Here are some tips.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10166_7-62 ... tag=promo2
Inkjet printer problems?
The inkjet market is now sufficiently mature and my cumulative experience adequately expansive that some objective conclusions can be offered.
Inkjet represent an intermediate solution for mass-market colour printing. Presently, although cheaper to run, colour laser printers cannot achieve adequate resolution except with high-priced commercial machines.
Dye-sublimation remains a minority sport and is extremely expensive.
From the outset, due to aggressive competition and profiteering, inkjet companies decided to sell their printers cheaply and recoupe on consumables (cartridges).
There are two systems presently in use in inkjets: Epson and Canon use ink tanks with separate head technology permanently plumbed into the mechanics. HP and Lexmark incorporate the droplet metering into the head itself. Neither technology is entirely satisfactory and is strongly dependent on actual field usage requirements rather than notional pre-purchase prejudices. Post-purchase maintenance will, therefore, depend on model, manufacture and actual usage, as outlined in the link above. Repeat: always run off a test page once a week.
Until recently, Epson led the field for best resolution, but HP and esp. Canon have caught up. Lexmark has always been bottom of the heap.
Epson technology, sadly, is a disaster waiting to happen. The mechanics can become unreliable and the inkfeed tubes on theirs and Canon machines can dry or experience airlocks and blockages. They are then beyond resurrection. All manufacturers run restrictive cartels that strongly discourage or actively prevent sales of spares, even though many have parts stamped with part numbers!! Once, I tried to buy a tiny, one-cent plastic lever for an HP printer. In the UK, I was refused supply at any cost. Eventually, it was offered for $50 plus shipping from the USA. After an order was placed, the order was rescinded by them. Sending the machine for repair incurs a standard service charge in excess of the cost of a new machine. Epson runs an obscure parts department in N Wales. I was quoted twice the cost of a new printer for a replacement carriage. This is leverage on a grand scale, ugly face of capitalism and a massive impact on toxic landfill. On the technical front, all except Canon have prove worse than useless in support concerning detailed technical information.
But, I digress.
In spite of the above comments, HP seem most mechanically reliable over long periods. They also have the best cartridge/ink system which is also amongst the most expensive. All inkjet printers need to be run at least once a week, as indicated in the link and above, but only HP stand a chance of being regenerated if they have seriously dried out. Lexmark, which use solid pigment in their formulation are totally useless. They dry out quickly and are subject to precipitation and crystallization when partially used; they cannot be reliably refilled for these reasons, thus represent a very expensive mistake unless daily use is guaranteed. Lexmark should be avoided since there are no balancing benefits.
As far as inks are concerned, Epson original ink seems brightest and least fading in independent tests. HP inks are satisfactory and easiest to replenish with third party fluids, subject to obvious caveats about nozzle wear, fadability, etc. At least three refills should be achieved, many more for less demanding applications in busy environments.
Of course, there will those who disagree with all or some of the foregoing and exceptions occur with individual applications, environments.
Conclusions? If costs are not a problem and best resolution is essential, buy Epson and be prepared to throw the entire machine away after the one-year warranty expires, with the outside chance you'll get lucky with an individual specimen. For the more parsimonious, buy HP and refill the cartridges early, ie when half-full. Canon looks increasingly attractive. Lexmark is an abject failure. If running costs are most important, buy a cheap colour laser printer and tolerate the lower resolution - prints should last virtually forever, whenever that is!
And finally, for Linux, most HP machines will run under CUPS, as will many Epson and Canon machines. Unless you are a coding professional with insider knowledge, avoid MFP machines under Linux, even gifts, or it'll be a thundering headache and late to bed for a week. Don't expect much help from the big four, despite some apparently friendly murmurings. In the longer term, my guess would be that Canon is most likely to make the enlightened leap towards assistance in Linux, but I could be wrong!
Notwithstanding, there are clever geeks who are able to get anything running under any OS, but much technical skill and knowledge may be required to follow their methods from published websites.
Inkjet represent an intermediate solution for mass-market colour printing. Presently, although cheaper to run, colour laser printers cannot achieve adequate resolution except with high-priced commercial machines.
Dye-sublimation remains a minority sport and is extremely expensive.
From the outset, due to aggressive competition and profiteering, inkjet companies decided to sell their printers cheaply and recoupe on consumables (cartridges).
There are two systems presently in use in inkjets: Epson and Canon use ink tanks with separate head technology permanently plumbed into the mechanics. HP and Lexmark incorporate the droplet metering into the head itself. Neither technology is entirely satisfactory and is strongly dependent on actual field usage requirements rather than notional pre-purchase prejudices. Post-purchase maintenance will, therefore, depend on model, manufacture and actual usage, as outlined in the link above. Repeat: always run off a test page once a week.
Until recently, Epson led the field for best resolution, but HP and esp. Canon have caught up. Lexmark has always been bottom of the heap.
Epson technology, sadly, is a disaster waiting to happen. The mechanics can become unreliable and the inkfeed tubes on theirs and Canon machines can dry or experience airlocks and blockages. They are then beyond resurrection. All manufacturers run restrictive cartels that strongly discourage or actively prevent sales of spares, even though many have parts stamped with part numbers!! Once, I tried to buy a tiny, one-cent plastic lever for an HP printer. In the UK, I was refused supply at any cost. Eventually, it was offered for $50 plus shipping from the USA. After an order was placed, the order was rescinded by them. Sending the machine for repair incurs a standard service charge in excess of the cost of a new machine. Epson runs an obscure parts department in N Wales. I was quoted twice the cost of a new printer for a replacement carriage. This is leverage on a grand scale, ugly face of capitalism and a massive impact on toxic landfill. On the technical front, all except Canon have prove worse than useless in support concerning detailed technical information.
But, I digress.
In spite of the above comments, HP seem most mechanically reliable over long periods. They also have the best cartridge/ink system which is also amongst the most expensive. All inkjet printers need to be run at least once a week, as indicated in the link and above, but only HP stand a chance of being regenerated if they have seriously dried out. Lexmark, which use solid pigment in their formulation are totally useless. They dry out quickly and are subject to precipitation and crystallization when partially used; they cannot be reliably refilled for these reasons, thus represent a very expensive mistake unless daily use is guaranteed. Lexmark should be avoided since there are no balancing benefits.
As far as inks are concerned, Epson original ink seems brightest and least fading in independent tests. HP inks are satisfactory and easiest to replenish with third party fluids, subject to obvious caveats about nozzle wear, fadability, etc. At least three refills should be achieved, many more for less demanding applications in busy environments.
Of course, there will those who disagree with all or some of the foregoing and exceptions occur with individual applications, environments.
Conclusions? If costs are not a problem and best resolution is essential, buy Epson and be prepared to throw the entire machine away after the one-year warranty expires, with the outside chance you'll get lucky with an individual specimen. For the more parsimonious, buy HP and refill the cartridges early, ie when half-full. Canon looks increasingly attractive. Lexmark is an abject failure. If running costs are most important, buy a cheap colour laser printer and tolerate the lower resolution - prints should last virtually forever, whenever that is!
And finally, for Linux, most HP machines will run under CUPS, as will many Epson and Canon machines. Unless you are a coding professional with insider knowledge, avoid MFP machines under Linux, even gifts, or it'll be a thundering headache and late to bed for a week. Don't expect much help from the big four, despite some apparently friendly murmurings. In the longer term, my guess would be that Canon is most likely to make the enlightened leap towards assistance in Linux, but I could be wrong!
Notwithstanding, there are clever geeks who are able to get anything running under any OS, but much technical skill and knowledge may be required to follow their methods from published websites.
I've had no luck with Lexmark and Canon, Epson is the only one I have been able to get working sucessfully.
In 1998 I hooked a 3 year old Epson dot matrix printer to RedHat 5.2 and despite the noise and slow speed it worked where the Lexmark 1000 did not.
In 1999 I bought an Epson 460 Color Stylus, the cheapest Epson at that time, and it worked in RedHat 5.2 and every other version of Linux since then and is still my main printer.
I have an 18 months old Canon that needs a new cartridge which costs nearly as much as what I paid for the printer and does not work in Linux so we now own another Epson.
In 1998 I hooked a 3 year old Epson dot matrix printer to RedHat 5.2 and despite the noise and slow speed it worked where the Lexmark 1000 did not.
In 1999 I bought an Epson 460 Color Stylus, the cheapest Epson at that time, and it worked in RedHat 5.2 and every other version of Linux since then and is still my main printer.
I have an 18 months old Canon that needs a new cartridge which costs nearly as much as what I paid for the printer and does not work in Linux so we now own another Epson.
inkjet printers
Having worked for one of the major recyclers, I concur with Sage's comments. Whilst HP medium quality printers and above seem reliable, there is that leverage problem with cartridges having hard wired expiry dates in them, the ink level recorded there as well (count down only) and provision in the printer to record all this info for up to three of each cartridge (colour, photo or black) including their individual serial numbers. Most systems that rely on steam driven printing (all except Epson) rely on the FLOW of ink to cool the heating pads in the individual nozzles. This is why it is important to print regularly, to avoid dried ink forming in the exposed nozzles.
Refilling success is determined by the quality of the ink used and the obfuscation in design by the printer manufacturer. Epson and HP are good at the latter in different ways. Have found Canon the easiest to refill. In experience those who use their printer often have the best success with refills. One family achieved ten refills on a HP57 black cartridge and quiite a number of Business regularly achieved 8-10 on their cartridges (Canon & HP)
Refilling success is determined by the quality of the ink used and the obfuscation in design by the printer manufacturer. Epson and HP are good at the latter in different ways. Have found Canon the easiest to refill. In experience those who use their printer often have the best success with refills. One family achieved ten refills on a HP57 black cartridge and quiite a number of Business regularly achieved 8-10 on their cartridges (Canon & HP)
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them"
- Albert Einstein
- Albert Einstein
Extremely valuable to have an insider's view, alex - thanks.
We have played around with the third party 'chipping' kits which try to defeat the ink refilling counter on Epson systems. Some work but success or failure is random. There are also various schemes for swapping tanks backwards and forwards to outwit the counter, described on the Web. The EU gave Epson an ear-bashing for their anti-competitive practices. Epson tried to claim that their ink monitoring system was essential to prevent airlocks forming if one or more ink tanks ran out. Whilst this is true, it also implies a fundamental design defect, wastage of remaining ink, as well as unfair leverage.
Notwithstanding, these 'features' are restricted to Epson, not HP. The HP scam only related to refilling their laser printer cartridges and I think that was resolved by HP and the EU. The biggest problem is that one can no longer rely on the USA, the largest market, for fairness and equity and support against crooked commercial practices whilst morons like Bush and his funders are in power. There are many decent folk over there, but the USDoJ is severely limited in what it can achieve, as was evident when they eventually convicted Microsoft. The best way forward would be to avoid such companies - presumably why we are here today!! Like Tony said - edukashun, edukation, education.
We have played around with the third party 'chipping' kits which try to defeat the ink refilling counter on Epson systems. Some work but success or failure is random. There are also various schemes for swapping tanks backwards and forwards to outwit the counter, described on the Web. The EU gave Epson an ear-bashing for their anti-competitive practices. Epson tried to claim that their ink monitoring system was essential to prevent airlocks forming if one or more ink tanks ran out. Whilst this is true, it also implies a fundamental design defect, wastage of remaining ink, as well as unfair leverage.
Notwithstanding, these 'features' are restricted to Epson, not HP. The HP scam only related to refilling their laser printer cartridges and I think that was resolved by HP and the EU. The biggest problem is that one can no longer rely on the USA, the largest market, for fairness and equity and support against crooked commercial practices whilst morons like Bush and his funders are in power. There are many decent folk over there, but the USDoJ is severely limited in what it can achieve, as was evident when they eventually convicted Microsoft. The best way forward would be to avoid such companies - presumably why we are here today!! Like Tony said - edukashun, edukation, education.
printer goings on
Sage,
Epson in EU, fell foul when lab tests on *empty* carts showed they were one third full still!
The things that were proliferating when I left, a year ago, were the use of smart chips across inkjet and lasers. The manufacturers were including trademark and patented material in these. Even if you could reprogram there was still the trademark/patent issue they could get you on. In the end the only way around was to develop your own chips without the specs. Needless to say there were the complants that certain features no longer worked, or an alarm would sound with the non-genuine cartridge. Also the *necessary* chips eat into your margins as they were not cheap to aquire. Thankful I never encountered this on Canon machines I saw. Apart from their refusal to support Linux I have not found anything I dislike with them. Their laser parts were very mch better than the equivalent HP part and cheaper. I now use the PIXMA iP3000 - it prints CD's and has a dual paper source, but yes I have to use TurboPrint in Linux.
Alex
Epson in EU, fell foul when lab tests on *empty* carts showed they were one third full still!
The things that were proliferating when I left, a year ago, were the use of smart chips across inkjet and lasers. The manufacturers were including trademark and patented material in these. Even if you could reprogram there was still the trademark/patent issue they could get you on. In the end the only way around was to develop your own chips without the specs. Needless to say there were the complants that certain features no longer worked, or an alarm would sound with the non-genuine cartridge. Also the *necessary* chips eat into your margins as they were not cheap to aquire. Thankful I never encountered this on Canon machines I saw. Apart from their refusal to support Linux I have not found anything I dislike with them. Their laser parts were very mch better than the equivalent HP part and cheaper. I now use the PIXMA iP3000 - it prints CD's and has a dual paper source, but yes I have to use TurboPrint in Linux.
Alex
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them"
- Albert Einstein
- Albert Einstein
Yes, we've run into all the issues you describe. Canon have a very helpful after-sales service and seem more ready to address anything that comes along. Older HP IJ's are OK and work in most flavours of Linux. As for laser printers, I still use my Epson GC5000, which is more or less where this company came onto the scene; they've been going downhill ever since.
Of course, it's not difficult to work out why Canon stands out from the pack. Japan belongs to the old world where tradition aims to provide quality and service, whereas the other jokers come from a culture designed only to make money!
Of course, it's not difficult to work out why Canon stands out from the pack. Japan belongs to the old world where tradition aims to provide quality and service, whereas the other jokers come from a culture designed only to make money!