Reply to: Toner refil Vs new

[BoredBloke]

"Inkjets are for gays and disguised employees."

In my case it was for printing CD's. They wouldn't go through the laser printer so I bought a cheap inkjet.

[Joe Black]

Maybe, but they're the only printers big enough for my invoices:



HTH

[DimPrawn]

Inkjets are for gays and disguised employees.

HTH

[BoredBloke]

My Epson r300 takes non epson cartridges which cost about £2 a pop. That is why I tend to go down the epson route for inkjets. As to the total cost of ownership, that was part of the review also. The ones which were recommended, while not being the absolute lowest, were towards the bottom end.

[oraclesmith]

I've got one of these :-

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/sh...ABA&catLevel=2


It's proper office equipment so it's a bit chunky but it's great. I do quite a bit of marketing output and photocopying. I sometimes use the fax too. I had an inkjet but I ditched it - used too much ink, too expensive to run, too unreliable, too slow, too much hassle.

[AtW]

Buy laser printer - the last rip off catridge I bought for my ink jet is the last, text printing is better in laser anyway - colour ones are affordable these days too.

[Joe Black]

It is all false economy just like with ink-jets

Tell me about it. I just had my inkjet pack up (slight unintended kick to aforementioned machine) after having forked out over €100 for new cartridges.

Question is now, do I upgrade it to a different model - which I wanted to do at some point - or consider the fact I have all the expensive cartridges and simply buy the new version of the same model cause it costs less than the ink.

[AtW]

Oct edition of computer shopper covered cheap mono laser printers. The one which won was Samsung ML 250 which cost 89 quid (24ppm), second was OKI at 70(16ppm).

It is all false economy just like with ink-jets - you need to look at total cost of ownership measured in number of pages printed: I was reading review of colour laser printer HP LaserJet 2600 and 3600, and even though the latter costs more to buy you actually get your money back quickly as costs per page are like 2.5 times less, see here: http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/06/22..._uk/page9.html

[BoredBloke]

Oct edition of computer shopper covered cheap mono laser printers. The one which won was Samsung ML 250 which cost 89 quid (24ppm), second was OKI at 70(16ppm).

I still have my trusty HPLJ4L at home. It is well over 10 years old and still on its original toner! At the prices above, I doubt I'd buy a new toner for it though - I'll probably just replace it as I don't do too much printing. I also have an Epson r300 for colour and CD printing.

HP was one of the worst of all of those tested.

[DaveB]

It appears that "HP" Colour Laser printers (at least one of them) is actually rebranded Canon - poor Hewlett and Package are turning in their graves, and LaserJet 4L was soo good and reliable

Packard

[AtW]

It appears that "HP" Colour Laser printers (at least one of them) is actually rebranded Canon - poor Hewlett and Package are turning in their graves, and LaserJet 4L was soo good and reliable

[PRC1964]

I've had a Canon LBP-810 for a couple of years and not had any trouble with it. It's still on it's first toner cartridge as I don't print that much. At my client they have HP printers and they seem to need new fuser units etc. with alarming regularity.

[AtW]

It's inkjet - HP's strong point was laser printers.

[DaveB]

Well this guy doesnt like HP printers

[TheMonkey]

I had bad experience with Brother - cheap crappy brand, maybe they are better now but I am not buying it anymore, Samsung might be good - think HP these days overpriced and lower quality than they used to be.

They used to be rubbish but they're uber reliable now.