[geeks] Printers, postscript, networking...

[Michael Parson]

On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 07:38:38PM -0400, Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:

<snip>

> I am also looking at the Brother 5250DN, but Brother lasers look
> flimsy, and it has a separate drum and toner, and I too have heard of
> problems. Also, the brother uses 80watts on stanby, and 600watts when
> printing.  The prints look nice though, and it is fast.

I had a Brother 1040 for a while, was a good printer, fast, nice output,
and best of all, cheap toner, since you were just replacing the toner.
Yeah, it did use more power in standby mode, but it went from standby to
printing extremely fast, hardly any warm-up time.  I wound up giving it
to my little brother when he was in college, no idea how many pages he
ran through it, but I think it died from the cat hair more than anything
else.  I think I paid about $140 for it new, ran at least 3 toner sets
through it before he got it.  It needs a new drum now, but I don't see
the point in dropping $80 for one, so it sits in the garage waiting for
me to dumpster it.

> The HP 1320 is rated a 8watts and 345watts respectively.
>
> I've had a hell of a time finding a laser printer that is small enough
> and has decent quality and features.
>
> There are a ton of crappy ones, and the good ones are still fairly
> expensive.  The 1320 is a rare exception in terms of price and
> features, so I'm hoping it is a good buy.
>
> Still doing some research before I make a purchase.

In the ink-jet realm, I've used Epson and HP.  IME, the Epson had nicer
print quality (6 color inks, seperate carts for each color), but it
wastes ink and gets clogged a lot (since I don't print that often).

The HP did much better with my printing habbits and didn't clog nearly
as much.  Kinda wish I had it back, but my ex-wife got it during the
divorce.

But yeah, all ink-jets suck.

All printers suck, for that matter.  Whatever happened to the paperless
office?

-- 
Michael Parson
mparson at bl.org