Tom's Hardware Benchmarks Inkjet Printer Paper

An anonymous reader writes "We all know that the specs of your inkjet printer, driver settings, and ink cartridges can make a big difference in the quality of your prints. But the cheapest and simplest aspect of printing can also have a big impact on the final quality: the paper. This short article is an interesting read, the author actually found ways to 'benchmark' inkjet printer paper."

Comments

Why wouldn't someone find a way to benchmarkpaper?

[GreatBunzinni]

A benchmark is a fancy word to describe a process where a set of items are evaluated objectively based on pre-defined parameters and following a standardized set of procedures. To put it shortly, benchmarking is a process to determine the best option.

Knowing this, why is it so odd that someone found a way to test paper and determine what's best for a given application? Does timothy actually believe that only computer parts can be evaluated by potential buyers?

Razors?

[spun]

People are still taken in by this scheme?

I believe the Discworld character Samuel Vimes had something to say regarding this "scheme." Being poor, he had to buy cheap shoes that wore out quickly and ended up costing him more over the long run, but he simply could not afford the more economical option because of the higher up-front costs. So yes, people are still being 'taken in' by this scheme because, being poor, they don't have any other real options. Luckily, every poor person is to blame for their own poverty and so we can continue to look down are noses at those inferior folks whose lack of options are their own damn faults.

Re:Razors?

[roman_mir]

Poor people are to blame for their poverty in current society, as they are a voting block, which demands bread and circuses paid by others, and the others end up being those, who actually do provide society with businesses (jobs), products and services, that make the society wealthier.

The 19 century USA gained so much wealth because of high levels of innovation and production based on capitalism and mostly free market.

My point is that cheap and plentiful boots are not a function of government intervention into the incomes of those, who actually do create products and services, but it is the function of those who create products and services. The more of those people are, the more products and services compete for the same money, this drives up efficiency and drives down the costs, and that's why USA had deflation in 19 century, which caused products to become cheaper and at the same time created huge amount of competition, which based on gov't idea that deflation is 'bad' is a paradox, but it is not, it is the idea that deflation based on competition is 'bad', that is wrong.

Get the businesses to compete not in the halls of government offices, but in the market for the customers' money, and you get more and more wealth, which is literally products, such as boots, and you get them cheaper and cheaper.

Get the government into that, start insuring businesses/individuals with government promises, start printing fiat, start living beyond the means, start borrowing and create inflation to write off the debt, and what you'll get is less and less investment, because savings get wiped out, and you get capital flight, which means production flight, and then you are left without wealth and so you are left without cheap good boots.