In article <46a761c5$0$10154$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>,
Wolf <ElLoboViejo DeleteThis @ruddy.moss> wrote:
> First off, what you want is not economic. A colour printer is a lousy
> choice for run-of-the-mill b/w (ie, text) printing. Ink costs a lot. In
> fact, "cheap" printers sometimes cost less to buy than a set of ink
> cartridges (but those cheap printers come with under-filled ink
> cartridges, so it's not worthwhile to just toss them and buy a new one.)
> If your daughter doesn't expect to print many photos, it may well be
> cheaper in the short term to use a photo-printing service in the nearest
> mall, and have only a b/w laser printer for her papers.
>
...
>
> My recommendation is two printers: one a photo-quality colour inkjet,
> the other a cheap laser printer.
I strongly agree. People seem to buy inkjets because they *think* they
want to print photos, but rarely use the capability. And you're paying
through the nose for it, every time you print a page of text.
It's the computer equivalent of buying a Hummer to commute to work every
morning, just so that you can go off-road twice a year. Sure, you have
the capability, but you're being raped for it every time you do normal
driving. :)
Unless your daughter is planning on being heavily involved in digital
photography, printing large (greater than 8x10) photos on a regular
basis, and needs the degree of control that having her own printer (as
opposed to going to the nearest minilab and having them run off on a
lightjet) affords, there's no reason to have an inkjet.
You can regularly find B&W laser printers for under or around $100 (I
have a Samsung but if I was doing it again today I'd get a Brother [1]),
and that's what I'd recommend to anyone going off to college. A printer
and an extra full toner cartridge (they tend to come with squib loads
from the factory, only good for a few hundred pages) ought to set her up
for most of the next four years, even if she's in a writing-intensive
major.
Heck, you can get a color laser for under $300 these days. I don't know
much about them, but it would satisfy all other (non-photo)
color-printing requirements, and the cost per page would almost
certainly still be much lower than an inkjet.
With the price of lab-printed digital photos where it is, you have to be
very much into digital photography as a hobby for an inkjet photo
printer to make sense. I consider myself a fairly accomplished amateur
photographer and even I think they're a PITA; you have to be a major
obsessive to maintain your own printer when you can go down to Costco
and get Frontier prints for a few cents a piece. (And it's really only
Costco if you're impatient; there are lots of online services that are
cheaper and don't require leaving your room.)
Good luck,
Kadin.
[1] Some of the Brother lasers are better than others. Some of them are
real PostScript printers, and thus are very compatible, not only with
Mac but with Linux as well, and basically are "future proof." I think
this is a pretty big plus. Some of the other models use proprietary
printer/host communication protocols and are Windows only, or
Windows/Mac but leave you at the mercy of Brother for drivers in the
future. I'd avoid them.
>> Stay informed about: Photo Printer