Postscript still important for laser printers? How much RAM is enough? LexMark?

On 07/24/2010 11:56 PM, Warren Block wrote:
Tim wrote:
On 07/24/2010 01:37 PM, MD34 wrote:

So, given that I won't print much, that I want inkjet comparable
quality, that I don't need wireless or networking, that I need fully
compatible Linux drivers, which printer would you go for?

There may not be a good answer to that. Epson has open-source drivers
and the printers don't seem to be terribly prone to clogging or drying
out.

??? Arthur Entlich who often help solve Epson problems on this group
even has a guide on unclogging!

Good ink and photo paper is still expensive, though.

From what I've seen, laser color printing doesn't come cheap either but
I suppose it might be cheaper. Which price ratio do you figure?

Another option would be local or online photo printing services like
mpix.com. That can be a lot cheaper than maintaining your own inkjet.

I doubt it. An 8½ x 11 is $3 at mpix, plus sales taxes in Canada.
Postage maybe? Even at 500 sheets a year, it would be $1,500. So I
certainly expect the printer to pay for itself in less than a year.

On 07/24/2010 11:47 PM, Warren Block wrote:

That's a quote from me. PostScript is the standard page description
language, usable on everything from low-end printers all the way to
overgrown copiers.

I only expect my printer languaeg to work on MY printer.

"Printer Command Language, more commonly referred to as PCL, is a Page
description language (PDL) developed by HP as a printer protocol and
*has become a de facto industry standard*."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_Command_Language

This seems pretty standard to me!

It's resolution-independent: the same file can be
printed on a 300 DPI laser or a 2400 DPI phototypesetter.

I don't intend to send my pictures to photo typesetters. And, if I ever
had to, I could send them a copy of the original.

Tim Okergit wrote:
On 07/24/2010 11:56 PM, Warren Block wrote:
Tim wrote:
On 07/24/2010 01:37 PM, MD34 wrote:

So, given that I won't print much, that I want inkjet comparable
quality, that I don't need wireless or networking, that I need fully
compatible Linux drivers, which printer would you go for?

There may not be a good answer to that. Epson has open-source drivers
and the printers don't seem to be terribly prone to clogging or drying
out.

??? Arthur Entlich who often help solve Epson problems on this group
even has a guide on unclogging!

Good ink and photo paper is still expensive, though.

From what I've seen, laser color printing doesn't come cheap either but
I suppose it might be cheaper. Which price ratio do you figure?

I've never really worked out color laser price per page. Partly that's
because a photo printed on a laser just can't compare to the shades and
ranges available on an inkjet. Rough guess would be that color laser
printing is something like 1/2 to 1/10 the cost of inkjet.

Another option would be local or online photo printing services like
mpix.com. That can be a lot cheaper than maintaining your own inkjet.

I doubt it. An 8½ x 11 is $3 at mpix, plus sales taxes in Canada.
Postage maybe? Even at 500 sheets a year, it would be $1,500. So I
certainly expect the printer to pay for itself in less than a year.

It really depends on what you're printing and what quality level you
expect.

Do you think you can print 8x10 or 8.5x11 on an inkjet with photo
paper and non-fading OEM ink for less than $3 Canadian?

As an example, a set of black and color ink for the older Epson six-ink
printers is $18 + $66 US, + $27 for sixty sheets of paper. You'd have
to get 60 perfect 8x10 prints from that, and I'm skeptical if that's
possible. And that would still cost just a bit more per print than the
photo lab prints at $2 (US) each.

A CIS could reduce that a lot. So could cheaper supplies, but whether
that's acceptable depends on what you're doing with the prints. Sending
them to relatives? No big deal. Selling them as art? Color matching
and fading are important.

On 07/25/2010 08:10 PM, Warren Block wrote:
Tim wrote:
On 07/24/2010 11:56 PM, Warren Block wrote:
Tim wrote:
On 07/24/2010 01:37 PM, MD34 wrote:

So, given that I won't print much, that I want inkjet comparable
quality, that I don't need wireless or networking, that I need fully
compatible Linux drivers, which printer would you go for?

There may not be a good answer to that. Epson has open-source drivers
and the printers don't seem to be terribly prone to clogging or drying
out.

??? Arthur Entlich who often help solve Epson problems on this group
even has a guide on unclogging!

Good ink and photo paper is still expensive, though.

From what I've seen, laser color printing doesn't come cheap either but
I suppose it might be cheaper. Which price ratio do you figure?

I've never really worked out color laser price per page. Partly that's
because a photo printed on a laser just can't compare to the shades and
ranges available on an inkjet.

Really? Even with a printer that would cost, say, $500?

Another option would be local or online photo printing services like
mpix.com. That can be a lot cheaper than maintaining your own inkjet.

I doubt it. An 8½ x 11 is $3 at mpix, plus sales taxes in Canada.
Postage maybe? Even at 500 sheets a year, it would be $1,500. So I
certainly expect the printer to pay for itself in less than a year.

It really depends on what you're printing and what quality level you
expect.

Do you think you can print 8x10 or 8.5x11 on an inkjet with photo
paper and non-fading OEM ink for less than $3 Canadian?

As an example, a set of black and color ink for the older Epson six-ink
printers is $18 + $66 US, + $27 for sixty sheets of paper. You'd have
to get 60 perfect 8x10 prints from that, and I'm skeptical if that's
possible. And that would still cost just a bit more per print than the
photo lab prints at $2 (US) each.

If you count only the consumables, it's $111 / 60 , so less that $2.
Also, I've had bad experiences with labs for... chemical process color
printing. Is it right to assume that if you provide a digital picture of
good quality that's how it will come out once printed?

A CIS could reduce that a lot. So could cheaper supplies, but whether
that's acceptable depends on what you're doing with the prints. Sending
them to relatives? No big deal. Selling them as art? Color matching
and fading are important.

Even if it was to send to relatives, second quality wouldn't be
acceptable to me. I suppose I'll have to send a picture or two to one or
two labs before I buy a printer

On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:06:25 -0400, Tim Okergit wrote:

On 07/24/2010 02:44 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:

All good reasons to avoid them. In some ways this sounds like the
situation with my Samsung ML-2150.

Oops, I din't know this. I almost bought a Samsung printer instead of my
HP since it was a bit cheaper, but the store manager told me to go for
the HP eyes closed. I thought if he was wrong I'd have better reason to
kick his ass if I went for HP

What's the name of that store? I want to buy my next printer there
also. Serious, I will never, ever again buy a Samsung printer.
Their proprietary memory stick upgrade just rankled me, and I didn't
know that until after I bought the printer. The fact that both of the
circuit boards in this printer failed, with expensive/inconvenient
repairs each time. The fact that this printer is failing again, with
"Internal Error" messages, with less than 50,000 prints lifetime!

Normally if I upgraded my printer, I would donate the old one to the
nearest "Goodwill" charity, but this one goes straight to the local
e-recycling center.

On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 16:58:38 -0400, Tim Okergit wrote:

On 07/24/2010 02:41 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
On 24 Jul 2010 15:11:56 GMT, Warren wrote:

That's a judgement call. I'd say yes. A PCL-only printer is livable,
and some people can use a host-based printer without problems. But a PS
printer gives you more options and is more versatile.

Sounds like I really should have a Postscript printer. I am
self-employed and can't deal with printer limitation hassles.

Maybe Andrew can explain further what he means by "more options and more
versatile" -- I must admit my needs are fairly basic -- but PCL
certainly does the job on my now old Laserjet 1012. (It doesn't feel old
in any way

Tim,

That wasn't me talking about "more options ..." That was someone
replying to me. I was the OP asking about the continued importance of
Postscript.


Oh. How can that be done?

Windows: http://articles.techrepublic.com.com...1-5034678.html

Thanks for the pointer.

-AH

On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 20:03:09 BST, Mr John FO Evans
wrote:


The important cost factor in a laser printer can be the replacement toner.
If you do a large volume of work the cost of the printer itself can be
relatively insignificant to the cost of replacing the toner.

John,

Thanks for this posting. In my experience over the years, service
costs are also important, at least for my small office/home office
application.

My first printer, years ago, was a QMS 810 PS, and that printer lasted
probably 15 years. Over that time, several repairs were necessary,
but since this printer was based on a Canon print engine that was
common to contemporary HP LaserJet printers, it was quick and
inexpensive to get repairs done. And there were multiple third--party
choices for toner cartridges. I should add that the QMS printer,
while ancient by today's standards, was extremely rugged and reliable.

Quite the opposite experience with my Samsung printer. That's why I'm
seriously considering the appropriate HP printer.



RAM

The RAM you need depends on the work you do. Double-sided printing takes
more - multiple collated copies takes even more. You need to check that the
printer is capable of doing the type of work you need to do and then check
the RAM needed with the printer manufacturer.

The HP printer I'm considering (P2055dn) comes with 128 MB standard.
That's plenty, even for double-sided printing with bitmaps.

HARD DISK (expensive!)

Printers with a built-in hard disk can often tackle larger and more complex
jobs as well as being able to remember routine work. Again consider you
requirements and check with the manufacturer.

Not for my application! But people should be aware that when they
replace the entire printer, or just the hard disk, the hard disk
should be scrubbed. Otherwise a hacker could recover confidential
information from the hard drive.


PC/RISCOS

By RISCOS, do you mean Solaris, or any non-Windows/nonMac OS?

-AH

I'm not trying to challenge your personal experiences with the Canon
versus HP printers, but to be fair, you really cannot compare a color
laser printer to an inkjet. Even the printer divisions may be different
in terms of support in the same company.

For many years HP used Canon engines in their laser printers, and it was
with those engines that HP developed the "never die" printer reputation.
The BJ inkjet line was a poorly made product, such that even Canon
recognized it and spent many millions of developing a completely new
inkjet printer from scratch, the "i" series, which has been very popular
and pretty reliable (as inkjet printers go).

HP has produced both stellar and dog printers in both their inkjet and
laser lineups, so one needs to look at the specific model, the cost of
acquisition as well as cost of consumables and add ons, and reliability.

I would not go on name or brand alone. They quality and costs vary
widely between models. I would agree that, in general, the less you pay
for a printer to buy it, the more the consumables will be, especially
with laser printers these days.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

Tim Okergit wrote:
On 07/24/2010 01:37 PM, MD34 wrote:

I used to service Lexmark laser and color laser printers and hated them.
Everything was hard to get to, tech support/parts order sucked big time.
Documentation was terrible.

In about a year, I'll buy a color printer for printing photographs. As
I've already said, years ago, I switched from A Canon BJ-300 to an HP
Laserjet 1012. I can almost say it was a change in lifestyle.

The BJ-300 ink was so expensive it drove me nuts and dealing with Canon
Canada was a hooredous experience. OTOH, printing with the HP laserjet
has always been a no-issue experience (that is after they updated the
Linux driver about 6 months after I bought it). Here is how ot works:

1) Plug the printer into a power outlet
2) Plug the USB cable into the computer
3) Put some paper in the tray
4) Turn the printer on
5) CTRL + P
6) Click "Print"

and it prints, every time, without a dpi missing or being added.

I don't have printer concerns anymore. The thing is there, it's a
printer, and it prints!

So, I don't intend to go back to inkjet printing and cleaningprint heads
ebery tiem I print. As for Canon, it's out for the rest of my life. I
don't ever want to hear about Canon anymore.

Though I won't print much, maybe 500 pages/year, I'd rather pay more on
the printer and less on consumables, even if it turned out to be cheaper
to buy a flimsy thing that brings profits on consumables. I don't agree
with this way of doing business and it infuriates me. (Note that the
Canon BJ-300 sold for $550... in 1989 and that ink cartridges that would
barely print more than 350 pages costed $30. I didn't consider this
closely enough when I bought.)

So, given that I won't print much, that I want inkjet comparable
quality, that I don't need wireless or networking, that I need fully
compatible Linux drivers, which printer would you go for?

Tim Okergit wrote:
On 07/25/2010 08:10 PM, Warren Block wrote:

I've never really worked out color laser price per page. Partly that's
because a photo printed on a laser just can't compare to the shades and
ranges available on an inkjet.

Really? Even with a printer that would cost, say, $500?

Unfortunately, yes. Color lasers have fixed toner colors, and those
colors are opaque and can't really be mixed. They can dither dots, but
that reduces the effective resolution. An inkjet can overprint to make
shades.

As an example, a set of black and color ink for the older Epson six-ink
printers is $18 + $66 US, + $27 for sixty sheets of paper. You'd have
to get 60 perfect 8x10 prints from that, and I'm skeptical if that's
possible. And that would still cost just a bit more per print than the
photo lab prints at $2 (US) each.

If you count only the consumables, it's $111 / 60 , so less that $2.

Yes, if in fact you can get 60 8x10 prints. That seems really unlikely
to me. Even half of that still seems unlikely.

Even if it was to send to relatives, second quality wouldn't be
acceptable to me. I suppose I'll have to send a picture or two to one or
two labs before I buy a printer

That's the only way to really be sure.

On 07/26/2010 03:24 AM, Arthur Entlich wrote:

I'm not trying to challenge your personal experiences with the Canon
versus HP printers, but to be fair, you really cannot compare a color
laser printer to an inkjet. Even the printer divisions may be different
in terms of support in the same company.

Canon Canada is Canon Canada. They don't make printers, they sell as
many printers as they can. They're into advertising, merchandising and
sales. Nobody there will get a red cent for fixing a problem on a
printer that's out of guarantee.

So they keep you waiting in line for the one word that would solve your
problem hping that you'll get ****ed off and buzz off. THis is the
"division" that, as a user, you have to deal with.

For me, it's "no more".

For many years HP used Canon engines in their laser printers, and it was
with those engines that HP developed the "never die" printer reputation.
The BJ inkjet line was a poorly made product, such that even Canon
recognized it and spent many millions of developing a completely new
inkjet printer from scratch, the "i" series, which has been very popular
and pretty reliable (as inkjet printers go).

The problem with Canon Canada is that if the printer is no longer on
guarantee and there a little 5¢ sponge that needs to be washed, they
just won't tell you where the sponge is. The printer could be fixed in 5
minutes but all they keep answering is: "We"re got this new model at
half the price. Why don't you buy one?"

To me, the problem never was the printer but Canon Canada. I do
understand that Canon makes the cartridge of my laserjet and that
there's not much to the printer except this essential part, but I
suppose the cradridge is made to HP's specifications and it really works
well. I never had to deal with HP but I would think that their support
is much better than Canon's.

Canon has no take apart instructions online whereas HP provides
instructions to take the printer apart to the last bolt. To me, this
really spells a different attitude. At 90$, even shops can hardly buy
every shop manual and they refer you to Canon who always say that you
can get a new peinter for the price of the repair.

So, my advice is, if you're into $550 (1990 price) throw away printers,
Canon is for you. Otherwise, stay away for that bunch of thieves.

Once again, in my experience, though I sometimes had to clean the print
head with a Q-Tip, the BJ-300 was a sturdy work horse. The only problem
was Canon withholding information in order to sell you another printer.

HP has produced both stellar and dog printers in both their inkjet and
laser lineups, so one needs to look at the specific model, the cost of
acquisition as well as cost of consumables and add ons, and reliability.

From what I read here, though HP's score might not be perfect,
customers are generally satisfied. If you stop looking for instructions
all over the net and go to HP's site for a solution to a problem, you'll
generally find one.

For instance, in the thread "Multifunction HP C4380 printer scanner".
Tobias had an unsolvable problem. I looked on HP's site and we never
heard form him again. Otherwise, Bob Headrick would have provided a
solution, just as you do for Epson. Who's Canon's... unofficial
representative on this group?

I would not go on name or brand alone. They quality and costs vary
widely between models. I would agree that, in general, the less you pay
for a printer to buy it, the more the consumables will be, especially
with laser printers these days.

Do you agree with Warren Block that laser color printing is still far
behind inkjet printers?