Recommend an inkjet?

[droidhacker]

I just want to bump this to say that this didn't help anyone and not me, the OP.

I want to object to HP as the 'opensource' Gods. I'm really sick and tired of Linux users praising so-called opensource companies as they're above everyone. ATI, HP, are crap companies with inferior support and subpar products. HP, especially, is garbage. Their product quality has gone into the toilet. I really don't give a damn about open source if the product is a piece of garbage. If the product is not usable, then it can be fully open source, it doesn't matter. This is common sense but praising an inferior product with poor support is not praiseworthy.

I will be boycotting these companies from now on.

You can have the best hardware in the world, but without the ability to actually USE IT, it is entirely WORTHLESS. I would MUCH rather have junk hardware with working drivers than the world's best hardware with no possibility of ever using it.

[droidhacker]

No... you have things very wrong.
The ONLY advantage to inkjunk is that you could potentially run extremely long paper through them.

Print quality of inkjunk is GARBAGE unless you spend $5 per page on paper. Laser printers print the same regardless of what kind of paper you put in them.

Noise is practically non-existent on a laser -- you hear, at most, the sound of the rollers turning. None of that head shaking nonsense.

Alignment.... laser printers line everything up perfectly. Inkjunk has a head that moves back and forth across the paper and each stroke is always slightly out of alignment from the last stroke unless you overlap strokes, in which case you get BLUR.

Separating the ink from the head does NOT reduce costs -- they (the manufacturer) profits more that way because it costs THEM LESS, but they get to charge you the same.

And laser printers are just as refillable as inkjunk.

This is total nonsense. Both systems have advantages.

HP - opensource gods, drivers with exceptional support, HIGH ink costs if using normal catridges, LOW to MODERATE ink cost if using XL catridges or refilling the ink, ink catridges mostly have integrated heads(1), EXCEPTIONAL quality image drawing even on normal quality paper, GOOD text printing, FAST printing speed. Good printers if you dont buy lowest market segment ones(or read reviews before) - they consume more and known for bugs with paper feeder.

Canon - binary drivers. By far not all models supported. I personally had to "fight" three(3) days over Cannon 2900 Laser printer. This is not a driver quality I expect. Low to medium ink costs, very comparable to HP XL catridges. EXCEPTIONAL quality image printing, however some report ink to be of low resistance against UV and rupture. Refillable. Units are a bit better priced than HP.

Hope it helps someone.

Don't know if there's any truth to it, but I read somewhere that HP printers are actually all made by cannon now.

[crazycheese]

Sources please No, rly, sources would be nice

You forget cancer and you forget printing costs for single household.
When using inkjet there is great amount of alternative ink.
Also, I have used laser from HP Laserjet 4L and I must say the printing quality for text work is same, unless you're some abc-lover with 2000x magnification glass enjoying the sexy font lines hehe.

Yer, its same, its good. Definately much much better than dot-matrix(although low print costs are unmatched with dot-matrix).

For graphics you will use laser/ink paper anyway, so the costs are same, the ink quality is better! Unless you print money lol. Or something requiring fine strict lines rather than oil paint style.

Yer, of course 200kg color laser box is best! But look at the price! And running costs! And cancer thing.

No... you have things very wrong.
The ONLY advantage to inkjunk is that you could potentially run extremely long paper through them.

Print quality of inkjunk is GARBAGE unless you spend $5 per page on paper. Laser printers print the same regardless of what kind of paper you put in them.

Noise is practically non-existent on a laser -- you hear, at most, the sound of the rollers turning. None of that head shaking nonsense.

Alignment.... laser printers line everything up perfectly. Inkjunk has a head that moves back and forth across the paper and each stroke is always slightly out of alignment from the last stroke unless you overlap strokes, in which case you get BLUR.

Separating the ink from the head does NOT reduce costs -- they (the manufacturer) profits more that way because it costs THEM LESS, but they get to charge you the same.

And laser printers are just as refillable as inkjunk.



Don't know if there's any truth to it, but I read somewhere that HP printers are actually all made by cannon now.

[droidhacker]

Sources please No, rly, sources would be nice

Sources? My own eyes.

You forget cancer

You are thinking of some VERY old fashioned kinds of toner.

and you forget printing costs for single household.

Unless your single household prints so few pages that the $25 inkjunk never even eats up the cartridge it came with (i.e. about 25 pages or less within the lifetime of the printer), then laser costs FAR FAR less to operate for ANYONE.

When using inkjet there is great amount of alternative ink.

Huh? There are tons of toner manufacturers, all of which make every kind of toner for compatibility with every kind of printer.

Also, I have used laser from HP Laserjet 4L and I must say the printing quality for text work is same,

Wow, your 20 year old 300 DPI laserjet 4L prints in equal quality to a brand new inkjunk? You know that you are really making my case for me...

unless you're some abc-lover with 2000x magnification glass enjoying the sexy font lines hehe.

I suggest you get your eyes examined. If you can't see the difference, then there is definitely something wrong with your vision.

Yer, its same, its good. Definately much much better than dot-matrix(although low print costs are unmatched with dot-matrix).

Nobody's talking about dot matrix except you, but you bring up an interesting point, because inkjunk is actually very similar to dot matrix and shares some of the same flaws... the alignment problem I mentioned... dot matrix had those too. The basic operation is similar, except that rather than stabbing the ink from the ribbon onto the paper, the inkjunk SPRAYS it.

For graphics you will use laser/ink paper anyway,

No, for graphics with a laser printer, you'll use regular copy paper that costs next to nothing.

so the costs are same, the ink quality is better! Unless you print money lol.

No, the LASER quality is INFINITELY better.

Or something requiring fine strict lines rather than oil paint style.

There is no similarity AT ALL between oil painting and inkjunk printing. There is no way possible for an inkjunk to reproduce the layers and texture of an oil painting -- it CAN'T be done. For that, you would have to look towards 3d printers, but for that (one that can do what you're claiming), you're looking at tens or hundreds of thousands of $$. For a 2d print of an oil painting, you're still looking at laser being FAR FAR more effective.

Yer, of course 200kg color laser box is best! But look at the price! And running costs! And cancer thing.

200 kg? What are you printing? Posters? This is a different beast and not applicable here.

[pingufunkybeat]

Perhaps this is offtopic, but I've just set up an HP Photosmart 2610 under Linux, and it was extremely easy, and fully supported.

I for one am impressed with the state of the HP drivers.

[crazycheese]

Lol, you are not going to kill me cause I use inkjet at home, wont you?
I suggest I tell you, what I know and then you tell me, what you know, and we shake hands and stay friends instead of puting this small part of internet on fire )

Nobody's talking about dot matrix except you, but you bring up an interesting point, because inkjunk is actually very similar to dot matrix and shares some of the same flaws... the alignment problem I mentioned... dot matrix had those too. The basic operation is similar, except that rather than stabbing the ink from the ribbon onto the paper, the inkjunk SPRAYS it.

Dot-matrix share not that big part with inkjet at all - only the basics of printing head function. That does not mean it is bad or inefficient. They are 8/9 or 24 needle printers that use kilometer-long catridges costing 4-5$ each, able to print War and Peace by Tolstoy three times before they run out of catridge. And then you can still use them second or even third time, only the color will degrade a bit.
They are slow, noisy, very bad quality, but are extremely efficient, which of course reflects their current price. Yes, current price.

Look at this: http://geizhals.at/eu/?cat=prmat

Printing large amounts of financial docs or logs - they are perfect for this.

They have NO alignment, they do not need it. You can align the head with your hand - they will probably survive nuclear attack. At least my Epson LX-300 was like that in DOS era.

You are thinking of some VERY old fashioned kinds of toner.

Huh? There are tons of toner manufacturers, all of which make every kind of toner for compatibility with every kind of printer.

So you mean toner is like paste nowadays? Its not microgranuar extremely fine dust anymore? Cause its important for it to be so in order for drum to be able to pick it off and melt to the paper. So, unless you prove, its still a cancer-causing dust, if set free(some amounts set free regardless of the process, its not possible to prevent it).
Then, there is no manufacturer able to duplicate highly complicated toners. They REFILL it. And in the moment they refill the stuff goes KABOOM from there(ever tried opening dirtbag of your vacuum cleaner, unless its water-based. Yeah, the ink analogy lol). Many do this quite carefully, but still vast amounts of dust make it out and this is why manufacturers consider it dangerous to refill toners.
Now compare the refilling process to simple ink.

Unless your single household prints so few pages that the $25 inkjunk never even eats up the cartridge it came with (i.e. about 25 pages or less within the lifetime of the printer), then laser costs FAR FAR less to operate for ANYONE.

Yes, my single household prints around 30-40 pages a month. Laser does NOT cost far less. There are fixed costs and running costs. Fixed purchasing cost for color inkjet are much much lower than for color laser, because the latter is much more complicated.

There purchase cost(running cost) for toner is also much higher and the toner also has "best before" so if you dont use it - its wasted.

Of course, as a result of more efficient storage and dosing, laser uses LESS color element when printing, but its still outperformed by dot-matrix(lol). But the result differs as well - laser prints at lower dpi and the result looks like its pen-made. Inkjet paints, the result looks like oil. It is the reason many photographers use inkjet even if they can afford professional color laser. Epson is very good for this - uses lots of ink and the results are very color reach.

Wow, your 20 year old 300 DPI laserjet 4L prints in equal quality to a brand new inkjunk? You know that you are really making my case for me...

Inkjunk, lol. I should note that, good joke!
The thing that I wanted to say is - laser has not that heavily progressed since 20 years(~14 years actually). The color came, the efficienty rised, the ram amount decreased, but the technology stayed same. Its dry-toner heat press.

I suggest you get your eyes examined. If you can't see the difference, then there is definitely something wrong with your vision.

Haha, you really printing bw correspondence for quality? So fonts stays nice and curves are sharp. I think the matrix wont exist then, but the case is opposite, so...

No, for graphics with a laser printer, you'll use regular copy paper that costs next to nothing.

No, the LASER quality is INFINITELY better.

Really I can Mona Lisa on cheap paper and it will look better than original? O_o

There is no similarity AT ALL between oil painting and inkjunk printing. There is no way possible for an inkjunk to reproduce the layers and texture of an oil painting -- it CAN'T be done. For that, you would have to look towards 3d printers, but for that (one that can do what you're claiming), you're looking at tens or hundreds of thousands of $$. For a 2d print of an oil painting, you're still looking at laser being FAR FAR more effective.

Of course there is! They function precisely as oil-painters. You are digging too deep requesting it to print layer-after-layer, but this also can be done. In fact the cream-printer prints cakes using same technology.

Aaand then comes laser press and does pancakes en-masse! Splendid!

200 kg? What are you printing? Posters? This is a different beast and not applicable here.

This standard small-mid enterprise A4/A3 color laser. Great dpi, great performance, great results(still pixelated, but nearly comparable to ink). Also great purchase, repair and running costs.

Also, wikipedia in its article on laser printers has nice paragraph about secret markings lol. You know you help NWO when you buy laser printer? Haha.

[crazycheese]

Perhaps this is offtopic, but I've just set up an HP Photosmart 2610 under Linux, and it was extremely easy, and fully supported.

I for one am impressed with the state of the HP drivers.

Yeah I was impressed as well. Actually Kodak sales guy told me it works in linux as well. He lied. Haha, now he has two OPENED printers and hp worked really like charm. Fact, even if for someone HP sucks, they take linux seriously, they even ship an optional linux utility to control the fine settings.

I think Panix had an paper jam in his inkjet, then he forceably fulled the paper away (the proper jam removal is even imprinted on the printer) and destroyed something within head positioning mechs. Or some HP engineer really fckdp on this model. Either way I would send it to HP ifs within guarantee. Sheet happens.

[Panix]

Forget this, topic is so old, I forgot you were the topic starter.
Now.
Lets see how its better to go shopping in modern world.

Study here: http://www.amazon.com/HP-PhotoSmart-...8714544&sr=8-1

And here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...scrollFullInfo

You will read about possible paper jam, that is clear the engineering problem. I wont buy it.

If you printer fails to align, there is something really really bad happend to head positioning mechanism. Mine aligned instantly and I have already done it several times.

The thing with HP printers where they require time to start up, which is often criticized, is because of the way they handle the necessary head cleaning. They park it every time they go off and they clean it every time on start. It takes time(15-20 secs). They produce sounds, yes. But then it is set to print. Others dont do it, they just park/unpark heads without cleaning. Then they start running 20 minutes cleaning cycle every week. And if they miss it, there is high probability ink dries up in the head. I prefer the HP way.

HP Photosmart printers are junk. They're also expensive for what you get. Also, with opensource HP, not all features work or they work at less than capacity or not at full function/feature. So, there goes your opensource benefits and argument. Most printers that aren't laser don't work well in Linux, imho. Due to no support or less than full features. This is the same sort of thing as video cards which is what I alluded to in my original post.

HP printers, for the most part, are garbage and to get a half decent one, you have to spend $100s of dollars. The entry level line is awful and full of flaws. The Photosmart line has a paper japm problem. I've experienced it with two already, one I owned and one from work.

I guess you, like others in this forum, or maybe many Linux users want to defend any company that has any minimal opensource support at all regardless of the quality of the product or support.

I wanted to support HP, too, but I have nothing but bad experiences with the ACTUAL PRODUCT. I can't use it with Linux if it doesn't work or has major design problems.

[Panix]

I think Panix had an paper jam in his inkjet, then he forceably fulled the paper away (the proper jam removal is even imprinted on the printer) and destroyed something within head positioning mechs. Or some HP engineer really fckdp on this model. Either way I would send it to HP ifs within guarantee. Sheet happens.

It was already broken when I bought it. Trying to blame me for the product's flaws is a bit shady. I will ignore your posts from now on.

[crazycheese]

It was already broken when I bought it. Trying to blame me for the product's flaws is a bit shady. I will ignore your posts from now on.

I wasnt trying to blame you. If its broken take it to the shop. Everything can be broken, everything can appear with design flaws. Its not your problem - ship it back and get the money. Shit happens.

It its happening on regular basis, yes, its other case. For example brother is CRAP on color, lexmark is CRAP in low-cost segment(less than 500$), canon and epson require you to reset non-original catridges with resetter, samsung is dropping linux support, canon drivers are CRAPY BINARY PIECE OF JUNK that are kept in the corner.

I have two b209 that costed 100$ each, work BOTH FINE out of the box, ink is CHEAP and there a lots of it, it does NOT jam, it has EVERYTHING in linux that it has in windows - EVERY OPTION from autopaper sorting to scanner dpi, it does NOT require to mess around - ZERO work.

You can ignore me and consider what you want. If HP company starts fckng up (like Oracle today) I will throw it away the same day. Apparently they mention LINUX support in a handbook, they provide same-day hardware driver support, the driver is almost completely opensource(same microcode by some models as with amd), they run own site DEDICATED to linux support, they PAY TEAM TO DEVELOP LINUX DRIVERS.

And no, I am NOT HP fan, not to slightest degree. I just SEE WHAT THEY DO. I watch the situation and I share my experiences just like most of us.

In any case, I hope you find the working linux printer that suits you and works without troubles. Cheers.