Recommend an inkjet?

[energyman]

get a Samsung CLP 315 or 320.

Yes, it is a laser printer.

Colour laser printer.

You can not print cds.

But fuck, toner is cheap compared to ink. And dried in ink is not a problem anymore. And the speed. And the dry paper. And the resistance against aging. Seriously... laser is the way to go.

[crazycheese]

You don't have to send me those links. My research is actually decent.

I've been to the HPLIP and Open Printing web sites.

You're still overlooking my point: THE PRINTERS ARE JUNK AND PRICEY. To get a decent HP printer that is compatible or supported in Linux, you have to spend big money. Or you have to find one used and look up the recommended printers list to make sure. Still, not all the features and functions work regardless of any open source support which is my other point.

So, sending me links is not proving anything and I already know about them.

I bought my printer because the printing function was an added feature for what I needed, which was a scanner. I went to the SANE project web page but I couldn't find a supported scanner. In the retail stores or any sources with new scanners, there are NO supported scanners in Linux and I couldn't find any used ones (at the time) so I went with a Photosmart printer (yes, I know, the multi-function types never do any one function very well but what can one do?). Big mistake.

Price:
I was unable to find any decent printing solution with low monthly print volume, very good color printing, cheap or alternative ink and MFC(I needed a scanner 2) for less than 75$. So, if 75$ is too big fish, just consider use local print store if you have one hear - they have good hardware and cost/per/page are very good due to mass print.

From my 3 day x 12h experience the low-priced models from all brands (especially Lexmark) either use various tricks to get to money later via high price ink/low internal volume or are defective by design. Or combination of both. What droidhacker was refering to.

The best ink is in HP and Epson, where it not only has cost but also has huge quality. Epson prints better than HP, but HP has waay better driver support and tolerates non-original ink(just confirm its ok to print further and done). Best alternative ink for HP is from Inktech.

The thing with HP ink is following - if you purchase XL catridges(I mean H564) you pay half the ink price, still 60$ for 4x complete package. Also their ink is labor tested by many to be of very high quality and very high scratch and UV resistance (120 years). No alternative ink cannot match it, maybe 20-30 years at top. So yes, hp ink is by far not cheap, but its very good. Not for text print of course.

Installation:
What I had to install for B209a - one distro is Debian (my girl parents) other is Gentoo (mine).
Turn printer on, it starts guiding you.
Connect to PC.
Add cartridges.
Add paper.
Help calibrate(put the printed paper to scanner above).

Pull CUPS
Pull Xsane(with all deps) or sane. No drivers.
Pull Hplip
On gentoo, add cupsd to start on boot. Debian does it by itself.
Either use KDE/Gnome printing to add printer or go to localhost:blabla port (dont remember, all documented) in your browser and add the detected printer there.
You can print and scan from all apps from now on.

Hplip has already scan drivers for all MFC included.

You need scan drivers FROM sane ONLY, if you use standalone scanners, HP standalone included. I connected canon scanner once this way, it was mustek under the label haha but it worked.

MFC and quality:
B209a is multifunction and it does everything well. I had contact with Brother MFC200 - it was opposite. The photoprinting quality is photographic. I had a recipe page printed by professional laser printer and the colorspace, quality are same. The Kodak 5250 on contrary, which I used in standalone mode to print only one this page was CRAP compared. Also Kodak only accepts Kodak paper thats very high price. Hp prints on everything and can manually override.

I also printed a lot of photography from Sony A500 in free time via Linux/Gimp/Gwenview - its photo quality.

Printer own cardreader works in linux too btw (USB, SD, miniSD).

My personal cons for this printer:
- You need "water resistant" inkjet photo paper. Its not rare, not high price, but you need it if you want your prints be water resistant(like they should). Compared to laser printer, inkjet is NOT water resistant - it depends on paper.
- HP premium paper is NOT water resistant. 120 years guarantee and yet not water resist. Ignore it.
- Consumes very very small amount of ink on start for head clean. Impossible to prevent on any inkjet.
- Printing head positioning mechanism is precise and can be damaged. Im not saying it regarding to your case. However on laser, the laser can stop functioning, the electronic can melt, the drum can wear-off, the motor can malfunction, it can overheat, dispence an lovely stream of cancer-causing toner impossible to cleanup with normal vc. Welcome to reality, where everything breaks.

And I once had some HP printer(not MFC) 7 or 9 years ago, with cartridges costing 50$ EACH, not refillable easily, with printing head build into each cartridge(so its extra price and gets damaged sooner). I was not using linux back then, but yes, crap. Immense crap. I think I have recycled it away. Would prefer "20-year old Laserjet 4L" to it anyday.

[Panix]

You don't have to send me those links. My research is actually decent.

I've been to the HPLIP and Open Printing web sites.

You're still overlooking my point: THE PRINTERS ARE JUNK AND PRICEY. To get a decent HP printer that is compatible or supported in Linux, you have to spend big money. Or you have to find one used and look up the recommended printers list to make sure. Still, not all the features and functions work regardless of any open source support which is my other point.

So, sending me links is not proving anything and I already know about them.

I bought my printer because the printing function was an added feature for what I needed, which was a scanner. I went to the SANE project web page but I couldn't find a supported scanner. In the retail stores or any sources with new scanners, there are NO supported scanners in Linux and I couldn't find any used ones (at the time) so I went with a Photosmart printer (yes, I know, the multi-function types never do any one function very well but what can one do?). Big mistake.

[crazycheese]

I guess you, like others in this forum, or maybe many Linux users want to defend any company that has any minimal opensource support at all regardless of the quality of the product or support.

Yeah, fcking minimal all the way!

http://hplipopensource.com/node/237

http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/recommended.html

Minimal my @$$.

[crazycheese]

It was already broken when I bought it. Trying to blame me for the product's flaws is a bit shady. I will ignore your posts from now on.

I wasnt trying to blame you. If its broken take it to the shop. Everything can be broken, everything can appear with design flaws. Its not your problem - ship it back and get the money. Shit happens.

It its happening on regular basis, yes, its other case. For example brother is CRAP on color, lexmark is CRAP in low-cost segment(less than 500$), canon and epson require you to reset non-original catridges with resetter, samsung is dropping linux support, canon drivers are CRAPY BINARY PIECE OF JUNK that are kept in the corner.

I have two b209 that costed 100$ each, work BOTH FINE out of the box, ink is CHEAP and there a lots of it, it does NOT jam, it has EVERYTHING in linux that it has in windows - EVERY OPTION from autopaper sorting to scanner dpi, it does NOT require to mess around - ZERO work.

You can ignore me and consider what you want. If HP company starts fckng up (like Oracle today) I will throw it away the same day. Apparently they mention LINUX support in a handbook, they provide same-day hardware driver support, the driver is almost completely opensource(same microcode by some models as with amd), they run own site DEDICATED to linux support, they PAY TEAM TO DEVELOP LINUX DRIVERS.

And no, I am NOT HP fan, not to slightest degree. I just SEE WHAT THEY DO. I watch the situation and I share my experiences just like most of us.

In any case, I hope you find the working linux printer that suits you and works without troubles. Cheers.

[Panix]

I think Panix had an paper jam in his inkjet, then he forceably fulled the paper away (the proper jam removal is even imprinted on the printer) and destroyed something within head positioning mechs. Or some HP engineer really fckdp on this model. Either way I would send it to HP ifs within guarantee. Sheet happens.

It was already broken when I bought it. Trying to blame me for the product's flaws is a bit shady. I will ignore your posts from now on.

[Panix]

Forget this, topic is so old, I forgot you were the topic starter.
Now.
Lets see how its better to go shopping in modern world.

Study here: http://www.amazon.com/HP-PhotoSmart-...8714544&sr=8-1

And here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...scrollFullInfo

You will read about possible paper jam, that is clear the engineering problem. I wont buy it.

If you printer fails to align, there is something really really bad happend to head positioning mechanism. Mine aligned instantly and I have already done it several times.

The thing with HP printers where they require time to start up, which is often criticized, is because of the way they handle the necessary head cleaning. They park it every time they go off and they clean it every time on start. It takes time(15-20 secs). They produce sounds, yes. But then it is set to print. Others dont do it, they just park/unpark heads without cleaning. Then they start running 20 minutes cleaning cycle every week. And if they miss it, there is high probability ink dries up in the head. I prefer the HP way.

HP Photosmart printers are junk. They're also expensive for what you get. Also, with opensource HP, not all features work or they work at less than capacity or not at full function/feature. So, there goes your opensource benefits and argument. Most printers that aren't laser don't work well in Linux, imho. Due to no support or less than full features. This is the same sort of thing as video cards which is what I alluded to in my original post.

HP printers, for the most part, are garbage and to get a half decent one, you have to spend $100s of dollars. The entry level line is awful and full of flaws. The Photosmart line has a paper japm problem. I've experienced it with two already, one I owned and one from work.

I guess you, like others in this forum, or maybe many Linux users want to defend any company that has any minimal opensource support at all regardless of the quality of the product or support.

I wanted to support HP, too, but I have nothing but bad experiences with the ACTUAL PRODUCT. I can't use it with Linux if it doesn't work or has major design problems.

[crazycheese]

Perhaps this is offtopic, but I've just set up an HP Photosmart 2610 under Linux, and it was extremely easy, and fully supported.

I for one am impressed with the state of the HP drivers.

Yeah I was impressed as well. Actually Kodak sales guy told me it works in linux as well. He lied. Haha, now he has two OPENED printers and hp worked really like charm. Fact, even if for someone HP sucks, they take linux seriously, they even ship an optional linux utility to control the fine settings.

I think Panix had an paper jam in his inkjet, then he forceably fulled the paper away (the proper jam removal is even imprinted on the printer) and destroyed something within head positioning mechs. Or some HP engineer really fckdp on this model. Either way I would send it to HP ifs within guarantee. Sheet happens.

[crazycheese]

Lol, you are not going to kill me cause I use inkjet at home, wont you?
I suggest I tell you, what I know and then you tell me, what you know, and we shake hands and stay friends instead of puting this small part of internet on fire )

Nobody's talking about dot matrix except you, but you bring up an interesting point, because inkjunk is actually very similar to dot matrix and shares some of the same flaws... the alignment problem I mentioned... dot matrix had those too. The basic operation is similar, except that rather than stabbing the ink from the ribbon onto the paper, the inkjunk SPRAYS it.

Dot-matrix share not that big part with inkjet at all - only the basics of printing head function. That does not mean it is bad or inefficient. They are 8/9 or 24 needle printers that use kilometer-long catridges costing 4-5$ each, able to print War and Peace by Tolstoy three times before they run out of catridge. And then you can still use them second or even third time, only the color will degrade a bit.
They are slow, noisy, very bad quality, but are extremely efficient, which of course reflects their current price. Yes, current price.

Look at this: http://geizhals.at/eu/?cat=prmat

Printing large amounts of financial docs or logs - they are perfect for this.

They have NO alignment, they do not need it. You can align the head with your hand - they will probably survive nuclear attack. At least my Epson LX-300 was like that in DOS era.

You are thinking of some VERY old fashioned kinds of toner.

Huh? There are tons of toner manufacturers, all of which make every kind of toner for compatibility with every kind of printer.

So you mean toner is like paste nowadays? Its not microgranuar extremely fine dust anymore? Cause its important for it to be so in order for drum to be able to pick it off and melt to the paper. So, unless you prove, its still a cancer-causing dust, if set free(some amounts set free regardless of the process, its not possible to prevent it).
Then, there is no manufacturer able to duplicate highly complicated toners. They REFILL it. And in the moment they refill the stuff goes KABOOM from there(ever tried opening dirtbag of your vacuum cleaner, unless its water-based. Yeah, the ink analogy lol). Many do this quite carefully, but still vast amounts of dust make it out and this is why manufacturers consider it dangerous to refill toners.
Now compare the refilling process to simple ink.

Unless your single household prints so few pages that the $25 inkjunk never even eats up the cartridge it came with (i.e. about 25 pages or less within the lifetime of the printer), then laser costs FAR FAR less to operate for ANYONE.

Yes, my single household prints around 30-40 pages a month. Laser does NOT cost far less. There are fixed costs and running costs. Fixed purchasing cost for color inkjet are much much lower than for color laser, because the latter is much more complicated.

There purchase cost(running cost) for toner is also much higher and the toner also has "best before" so if you dont use it - its wasted.

Of course, as a result of more efficient storage and dosing, laser uses LESS color element when printing, but its still outperformed by dot-matrix(lol). But the result differs as well - laser prints at lower dpi and the result looks like its pen-made. Inkjet paints, the result looks like oil. It is the reason many photographers use inkjet even if they can afford professional color laser. Epson is very good for this - uses lots of ink and the results are very color reach.

Wow, your 20 year old 300 DPI laserjet 4L prints in equal quality to a brand new inkjunk? You know that you are really making my case for me...

Inkjunk, lol. I should note that, good joke!
The thing that I wanted to say is - laser has not that heavily progressed since 20 years(~14 years actually). The color came, the efficienty rised, the ram amount decreased, but the technology stayed same. Its dry-toner heat press.

I suggest you get your eyes examined. If you can't see the difference, then there is definitely something wrong with your vision.

Haha, you really printing bw correspondence for quality? So fonts stays nice and curves are sharp. I think the matrix wont exist then, but the case is opposite, so...

No, for graphics with a laser printer, you'll use regular copy paper that costs next to nothing.

No, the LASER quality is INFINITELY better.

Really I can Mona Lisa on cheap paper and it will look better than original? O_o

There is no similarity AT ALL between oil painting and inkjunk printing. There is no way possible for an inkjunk to reproduce the layers and texture of an oil painting -- it CAN'T be done. For that, you would have to look towards 3d printers, but for that (one that can do what you're claiming), you're looking at tens or hundreds of thousands of $$. For a 2d print of an oil painting, you're still looking at laser being FAR FAR more effective.

Of course there is! They function precisely as oil-painters. You are digging too deep requesting it to print layer-after-layer, but this also can be done. In fact the cream-printer prints cakes using same technology.

Aaand then comes laser press and does pancakes en-masse! Splendid!

200 kg? What are you printing? Posters? This is a different beast and not applicable here.

This standard small-mid enterprise A4/A3 color laser. Great dpi, great performance, great results(still pixelated, but nearly comparable to ink). Also great purchase, repair and running costs.

Also, wikipedia in its article on laser printers has nice paragraph about secret markings lol. You know you help NWO when you buy laser printer? Haha.

[pingufunkybeat]

Perhaps this is offtopic, but I've just set up an HP Photosmart 2610 under Linux, and it was extremely easy, and fully supported.

I for one am impressed with the state of the HP drivers.