What inkjet printer prints the best text?

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:48:24 GMT, measekite
wrote:



TJ wrote:
Burt wrote:

On my desk I always have the two printer solution to the problem. A
good quality b/w laser printer and an inkjet that prints good quality
photos and color graphics. The best of both worlds at this point in
time. Fast text printing for multi-page reports, documentation
booklets, checks, and business correspondance. Photo prints that
look, to the naked eye, as good as lab prints.

Probably the best solution, as long as the O.P. has the space and the
cash to buy, use, and support two printers.

TJ

If you really think about it you may buy two printers but in essence you
are really supporting one in a giving time period. You see if you use
the printers equally then in theory each will last twice as long in a
given period so each will require 1/2 the maintenance. So the average
is the same for one printer.

If the 2nd printer is a B&W laser the average is much lower,
because the cost per page is much lower. If it were an
older model B&W laser which took higher capacity cartridges
and/or could be refilled with bulk toner, the cost drops
even further. That it prints quite a bit faster and
razor-sharp text with cheap copy machine paper is icing on
the cake.

Frank wrote:
measekite wrote:

---more bull**** lies----
Get lost asshole!
Frank

PLONK

--
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy New Year
Joyeux Noel, Bonne Annee.
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
http://cbfalconer.home.att.net



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:
Burt wrote:

On my desk I always have the two printer solution to the problem. A
good quality b/w laser printer and an inkjet that prints good quality
photos and color graphics. The best of both worlds at this point in
time. Fast text printing for multi-page reports, documentation
booklets, checks, and business correspondance. Photo prints that
look, to the naked eye, as good as lab prints.

Probably the best solution, as long as the O.P. has the space and the
cash to buy, use, and support two printers.

TJ

If you really think about it you may buy two printers but in essence you
are really supporting one in a giving time period. You see if you use
the printers equally then in theory each will last twice as long in a
given period so each will require 1/2 the maintenance. So the average
is the same for one printer.

It's a moot point. If you really think about it, a well-designed,
well-built printer will probably be considered outdated and/or obsolete
by the manufacturer long before it quits printing, even if it's the only
printer you use. How many printers have we heard about in this newsgroup
that don't work with Vista because the manufacturer didn't bother to
develop a driver? It doesn't matter if you use a printer every day or
once a month - when the support is gone, it's gone.

Your argument doesn't address the problem of needing enough space, either.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ writes:
How many printers have we heard about in this newsgroup
that don't work with Vista because the manufacturer didn't bother to
develop a driver?

Of course, a printer that actually requires a special driver is a crap
design in the first place...

-Miles

--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

"Miles Bader" wrote in message
...
TJ writes:
How many printers have we heard about in this newsgroup
that don't work with Vista because the manufacturer didn't bother to
develop a driver?

Of course, a printer that actually requires a special driver is a crap
design in the first place...

-Miles

--
Excuse me for contradicting your generalization, Miles. I've had several
peripheral devices and software versions that worked great but didn't have
new drivers or were incompatable when we updated our OS. Had to replace
them with new devices for which the new version of the OS had a driver or
software versions that were compatable with the new OS version. Common
problems that I've encountered while migrating through the various versions
of Windows. The devices were not crap - the manufacturers of these
devices/software versions decided to not support them with the new windows
version. That is why I've purchased my last two computers in Oct and Nov
and specified WinXP instead of Vista.

"Burt" writes:
Of course, a printer that actually requires a special driver is a crap
design in the first place...

Excuse me for contradicting your generalization, Miles. I've had several
peripheral devices and software versions that worked great but didn't have
new drivers or were incompatable when we updated our OS. Had to replace
them with new devices for which the new version of the OS had a driver or
software versions that were compatable with the new OS version.

I'm not claiming the printer _hardware_ is crap[1], but if the hardware
_requires_ certain software, then one cannot judge that hardware in
isolation, because it's more or less useless without the software. In
such cases one must judge the "total package."

If part of that total package is a non-portable and quickly obsoleted[2]
software driver, then I think it's fair to say that the package is
indeed crap, no matter how nice its hardware component.

-Miles


[1] Though this sort of "driver required" design seems rather more
common with very low-end devices, where often the hardware also is
particularly great.

[2] ... and often buggy and badly designed -- most peripheral companies
are a lot less skillful at writing software than they are at
building hardware.

--
Any man who is a triangle, has thee right, when in Cartesian Space, to
have angles, which when summed, come to know more, nor no less, than
nine score degrees, should he so wish. [TEMPLE OV THEE LEMUR]

Burt wrote:
"Miles Bader" wrote in message
...
TJ writes:
How many printers have we heard about in this newsgroup
that don't work with Vista because the manufacturer didn't bother to
develop a driver?
Of course, a printer that actually requires a special driver is a crap
design in the first place...

-Miles

--
Excuse me for contradicting your generalization, Miles. I've had several
peripheral devices and software versions that worked great but didn't have
new drivers or were incompatable when we updated our OS. Had to replace
them with new devices for which the new version of the OS had a driver or
software versions that were compatable with the new OS version. Common
problems that I've encountered while migrating through the various versions
of Windows. The devices were not crap - the manufacturers of these
devices/software versions decided to not support them with the new windows
version. That is why I've purchased my last two computers in Oct and Nov
and specified WinXP instead of Vista.


I haven't had that problem with Linux. In almost six years of using
Linux, through several updated versions, all of my peripherals (except
for one oddball Visioneer scanner) have worked "out-of-the-box," and
they keep working that way.

IMNSHO, any OS that radically changes its device driver requirements
with every new version is crap, too.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ wrote:

I haven't had that problem with Linux. In almost six years of using
Linux, through several updated versions, all of my peripherals (except
for one oddball Visioneer scanner) have worked "out-of-the-box," and
they keep working that way.

IMNSHO, any OS that radically changes its device driver requirements
with every new version is crap, too.

I concur. But since when has Microsoft been considerate?
And now that I'm sour, let me add Visioneer to the list of "we've got
your money, go to hell" companies. They're so arrogant and stingy that
they simply told their customers with scanners for Windows 9x that they
were obsolete and wouldn't work under XP. After wasting long distance
phone calls attempting to contact them without being hung up on, I
discovered that my scanner works fine under XP after all. SP2, too. Pass
these jokers by, folks.

Bubba

I don't think that you're actually disagreeing with each other. I agree
with all three of you.

When I _really_ retire, it'll be time for me to switch OSs. I want
Microsoft out of my life, but can't dump them yet because I need to
maintain compatibility.

Richard

Miles Bader wrote:
TJ writes:

How many printers have we heard about in this newsgroup that
don't work with Vista because the manufacturer didn't bother to
develop a driver?

Of course, a printer that actually requires a special driver is
a crap design in the first place...

Of course a system that uses Vista is a crap design in the first
place. For some of the reasons, see below.

--
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0702.html#8
http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com