" cartridges are not always light cyan and light magenta. The author tells the reader to get some specs from the salesman. He then tells the reader in the next sentence to completely disregard those specs.
I can't get to the fine article at the moment, so I don't know what their recommendations are. I've been in the business of designing embedded controllers for MFPs and lately I've been recommending the Canon Pixma iP3000 to friends and relatives.
The Pixma has separate ink tanks (the heads are separate, so carts are cheaper and can be refilled easier). The iP3000 uses four inks. The iP4000 is a six ink version, but I don't think the quality difference justifies that extra cost.
The Pixma does a great job with digital photos, even on plain paper. It does edge to edge printing on all paper sizes. All in all a great printer for around $50.
Sorry if this sounds like a sales pitch. I gain nothing from the sale of these devices, I'm just a satisfied customer.
Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
For all you slashbots who think the only use for color is photos, you need to stop and ponder the possibility of other uses for printed material before you crap all over my inkjet printer. YOU might not use an inkjet for anything beyond that, but there are plenty of us who do. If you do paper (cardstock) modeling the inkjet is far superior, because that expensive laser toner CRACKS and flakes off if you score or bend it too much (two things you tend to do when modeling anything more than a flat panel). Inkjet printers can even print on plastic card and other structural materials (not to be considered with the heated drum of the laser...) I only wish I could get a good continuous ink system for my HP 842C printer.
I'd love to help you out -- which way did you come in?
I got a epson 880 a while ago, and it works well with really cheap "generic" cartriges. Someone gave me a brother HL1440, which is probably even cheaper over long term, but at $8/cartrige who's to complain with the epson?
Bottom line: ignore the article, check ink sites, get printer with cheapest ink.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Plus, with a photo printer, you have the flexibility to do things you can't do in any other way. Most digital photos are much higher resolution than is needed for a decent print. I have a blow-up of about a quarter of one photo (percentage by area, not by width) blown up to an 8x10. Good luck getting Wal-Mart or CostCo to do that for you. Good luck getting the sizes right if you do it yourself and depend on someone else to do the print setup and printing....
You're right that if all you do is tiny photos at 4x5, it is probably cheaper to have somebody else do your prints. However, at an 8x10 size, it isn't even close, and the difference in terms of what you can practically do with it makes it worth every penny. That said, my normal, day-to-day printouts are done on a cheap black laser printer. Photo inkjet printers are nice. For everything else, though, inkjets aren't worth the hassle.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Maybe it's time you expected more from your hardware. If you're willing to bet nearly 20% of the price that it'll break in the next year or so, then perhaps you should consider a different model.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
w00t!!!! -1!!!
we're still using technology that's just a slight spin on the old dot matrix printers.
A "slight spin"? Not even close. Dot matrix printers were a percussion printer. You had an ink-soaked ribbon that flew over the head of the printer, with the head consisting of a number of hammers (called pins) arranged in a matrix that would impress the ink (like typewriters) upon the page. Different pins fired depending on the letter that was to be printed.
Inkjets, which used to be called "bubblejets" (better description of what they do), would use a heat element on the printer head to actually boil the ink so that a single bubble of ink would seap out through a tiny crack in the printer head, creating a spec of ink on the page. Modern printer heads consist of about 300 - 500 of these little cracks for ink to seap out.
The only thing similar between inkjets and dot-matrix printers is that both create a letter (or piece of an image) through dots, rather than solid color.
Actually the droplet size doesn't affect resolution, it affects the smoothness of the image. If a printer has large droplets you will see them at a normal viewing distance in the highlights. With small droplets you can't see the dots unless you look real close. Another thing this completely missed and everyone extolling the virtues of DyeSub has no clue about is: how long the prints last. Even the prints from a 1 hour photo will fade in a shoebox after 40 years, most dye-sub prints don't even last 8. Read http://www.wilhelm-research.com/4x6/4x6.html (the Epson R800 uses the same inkset as the picturemate)
Ok seriously, for all those that say that laser printers are the answer to all our printing solutions, lets think about those that dont print 3000 pages in a year, or even 300. Not only will it cost them $400 for a color laser printer (maybe $300 if its on sale) but the laser will be 4 times as large as a small inkjet printer. Also, for the many people who want an all-in-one printer (scanner, copier, maybe fax) a color laser version of this will cost in the $800-$1000 dollar range. Also, although the cartridges for inkjet printers are ridiculously expensive, look for the printers that have cartridges without a microchip (read, not epson or hp) because these printers will decide that the cartridge is empty a while before it is. Also, when purchasing a printer, check the size of the cartridge in mL versus the cost of the cartridge. Finally, keep in mind that while the $50 inkjet printers do work, they are also the least reliable machines I have ever seen, and should be avoided in favor of something a step up from them. ex.(canon ip1500, hp 3875)
> > My GF is a graphics designer who specializes in print media.
> Your GF probably shouldn't be trying to get by with a cheapo desktop printer, then.
Who said the user in question was looking for a cheapo desktop printer? Inkjets aren't all cheap crap. As is the case with others who have posted here, I use an Epson 2200 for my small business (artwork reproductions) daily, and combined with some $500 software and display calibration, I can produce amazingly accurate prints that will last a lifetime on a variety of media.
Sure, this is different from how most people use their inkjets, but for my uses the technology is as revolutionary as digital cameras.
Read the reviews, this printer is simply the best you can get for under $100.
Just don't bother using it with linux. :)
Best regards, A.C.
I print infrequently and the stuff I print is for reference.
By printing in Fast Draft mode and 2 pages per side AND duplex, I'm replacing ink twice a year.
I do mostly document printing and occasional photo prints. Two years ago I bought a Canon i850 for $150 and noticed that Costco sold an ink refill set for $17. I did some research online and found that after ten or more refills, it might kill the printheads. Well, I refilled 17 times before the heads died. With a savings of $50 per refill, I saved a *lot* of money, even compared to lasers.
So I just bought a Canon PIXMA 4000 that has 4 color photo printing and an extra large black reservoir for documents - and it even prints on both sides! And with the current $70 rebate, it cost me $30! With my first ink refill, the printer will have paid for itself.
The antidote for misuse of freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.
-- Molly Ivins
It's been _sort of_ mentioned before, but there is no comparison for photo printing.
/. group-think where everyone jumps on the "let's bash the technology i don't like" bandwagon.
A color laser, even the best out there, simply can't print a decent photo, and dye-sub devices are nowhere near the speed or quality of a good inkjet.
I'm in love with my Canon i9900; it's cheaper than a lab, it's as fast as a laser (draft text, anyway), and the photo quality far, far surpasses any non-professional photo lab. As soon as I can afford a decent 18 or 24" printer, I'll grab it.
I also adore my canon multi-function device; fast, duplex printing and decent quality scans/fax/copy.
For any serious photo enthusiast or professional, inkjets are going to dominate for a long time; it's fine to disparage a technology for certain uses, but it's always nice to avoid that
My 2c...
--------------------- -me, Crusher of those who are Foolish (don't be foolish)
So I currently use a dumpster dived HP930, and the cheapest cheap ass cartridges I can find, because my printing requirements are about 5 pages per month, for things like FedEx ship labels. Of course the cartridges dry up after about 10 months, so I'm still paying 75c or so per page.
So what's up with the new generation of cheap-ass sub-$100 laser printers? Will the cartridges essentially last forever since there is no ink to dry up and clog? At 5 pages per month I'd be replaceing a toner cart like once every 10 years.
Yeah, inkjets are just another way for The Man to exploit the masses. What would really be cool for people like me who print 5 pages per mo - self-writing paper.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
That's because today's HP is to color laser printers what Stephen Hawking is to synchronized swimming.
I have a $500 Konica Minolta magicolor 2430DL laser printer. It produces glossy color photos that are better in quality than the glossy magazines on my coffee table; and that is quite sufficient quality for almost all home and business purposes. For the occasions when I really need true photographic print quality, there's Ofoto or the nearest camera store.
The only remaining advantage of inkjets is their ability to print on all kinds of stuff, like CDs and cardboard and ordinary envelopes.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Where does one find a 17 foot CRT?
No way to purchase a good inkjet? How about the continuous ink printers as mentioned in this post?6 8&cid=13268990
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1583
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
That's the one -- NEC Superscript. Very nice printer. The only thing I didn't like was the external paper storage, but for the price, it was a great printer.
I finally got to breeze through the article. It might as well have been written by an untrained but literate PC superstore salesperson. At first I was hopeful - maybe they'd talk about the things *I* care about, like which manufacturer's printers are most conducive to using alternative, less expensive ink, and which manufacturers are embedding technology (chips with encrypted authenticity codes on the cartridges, date codes, etc.) to make it painful/impossible. But they didn't mention that at all. The article lost all credibility with me right when it began: the first recommendation is to INSIST on a USB2.0 interface! Does anyone here think USB1.1's 1MByte/s transfer rate is any sort of bottleneck in inkjet printing? What a bunch of fluff.
Ink will always be more expensive & less reliable than toner cartridge assemblies. If you absolutely need color prints, do some math here:
HP color laserjet 3550: $600-700.
Black toner $133: 6k pages
cyan, magenta, yellow: $130 4k pages
$1223 for about 4k pages
30 cents (plus paper) to print a page of a mix of color and black toner.
hp 5550: $125
hp 56 black INK cartridge: $18 for 450 pages
hp 57 color INK cartridge: $35 for 400 pages
44 cents (plus paper) per page.
Does anybody know where to go for information about hacking inkjet printers?
Here's my dillema:
I own an HP Photosmart 7350
I'm creating some awesome gig+ panoramic photos
I can't print more than 13 inches length, which is ridiculous considering I have 19 inch paper and can buy a roll of photo paper up to 20 feet long.
I know there are Canon printers that print photos from banner photo paper, but as far as I can tell, they're length limited as well.
The manufacturer says buy another printer. I say screw them. The print quality and cost (as long as I'm using ink refill kits) is as good as I need for personal/fun prints.
Any help is appreciated!
While the article has some good general points, and, IMO, some bad ones, it fails to tell me what I really want to know.
A good point is that replacement ink can be expensive. However, it does not suggest a way to determine if a particular model suffers from expensive ink or not. Really. How can anyone determine if some HP model gets 30 sheets or 500 from a refill by research alone? The only way to do it is to buy one and try it. Too late!
My strategy is to find cheap off brand refills. I buy $100 of ink at a time to save on shipping, but i get easily five times the ink that i'd get using the printer brand ink for that money. Not all models are supported, so go to one of the online companies and look up prices.
I want a TCO breakdown for many models of ink jet and laser printer. Aquisition cost, cost per page, feature list. Then i can select those features i want, and from my usage, i can figure out what model to get.
Another issue that is simply not addressed. Does your OS support that model? For Linux, Ghostscript lists supported models, more or less. In the past, i chose an IBM model for which the codes were published, and wrote my own driver. This was a filter that accepted PBM Plus bitmaps for input and converted them to escape sequences and data. I miss it now, because it was so much faster than Ghostscript.
-- Stephen.
After reading here for years, this finally spurned a comment from me. I love the Xerox machines here @ work, all nice and networked and whip out pages all day long with their little dropping trays so I can print out DOM/CSS/Snort manuals all at once and go pick them up later w/o having pages all over the floor. However. I also print 'fine art' (no need to discuss that) for gallery shows and sale. No one can touch the Epson quality. I've printed on a large array of their printers (including the first 44"!), and just bought a r2400. Which, thankfully, _finally_ arrived today and after four test prints I have rolled out several amazing 13"x19"s. They are stunningly beautiful. I have printed on a lot of dye-subs and even the ones you can send out to have prints made of do not compare (though of course it could be a lousy print tech..), but I have myself printed on dye-subs and Epson is totally comparable and easier to maintain. As far as quality printing goes (for imagery, not charts and papers), Epson is _the_ only way to go. For office/home/student use, get urself a laser from St. Vinnie's.
The Xerox 6100 (resold by Dell) and the Samsung CLP-550(N) and CLP-510(N) appear to use the same printer engine. They all support a proprietary printer language, SPL-C, which is labelled as Samsung Printer Language-Color in the Samsung manuals. The Xerox only supports 64 MB memory (64MB max), whereas the CLP-550 is 64MB (320MB max), and the CLP-550N (built-in network card) is 128MB (384MB max). The CLP 550 models also support PCL and Postscript natively. The CLP-510 is slightly faster than the Xerox and 550, but only supports SPL-C and is 64MB (192MB max).
/etc/printcap for my FreeBSD boxes and the printer drivers on Windows, and it worked great out of the box. If I haven't been using it, it does take a minute or two to print, but not 5 minutes.
Including shipping, I paid about $380 for a CLP-550N at techonweb.com, and there were a couple other online vendors selling it for about the same. I plugged it in to my network, and added it to
Sorry, but this article wasn't "News for Nerds." It was fluff for technophobes.
Touting Pictbridge, card readers, and little tiny color screens, because "you need not bother booting up your PC every time you want to take a print out"?! That's great for granny who feels threatened by her PC, but for us "nerds", the thought of printing a picture without any processing (denoising, unsharp masking, exposure correction, etc.) is pretty heinous. Besides, most of us have our PCs on all of the time anyway.
The rest of the article was just as intellectually hollow:
Ink cost is a concern. No kidding?
Longer warranties are better than shorter ones and on-site service is better than having to ship the printer out for service. That's news.
Bigger input and output trays are more convenient. More insight from the tech wizards at CoolTechZone...
"Duplex printing enables you to print on both sides of a page." You don't say?
I sure am glad that I have that kind of insightful commentary to guide me -- should I ever want to buy a slow printer that costs more per page than my laser printer and can't do photo-quality printing of color images.
Okay, here is the deal on photo inkjet printers. I have two, one is a epson photo r300 that I use for some prints, mostly small ones, and printing DVD's. The other one is a Canon i9900, that I use for portrats and other large format prints. The epson has a max. print size of 8.5x11 where the canon can do 13x19.
Since these are photo printers they come with 6 to 8 ink carts. This allows them a wider color range than standard printers, 3 color carts, that print photos. Since I print packages of prints instead of vacation prints the cost vs the convenence is much better. The cost of each of these color carts runs about 10 bucks for OEM and half for third party, the cost isn't a bank breaker.
Truth is there is no printer that will allow you to print vacation pictures or rolls of 3x5 or 4x6 pirnts at home cheaper than a lab can do it. Well at least no printer that a home user will need. If your going to be running off 30 or more pictures your better off contacting a print lab. An excellet one is www.winkflash.com, they charge 12 cents apiece for a 4x6.
As for the cost of ink carts, OEM carts can cost you an arm and a leg true. But third party carts can be just as good and can be much cheaper. Personally, I use third party inks in my epson and OEM carts in my canon. I just haven't found any good third party carts that make me happy for the canon.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
For a supposedly good review, it sucks like all the other reviews out there because it doesn't talk about the longevity and fading of prints!
If you print a photo on a low end inkjet, it may look great, but I guarantee it will fade after a few months, especially if it is exposed to light on a daily basis.
I usually buy high end Epson printers because they at least make an attempt to make prints that last. There may be other printers that do too, but no reviews ever mention it and companies don't make it a marketing point.
Strange!
I needed a scanner, and an inkjet came free attached to the bottom of an almost free HP all-in-one. I use the inkjet infrequently, mainly for test pages to assure the cartridge nozzles don't dry out.
Hmm, maybe i am living in a backwater community... BUT: Going to a local hardware reseller with some FDD/USB-Stick/whatsoever... and asking for a test page??? Will he just grinn or rip open the sealed product box and ink cardridge? Guess, please!!!
Mine actually had an honest-to-goodness paper tray, but it also introduced me to a new (to me) concept at the time, the "Windows-only printer." Nice quality though; 6 pages per minute and 600 dpi was pretty amazing for the price.
I picked one up for $230 and picked up a 3 yr warranty for $40.. since this was paid for by a non-profit I work for.
It's churned out several hundred 11x17 posters on 100# hammermill for 68 bucks worth of ink so far. (black and cyan). It willl need yellow and magenta soon. So far it's been great. If I want more than a dozen or so of one poster I use kinkos/fedex and they appear at my door in 2 days but they won't print on 100# paper and I usually don't want to wait.
I tried to RTFM, but that was just too long. I'll just go to my local Best Buy and ask the sales person what they recommend. They never steer the customer wrong.
Don't allow yourself to dream away time. Be productive. -- Some fortune cookie
I'm sure there are people out there who, would prefer their "private" pictures remain private. Who knows where those pictures of that drunken party end up from the photo shop.
Interesting assessment.
However, when I purchased, I did not plan on the usage cycle I encountered. Just happened to come about on it's own.
On the whole I've been quite satisfied with the purchase as the printer suits my needs quite well.
And my "hyper-extensive warranty" does get me a brand new one, as it's a replacement warranty that grants me a brand new equal or comparable model on the spot -- no waiting for "repair" or getting a refurbished model shipped.
Brand new... in the box... straight off the shelf.
And as for hardware expectations, I put my bank into my high end workstation hardware... the printer/fax/copier is merely a non-critical extension of my system.
Ugh.
More do-it-yourself:
See this comment: Inkjet refills: 54 cents.
That's not 54 cents per tank, that's 54 cents for all of them together.
If you're serious about printing photos, though, don't use inkjet. Go dye-sub printers. In all practicalty, it's amazing inkjets still exist. If you want mediocre results, then get an inkjet. If you want quality results, but two printers: a laser and a dye-sub.
But yet you have the desire to print 8x10's out of them from home?
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q= 550n+site%3Anewegg.com
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
The source of the news is definitely to blame for it's low quality. What you haven't realized is you are not in the audience that they are catering to. 'Cool' is so 90's. What you really need is a site more apropriate for the naught-ies.
HP printer software has been disgusting for us, too. Uninstalling a multi-function printer deleted more than 800 unrelated files on the hard drive.
OK, I'm going to stop after the first sentence: "When readying to buy a printer, you must first decide not only upon the kind of usage you will be putting it through but also on the type of usage." Reminds me of a feedback comment on eBay: "You are happy and enjoy transaction that make me pleasure also!Thank you!!"
Really? I guess mine must have been an earlier version -- it was a real printer and worked with Linux from the very start. I even got to go buy old 70ns simms to upgrade its ram. Seems like it was a bit more than $129 too -- probably $200 or $250. Ah well...
Righto... you can buy inkjets that cost $2000/gal for a refill, $3000/gal to refill, typically $5000/gal to refill, and in some cases esp. those free printers from over $10,000/gal to refill. It doesn't sound so bad if you price it by the ml, but given you can get quality bulk ink for hundreds of dollars/gal there is something really wrong. Hell even low end lasers are not much better.
Now I can appreciate the fact that a lot of research goes into formatting inks and papers. This is understood and appreciated. But this being true why is it that Lyson and Mediastreet can get away with selling inks and papers; archival inks no less, for under $700/gal? Formulabs and Image Specialists make some excellent solutions as well in the sub $300/gal bracket. So why pay thousands of dollars for ink?
It's my hope that enough people will start buying 3rd party refill ink that the major manufacturers will start felling it. Really it shouldn't cost more than $50 to refill a typical inkjet, nor upwards of $70 to refill a photo inkjet.
Until such time as we get carts for under $5.00 per 20ml, I plan to refill manually. I want reasonable sized ink tanks with the option to go with external tanks. I want the choice to go bulk filling or convenient repackaged cartages. And if you're not going to give it to me then I'll buy that $100 printer and get it from that other guy, for under $1.50/20ml. I'll print till I'm blue in the face and the hands too. And when my printer breaks you're going to fix it under warranty... till it's up and I'm going to do it again, till you price your ink at reasonable levels and stop making throw away printers.
So, and I mean this with all due respect... Bite me HP, Bight me Epson, Bite me Canon, Bite me Brother and Lexmark... well go bite soemone else.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
they charge you for computer time
on top of which they can charge you
30 cents a page where as using a copier directly is 10 or 15 cents
When I take pictures of my family, they aren't pornographic pictures.
They still have flesh tones.
In fact, I would be surprised if most personal photos weren't more important for who's in the photo than what's in the photo.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
I've had an Epson Stylus Color 740 since summer 2000. (Bought it refurbished.)
We use it at least a few times/month, but often have to run the cleaning utility if we haven't used it for a week or so.
When the ink dries in the print heads we just run the cleaning utility a couple of times and we're good. We haven't had to replace any print heads after 5 years of periodic print head crusting.
After trying various 3rd party inks I've settled on some that's a little less than $4/cartridge. (One black cart. and one color cart.)
Photos come out looking like photos.
The paper path is nearly straight, so cardstock, envelopes, etc. work great.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
If they didn't charge $100 for shipping, and tax on top of it. That makes it a mediocre price. And $25 for the USB cable to use with your FREE printer? At least they don't ask $50 like Best Buy, but what a rip-off! Most folks probably don't realize they can buy a USB cable for like $3, and I guess that's what the jerks are counting on.
The HP deskjet 3520 came with full ink carts. I checked before buying it and compared the ml count on the printer box with the replacement carts. And by the way, the B&W cart plus the color cart would have cost more than the printer that included both. If they want me to trash it and buy a brand new one when the ink runs out, then so be it.