Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #430865 > unrolled thread

Brother International is a bunch of asshats

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design

Contents

  Brother International is a bunch of asshats Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-10-11 10:31 -0400
    Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2016-10-11 07:42 -0700
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-10-11 10:51 -0400
        Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Baron <baron@linuxmaniac.net> - 2016-10-11 17:05 +0100
        Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2016-10-11 09:19 -0700
          Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2016-10-11 20:56 -0800
          Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats "P E Schoen" <paul@pstech-inc.com> - 2016-10-12 04:30 -0400
            Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2016-10-12 08:13 -0500
        Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-11 10:43 -0700
          Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats John Devereux <john@devereux.me.uk> - 2016-10-11 19:20 +0100
            Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-11 13:50 -0700
              Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-10-11 17:01 -0500
              Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats John Devereux <john@devereux.me.uk> - 2016-10-12 08:12 +0100
          Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats jurb6006@gmail.com - 2016-10-11 11:22 -0700
            Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-11 14:11 -0700
    Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-10-11 09:02 -0700
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Bill Martin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2016-10-11 09:50 -0700
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2016-10-11 14:14 -0500
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2016-10-11 14:26 -0700
    Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Marte Schwarz <marte.schwarz@gmx.de> - 2016-10-11 18:14 +0200
    Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-11 10:10 -0700
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2016-10-11 13:50 -0400
        Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-10-11 14:28 -0400
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-10-11 14:22 -0400
    Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Ecnerwal <MyNameForward@ReplaceWithMyVices.Com.invalid> - 2016-10-11 16:52 -0400
    Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-10-11 17:55 -0700
      Re: Brother International is a bunch of asshats Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-10-12 12:42 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#430865 — Brother International is a bunch of asshats

So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
 Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.

It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
bills I ever spent.

The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
cleaning doesn't make that any better.

There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
crippled.

I know this from two lines of evidence:

1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and especially

2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
it comes out _perfectly_.

Asshats.

I'm never buying another Brother product.

However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

-- 
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#430866

On 2016-10-11 07:31, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
>   Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>
> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
> cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
> bills I ever spent.
>
> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
> aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
> routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
> cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>
> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
> crippled.
>
> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>
> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
> see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and especially
>
> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
> it comes out _perfectly_.
>
> Asshats.
>
> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>
> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
> is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>

No, but regarding brands this is my experience: I had a Brother MFC 
(monochrome Laser all-in-one) and it was ok for several years, even with 
aftermarket toner. Eventually numerous paper jams ensued and eventually 
the electronics hung it up.

I replaced it with a Canon ImageClass unit and the difference was day 
and night. Nice and sound mechanical clicking and clacking noises 
instead of creaking noises, never a paper jam. Might be worth checking 
out a Canon product that suits your 11*17 requirement and other.

One thing that IMO goes in favor of Brother: Their software was much 
better than Canon's. Software architecture seems not to be Canon's strength.

HP: Their stuff always held up remarkably well. Even the old low-cost 
HP-5L still works and it's almost 20 years now.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430867

On 10/11/2016 10:42 AM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-10-11 07:31, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
>>   Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>>
>> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>> cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
>> bills I ever spent.
>>
>> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>> aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
>> routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
>> cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>>
>> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
>> crippled.
>>
>> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>>
>> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
>> see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and
>> especially
>>
>> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
>> it comes out _perfectly_.
>>
>> Asshats.
>>
>> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>>
>> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
>> is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>>
> 
> No, but regarding brands this is my experience: I had a Brother MFC
> (monochrome Laser all-in-one) and it was ok for several years, even with
> aftermarket toner. Eventually numerous paper jams ensued and eventually
> the electronics hung it up.
> 
> I replaced it with a Canon ImageClass unit and the difference was day
> and night. Nice and sound mechanical clicking and clacking noises
> instead of creaking noises, never a paper jam. Might be worth checking
> out a Canon product that suits your 11*17 requirement and other.
> 
> One thing that IMO goes in favor of Brother: Their software was much
> better than Canon's. Software architecture seems not to be Canon's
> strength.
> 
> HP: Their stuff always held up remarkably well. Even the old low-cost
> HP-5L still works and it's almost 20 years now.

Pre-Fiorina HPs worked great.  I have a 6P that is still going strong
since the 90s, and my desk printer is a 2300DTN duplex model that is
amazing.  I've heard less good things about their newer models, and it's
perfectly possible for a set of toner to cost twice as much as the
printer (see the 5500N model--$400 _per colour_).

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

-- 
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430877

Phil Hobbs prodded the keyboard with:

> On 10/11/2016 10:42 AM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-10-11 07:31, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>>> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the
>>> death.
>>>   Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>>>
>>> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>>> cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better
>>> three bills I ever spent.
>>>
>>> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>>> aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head
>>> cleaning routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints,
>>> and repeated cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>>>
>>> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's
>>> deliberately crippled.
>>>
>>> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>>>
>>> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed,
>>> you see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time,
>>> and especially
>>>
>>> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in
>>> black, and it comes out _perfectly_.
>>>
>>> Asshats.
>>>
>>> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>>>
>>> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer. 
>>> Budget
>>> is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>>>
>> 
>> No, but regarding brands this is my experience: I had a Brother MFC
>> (monochrome Laser all-in-one) and it was ok for several years, even
>> with aftermarket toner. Eventually numerous paper jams ensued and
>> eventually the electronics hung it up.
>> 
>> I replaced it with a Canon ImageClass unit and the difference was
>> day and night. Nice and sound mechanical clicking and clacking
>> noises instead of creaking noises, never a paper jam. Might be
>> worth checking out a Canon product that suits your 11*17
>> requirement and other.
>> 
>> One thing that IMO goes in favor of Brother: Their software was
>> much better than Canon's. Software architecture seems not to be
>> Canon's strength.
>> 
>> HP: Their stuff always held up remarkably well. Even the old
>> low-cost HP-5L still works and it's almost 20 years now.
> 
> Pre-Fiorina HPs worked great.  I have a 6P that is still going
> strong since the 90s, and my desk printer is a 2300DTN duplex model
> that is
> amazing.  I've heard less good things about their newer models, and
> it's perfectly possible for a set of toner to cost twice as much as
> the printer (see the 5500N model--$400 _per colour_).
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Phil Hobbs
> 
Hi Guys,

I still have and use a HP Deskjet 500, at least until I run out of ink
to refill my remaining good cartridge. I bought it just after they
came out, when I retired my old dot matrix printer. So it must be
getting on for 35 years or thereabouts.


-- 
Best Regards:
                      Baron.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430879

On 2016-10-11 07:51, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> On 10/11/2016 10:42 AM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-10-11 07:31, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>>> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
>>>    Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>>>
>>> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>>> cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
>>> bills I ever spent.
>>>
>>> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>>> aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
>>> routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
>>> cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>>>
>>> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
>>> crippled.
>>>
>>> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>>>
>>> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
>>> see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and
>>> especially
>>>
>>> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
>>> it comes out _perfectly_.
>>>
>>> Asshats.
>>>
>>> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>>>
>>> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
>>> is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>>>
>>
>> No, but regarding brands this is my experience: I had a Brother MFC
>> (monochrome Laser all-in-one) and it was ok for several years, even with
>> aftermarket toner. Eventually numerous paper jams ensued and eventually
>> the electronics hung it up.
>>
>> I replaced it with a Canon ImageClass unit and the difference was day
>> and night. Nice and sound mechanical clicking and clacking noises
>> instead of creaking noises, never a paper jam. Might be worth checking
>> out a Canon product that suits your 11*17 requirement and other.
>>
>> One thing that IMO goes in favor of Brother: Their software was much
>> better than Canon's. Software architecture seems not to be Canon's
>> strength.
>>
>> HP: Their stuff always held up remarkably well. Even the old low-cost
>> HP-5L still works and it's almost 20 years now.
>
> Pre-Fiorina HPs worked great.  I have a 6P that is still going strong
> since the 90s, and my desk printer is a 2300DTN duplex model that is
> amazing.  I've heard less good things about their newer models, and it's
> perfectly possible for a set of toner to cost twice as much as the
> printer (see the 5500N model--$400 _per colour_).
>

The first thing I do before even considering a printer is to scope out 
whether it will accept after-market toner. If it doesn't then me no buy.

Ink is particularly expensive and I do not use inkjet printer anymore 
because it dried up in the hot summers here. The exception was an old HP 
DeskJet because one could re-ink cartridges via ink bottle and syringe. 
I got 3-4 uses out of each HP cartridge until the front was chafed too much.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430955

Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-10-11 07:51, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>> On 10/11/2016 10:42 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>> On 2016-10-11 07:31, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>>>> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the
>>>> death.
>>>> Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>>>>
>>>> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>>>> cartridges, and it worked great for years. One of the better three
>>>> bills I ever spent.
>>>>
>>>> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>>>> aftermarket ink but doesn't really. When you run the head cleaning
>>>> routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
>>>> cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>>>>
>>>> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
>>>> crippled.
>>>>
>>>> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>>>>
>>>> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
>>>> see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and
>>>> especially
>>>>
>>>> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
>>>> it comes out _perfectly_.
>>>>
>>>> Asshats.
>>>>
>>>> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>>>>
>>>> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer. Budget
>>>> is probably $1k or thereabouts. Anybody got one that they like?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, but regarding brands this is my experience: I had a Brother MFC
>>> (monochrome Laser all-in-one) and it was ok for several years, even with
>>> aftermarket toner. Eventually numerous paper jams ensued and eventually
>>> the electronics hung it up.
>>>
>>> I replaced it with a Canon ImageClass unit and the difference was day
>>> and night. Nice and sound mechanical clicking and clacking noises
>>> instead of creaking noises, never a paper jam. Might be worth checking
>>> out a Canon product that suits your 11*17 requirement and other.
>>>
>>> One thing that IMO goes in favor of Brother: Their software was much
>>> better than Canon's. Software architecture seems not to be Canon's
>>> strength.
>>>
>>> HP: Their stuff always held up remarkably well. Even the old low-cost
>>> HP-5L still works and it's almost 20 years now.
>>
>> Pre-Fiorina HPs worked great. I have a 6P that is still going strong
>> since the 90s, and my desk printer is a 2300DTN duplex model that is
>> amazing. I've heard less good things about their newer models, and it's
>> perfectly possible for a set of toner to cost twice as much as the
>> printer (see the 5500N model--$400 _per colour_).
>>
>
> The first thing I do before even considering a printer is to scope out
> whether it will accept after-market toner. If it doesn't then me no buy.
>
> Ink is particularly expensive and I do not use inkjet printer anymore
> because it dried up in the hot summers here. The exception was an old HP
> DeskJet because one could re-ink cartridges via ink bottle and syringe.
> I got 3-4 uses out of each HP cartridge until the front was chafed too
> much.
>
   Shoot, i have a Canon BJC4100 and refilled the black BC-20 cartridge 
(only one i use) at least a dozen times; still going strong.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430969

"Joerg"  wrote in message news:e64hoaF5hl1U1@mid.individual.net...

> The first thing I do before even considering a printer is to scope out 
> whether it will accept after-market toner. If it doesn't then me no buy.

> Ink is particularly expensive and I do not use inkjet printer anymore 
> because it dried up in the hot summers here. The exception was an old HP 
> DeskJet because one could re-ink cartridges via ink bottle and syringe. I 
> got 3-4 uses out of each HP cartridge until the front was chafed too much.

I have an HP Officejet 6700 All-in-one that stopped working because it 
reported the cartridges were out of ink. They were the original "starter" 
cartridges and are good for only about 50 copies. I mostly print B&W so I 
bought a genuine HP replacement black cartridge for about $30. But it still 
would not print, because one or more of the color cartridges were depleted. 
Apparently even printing B&W uses a little bit of each color cartridge to 
keep them from clogging. And every once in a while the printer will exercise 
itself by squirting ink from each of the cartridges into a reservoir, again 
to keep them from drying up and clogging. But mostly to waste ink and force 
you to buy a new set at least once a year, for about $100 for a full set. I 
only paid about $80 for the printer...

I was very frustrated, and bought a Canon laser printer LBP6200 for about 
$40, and used it to print the forms I needed. It also has a "starter" 
cartridge but it's good for about 100 pages, and it's still working fine 
after about 3 years. The replacement cartridge is probably about $80 but 
it's good for a couple thousand pages. And aftermarket cartridges are about 
$30.

For the HP Deskjet, I bought a set of four "XL" cartridges from a eBay 
source for about $20 total, with shipping. One of them was reported as 
"protected", and could not be made to work. I contacted the seller and a few 
days later I got another cartridge that worked. Those cartridges worked for 
about a year, with limited use, and when they "went bad" I bought another 
set on eBay that was only about $15 and after about a year they are still 
going strong, although I had to replace the black cartridge with another I 
had. Sometimes I get a "nag screen" informing me that I might have 
"counterfeit" cartridges that might damage my printer, but so far I've been 
able to print when needed.

The HP printer often gets paper jams or false "out of paper" warnings, and 
it has a hard time printing on glossy photo paper.

I'm happy with the Canon, but it's probably a "crap shoot" when you buy a 
new printer. They're all made in China for cheap and, like Forrest Gump's 
box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get.

Paul 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430981

"P E Schoen" <paul@pstech-inc.com> wrote in message 
news:ntksan$n9h$1@dont-email.me...
> I'm happy with the Canon, but it's probably a "crap shoot" when you buy a
> new printer. They're all made in China for cheap and, like Forrest Gump's
> box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get.
>


FYI, I had a Pixma i6000D for some years -- though I didn't print much, it 
always seemed to be ready to go, and was /made/ to use ink refills. 
DRM-free.  Big visible compartments in the cartridges, tell at-a-glance how 
much ink is really left.

Best of all, even if you were low on ink (any color), or completely out of 
some... you could still make it print.  At your own risk, of course...

Great print quality too (including photos, obviously), except for the 
water-solubility (which is pretty typical for inkjets regardless), and the 
slow printing speed on high-res images.  Also, it did full duplex, but the 
duplex cycle was ungodly slow -- literally, waiting for ink to dry before 
printing the other side.  So, well, what can you do.

The software/drivers were kind of on the bulky- or sloppy-feeling side, I 
think.  I can see how it might be the case, with newer models, that they're 
downright bloated (which someone else suggested about Canon, earlier). 
Dunno.


Trivia:
Speaking of Canon, and LBP's... damn...  That brought 1994 back to mind...

We had just got a family PC, with a printer, multimedia package, all that 
good stuff.  Canon 486SX-33 something or other.  325MB Quantum HDD, which 
had a very distinctive POST rhythm, that I'd love to hear a recording of... 
And guess the printer, a LBP...340?  430?  Yeayeayea, 430, that was the one:
http://www.recycledgoods.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/1000x/af097278c5db4767b0fe9bb92fe21690/c/a/canon-l10294a-laser-printer-lbp-430-1.18.jpg

In later years, as those original parts expired from age and obsoleteness, 
we (us kids) took them apart...

...To this day, the "jewel" (six sided laser-scanning mirror) from that 
printer is still in my parents' Christmas decoration box! :-D

Tim

-- 
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430887

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:51:56 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>Pre-Fiorina HPs worked great.

Agreed, with a few reservations.  Mostly HP knew about chronic
problems that affected longevity and did absolutely nothing to fix the
problem in subsequent models.  For example, the magnetized solenoid
and decomposing rubber damper on the solenoids inspired many premature
replacement.  See example later in this rant.

>I have a 6P that is still going strong
>since the 90s, 

Retch.  I recycled most of those years ago due to chronic paper jam
and fuser film deterioration problems.  They were also rather slow.

>and my desk printer is a 2300DTN duplex model that is
>amazing.

That's my favorite laser printer.  I have several.  I've refurbished
and resold about 12 more.  If yours starts to paper jam in duplex
mode, here's the fix:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/hp2200/hp2200.html>
Internally, the HP LaserJet 2200 and 2300 are quite similar, except
that the 2300 has an LCD display and more buttons to push.  I've run
into this problem eventually on most HP printers of that era and have
found that I have to replace the froam rubber damper on all printers.
For example, same story but on an HP LaserJet 4200:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/hp4200/hp4200.html>

>I've heard less good things about their newer models, and it's
>perfectly possible for a set of toner to cost twice as much as the
>printer (see the 5500N model--$400 _per colour_).

It varies.  Some good, some bad, some really bad.  The more expensive
printers seem to be quite tolerable.  The cheap consumer junk printers
are worthless.  I forgot the model number, but there was one HP AOI
LaserJet where HP must have really worked hard to provide the SMALLEST
possible toner cartridge.

-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430891

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> writes:

> On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:51:56 -0400, Phil Hobbs
> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>
>>Pre-Fiorina HPs worked great.
>
> Agreed, with a few reservations.  Mostly HP knew about chronic
> problems that affected longevity and did absolutely nothing to fix the
> problem in subsequent models.  For example, the magnetized solenoid
> and decomposing rubber damper on the solenoids inspired many premature
> replacement.  See example later in this rant.
>
>>I have a 6P that is still going strong
>>since the 90s, 
>
> Retch.  I recycled most of those years ago due to chronic paper jam
> and fuser film deterioration problems.  They were also rather slow.
>
>>and my desk printer is a 2300DTN duplex model that is
>>amazing.
>
> That's my favorite laser printer.  I have several.  I've refurbished
> and resold about 12 more.  If yours starts to paper jam in duplex
> mode, here's the fix:

Hey Jeff, any similar recommendation for aftermarket workhorse color
laser printers?  I have a very old HP 4500DN we use for printing manuals
(and general use). Even genuine consumables are dirt cheap on ebay since
everyone is throwing them out. But it is slow and big and heavy, and can
have feed problems with our "silk" finish paper.

> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/hp2200/hp2200.html> Internally, the HP
> LaserJet 2200 and 2300 are quite similar, except that the 2300 has an
> LCD display and more buttons to push.  I've run into this problem
> eventually on most HP printers of that era and have found that I have
> to replace the froam rubber damper on all printers.  For example, same
> story but on an HP LaserJet 4200:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/hp4200/hp4200.html>
>
>>I've heard less good things about their newer models, and it's
>>perfectly possible for a set of toner to cost twice as much as the
>>printer (see the 5500N model--$400 _per colour_).
>
> It varies.  Some good, some bad, some really bad.  The more expensive
> printers seem to be quite tolerable.  The cheap consumer junk printers
> are worthless.  I forgot the model number, but there was one HP AOI
> LaserJet where HP must have really worked hard to provide the SMALLEST
> possible toner cartridge.


-- 

John Devereux

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430905

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 19:20:56 +0100, John Devereux
<john@devereux.me.uk> wrote:

>Hey Jeff, any similar recommendation for aftermarket workhorse color
>laser printers?  I have a very old HP 4500DN we use for printing manuals
>(and general use). Even genuine consumables are dirt cheap on ebay since
>everyone is throwing them out. But it is slow and big and heavy, and can
>have feed problems with our "silk" finish paper.

About a week ago, I tore down and refurbished a pair of HP 45500DN
printers for a local appraiser.  He also uses them for reports.  150K
and 200K pages each.  He wants to keep the printers going hopefully
forever because of the low cost of ownership and reliability.  He
claims he can start a large print job, and go off to do something
else, and know that it will be done without any problems.  

However, the problem that precipitated a rebuild was not the usual
worn rubber parts or cleaning.  Despite my repeated warnings, he
purchased some genuine HP "old stock" toner carts.  However, there's a
problem.  Everything on eBay is "genuine" HP "old stock" which means
they're old carts with an uncertain history.  Caveat emptor.  I'm not
sure exactly what went wrong, but after about 100 color pages, the
prints started to look awful with toner splattered everywhere.  My
guess(tm) is the rubber scrubber blades inside the toner carts had age
hardened and were not removing excess toner from the drums.  Lots of
cleaning, some pre-emptive rubber parts replacements, and different
set of carts, and both printers now work normally.

4500/4550 parts and pieces.
<http://www.printerworks.com/Top-LaserJet-Parts-PrinterWorks/CLJ-4500-Printer-Parts.html>

Sorry, but I'm not going to recommend any printer I haven't sold,
setup, played with, repaired, dissected, or otherwise had some
experience using.  Most of the stuff I have in the office are older
home color laser printers, all of which have some type of limitation
of chronic problem.  If you're really using it as a printing press, I
would avoid all the low end printers.  They just don't last.  Same for
Brother, where the low end product are ummm... low end.

Incidentally, I picked up a semi-dead Brother (model number forgotten)
color laser printer for $40 from a local recycler.  I then burned
about 15 hrs and $40 in parts, and it still dumps blue toner.  Fixing
b&w laser printers is fairly simple, but color seems is far more
complex.

Also, if you want cheap Brother printers, look for the "refurbished"
printers on Staples web pile:
<http://www.staples.com/refurbished+brother+color+laser+printer/directory_refurbished%2520brother%2520color%2520laser%2520printer>
They're about half the price of a new printer and seem to be new in
the box on arrival.  Other than one printer with shipping damage, no
problems.


-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430914

Jeff Liebermann wrote:


> However, the problem that precipitated a rebuild was not the usual
> worn rubber parts or cleaning.  Despite my repeated warnings, he
> purchased some genuine HP "old stock" toner carts.  However, there's a
> problem.  Everything on eBay is "genuine" HP "old stock" which means
> they're old carts with an uncertain history.  Caveat emptor.  I'm not
> sure exactly what went wrong, but after about 100 color pages, the
> prints started to look awful with toner splattered everywhere.
Yup, classic wiper blade failure.  Apparently, the wiper blades develop a 
"set" after sitting in the cart for a year or so, and won't apply sufficient 
pressure against the photoconductor roller to wipe it clean.  Nothing you 
can do will fix them, as far as I can tell - I've tried just about 
everything.  But, there are outfits that will sell JUST the wiper blades.
Most want you to buy them by the dozen, but there are some places that will 
sell just one.  The shipping will usually be more than the blade costs.  I 
have been doing this on my HP 5m for some time, I buy those grey-market 
carts, and replace the wiper blade, and they work great.

Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430962

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> writes:

> On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 19:20:56 +0100, John Devereux
> <john@devereux.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>Hey Jeff, any similar recommendation for aftermarket workhorse color
>>laser printers?  I have a very old HP 4500DN we use for printing manuals
>>(and general use). Even genuine consumables are dirt cheap on ebay since
>>everyone is throwing them out. But it is slow and big and heavy, and can
>>have feed problems with our "silk" finish paper.
>
> About a week ago, I tore down and refurbished a pair of HP 45500DN
> printers for a local appraiser.  He also uses them for reports.  150K
> and 200K pages each.  He wants to keep the printers going hopefully
> forever because of the low cost of ownership and reliability.  He
> claims he can start a large print job, and go off to do something
> else, and know that it will be done without any problems.  
>
> However, the problem that precipitated a rebuild was not the usual
> worn rubber parts or cleaning.  Despite my repeated warnings, he
> purchased some genuine HP "old stock" toner carts.  However, there's a
> problem.  Everything on eBay is "genuine" HP "old stock" which means
> they're old carts with an uncertain history.  Caveat emptor.  I'm not
> sure exactly what went wrong, but after about 100 color pages, the
> prints started to look awful with toner splattered everywhere.

Oh yes I've had something similar happen, a lot of the "genuine" stock
is indeed old. It's not too much trouble to swap out the guilty
consumable.

> My guess(tm) is the rubber scrubber blades inside the toner carts had
> age hardened and were not removing excess toner from the drums.  Lots
> of cleaning, some pre-emptive rubber parts replacements, and different
> set of carts, and both printers now work normally.
>
> 4500/4550 parts and pieces.
> <http://www.printerworks.com/Top-LaserJet-Parts-PrinterWorks/CLJ-4500-Printer-Parts.html>

Thanks!

> Sorry, but I'm not going to recommend any printer I haven't sold,
> setup, played with, repaired, dissected, or otherwise had some
> experience using.

OK, understood.

> Most of the stuff I have in the office are older
> home color laser printers, all of which have some type of limitation
> of chronic problem.  If you're really using it as a printing press, I
> would avoid all the low end printers.  They just don't last.  Same for
> Brother, where the low end product are ummm... low end.

The 4500DN was pretty "high end" when we bought it, ~$7000 in USian!
last time I looked they were basically free here now, as long as you
don't need it shipped... I guess we'll keep using it.

> Incidentally, I picked up a semi-dead Brother (model number forgotten)
> color laser printer for $40 from a local recycler.  I then burned
> about 15 hrs and $40 in parts, and it still dumps blue toner.  Fixing
> b&w laser printers is fairly simple, but color seems is far more
> complex.
>
> Also, if you want cheap Brother printers, look for the "refurbished"
> printers on Staples web pile:
> <http://www.staples.com/refurbished+brother+color+laser+printer/directory_refurbished%2520brother%2520color%2520laser%2520printer>
> They're about half the price of a new printer and seem to be new in
> the box on arrival.  Other than one printer with shipping damage, no
> problems.





-- 

John Devereux

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430892

>"I forgot the model number, but there was one HP AOI
>LaserJet where HP must have really worked hard to provide the >SMALLEST possible toner cartridge. "

Sounds like mine. 

CM1312MFP

And the sombitch doesn't want to even scan if it is out of toner. And they have the chips in the cartridges. There are aftermarket chips that fool the machine into thinking there was no usage. You have to glue them in. And then, I tore up a used cartridge ad saw no easy way to do a refill. For one they simply don't come apart. If I ever get around to it I will really examine those spent cartridges and figure it out, but that is a very destructive process. 

I am to the point where I think it might be better to just go to Officemax or whatever for printing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430909

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:22:30 -0700 (PDT), jurb6006@gmail.com wrote:

>Sounds like mine. 
>CM1312MFP

Retch.  That's a CP1215 with a scanner stuck on top.  At best, it's
ugly.  I have a CP1215 with some broken/melted plastic parts.  The
previous owner put 50K pages on it in 2 months before it died.  About
all do is fix it for myself as I wouldn't inflict it on a customer.
Hint:  If heavily used, let it cool down by itself before turning off
the power.

>And the sombitch doesn't want to even scan if it is out of toner.

In the interest of accuracy, it doesn't finish the self test unless
it's happy with the toner.

>And they have the chips in the cartridges.

Of course.  It's to guarantee your print quality.  Do you think that
any sane printer manufacturer is going to honor the warranty on their
printer for even a few months if they suspected it's been running on
whatever plastic dust is found in cloned cartridges?  Extra credit to
HP for also checking for an expiration date on some cartridges.  HP
does support aftermarket suppliers, but only if they do things the HP
way, which now means a digitally signed certificate on the cartridge
chip:
<http://h20195.www2.hp.com/v2/GetPDF.aspx/4aa6-4612enw.pdf>

>There are aftermarket chips that fool the machine into thinking 
>there was no usage. You have to glue them in.

Double sided tape, super glue, contact cement, hot melt glue, etc.
Not a problem.

>And then, I tore up a used cartridge ad saw no easy way to do a 
>refill. For one they simply don't come apart. If I ever get around 
>to it I will really examine those spent cartridges and figure it 
>out, but that is a very destructive process. 

Most carts have required drilling TWO holes.  One to unload the toner
accumulated in the waste bin.  The other to empty what's left in the
toner supply bin, and then refill it.  I use aluminum duct tape to
seal the holes.

>I am to the point where I think it might be better to just go to 
>Officemax or whatever for printing.

Good luck.
-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430876

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:31:05 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
> Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>
>It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
>bills I ever spent.
>
>The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
>routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
>cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>
>There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
>crippled.
>
>I know this from two lines of evidence:
>
>1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
>see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and especially
>
>2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
>it comes out _perfectly_.
>
>Asshats.
>
>I'm never buying another Brother product.
>
>However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
>is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>
>Cheers
>
>Phil Hobbs

I have three HP CP1525nw LaserJet color printers. They are fabulous if
you don't print a lot: a cartrige set costs more than the printer.
They will sit patiently for months and then print beautifully.

We have a big B-size Sharp color digital copier/printer/scanner at
work that's wonderful. It's reliable and takes toner by the bucket.
B-size schematics rock. PADS doesn't really do schematics in color,
but that would be cool.

We have a used HP 5100 b+w B-size printer, nice but we don't use it
much any more because the toner cartrige is too expensive. Are there
B-size inkjets around?



-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430883

On 10/11/2016 09:02 AM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:31:05 -0400, Phil Hobbs
> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>
>> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
>> Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>>
>> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>> cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
>> bills I ever spent.
>>
>> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>> aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
>> routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
>> cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>>
>> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
>> crippled.
>>
>> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>>
>> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
>> see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and especially
>>
>> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
>> it comes out _perfectly_.
>>
>> Asshats.
>>
>> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>>
>> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
>> is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Phil Hobbs
>
> I have three HP CP1525nw LaserJet color printers. They are fabulous if
> you don't print a lot: a cartrige set costs more than the printer.
> They will sit patiently for months and then print beautifully.
>
> We have a big B-size Sharp color digital copier/printer/scanner at
> work that's wonderful. It's reliable and takes toner by the bucket.
> B-size schematics rock. PADS doesn't really do schematics in color,
> but that would be cool.
>
> We have a used HP 5100 b+w B-size printer, nice but we don't use it
> much any more because the toner cartrige is too expensive. Are there
> B-size inkjets around?
>
>
>
Haven't looked lately, but there used to be 'B' size inkjets fro HP-BPD 
division in Singapore.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430900

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote in message 
news:3i2qvbtv51gglhc78064auoilv0vcpfrps@4ax.com...
> We have a big B-size Sharp color digital copier/printer/scanner at
> work that's wonderful. It's reliable and takes toner by the bucket.
> B-size schematics rock. PADS doesn't really do schematics in color,
> but that would be cool.

A client has a Sharp MX-something or other MFC.  Altium color schematics 
never looked so good!

Tim

-- 
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430910

On 10/11/2016 9:02 AM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:31:05 -0400, Phil Hobbs
> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>
>> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.
>> Looks like an encoder failure on the paper feed.
>>
>> It was one of their last ones that didn't have chips in the ink
>> cartridges, and it worked great for years.  One of the better three
>> bills I ever spent.
>>
>> The replacement, an MFCJ series model, pretends to print with
>> aftermarket ink but doesn't really.  When you run the head cleaning
>> routine, only about 10% of the black ink pattern prints, and repeated
>> cleaning doesn't make that any better.
>>
>> There's nothing wrong with the ink or the print head--it's deliberately
>> crippled.
>>
>> I know this from two lines of evidence:
>>
>> 1. When you hold two test prints up to the sunlight superimposed, you
>> see that it's a different set of spots that prints each time, and especially
>>
>> 2. It prints the machine serial number on the test print, in black, and
>> it comes out _perfectly_.
>>
>> Asshats.
>>
>> I'm never buying another Brother product.
>>
>> However, I do need a light-duty B-size (11x17) colour printer.  Budget
>> is probably $1k or thereabouts.  Anybody got one that they like?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Phil Hobbs
>
> I have three HP CP1525nw LaserJet color printers. They are fabulous if
> you don't print a lot: a cartrige set costs more than the printer.
> They will sit patiently for months and then print beautifully.
>
> We have a big B-size Sharp color digital copier/printer/scanner at
> work that's wonderful. It's reliable and takes toner by the bucket.
> B-size schematics rock. PADS doesn't really do schematics in color,
> but that would be cool.
>
> We have a used HP 5100 b+w B-size printer, nice but we don't use it
> much any more because the toner cartrige is too expensive. Are there
> B-size inkjets around?

Sure.  I rescued ($0) one of these:
 
<http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product/Specifications.do?sku=C11C655001>
a while back.  Used it to print copies of SWMBO's artwork (it's
a "photo printer").  When the grocery bag full of ink cartridges
ran out, I discarded it.

Also had a (low resolution) EPSON that would do C size.  Opted to
dump it as I seldom printed anything that large.

Currently have a rescued ($0) one of these (E size):
     <http://h20564.www2.hp.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docId=emr_na-bpp01854>
that I will use until I run out of paper (rolls) and ink carts.

For photo/publication quality work, I find it easier to walk the
12 minutes to Kinkos (faster than driving there!) and let them
worry about keeping their equipment in (ahem) "peak" operating
condition.  Even at $1 per 11x17 *photo*, its a bargain not to have to
muck with supplies and deadlines!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430878

Hi Phil,
> So my trusty Brother MFC6490CW B-size all-in-one printer died the death.

My MFCJ6510DW is the best printer I ever had. If I should buy anotherone 
I woul upgrade to MFCJ6520DW with a second paper feeder.

May be there is a single issue?

Marte

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design

csiph-web