Bruce Johnson wrote: > The wax printers and lasers are quite a bit more expensive initially, > but they're a lot longer lived and supplies are *cheaper* on > a per-page > basis. > > You would likely save money, overall, by not replacing the > inkjets when > they wear out (or heck, with the price of some printers when the ink > runs out), and adding more workgroup color lasers for draft work. > > For home use, this breaks because a typical home user isn't going to > recoup the initial cost of purchasing the printer for *years*, and > inkjet printers are better for photo printing, at least high-quality > ones versus lasers or thermal wax. Only Dye-sub printers give better > quality than inkjets (and are, not coincidentally, the only printing > technology *higher* in cost per page than inkjets.)
The only other thing that I would mention in the realm of home use is the reliability. I have owned 4 different ink jets (heck, I used to work on the Ink Jet drivers for HP a decade or so ago), and I have problems with the ink drying out, etc. when not used for a few weeks. For example, I used to not do much photo printing, or much color of any kind, so the color ink would dry out, and when I would go to use it the next time, it would take me an hour to get it all working again (4 or 5 head cleanings would normally get it working again). This wasn't just on HP's, it was Epson's as well (I still have a 740 that was used like 10 or 12 times before I got fed up with it and retired it). I haven't had this issue with any laser printer. With color laser's as low as $599 brand new these days, I just can't get myself to purchase anything else. Bottom line of what I am trying to say is that for home users, you might want to consider the hassle factor. I have found ink jets to be a lot of hassle for many reasons that I haven't had with color laser's. When you are waiting for something to print, and pick it up after it comes out, and it smears, its very disappointing, and that's only one issue. I have been happier with the photo quality of my 4550 on photo paper than any ink jet I have owned, "owned" being the operative word. I've seen what the newer photo printers can do on photo/glossy paper, and it is better than what my 4550 can do on photo paper. Enough better to put up with the additional hassles? Not even close, IMO. If money is the overriding issue, I would recommend treating them (as Bruce says) as disposable printers, and getting the least expensive one that has the needed quality. I've seen them for as little as US $39, which isn't much more than a couple of refills will cost. --> Russ -- PCI-PowerMacs is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Sonnet & PowerLogix Upgrades - start at $169 | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> PCI-PowerMacs list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/pci-powermacs.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive:<http://www.mail-archive.com/pci-powermacs%40mail.maclaunch.com/> Using a Mac? Free email & more at Applelinks! http://www.applelinks.com
