[NTLUG:Discuss] [Bulk] Re: Color printer for Linux

[Leroy Tennison]

Terry wrote:
> On 3/21/06, Chris Cox <cjcox at acm.org> wrote:
>   
>> Terry wrote:
>>     
>>> On 3/21/06, Patrick R. Michaud <pmichaud at pobox.com> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:15:16PM -0600, Chris Cox wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> So... I love the photo quality you get with the Epson.... but...
>>>>>
>>>>> The heads do clog... and on the Epson (unlike HP) they aren't
>>>>> built into the cartridge,, so when they clog, they clog and
>>>>> are are VERY HARD to unclog.  Mine went with use for maybe
>>>>> a month or so and I've got one head that simply will NOT
>>>>> unclog... sigh...
>>>>>           
>>> The epson is more economical to run because cartridges are ink
>>> containers only and so they are a lot cheaper, cartridges with built
>>> in print heads are a lot more expensive, so that makes your per-page
>>> print cost higher.
>>>       
>> If only this were actually true.   You really don't feel
>> the price difference at all.  Both are expensive.  Even if
>> you manage to find clone deals (because HP vs. Epson, they
>> really do cost about the same) you won't save all that
>> much.
>>
>> After 3 cartridge swaps you will have more than paid
>> for the printer.. so much so that you could have just
>> bought another printer with it's mini-starter cartridges
>> and economically it works out the same.
>>
>>     
>>>> Just to add a "me too" to this -- my father had an Epson printer
>>>> for about a year when the print head clogged, and nothing we tried
>>>> was able to unclog it.  The solution ended up being a new (HP) printer.
>>>>         
>>> You'll be unhappy when it comes time to buy new print cartridges.
>>> (If it's a low end sub-$100 printer, you might as well ditch it and
>>> buy another printer).... BUT... We have strayed off topic here ....
>>> sorry....  :)
>>>       
>> Epsons Dura* inks are not easily cloned.  You can
>> try to use cloned inks, you'll usually get more clogs
>> and poorer quality output.
>>
>> You need a cartrige reprogrammer (or other technique)
>> to allow you get the most out of the ink cartridges.
>>
>> With that said, the low end Epson stuff has a bigger
>> clone cartridge market.  I'm talking about their
>> photo quality ink jets.  There are a couple of brands
>> that are ok... but you'll save a couple of bucks... not
>> $50... which is what I'd need to save to warrant
>> keeping the Epson long term.
>>
>> Since I've used both HP and Epson Inkjets, here's my observations:
>>
>> EPSON pros
>>
>> 1. Excellent photo print quality.  No need for professional
>> photo finishing.  Again, I use the C8x versions, which
>> are general purpose.
>>
>> 2. Good speed.  Epson makes a line of photo printers
>> as well, but you'll lose the "good speed" aspect.
>>
>> EPSON cons
>>
>> 1. Text quality is poor unless you run highest res, then
>> it's VERY slow.
>>
>> 2. Ink cost is on par with HP, but no new heads means
>> there is a clogging potential.
>>
>> HP pros
>>
>> 1. Excellect text, very sharp even at default settings.
>>
>> 2. Ink cartridges are easy to find, have heads in them.
>>
>> HP cons
>>
>> 1. Photo quality is just ok.  You'll be able to tell
>> it's an inkjet.
>>
>> 2. Tend to pay too much for the HP name.
>>
>> In the $100 arena, the Epson is certainly better overall,
>> but both are cheap with regards to quality at this
>> level... so you might have paper handling issues, etc.
>> over time.
>>
>> I do not see a difference in ink costs at all.
>> As a percentage of the overall purchase of the black
>> and color cartridges, there just isn't any large
>> savings Epson vs. HP there.
>>     
>
> Maybe HP has dropped their prices and Epson has raised theirs
> recently, but the price comparisons I've made in the stores I visit,
> the Epson section had prices marked 20% or so cheaper than HPs
> section.
> And I just helped my friend order a set of after market refilled
> cartridges for his C84 for $27, so ... I dono, maybe you're right, but
> I just don't think so.
>
>
> And as far as the clogging problem, I'm not seeing any evidence of
> that either.  I've had an 825 for several years now and recently
> retrieved it from the barn where it's been stored for over 7 months,
> plugged it in, and it printed like a charm.
>
> I refill the cartridges for my 825 because it is so very easy to do. 
> And yes, I have the little device to reset the chip and if I'm not
> mistaken, I only paid about $10 for it so that's no big deal either.
>
> I have no problem with HP, in fact I have an old HP-5L that has given
> me good service for several years now and the toner cartridge is
> second to none in the area of longevity.  But for Ink Jet, Epson is my
> pick. For the most part, (when compared to HP), they contain more ink,
> and they're cheaper, (at least they were last time I checked).
>
>   
>> I don't think any of this is off topic.  Just an
>> analysis of the current state of color ink jet
>> technology.  There are pros and cons...
>>
>> I love my Epson (when the heads aren't clogged!) for
>> photos.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://ntlug.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>     
>
>
> --
> <><
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://ntlug.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>   
OK, let me see if I'm getting something correct here.  The HP cartridges 
have the dispensing heads built in so, if they clog, all you have lost 
is a cartridge (not that they are an insignificant cost, but, if they 
are almost empty...).  The Epson (like the Canon) has the dispensing 
heads built into the printer so, if they clog, you have lost the printer.

So, if you aren't printing photos (as I am not) and the costs of the two 
(unit and ink) are reasonably close (which I'll have to check) then it 
will be more economical to own an HP is it will not be used for long 
periods of time.  Is this correct or am I missing something?