[NTLUG:Discuss] Color printer for Linux

[Chris Cox]

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.

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.