new Tom's Hardware printer test: Canon vs HP

I've read this new THG review yesterday and I must say that it is the
worst THG review I've ever seen. For a website that rose out through
overclocking articles, I find it quite hypocritical for them to ignore
inkjet refilling.

Secondly: did THG test the printers for paper handling reliability? I
have printed at least 10 thousand pages on my Canon MP750 so far and I
didn't have a single misfeed, ever. I've printed out books using the
manual duplex feature without fear of a page misfeed that would ruin
the entire book. As an owner of 4 Hewlett Packard printers in the past,
I had experienced an average 1:200 misfeed ratio. I had successfully
dropped the ratio to 1:350 using my "grease on the rollers" method, but
the fact is that most efforts to duplex print resulted in frustration
due to page misfeeds.

Thirdly: is there any reference (considering that we are talking about
a hardware enthusiast and technically experienced site here) to the
*terrible* device drivers HP produces? Their javascript user interface,
their 750 MB installation requirements, the programs they run on
startup eating resources, and the fewer options?

Fourthly: THG dedicates 3 pages on quality tests, but they fail to
provide us with the original photo. My guess is: how could anyone say
which printer is best without being able to compare with the original?

Fifthly: THG compares printers in draft mode. That's laughable. Draft
mode in inkjet printers is just an advertisement trick. Considering the
quality degradation, if people would print on draft mode, people would
much better use a laser printer and enjoy much higher quality on the
same speeds without the inkjet noise.

Instead THG is focusing on features like LCD screens and card readers.
Just what the average THG reader needs...

Here is a simple comparison from my own experience:

* Canon has more reliable paper feed
* Canon offers two different ways to feed paper
* Canon has higher quality photos.
* HP has higher quality text.
* Canon is much faster on business documents where speed is important.
* Canon is much more quiet. Very important on business environments.
* Canon printers from Europe can print on CDs, you can modify them to
do so in the US. Very important for the home user.
* Canon has better drivers. I just can't stress how important that is
for the overall system health.
* Canon printers can be refilled and that saves you 95% of the ink
costs.

Canon printers are better, both for the business user and the home
user. Period.

I find it quite hypocritical for them to
ignore inkjet refilling.

Why? When they test out motherboards they do their best to test in
both stock mode and overclocked mode. While I think it would be nice
of them to include some aftermarket ink tests... the truth of the
matter is this would increase the level of testing by a factor of at
least two to test one other option... and there are at least 5 major
options available assuming they are even aware of them.

They are being fair testing the products out of the box with the ink
out of the box.

Thirdly: is there any reference
(considering that we are talking about
a hardware enthusiast and technically
experienced site here) to the
*terrible* device drivers HP produces?

Techncialy these are produced by Microsoft IIRC. And actually the HP
drivers tend to be pretty decent... it's the auto install routine that
i've noticed being screwy on some models.

Fourthly: THG dedicates 3 pages on
quality tests, but they fail to
provide us with the original photo.

wow, good point.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/12/...igh/page6.html
You can find the photo here of the girl on the bike. Normally they are
good about this but I guess they forgot. Tell them about it, it's a
valid complaint, i'm sure they'll correct it.

Fifthly: THG compares printers in draft mode. That's laughable. Draft
mode in inkjet printers is just an
advertisement trick.

I use draft mode... totally. It does use less ink. The contrast isn't
as cool as regular or HQ mode but I do indeed do draft mode.


1. Panos Stokas
Dec 10, 12:12 am show options
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.printers
From: "Panos Stokas" - Find messages by this
author
Date: 10 Dec 2005 00:12:04 -0800
Local: Sat, Dec 10 2005 12:12 am
Subject: new Tom's Hardware printer test: Canon vs HP
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

I've read this new THG review yesterday and I must say that it is the
worst THG review I've ever seen. For a website that rose out through
overclocking articles, I find it quite hypocritical for them to ignore
inkjet refilling.

Secondly: did THG test the printers for paper handling reliability? I
have printed at least 10 thousand pages on my Canon MP750 so far and I
didn't have a single misfeed, ever. I've printed out books using the
manual duplex feature without fear of a page misfeed that would ruin
the entire book. As an owner of 4 Hewlett Packard printers in the past,
I had experienced an average 1:200 misfeed ratio. I had successfully
dropped the ratio to 1:350 using my "grease on the rollers" method, but
the fact is that most efforts to duplex print resulted in frustration
due to page misfeeds.

Thirdly: is there any reference (considering that we are talking about
a hardware enthusiast and technically experienced site here) to the
*terrible* device drivers HP produces? Their javascript user interface,
their 750 MB installation requirements, the programs they run on
startup eating resources, and the fewer options?

Fourthly: THG dedicates 3 pages on quality tests, but they fail to
provide us with the original photo. My guess is: how could anyone say
which printer is best without being able to compare with the original?

Fifthly: THG compares printers in draft mode. That's laughable. Draft
mode in inkjet printers is just an advertisement trick. Considering the
quality degradation, if people would print on draft mode, people would
much better use a laser printer and enjoy much higher quality on the
same speeds without the inkjet noise.

Instead THG is focusing on features like LCD screens and card readers.
Just what the average THG reader needs...

Here is a simple comparison from my own experience:

* Canon has more reliable paper feed

I haven't had too many problems with mine... HP's paper feed is pretty
good from my experence.

Canon offers two different ways to feed paper

Nice feature, not useful to some but a nice feature.

Canon has higher quality photos.

That's opinion and that can be seen in their quality tests... ok not so
much so without the origional photograph. Actually from their last
review I would have picked the epson r800 as the best of the lot.
Canon is pretty good though.

HP has higher quality text.

This could be... I actually prefer the canon for text, esp when doing 5
point kanji. If you can make out kanji at 5 point the printer is good.

* Canon is much faster on business
documents where speed is important.

What is this business document test? Tell us more about it.

* Canon is much more quiet. Very
important on business environments.

That's a good point, toms should include noise level.

Canon printers from Europe can print
on CDs, you can modify them to
do so in the US. Very important for the home user.

They do speak about CD printing actually. Your point on this is moot.
It's not important to all users but it is handy.

* Canon has better drivers. I just can't
stress how important that is
for the overall system health.

Ummmm.... Actuallly I find canon's drivers to be kinda basic and not
all that spiffy. I mean at least with Epson you get a ton of options
including that fab microweave mode, HP pretty much the same deal. The
canon drivers have few options and the interface looks like it was
writen as a 16bit application. Further, HP drivers are at least writen
by microsoft for microsoft... and no one knows microsoft like
microsoft.

Canon printers can be refilled and that
saves you 95% of the ink costs.

When you take all factors into account, it's more like 80% to 90%.
Either you need refillable cartridges that cost $3 to $5 each or you
need canon oems to refill costing $10 to $15 each. Don't get me wrong
the figure is high, but you gotta take other things into account and
not just raw ink cost.

When they test out motherboards they do their best to
test in both stock mode and overclocked mode

My point exactly. They do test overclock ability of motherboards but
they do not do the same for refill ability on inkjets.

Techncialy these are produced by Microsoft IIRC

No. Microsoft is not to blame on this one. It's not the driver model
I am having a problem with it's...

And actually the HP drivers tend to be pretty decent...

.... the fact that they require you to install the entire software and
parts of their drivers are accessible only through a DHTML interface.
Also the fact that when you try to share HP drivers on a LAN you'll
have to wait until the HP driver has to spool the entire print job on
the server before it starts printing out pages.

Did you try to install one of the latest models? HP drivers are not the
same to what they have been a few years ago.

Do you really justify 400 MB for a printer device driver?

they fail to provide us with the original photo.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/12/...igh/page6.html

Did you notice that these two images are 100% identical?

http://images.tomshardware.com/2004/...detail_big.jpg

http://images.tomshardware.com/2004/...detail_big.jpg

Another "mistake" I guess. Come to think, I used to like Tom's
Hardware.

I use draft mode... totally. It does use less ink.

In a quality that simply doesn't justify inkjet technology with all
it's fallacies.

I would not disagree with your preferences, I just don't think draft
mode should be a factor in an inkjet test. But I understand this is
just my opinion.

I haven't had too many problems with mine [paper feed]

Too many is just not good enough for serious use.

Actually from their last review

.... no serious conclusions could be drawn considering the problem
I've specified earlier.

* Canon is much faster on business
documents where speed is important.

What is this business document test? Tell us more about it.

As I've said this is my personal experience. But I have printed the
same documents (I print plenty of business documents) on those printers
and the Canon prints in normal quality is roughly equal to HP at the
everyday (below normal but not draft) quality.

I doubt that you would find one test on the web that wouldn't give
Canon credits for speed in text & graphics documents.

They do speak about CD printing actually.
Your point on this is moot.

You mean Canon, right? HPs don't do direct CD printing.

The canon drivers have few options and the interface
looks like it was writen as a 16bit application.

What do you mean "few" options? They provide more options for page
setup than HP, which is exactly what a driver is meant for.

"looks like" ? Is this a technical debate or about aesthetics ?

Further, HP drivers are at least writen
by microsoft for microsoft...

What are you talking about? Where did you find the information that
HP's device drivers are written by Microsoft?

And how does that contribute to a point about driver software quality?

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073


"Panos Stokas" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've read this new THG review yesterday and I must say that it is the
worst THG review I've ever seen. For a website that rose out through
overclocking articles, I find it quite hypocritical for them to ignore
inkjet refilling.

Lots of problems with the review:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/...printer_fleet/

1. Canon has a model IP6600 which has:

1. LCD screen
2. Card Slots
3. 3000 nozzles
4. photo magenta and photo cyan
5. cd/dvd printing
6. 1 picoliter droplet

yet we are subjected to a review of the 4200/5200 models which the reviewer
states: "the Japanese vendor remained mired in its usual conservatism".

2. Ink Capacity

HP 8250

6 HP ink cartridges:
HP 02 Black, 16 ml,
HP 02 Cyan, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Magenta, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Yellow, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Light Cyan, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Light Magenta, 4.5ml

Canon IP4200/5200/6600:

13 ml per cart except pigment black for the 4200/5200 which is 26 ml. Why
don't reviews state how much ink we will be getting and how much those carts
will cost ?

Canon's have 3 times more ink and yet the carts cost about the same as HP
!!!

3. Third party inks

One way to dramtically reduce cost is to use third party ink. The cost
difference can be 20 times lower. I use Formulabs in all my Canons and the
quality is the same I was getting from Canon OEM ink. There is no problem
with color fading as the OEM's will always try to claim. I have pictures
that I did a year ago that are as bright and crisp as the day I printed
them. Proper storage and display is recommended for any picture you take.

The ink I purchased cost me $34 versus Canon OEM ink which would run me $600
for the same amount.

It's no secret that ink is where they make their money. Producing ink can be
as low as $4 per liter and yet they sell it for $1000 per liter or more. HP
makes it's lion share of profit on ink sales alone.


http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073

Sign up at Toms and add your replies their so he gets them.

zakezuke wrote:

Fifthly: THG compares printers in draft mode. That's laughable. Draft
mode in inkjet printers is just an
advertisement trick.


I use draft mode... totally. It does use less ink. The contrast isn't
as cool as regular or HQ mode but I do indeed do draft mode.

I can't really comment on the whole thing but I do agree that draft mode
on different printers is not a good benchmark.

Just looking at a C84 draft mode vs' a Canon MP750 and you can see a
MASSIVE difference in the ink used and the quality of the print. Why
they don't use "Normal" quality output is beyond me... That, after all,
is the benchmark most users will likely be using for regular inkjet
printing.

Anticipating a query photo printers, you'd also be sure to level the
benchmark at the "highest quality" level or at least test at that level
for additional comparison.

Having done some reviews for publications, in their defense, let me just
say that although it could be otherwise there, usually, reviews are
bought from an individual reviewer and some reviewers have different
priorities and see corresponding features and functionality differently.

I find it is best to look for a by-line when reading a review and if you
find that person tends to weight features differently than you do, to,
as you would with a movie reviewer, seek out a reviewer that has more
similar leanings to your own.

It may also make sense to writ the editor and express your concerns, as
it may alter who they hire to do reviews.

Art

Panos Stokas wrote:

I've read this new THG review yesterday and I must say that it is the
worst THG review I've ever seen. For a website that rose out through
overclocking articles, I find it quite hypocritical for them to ignore
inkjet refilling.

Secondly: did THG test the printers for paper handling reliability? I
have printed at least 10 thousand pages on my Canon MP750 so far and I
didn't have a single misfeed, ever. I've printed out books using the
manual duplex feature without fear of a page misfeed that would ruin
the entire book. As an owner of 4 Hewlett Packard printers in the past,
I had experienced an average 1:200 misfeed ratio. I had successfully
dropped the ratio to 1:350 using my "grease on the rollers" method, but
the fact is that most efforts to duplex print resulted in frustration
due to page misfeeds.

Thirdly: is there any reference (considering that we are talking about
a hardware enthusiast and technically experienced site here) to the
*terrible* device drivers HP produces? Their javascript user interface,
their 750 MB installation requirements, the programs they run on
startup eating resources, and the fewer options?

Fourthly: THG dedicates 3 pages on quality tests, but they fail to
provide us with the original photo. My guess is: how could anyone say
which printer is best without being able to compare with the original?

Fifthly: THG compares printers in draft mode. That's laughable. Draft
mode in inkjet printers is just an advertisement trick. Considering the
quality degradation, if people would print on draft mode, people would
much better use a laser printer and enjoy much higher quality on the
same speeds without the inkjet noise.

Instead THG is focusing on features like LCD screens and card readers.
Just what the average THG reader needs...

Here is a simple comparison from my own experience:

* Canon has more reliable paper feed
* Canon offers two different ways to feed paper
* Canon has higher quality photos.
* HP has higher quality text.
* Canon is much faster on business documents where speed is important.
* Canon is much more quiet. Very important on business environments.
* Canon printers from Europe can print on CDs, you can modify them to
do so in the US. Very important for the home user.
* Canon has better drivers. I just can't stress how important that is
for the overall system health.
* Canon printers can be refilled and that saves you 95% of the ink
costs.

Canon printers are better, both for the business user and the home
user. Period.

When they test out motherboards they do their best to
test in both stock mode and overclocked mode

My point exactly. They do test overclock ability of motherboards but
they do not do the same for refill ability on inkjets.

The thing is most reviewers don't take this into account. I agree it
would be nice but painfully hard esp since there are many choices for
ink, and many printers from which to test. And this is even assuming
the reviewer is familar with these options.

Did you notice that these two images are 100% identical?

Nope, I can't get them to display... perhaps it's direct linking
tomshardware doesn't like.

I haven't had too many problems with mine [paper feed]
Too many is just not good enough for serious use.

I have NEVER had an issue with letter sized paper in my psc 950. 4x6 I
can't say that with. Now my canon ip3000 on the other hand is pretty
good, but my prints are almost always slightly askew for some reason.
Perhaps I can do something to correct that but using my chopper with my
HP it's always spot on square.

They do speak about CD printing actually.
Your point on this is moot.
You mean Canon, right? HPs don't do direct CD printing.

I read the same review you did, they spoke about CD printing on the
ip4200... so you can't say they didn't bring it up. You could say they
should bring up the fact that you can enable the feature... but keep
also in mind that that would be a seperate hack and the hack is pretty
dang young. Granted I joined the steve's forums thread a late
march/april... and the ip4000 was already kinda figured out but I can
take credit for some of the work done hacking the mp750/760/780. My
project was mostly compiling existing info I started in late may from
which knightcrawler sifted through my disorganized notes and made a
really spiffy site with easy to follow instruction blocks. I can't say
I wrote the book on the subject.... but my contribution was noteworthy
and I know a little bit about the subject. But you can't assume tom's
hardware knows about it... in fact you should tell them, they should
publish the work of my self and knightcrawler.

What do you mean "few" options? They provide more options for page
setup than HP, which is exactly what a driver is meant for.

"looks like" ? Is this a technical debate or about aesthetics ?

I'm getting some odd ball issues with the canon drivers dealing with
Unicode, specificly Japanese... which is something that you wouldn't
expect from a Japanese company. They do offer a Japanese driver but
it's sorta full blown Fapanese... with no choice to use japanese but be
english... or a choice to meet it half way and display in romaji, at
least not from what i've seen.
It's hard to explain perfectly but some of the software from canon
results in memory leaks, the likes of which you only experence running
16bit applications in 2k/xp.

What are you talking about? Where did you find the information that
HP's device drivers are written by Microsoft?

There was an article a while back about a company who contacted HP
regarding adding some propriority features... navigating up the chain
only to discover that HP doesn't actually write the drivers and they
had to talk to microsoft... and contracted microsoft to do the work and
their custom drivers came with full HP logos.

And how does that contribute to a point about driver software quality?

Well, one big issue I have with the canon drivers is a lack of real
hard core control over the use of the two blacks. It's pretty much a
use pigment on plain paper and dye on photo paper.... or oddly enough I
caught it using dye black on plain paper when I mixed in colored text
with black text... ran out of cyan and the black text was well, not
black anymore. On HP drivers at the very least it's at least object
oriented... not document oriented. As in text gets treated like text
and graphics get treated like graphics.

And actually the HP drivers tend to be pretty decent...

.. .. the fact that they require you to install the entire software and
parts of their drivers are accessible only through a DHTML interface.
Also the fact that when you try to share HP drivers on a LAN you'll
have to wait until the HP driver has to spool the entire print job on
the server before it starts printing out pages.

Ummm... i'll agree that the full install disc with all the extra crap
is rather bogus... and causes some serious tweeky weirdo stuff if it
screws up. Certainly a software issue coupled by a media issue... some
of those discs I got were bloody unreadable on any of my drives... and
I have some spiffy CD rom drives that read just about anything. But
you can't say you are required to install 500megs of crap... you can
just install the driver. It's not a problem. Not sure on the
spooling issue... I can't say I've noticed it.

Knightcrawler wrote:



2. Ink Capacity

HP 8250

6 HP ink cartridges:
HP 02 Black, 16 ml,
HP 02 Cyan, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Magenta, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Yellow, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Light Cyan, 4.5 ml,
HP 02 Light Magenta, 4.5ml

Canon IP4200/5200/6600:

13 ml per cart except pigment black for the 4200/5200 which is 26 ml. Why
don't reviews state how much ink we will be getting and how much those carts
will cost ?

Canon's have 3 times more ink and yet the carts cost about the same as HP
!!!



In fact, there is a much more important issue. HP has introduced a
number of new features to their printers which restricts the amount of
ink wasted during cleaning cycles, etc. A millimeter of ink isn't
necessarily of the same value to another printer. Maybe the Canon uses
up 3 times as much ink as the HP for the same yield of documents


Art

Knightcrawler wrote:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...73.html#914073


"Panos Stokas" wrote in message
roups.com...


I've read this new THG review yesterday and I must say that it is the
worst THG review I've ever seen. For a website that rose out through
overclocking articles, I find it quite hypocritical for them to ignore
inkjet refilling.





THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE REVIEWING AND THE VENDOR LABELERS WILL
NOT TELL THEM.