Re: Printers

[Bill Troop billtroop@xxxxxxxx]

For duplexing, I have a very high opinion of Lexmark's T-series duplexers.
They work at the full speed of the printer (most other duplexers cut
printer speed in half), and they never seem to jam. Lexmark's prices are
about to take a drop, in view of the very strong price competition from
HP's 4200/4300 series. Hard Copy Observer predicts that we will see 50 ppm
or greater in a sub-$1500 laser printer within a short period of time. Note
that on current Lexmark printers, 1200 dpi enforces a 50% loss in speed; HP
prints 1200 dpi at rated speed. I have always been a big Lexmark fan, but I
am very impressed with HP's latest offering. However, in my observation,
toner particle size is much more even with Lexmark printers. That is, with
an HP printer, you get a very light print at the beginning of the toner's
life; and a very dark print towards its end -- that's an indication of poor
particle size distribution. The smaller particles get used up first: that's
why the print is lighter and clearer at the beginning of the toner life
cycle. Lexmark's toners seem more even throughout their life cycle.
Brother has just introduced its first network printer with its own engine,
the HL-7050. Previously, Brother used Canon engines, and could not compete
adequately pricewise. Its previous network printers did not do true 1200
dpi but the 7050 reportedly does. I would not imagine that Brother would be
capable of dependable duplexing, but you never know. Automatic duplexing is
great. It is wonderful to save so much paper. Yet it is amazing how few
offices use duplexing.

At 12/23/2002 12:28 PM, you wrote:
> Considering a brother 1650 laser printer. Anyone using it and printing
> with XyDos? If so what printer file applies, please? And any word on
> reliability would be appreciated. Overall have an HPIIIP workhorse, but it
> won't duplex (can't manually re-feed sheets printed on one side) and the
> B1650 has built in duplex. Thank you.
>
> Michael Norman