Printers survive 83 alone

Wolf K wrote:

I just bought an Epson ET-3600, with ink bottles feeding tanks which
feed the print heads. The ink that comes with is supposedly the
equivalent of "up to" 200 sets of cartridges

Presume you need some sort of waste bottle as well, as I can't see the
sponges coping with 120 cartridges worth of overflow ...

Andy Burns wrote:
Wolf K wrote:

I just bought an Epson ET-3600, with ink bottles feeding tanks which
feed the print heads. The ink that comes with is supposedly the
equivalent of "up to" 200 sets of cartridges

Presume you need some sort of waste bottle as well, as I can't see the
sponges coping with 120 cartridges worth of overflow ...


The installation instructions say to leave the
printer in the kitchen sink and "don't worry about it".

I'd be more worried about the kids getting a hold
of the refill bottles and having a "Cyan" versus
"Magenta" gun fight. You know you wanna...

Paul

On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 10:24:05 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

https://www.amazon.com/Epson-EcoTank.../dp/B01IH2KM5K

I expected to hate it, but it's not as bad as I expected. :-)
Surely not my cup of tea, but I see some of its benefits.


I don't like the idea of combo printer/scanner units. I prefer
separate units, so if one dies, that's all I have to replace.

As far as I'm concerned, the only advantage of a combo is that it
takes less desk space, but I can just manage to squeeze in separate
ones here.

Ken Blake wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, the only advantage of a combo is that it
takes less desk space, but I can just manage to squeeze in separate
ones here.

Similar thoughts here, plus some of the multi-function units are
enormous so eat more space. I have an A4 colour duplex ethernet laser,
which is too big to give space to in my study, so it's largely unused.

Now I have a small mono laser (Samsung M2026W) and a Strobe 500 scanner
which can be used in a small single sheet configuration, or docked into
a 20 sheet auto feeder. When not in use they collectively take little
more than 1sq foot of space, but need a little more for paper trays when
in use.

On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:11:48 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:49:49 -0700, Gene Wirchenko
wrote:

I had another inkjet printer die on me similarly. I ended up
just replacing it. The printer was only about C$120 so any repair
would not have been worth it.

My inkjet printer is a temporary solution until I get around to buying a
replacement color laser. It's an Epson R220 that I got for $30-$35 about
a dozen years ago. A local store was discontinuing them and put them on
sale for $35. Knowing that they come with a set of genuine Epson ink
cartridges, which cost way more than that, I bought 5 or 6 printers just
to get the ink. A few days later, as a final closeout price, they
dropped down to $30 and I went back to get the rest of what they had. I
ended up with 12, I think. I immediately gave 3 away to family members
and a close friend, but I scavenged the ink from the rest. All but two
of the now-inkless printers went immediately to Goodwill, leaving me
with two printers and a bunch of ink. That's why I have ink that's so
old.

I had a very old Wang computer with a special Wang printer which
used one time carbon ribbons. I was able to buy several of those
printers with near unused cartridges for less than the cost of
new cartridges.

On 06/17/2017 01:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

As far as I'm concerned, the only advantage of a combo is that it
takes less desk space, but I can just manage to squeeze in separate
ones here.


I normally feel that way about combo devices.

A combo printer/scanner does make it easy to make copies.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Men become civilized not in proportion to their willingness to believe
but in proportion to their readiness to doubt." [H. L. Menchen]

On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:32:55 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 06/17/2017 01:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

As far as I'm concerned, the only advantage of a combo is that it
takes less desk space, but I can just manage to squeeze in separate
ones here.


I normally feel that way about combo devices.

A combo printer/scanner does make it easy to make copies.



Easier than separate devices? Not here it doesn't. My stand-alone
scanner has a "copy" button, or I can use the scanner software, which
has a "copy" choice.

Ken Blake wrote:

My stand-alone scanner has a "copy" button

That's what I like about the Strobe scanner, the on/off switch is
actually a dial with 6 numbered settings on it, each slot is
configurable, so e.g. 1=scan to duplex colour PDF, 2=B/W simplex copy,
3=scan and compose email ...

On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 02:56:40 -0400, "Andy" wrote:

Ink if sealed and kept stored right will last many years i have ink older
then youre's and it works fine but don't tell that to HP they say it cant
work it's to old HA.

I think there could be an issue with it settling. Do you give it
a good shaking before you use it?

I did see some ribbons that had their ink solvent evaporate out
of sealed packages. How that happened, I do not know, but we checked
them, and the ribbons were dry.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

On 6/18/2017 2:22 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:32:55 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 06/17/2017 01:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

As far as I'm concerned, the only advantage of a combo is that it
takes less desk space, but I can just manage to squeeze in separate
ones here.


I normally feel that way about combo devices.

A combo printer/scanner does make it easy to make copies.



Easier than separate devices? Not here it doesn't. My stand-alone
scanner has a "copy" button, or I can use the scanner software, which
has a "copy" choice.


Likewise, my scanner has 4 buttons, One of which is Copy to printer so
with 1 button press the job is done.
My Okidata c5150 has no scanner so had to use a separate one, Either way
is OK with me as my last Inkjet was a multi devise but due to ink prices
I went with a colour Laser.

Rene

On 06/18/2017 02:22 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Easier than separate devices? Not here it doesn't. My stand-alone
scanner has a "copy" button, or I can use the scanner software, which
has a "copy" choice.


That button must be communicating with some software in your computer,
which must be set up and working properly. A more comp]lex (and so
vulnerable) setup than something that happens entirely within that device.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Men become civilized not in proportion to their willingness to believe
but in proportion to their readiness to doubt." [H. L. Menchen]

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:15:02 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 06/18/2017 02:22 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Easier than separate devices? Not here it doesn't. My stand-alone
scanner has a "copy" button, or I can use the scanner software, which
has a "copy" choice.


That button must be communicating with some software in your computer,
which must be set up and working properly.


Yes.


A more comp]lex (and so
vulnerable) setup than something that happens entirely within that device.


Complex? Not at all; I don't remember any details, but I remember that
setting up the scanner was very easy. Vulnerable? Vulnerable to what?
I've never had a problem with it, running under XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1,
and now 10.

But if you prefer all-in-one units, that's fine with me. I don't, for
the reason I explained, but I won't try to convert you to my way of
thinking.

In message , Ken Blake
writes:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:15:02 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 06/18/2017 02:22 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Easier than separate devices? Not here it doesn't. My stand-alone
scanner has a "copy" button, or I can use the scanner software, which
has a "copy" choice.


That button must be communicating with some software in your computer,
which must be set up and working properly.


Yes.


A more comp]lex (and so
vulnerable) setup than something that happens entirely within that device.


Complex? Not at all; I don't remember any details, but I remember that
setting up the scanner was very easy. Vulnerable? Vulnerable to what?
I've never had a problem with it, running under XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1,
and now 10.

Complex in that the computer has to be on! If you're like me, the
computer is on all the time I'm nearby; however, there are strange folk
who have computers that are only turned on to do certain things, and
then turned off again. Such people find the copying ability of
all-in-ones very handy.

But if you prefer all-in-one units, that's fine with me. I don't, for
the reason I explained, but I won't try to convert you to my way of
thinking.

I agree, in principle. In practice, the costs of standalones,
all-in-ones, and other variations (?) are all over the place, so it's
hard to keep up.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

What's awful about weird views is not the views. It's the intolerance. If
someone wants to worship the Duke of Edinburgh or a pineapple, fine. But don't
kill me if I don't agree. - Tim Rice, Radio Times 15-21 October 2011.

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:40:39 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:15:02 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 18/06/2017 02:22 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Easier than separate devices? Not here it doesn't. My stand-alone
scanner has a "copy" button, or I can use the scanner software, which
has a "copy" choice.


That button must be communicating with some software in your computer,
which must be set up and working properly.


Yes.


A more comp]lex (and so
vulnerable) setup than something that happens entirely within that device.


Complex? Not at all; I don't remember any details, but I remember that
setting up the scanner was very easy. Vulnerable? Vulnerable to what?
I've never had a problem with it, running under XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1,
and now 10.

But if you prefer all-in-one units, that's fine with me. I don't, for
the reason I explained, but I won't try to convert you to my way of
thinking.

When the printer dies in your all in one you have to replace the
scanner as well. OTOH all in ones take up lest space.

On 06/19/2017 07:50 PM, Lucifer Morningstar wrote:

[snip]

When the printer dies in your all in one you have to replace the
scanner as well. OTOH all in ones take up lest space.


When an all-in-one dies, you replace it and almost immediately have a
copier that works. With the other solution (scanner, printer, and
several pieces of excessively complicaed software), if one fails and you
replace it (there's a good chance you can't get the same model) how much
work is it going to be to get the combination working again?

Also, an all-in-one can act as a copier without a computer connected.
Some can scan and print that way too (using a USB drive).

Yes, I am aware that both sides of this question (all-in-one and
separate) have advantages AND disadvantages.

BTW, I am normally opposed to combo devices. This is an exception.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"It is your god-given right to destroy any man or woman calling
themselves doctors who willingly slaughter innocent children." [Keith
Tucci, Exec. Dir, Operation Rescue]