Personal laser printers that can duplex-print on mac osx tiger?
Newbie
apologize to all who have seen that post. However, having visited a few
stores and spent time with manufacturer reps on the phone, I have a
more precise querry. I'd also like to ask it of mac users as, sadly,
neither stores nor vendor reps seem all that sure footed about macs.
I would like a basic laser printer that can do duplex printing on mac.
So far the only candidate I have is HP 1320. It lists for 399 but
available for less. Does anybody know of any offering from another
manufacturer up to this price that can do duplex printing on a mac?
You'd think it would be easy: just look at the specifications. But
people don;t know macs and read from some sheet that says mac
compatible. Great, but turns out that doesn't mean all advertized
features work with a mac! (So Brother 5170D is advertized as duplex and
mac-compatible, but only a disappointed buyer can tell you that the
duplex feature is windows only. The advertizing is not false, but
misleading enough to cause a heartburn.)
Other than duplexing, all I want is that the paper shouldn't jam. :-)
Please forward, repost as you see fit. All help appreciated.
vze3...@verizon.net
a solid machine. Duplex prints just fine under Tiger, all the bell and
whistles supported.
--jim
Thor Lancelot Simon
>
>(So Brother 5170D is advertized as duplex and
>mac-compatible, but only a disappointed buyer can tell you that the
>duplex feature is windows only. The advertizing is not false, but
>misleading enough to cause a heartburn.)
That's utter nonsense. I have yet to encounter a duplex printer from
a reputable manufacturer that won't print duplex when attached to a
Macintosh. Perhaps you have driver problems (one hint: don't use the
CUPS drivers unless you have to. They ignore features of many printers,
particularly Postscript printers like the Brother 5170 you mention
above).
In fact, I own a Brother 5170D. It's sitting right next to my Powerbook
as I type this. I have printed about 50 pages, in duplex, this morning.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be
abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
Newbie
> In article <261020050206055030%new...@no.spam>, Newbie <Nobody> wrote:
> >
> >(So Brother 5170D is advertized as duplex and
> >mac-compatible, but only a disappointed buyer can tell you that the
> >duplex feature is windows only. The advertizing is not false, but
> >misleading enough to cause a heartburn.)
>
> That's utter nonsense. I have yet to encounter a duplex printer from
> a reputable manufacturer that won't print duplex when attached to a
> Macintosh. Perhaps you have driver problems (one hint: don't use the
> CUPS drivers unless you have to. They ignore features of many printers,
> particularly Postscript printers like the Brother 5170 you mention
> above).
>
> In fact, I own a Brother 5170D. It's sitting right next to my Powerbook
> as I type this. I have printed about 50 pages, in duplex, this morning.
Good to know your experience. W/o owning the printer I can only go by
other people's remarks. My comment was based on the following review at
Amazon. It claims that the lack of duplex supprt on Mac is even
mentioned in some fine print in Brother's own manual. Funny thing is,
when I mentioned this review to Brother rep, he didn't challenge it:
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001JXAGQ/qid=1130341707
/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-6242517-2101704?v=glance&s=electronics&n=507846>
======== Begin Amazon review ========
"No duplex for Mac, tough network setup for Windows XP, October 14,
2005
Reviewer: Cosmo_dog (Out there) - See all my reviews
Overall, I'm pretty happy with the Brother HL-5170DN, which I have set
up in my home network of Macs and Windows computers. Print quality is
crisp and it's plenty fast for a home network environment. I had to
ding the printer for two reasons. The D and the N in the part number
tout the two big features in this printer, namely duplex printing, and
networking. This printer won't support duplex printing on Macs, and my
network setup for Windows wasn't a smooth ride.
Mac users can't take advantage of the auto-duplex printing feature.
You'll have to look deep in the owner's manual (which is only available
as a .pdf on the CD) to find the notations that there are a host of
functions not supported on the Mac, including duplex printing. So much
for the "D" if you're a Mac user..."
======== End Amazon review ========
Mark Geary
< So far the only candidate I have is HP 1320. It lists for 399 but
< available for less. Does anybody know of any offering from another
< manufacturer up to this price that can do duplex printing on a mac?
I've been using an HP 1320n from both 9.2.2 and 10.3.9 for a number of
months without problems. No problems with duplexing, and, personally,
I prefers my printers to be networked.
My only complaint is that if I print a postscript file with lpr from
the command line, then the printer waits for me to press the select
button before it prints. I don't imagine that most people will care
about this.
Mark Geary
--
"It's going to be a tough one Sam...Ziggy hasn't got a clue and the
guy in the waiting room keeps asking me if I want a jelly baby."
Newbie
> I've been using an HP 1320n from both 9.2.2 and 10.3.9 for a
> number of months without problems. No problems with duplexing,
> and, personally, I prefers my printers to be networked.
As I said, 1320 was my only candidate until I heard about Kyocera and
also that Brother models can duplex on a mac.
The only complaint I have heard of 1320 is that manual feeder is clumsy.
Another interesting aspect: a rebate, first of $50 then $100, has been
offered for it continuously since August, which makes me wonder if the
model is about to be replaced. If so, I might still choose the rebate
over the newer model but I would like to know what's coming and make an
informed choice.
> My only complaint is that if I print a postscript file with lpr from
> the command line, then the printer waits for me to press the select
> button before it prints.
What about pdf files?
Steve Hix
> < I would like a basic laser printer that can do duplex printing on mac.
> < So far the only candidate I have is HP 1320. It lists for 399 but
> < available for less. Does anybody know of any offering from another
> < manufacturer up to this price that can do duplex printing on a mac?
We're using a Brother HL-5170DN here at home. Duplex and networkable,
and supports Bonjour (neé Rendezvous), to boot. Cost $290 plus shipping.
Matthew Russotto
>Good to know your experience. W/o owning the printer I can only go by
>other people's remarks. My comment was based on the following review at
>Amazon. It claims that the lack of duplex supprt on Mac is even
>mentioned in some fine print in Brother's own manual. Funny thing is,
>when I mentioned this review to Brother rep, he didn't challenge it:
Heh. You expect a sales rep to know something about the product he's
selling? I guess hope really does spring eternal. Anyway, one of the
FAQ's on the Brother web site tells you exactly where the duplex option
is in 10.3. And the manual (which depicts the 10.1 driver)
specifically points out the "print on both sides option". It appears
the reviewer confused "Manual Duplex Printing" (where you have to flip
the paper over and feed it back in) with "Duplex Printing with Duplex
Tray" (where the printer does the work).
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Newbie
> We're using a Brother HL-5170DN here at home. Duplex and networkable,
> and supports Bonjour (neé Rendezvous), to boot. Cost $290 plus shipping.
Great news, and thanks. BTW just found out that this model is about to
be replaced by 5250DN: slightly smaller and lighter, faster processor,
30 ppm, MSRP $249 -
<http://www.brother-usa.com/printer/Printer_ataglance_psvar=ZADDFEATURE&
psvalue=1.aspx>
I'll go look at the Kyocera FS-1020D but at present 5250DN would seem
to be my best buy. Unless HP replace 1320 with some dynamite
shocker.:-)
Thor Lancelot Simon
>Mark Geary <ge...@fnord.io.com> wrote:
>
>> I've been using an HP 1320n from both 9.2.2 and 10.3.9 for a
>> number of months without problems. No problems with duplexing,
>> and, personally, I prefers my printers to be networked.
>
>As I said, 1320 was my only candidate until I heard about Kyocera and
>also that Brother models can duplex on a mac.
Let me try again: what rational reason do you have for believing that
_any_ printer that prints duplex at all, and has a Mac driver, can't
duplex on a Mac?
Newbie
> Let me try again: what rational reason do you have for believing
> that _any_ printer that prints duplex at all, and has a Mac driver,
> can't duplex on a Mac?
This is my first laser purchase. I went to the extent of choosing the
name "newbie" to emphasize my inexperience, so anyone who prefers to
deal with experts will know to stay away. Still, please forgive my
flaws.
As for your question, I am yet to encounter a manufacturer whose claims
can be trusted without verifying. I don't "believe" or "disbelieve"
them, nor stetements I find on the web. I look at the information and
opinions I get and weigh them.
On Amazon I saw one user's statement that his 5170DN does not duplex on
his mac. I didn't automatically believe or disbelieve him, but it was
something to consider. I brought it up with Brother's rep, and they
didn't challenge it. But if a few people say their Brother printer
duplexes with their mac, then that changes the situation.
Without a physicsl printer at my disposal, I don't know any better way.
John Proctor
If, as I suspect, you live in the USA (the land of the lawsuit) don't
you think that if a company misrepresented its product that some
out-of-work 'whiplash willy' would have tried it on? They certainly do
it with great regularity with Apple!
BTW, I have a used HP 8000DN that I got (at a good price) and I use it
with my PB G4 and iMac G5 on our home network. It is much better than
the low duty cycle 'personal' laser printers! I just love A3 for
schematic work (I'm an EE) and it duplexes very well too!
--
Regards,
John D Proctor
Newbie
> If, as I suspect, you live in the USA (the land of the lawsuit) don't
> you think that if a company misrepresented its product that some
> out-of-work 'whiplash willy' would have tried it on? They certainly do
> it with great regularity with Apple!
Well, why do you think we call ourselves a "nation of laws"? :-)
But then contracts, agreements, even advertizing...are all written with
that possibility in mind. In real life if something does not threaten
life or health it won't move a jury to make huge awards and lawyers
won't be interested.
For a printer that does not work as advertized, all I would expect is
refund. :-)
> BTW, I have a used HP 8000DN that I got (at a good price) and I use it
> with my PB G4 and iMac G5 on our home network. It is much better than
> the low duty cycle 'personal' laser printers! I just love A3 for
> schematic work (I'm an EE) and it duplexes very well too!
Right now my printer has to go on my desk itself, so "small footprint"
is important. So should be noise, but it will be noisy only when
printing but it will occupy the space all the time.
Jeff
using OS X 10.4.2
Per Rønne
> I would like a basic laser printer that can do duplex printing on mac.
Well, I'm using my HP LaserJet 4050N with a duplex unit. And since I'm
the only one living in my flat, it could be said to be a 'personal'
laser printer.
Unfortunately, it is no longer produced but of course this only means
that HP has made a new, better and cheaper product.
> So far the only candidate I have is HP 1320. It lists for 399
399 what? €399 is quite different from ¥399, you know:-).
--
Per Erik Rønne
Per Rønne
> That's utter nonsense. I have yet to encounter a duplex printer from
> a reputable manufacturer that won't print duplex when attached to a
> Macintosh.
HP LaserJet 1010:-).
--
Per Erik Rønne
Tim Streater
wrote:
> John Proctor <lo...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>
> > If, as I suspect, you live in the USA (the land of the lawsuit) don't
> > you think that if a company misrepresented its product that some
> > out-of-work 'whiplash willy' would have tried it on? They certainly do
> > it with great regularity with Apple!
>
> Well, why do you think we call ourselves a "nation of laws"? :-)
>
> But then contracts, agreements, even advertizing...are all written with
> that possibility in mind. In real life if something does not threaten
> life or health it won't move a jury to make huge awards and lawyers
> won't be interested.
>
> For a printer that does not work as advertized, all I would expect is
> refund. :-)
Errm, "advertising" is spelt with an "s" not a "z". Even in the USA.
-- tim
Silicon Sam
for all the computers in the house to use, even my Mac. I would be
hard pressed to give up the printer, it fits all my needs and then some.
Kiran
> That's utter nonsense. I have yet to encounter a duplex printer from
> a reputable manufacturer that won't print duplex when attached to a
> Macintosh...
And of the hundreds of models that have been in the marke, just how
many have you "encountered"?
Kiran
> > So far the only candidate I have is HP 1320. It lists for 399
> 399 what? ¤399 is quite different from ¥399, you know:-).
I am sure OP meant US$. However, that's list price. A friend just
bought one for $230: that is $330 minus the $100 rebate.
Kiran
> Errm, "advertising" is spelt with an "s" not a "z". Even in the USA.
English language is considerably richer and more fluid than your
education has led you to realize. Demand your tuition back. Unless, of
course, you attended a free municipal school, in which case you got
your money's worth. :)
Dictionary.com credits the following entry to Princeton University:
===============================================
1 entry found for advertize.
advertize
v 1: make publicity for; try to sell (a product); "The salesman is
aggressively pushing the new computer model"; "The company is
heavily advertizing their new laptops" [syn: advertise, promote,
push] 2: call attention to; "Please don't advertise the fact that
he has AIDS" [syn: advertise, publicize, publicise]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
===============================================
Tim Streater
wrote:
Any real dictionary will tell you that some words end in "-ise", such as
advertise, enterprise, and a few others, and that this is the case
worldwide. In the UK we prefer, but do not insist on, "-ise", except for
a few words ("size" comes to mind) which end in "-ize". Yanks, for
reasons best known to themselves, seem to prefer the ugly "-ize" suffix.
Any proper dictionary will tell you that too, as well as listing the
words for which "-ise" is mandatory.
-- tim
Kiran
> Errm, "advertising" is spelt with an "s" not a "z". Even in the USA.
BTW, Tim, you are going to love this. According to Merriam-Webster
Online Dictionary
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=advertize>
"Main Entry: advertize, advertizement
British variant of ADVERTISE, ADVERTISEMENT"
Here are a few British references that use "advertize" or
"advertizing".
Oxford Academic House:
http://www2.bioch.ox.ac.uk/~awatts/house.html
Oxford University Press:
<http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/guidance_articles/usinggradedreaders?c
c=gb>
Cambridge University Press:
<http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/print.asp?isbn=0521588065&print=y>
Another Cambridge University page:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/cuhags/events/minutes/74-03-12.htm
And most interestingly, House of Lords Journal (1832)
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=19250
=
Kiran
> Hey, this is the net. I can say anything I want to. And we even
> invented this thing called a wiki, which I can edit to mean whatever I
> want it to and people give it credibility.
>
> <snort> Yeah, right.
>
> I'm not sure where you or dictionary.com came up with that, but
> advertize isn't a word.
OK, Shakespeare, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says
Kiran
Streater <tim.st...@dante.org.uk> wrote:
> Any proper dictionary will tell you that too, as well as listing the
> words for which "-ise" is mandatory.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=advertize
" Main Entry: advertize, advertizement
British variant of ADVERTISE, ADVERTISEMENT"
Anyone can have an opinion, but consider actual usage over sevaral
centuries. Search for "advertize" in the following documents.
House of Lords Journal (1621)
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=30288
Oxford University Press (2005):
http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/guidance_articles/usinggradedreaders?cc
=gb
That should tell you it has been a word for a few hundred years.
Good bye.
Thor Lancelot Simon
Several dozen. I used to be responsible for the printing system used
by undergraduates at a good-sized university.
For what it's worth, if you know how the OS X printing subsystem works,
and you know how duplex (or tray, or...) specification on Postscript
or PCL printers works, it's pretty obvious that if the printer works at
all, it's going to work properly in duplex mode. There are a few small
exceptions (one involves CUPS, with its notoriously bad data on printer
features and "I know what you mean -- you don't!" default configuration,
getting in the way -- and 10.4 seems to use CUPS drivers for many printers
by default instead of "Generic Postscript" or even a vendor-supplied PPD;
the other involves really cheap printers made for the PC market that
require the host to feed raw raster data and paper-motion commands, but
those seldom have OS X support *at all*) but the only reasonable default
assumption if you understand how the innards work is "it will work fine",
because the number of printers for which that's not so is truly tiny.
Kiran
> the only reasonable default assumption if you understand how
> the innards work is "it will work fine", because the number of
> printers for which that's not so is truly tiny.
Since it can happen, at leats I find it reasonable that faced with such
a report the OP should be cautious. Beisdes why make any default
assumtion when he can gather actual and factual information as he
has been trying to do?
Thor Lancelot Simon
There is a world of difference between the claims "it might not work"
and "it usually doesn't work". I don't have an infinite amount of time
to go around the world testing individual cases when I know a general
rule and I doubt most other people do, either.
When you consider that much of the "actual and factual information" the
original poster has gathered is *clearly empirically false*, it seems
pretty obvious to me that the default assumption "it won't work" in fact
costs him a lot more time and effort assumption "it will work" would have.
Newbie
> Thor Lancelot Simon <t...@panix.com> wrote:
> > the only reasonable default assumption if you understand how
> > the innards work is "it will work fine", because the number of
> > printers for which that's not so is truly tiny.
>
> a report the OP should be cautious. Besides why make any default
> assumtion when he can gather actual and factual information as he
> has been trying to do?
Thanks Kiran, a good summary of how I approached it. Another point Thor
might wish to factor is that I'd buy just one printer not dozens (less
room for error, plus possible to pay a lot of attention). Also, I am
looking at spending my own money, not some university's. :-)
I have summarized my conclusions in another post.
Newbie
> the default assumption "it won't work" in fact costs him a lot
> more time and effort assumption "it will work" would have.
I think you are mistaken that I spent so much time assuming things
won't work and trying to find one that would. I spent time trying to
learn what was available, at what cost, other pros and cons, and
balancing what I needed vs wanted vs could afford.
But you do raise one interesting point. If minimizing time was all that
mattered, I should buy the first decent looking printer I saw. As you
say, chances are it would work and I'd be done with it.
However, this is my first laser purchase and another may not come for
years. It gave me pleasure and satisfaction to research what is
available and make my selection. Probably similar to how some people
reserach cameras and stereos although most cameras take photos and most
stereos play music.
Then again, many people do walk into a Best Buy or Circuit City and
just buy a camera or stereo. I bought my VCR and clock radio at Target
with zero research (just weighing the displayed choices then and
there). One person may buy a kitchen knife casually while another
spends days brooding over Wusthoff vs Henckel.
I don't claim to understand why some actions are casual and others draw
us in more. All I can say is that each of us decides how to use our
time, and researching this particular purchase gave me satisfaction and
enjoyment.
Tim Streater
wrote:
> Elmo P. Shagnasty <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey, this is the net. I can say anything I want to. And we even
> > invented this thing called a wiki, which I can edit to mean whatever I
> > want it to and people give it credibility.
> >
> > <snort> Yeah, right.
> >
> > I'm not sure where you or dictionary.com came up with that, but
> > advertize isn't a word.
>
> OK, Shakespeare, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says
> <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=advertize>
This entry is simply wrong. There is no such British variant.
> "Main Entry: advertize, advertizement
> British variant of ADVERTISE, ADVERTISEMENT"
>
> Here are a few British references that use "advertize" or
> "advertizing".
>
> Oxford Academic House:
> http://www2.bioch.ox.ac.uk/~awatts/house.html
This is just some ignorant person's personal website. It's not a
dictionary entry.
> Oxford University Press:
> <http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/guidance_articles/usinggradedreaders?c
> c=gb>
Neither is this.
> Cambridge University Press:
> <http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/print.asp?isbn=0521588065&print=y>
Or this.
> Another Cambridge University page:
> http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/cuhags/events/minutes/74-03-12.htm
Or this.
> And most interestingly, House of Lords Journal (1832)
> http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=19250
Or this - and in any case it would be usage from 1832 - obsolete.
All you've done is trawl the web for spelling mistakes. Big fucking deal.
Stay ignorant if you want to, I don't give a monkey's.
-- tim
RPS
> > OK, Shakespeare, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says
> > <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=advertize>
>
> This entry is simply wrong. There is no such British variant.
> > Oxford University Press:
> > <http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/guidance_articles/usinggradedreaders?c
> > c=gb>
>
> Neither is this.
> > Cambridge University Press:
> > <http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/print.asp?isbn=0521588065&print=y>
>
> Or this.
> > And most interestingly, House of Lords Journal (1832)
> > http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=19250
>
> Or this - and in any case it would be usage from 1832 - obsolete.
Right, Tim, 1832 citation is "obsolete", 2005 is "simply wrong". It is
good that you are around to protect us, otherwise Merriam-Webster
Dictionary, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, House
of Lords Journal etc., would have succeeded in misleading us. :-)
AlexS
for several centuries.
CNN/Reuters two weeks ago:
" http://edition.cnn.com/2005/BUSINESS/10/12/ba.saatchi.reut/
"LONDON, England (Reuters) -- British Airways said it had picked
London-based Bartle Bogle Hegarty (BBH) as its worldwide creative
advertizing agency, one of the ad sector's most coveted accounts."
You may be tempted to dismiss this as a mistake that did not get
caught, but as someone who has worked as an editor, I can assure you
that a "liberal minority" does accept both forms.
Paul Sture
From:
http://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/chambers/chref/chref.py/main
"Search Results for 'advertise'
advertise or (US sometimes) advertize verb (advertised, advertising; US
sometimes advertized, advertizing) 1 to draw attention to or describe
(goods for sale, services offered, etc) in newspapers, on TV, etc, to
encourage people to buy or use them. 2 (usually advertise for something
or someone) to ask for or seek it or them by putting a notice in a
newspaper, shop window, etc. 3 to make something known publicly or
generally. advertiser noun. advertising noun the business or profession
of producing advertisements for goods.
ETYMOLOGY: 16c: from French avertir, from Latin advertere to direct
attention to."
RPS
> So much for "wiki".
Merriam Webster and Chambers dictionaries are not quite Wiki. Besides,
previous postings have shown the usage in House of Lords Journal
(equivalent to US Senate Proceedings) all the way back to 1621.
David Dunham
very quiet and quick. And attaches to our Ethernet, so I can disable
AppleTalk.
The only possible glitch is that on my wife's computer, she can't print
from Classic applications. (But I can from my computer...)
--
David Dunham A Sharp, LLC
http://www.a-sharp.com/
"I say we should listen to the customers and give them what they want."
"What they want is better products for free." --Scott Adams
J. Rushford
> I recently got a Brother HL-5250DN, and am quite happy with it. It's
> very quiet and quick. And attaches to our Ethernet, so I can disable
> AppleTalk.
>
> The only possible glitch is that on my wife's computer, she can't print
> from Classic applications. (But I can from my computer...)
>
printing feature (duplex) on the 1320 but the toner cartridge only seems
to last half as long as that on the 5MP.
regards
John
Paul Reading
Are there any Duplexing Colour lasers that will print edge to edge?
G.T.
I just ordered a Brother HL-5250DN because I can't find anything close
to it's price range that is networked, duplexes, and has PostScript
emulation.
Greg
--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons
Geoffrey F. Green
"G.T." <getn...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> I just ordered a Brother HL-5250DN because I can't find anything close
> to it's price range that is networked, duplexes, and has PostScript
> emulation.
I'm thinking of getting one also, but I figure there must be a catch
because it's so feature-packed and so cheap. Let us know how it goes.
- geoff
Adrian
> I replaced my HP 5MP with an HP 1320 laserjet. I like the double sided
> printing feature (duplex) on the 1320 but the toner cartridge only seems
> to last half as long as that on the 5MP.
I believe some new printers are sold with a lower than standard capacity
toner cartridge. If that is the case in this instance it may be that the
replacement lasts longer.
--
Adrian
G.T.
"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-...@stuebegreen.com> wrote in message
news:geoff-usenet2-D7D...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Should be delivered next Tuesday. I got it at PCNation for $242 plus CA
sales tax with free 3-day Fed-Ex shipping. (I hope they don't substitute
the shipping as I MUCH prefer Fed-Ex over UPS).
Greg
pl...@csus_abcdefghij.edu
"7000" page cart can be purchased at a higher cost.
The low price is the probability that a replacement drum is very expensive
such that it would be preferable for me to just junk it (after the 25000
pages) & get a new printer since the drum is currently at $180. By then
newer models at lower cost & faster gimmicks will be available. Laser
printers are now in the realm of "throwaway", just like motherboads for the
ibmpc types; or even harddrives these days; even monitors have dropped prices
tremendously.......
Anyway I got mine in Oct '05 from the Staples local store at about $250 &
left it on my "network" of 2 computers. The printer is configurable via
a browser, command line & web (if one desires, ugh). Only thing is that
the BR 5150dn doesn't have a "print feed thru" for envelopes & labels but
haven't had problems with either, possibily it is so much faster than the
hp 5mp.
NB: the 5250dn prints the "back side" (page 2) before the front side (page 1)
when printing duplex mode; so be careful when doing labels if the printer
is set for duplex printing as default.
David Dunham
<geoff-usenet2-D7D...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-...@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
> > I just ordered a Brother HL-5250DN because I can't find anything close
> > to it's price range that is networked, duplexes, and has PostScript
> > emulation.
>
> I'm thinking of getting one also, but I figure there must be a catch
> because it's so feature-packed and so cheap. Let us know how it goes.
It's hard to know if it's on -- it's really quiet, and turns off all
lights after a while.
G.T.
It arrived alot earlier than I was expecting. So far it's been a great
purchase. I'm using Postscript from all my computers, even generic
Postscript PPDs work fine; two XP computers, this OpenBSD laptop, and
most importantly my Mac.
The build itself feels pretty cheap and it's a little noisier while
printing than my Xerox 4517 was. The only other negative is that I get
a little bit of paper curl.
I've got it connected via Ethernet. You can basically set it up via any
web browser after you print out a config page to get it's current
169.254/16 IP address, that's done by hitting the Go button quickly
three times. Or via telnet, I'm digging that, I think telnet provides
you with access to the most config features. Or via the Windows utility
which is pretty full featured. There is also a Java app but I didn't
try it on my Mac or this laptop.
It's pretty fast, and at 600dpi it's very crisp. Duplexing spits out
the current page and then sucks it back in for the other side. It goes
to sleep and if you send a print job over the network the built-in print
server wakes up the printer.
It's definitely going to fit our needs. My girlfriend is working on her
thesis and my Epson Photo 2200 just wasn't going to cut it for text.
Geoffrey F. Green
"G.T." <getn...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> It arrived alot earlier than I was expecting. So far it's been a great
> purchase. I'm using Postscript from all my computers, even generic
> Postscript PPDs work fine; two XP computers, this OpenBSD laptop, and
> most importantly my Mac.
>
> The build itself feels pretty cheap and it's a little noisier while
> printing than my Xerox 4517 was. The only other negative is that I get
> a little bit of paper curl.
>
> I've got it connected via Ethernet. You can basically set it up via any
> web browser after you print out a config page to get it's current
> 169.254/16 IP address, that's done by hitting the Go button quickly
> three times. Or via telnet, I'm digging that, I think telnet provides
> you with access to the most config features. Or via the Windows utility
> which is pretty full featured. There is also a Java app but I didn't
> try it on my Mac or this laptop.
>
> It's pretty fast, and at 600dpi it's very crisp. Duplexing spits out
> the current page and then sucks it back in for the other side. It goes
> to sleep and if you send a print job over the network the built-in print
> server wakes up the printer.
>
> It's definitely going to fit our needs. My girlfriend is working on her
> thesis and my Epson Photo 2200 just wasn't going to cut it for text.
Thanks much for the review -- looks like a great buy.
- geoff
Gray Shockley
(in article <j8-dnfBqPdm...@comcast.com>):
I came across this first on a small Xerox copier about ten years ago and then
came across it again on a Lexmark about five or six years ago.
And it is the same on my 1320n.
What you've got is a "starter cartridge". When you need a
new cartridge you have the choice of two rather than just one.
<http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/supplies_model.do?landing=printing
_supplies&family_name=LaserJet&model_name=LaserJet+1320n&catLevel=1>
has the data (and the prices of $72 and $131).
Notice that the two carts have different suffixes and the more expensive cart
has an additional two words: "maximum capacity".
++ gray