Prev: iPad and Kindle app
Next: Update: Plusnet - problems *sending* mail...
From: Andy Hewitt on 9 Aug 2010 04:34
Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote:

> On 2010-08-09 09:02:38 +0100, Peter Ceresole said:
>
> > Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> HP were the other brand I might have considered but a wee voice in the
> >>> back of my head was saying 'avoid'.
> >>
> >> I've installed a few for some PC friends lately, and they are just
> >> awful, at least on Windows anyway
> >
> > Just a shout for HP; for several years now I've used a 1022, on four
> > Macs. Mono only, because that's what I need. It's quick, reasonably
> > priced, good quality. The HP installation software goes on rapidly
> > (bundled with 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6) and doesn't break anything.
> >
> > I'm a fan.
>
> I think reinforces one of Jim's (?) points. HP printers *used* to be
> good, but are much less so now.

Absolutely yes. The old HP 'bricks', i.e. the old Deskjet 600, 700 and
800 series were excellent in their day, but once they started changing
the style, and moving into the budget market, they just seemed to lose
the plot somewhat. Similarly with the old Laserjets.

FWIW, I'm using an old LJ4100DTN here for printing the church magazine,
and it does an excellent job, churning out over 1000 sheets of duplexed
printing without a hitch in one go. The software still sucks though, it
just ignores my commands to use paper from a specific tray, which is
exactly the same with the ones I use at work now.

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.me.com/andrewhewitt1/>
From: Rowland McDonnell on 9 Aug 2010 06:10
Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote:

> Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote:
>
> > Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote:
[snip]

> > > Lexmark are just rubbish, or at least the ones I've used have been. They
> > > also have the most expensive carts. I believe these are also rebadged
> > > for Dell.
> >
> > FWIW it's the same in the Windows world - Lexmark drivers can interfere
> > with lots of things there as well.
>
> It wasn't the drivers so much, as the actual quality of the thing, the
> inkjet I had, had bits fall off each time I used it. I used some of
> their lasers at work too, and was always under the counter removing
> jammed paper.

HP's quality is not what it was. I'd not buy another HP inkjet myself.

My HP DW970cxi (at the time, the top of the range HP A4 inkjet AFAICT)
broke inside not many years use. The HP DW520 it replaced had done much
more service and *still* works (tried it out the other day).

The HP DW970cxi's driver software was always problematic.

On the other than, my only complaint about the HP LJ 1320n PS+Ethernet
HP laser printer I've now got is that the 10/100 Ethernet interface
seems only to be able to accept data at about the same average speed as
an old-fashioned `high speed' RS232 port, i.e., not a lot over 100
kbit/s.

(it did once jam, but that turned out to be down to me being sloppy with
the paper tray)

Rowland.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 9 Aug 2010 06:29
Martin S Taylor <mst(a)hRyEpMnOoVtEiTsHm.cIo.uSk> wrote:

> Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote
> >> I have an iP4500, which I think uses the same ink, and a set of five
> >> carts is about �45 for genuine Canon ones. PCW are known for ripping you
> >> off on consumables.
> >
> > I got my last set of Canon carts for my MP600 (same family) for about
> > �40 at Asda. And not �65 as they were in Purple World next door, or
> > �70 at Staples next door but one.
>
> Best place I've found is inkntoneruk who will beat any price. Their
> compatible cartridges are (only) okay, but very much cheaper than originals,
> though they still sell originals cheaper than anyone, I think.

[snip]

Hmm. So I asked:

http://www.inkntoneruk.co.uk

for Q4959X (the one I need).

I've seen lower offered prices for original HP toner cartridges - but
the �41.77 for a `compatible' toner cartridge does make me wonder about
quality.

I might well have a gamble on one next time I'm thinking of a toner
cartridge, but given that I seem to get through only about one a year[1]
and do like decent quality - well, anyone with any experience of these
`compatible' cartridges like to comment?

Rowland.

[1] Yes, about �100 a pop *is* a lot of money for printer supplies - but
if you think of it as �2 a week, suddenly it doesn't seem a problem.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 9 Aug 2010 07:15
Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote:
>
> > > HP were the other brand I might have considered but a wee voice in the
> > > back of my head was saying 'avoid'.
> >
> > I've installed a few for some PC friends lately, and they are just
> > awful, at least on Windows anyway
>
> Just a shout for HP; for several years now I've used a 1022, on four
> Macs. Mono only, because that's what I need. It's quick, reasonably
> priced, good quality. The HP installation software goes on rapidly
> (bundled with 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6) and doesn't break anything.
>
> I'm a fan.

<cough>

I've got an HP LJ 1320n, similar vintage to the HP LJ 1022 Peter refers
to. Before that, I had an HP LJ 970cxi.

My current printer's Postscript, so no HP driver. However, the HP
software that came with the 970 *did* break the OS so badly I had to
re-install[1], and I do recall being told that bits of software supplied
with my 1320 would also have broken the MacOS if I'd installed 'em.

Be wary of HP driver software: some of it's fine. Some of it's not.

Rowland.

[1] When I rang up HP, it turned out to be a known problem which was
not mentioned in the paper documentation or the on-line documentation.
HP told me, after I'd reported the problem, that they had updated the
on-line documentation for that printer. I checked: HP had in fact made
no changes.

My 1978 HP 32E calculator is still going strong - albeit on its third or
fourth battery pack by now.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Martin S Taylor on 9 Aug 2010 18:43
Rowland McDonnell wrote
> I might well have a gamble on one next time I'm thinking of a toner
> cartridge, but given that I seem to get through only about one a year[1]
> and do like decent quality - well, anyone with any experience of these
> `compatible' cartridges like to comment?

As I implied in my post, I didn't like them, and sent mine back to
inkntoneruk. They were very nice about it.

The quality would have satisfied anyone who isn't fussy but I am (and it
sounds like you are too, Rowland).

MST

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: iPad and Kindle app
Next: Update: Plusnet - problems *sending* mail...