Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Ink at $1228.95 (US) a liter: two questions to Bob Headrick

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
January 2, 2005 7:20:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Was: Cost of toner and Bob Headrick

Bob Headrick wrote:

> I am *not* a LaserJet expert. (...)

> - Bob Headrick, 10 years as an inkjet guy for HP

Ok, I understand. But I do have a few questions about inkjet printers just the
same. You'll remember I said I considered them too but a salesman said the
ink cost are staggering. So, let's see the exact figures for black ink on a
PSC 1012. The cartridge is the C6656A and it sells for $27.99 (CAN) from the
second cartridge on:

<http://www.staples.ca/ENG/Catalog/cat_sku.asp?CatIds=88...;

So, let's say $28 (CAN) or $23.35 (US) for 19 ml of ink. (/Only/ 20$ from HP,
but us crazy Canuck have to pay a little extra, even at Staples.)

This comes down to $1228.95 (US) a liter of ink. Now, for what Art Entlich
describes as: "water, alcohol and glycol mix" and "dye colors"(1), some people
might think the price is a tad steep. But, imagine the job of drilling
hundreds of tiny holes in the printhead and fitting the nozzles in with
tweezers! :)  HP is doing all this for us. Quite a job!

(1)EdyAd.20204$Y72.17321@edtnps91 Here, pigments instead of dye colors.

And, that's not the point. The point is, thanks to the marvelous printhead
technology, you can print 450 pages with the said 19 ml of ink(1), which
brings the cost to hardly more than 5¢ a page, close to that of some laser
printers. (The HP 1012 comes to mind.)

(1)
<http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF06c/A10-12771...;

For an expert such as you, Bob -- because after "10 years as an injet guy at
HP", I figure you're more than "a guy" -- how 19 ml of ink can print 450
pages, is evident, I suppose. But, for the layman, it's a whole different
story. I, for one, certainly have to figure it out.

Let's divide 19 ml by 450. That's 0.0422... ml per page. Now, since an insulin
syringe is 1 cc and is divided in 100 units, 4 units is 0.04 ml. That's really
not a lot!

So, here's my first question, Bob. Is there anywhere ob HP's site a page
printed at 5% coverage, so we can see what we're talking about? Or can you
tell us how many capital A, 12 cpi, Times roman, you can print on standard
paper with 0.04 ml of ink?

People who owned this kind of printers tell me that the printhead has quitted
the bad habit of taking a little ink bath each time the printer is turned on,
but that I notheless shouldn't hope for more than 200 pages per cartridge
instead of the 450 stated by HP.

Second question. Is there any reason, other than the 5% coverage issue, that
shortens the cartridge life's?

After we understand those basic facts, then, we can analyse if, though, as
Bill Crocker puts it, "We're all too well aware of the high cost of
consumables", they /should/ be all that expensive.

Maybe it's so, or maybe HP is headed by a centipede with Imelda Marco's
inclinations and she's setting a real bad exemple as to the means of salvaging
the company. Of course, I agree with Art Entlich that we shouldn't try to get
you involved in this discussion, but is it still possible to get real-life
figures instead of an irrelevant technical mumbo-jumbo from HP?

Gee Bob, I hope you won't tell us that you know nothing about ink because
you're specialising in the paper tray section of the inkjet division at HP!

GP
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 2, 2005 9:19:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"GP" <gilpel@inverse.nretla.org> wrote in message
news:10tgp7d8mm7kk67@corp.supernews.com...

> Let's divide 19 ml by 450. That's 0.0422... ml per page. Now, since an
> insulin
> syringe is 1 cc and is divided in 100 units, 4 units is 0.04 ml. That's
> really not a lot!
>
> So, here's my first question, Bob. Is there anywhere ob HP's site a page
> printed at 5% coverage, so we can see what we're talking about? Or can you
> tell us how many capital A, 12 cpi, Times roman, you can print on standard
> paper with 0.04 ml of ink?

http://www.hp.com/sbso/product/supplies/whybuy_iso.html shows an ISO page for
laser cartridges. It does not look a lot different from the page used for
inkjet cartridges.

As for the capital A - using Word 2003, page setup with 1/2" margins on
8.5"x11" page, a full page of 12 pt Times Roman capital A's is 52 lines of 62
A's each line. According to my scanner this is a page coverage of 9.3%. By my
calculations you could print about 1660 12pt Times Roman A's per 0.04 mL of
ink.

> People who owned this kind of printers tell me that the printhead has quitted
> the bad habit of taking a little ink bath each time the printer is turned on,
> but that I notheless shouldn't hope for more than 200 pages per cartridge
> instead of the 450 stated by HP.

Typically the page coverage (for text) is less than 5% and typically a user
will get more than the rated number of pages. If they are getting 200 pages
they either have misestimated, are printing graphics or other heavy usage or
are using lower fill cartridges such as the #27, 28.

> Second question. Is there any reason, other than the 5% coverage issue, that
> shortens the cartridge life's?

Yes, there are a number or reasons, which can include: driver settings, print
modes (draft, normal, best), paper selection, storage conditions (time,
temperature, humidity), time since last print job, whether the power is removed
(such as with a power strip), whether cleaning cycles are run, what model of
printer, etc, etc, etc.

I would comment that for the most part people have no idea how much printing
they actually do; comparing estimates from folks as to their printing with the
reality as measures in the printer often results in very wide (>3X)
discrepancies).

> After we understand those basic facts, then, we can analyse if,
> though, as Bill Crocker puts it, "We're all too well aware of the high cost
> of consumables", they /should/ be all that expensive.

I do not believe any of the above would help answer that question. For that
you might need to look at the cost of production lines, R&D, wafer fab, etc,
etc. I would bet that you do not have any idea of the number of folks involved
in designing a print cartridge such as the #56. How much do you think HP has
invested in production lines for the #56 cartridge? $1M? $10M? $100M? More?
There is a lot more to designing a printing system than meets the eye.

- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 2, 2005 10:20:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

You could address this same set of tricky questions and accusations to
"a guy" at any inkjet printer manufacturing company.

So, why don't you go and do that and tell us what response you get.

Many people here know that the business model for inkjets is to make the
big money off of the cartridges.

The razor business was an older example, where they used to sell the
blade holder cheap or give it away, and then make money from all the
blades you had to buy.

Then some English company introduced the stainless steel razor blade
which didn't corrode the sharp edge away rapidly, and the number of
blades sold took a drop, and somewhat changed the way the razor blade
business earned their profit.

The 5% coverage thing comes from laser printers, and it has long been
said to correspond to the coverage of a normal business letter
resembling a typewritten page.

No pictures and no giant wide heavy fonts.

Go find something useful to do. Anywhere but here, please.



GP wrote:
> Was: Cost of toner and Bob Headrick
>
> Bob Headrick wrote:
>
> > I am *not* a LaserJet expert. (...)
>
> > - Bob Headrick, 10 years as an inkjet guy for HP
>
> Ok, I understand. But I do have a few questions about inkjet printers
> just the same. You'll remember I said I considered them too but a
> salesman said the
> ink cost are staggering. So, let's see the exact figures for black ink on a
> PSC 1012. The cartridge is the C6656A and it sells for $27.99 (CAN) from
> the
> second cartridge on:
>
> <http://www.staples.ca/ENG/Catalog/cat_sku.asp?CatIds=88...;
>
>
> So, let's say $28 (CAN) or $23.35 (US) for 19 ml of ink. (/Only/ 20$
> from HP,
> but us crazy Canuck have to pay a little extra, even at Staples.)
>
> This comes down to $1228.95 (US) a liter of ink. Now, for what Art Entlich
> describes as: "water, alcohol and glycol mix" and "dye colors"(1), some
> people
> might think the price is a tad steep. But, imagine the job of drilling
> hundreds of tiny holes in the printhead and fitting the nozzles in with
> tweezers! :)  HP is doing all this for us. Quite a job!
>
> (1)EdyAd.20204$Y72.17321@edtnps91 Here, pigments instead of dye colors.
>
> And, that's not the point. The point is, thanks to the marvelous
> printhead technology, you can print 450 pages with the said 19 ml of
> ink(1), which brings the cost to hardly more than 5¢ a page, close to
> that of some laser printers. (The HP 1012 comes to mind.)
>
> (1)
> <http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF06c/A10-12771...;
>
>
> For an expert such as you, Bob -- because after "10 years as an injet
> guy at
> HP", I figure you're more than "a guy" -- how 19 ml of ink can print 450
> pages, is evident, I suppose. But, for the layman, it's a whole different
> story. I, for one, certainly have to figure it out.
>
> Let's divide 19 ml by 450. That's 0.0422... ml per page. Now, since an
> insulin
> syringe is 1 cc and is divided in 100 units, 4 units is 0.04 ml. That's
> really not a lot!
>
> So, here's my first question, Bob. Is there anywhere ob HP's site a page
> printed at 5% coverage, so we can see what we're talking about? Or can
> you tell us how many capital A, 12 cpi, Times roman, you can print on
> standard paper with 0.04 ml of ink?
>
> People who owned this kind of printers tell me that the printhead has
> quitted the bad habit of taking a little ink bath each time the printer
> is turned on, but that I notheless shouldn't hope for more than 200
> pages per cartridge instead of the 450 stated by HP.
>
> Second question. Is there any reason, other than the 5% coverage issue,
> that shortens the cartridge life's?
>
> After we understand those basic facts, then, we can analyse if, though, as
> Bill Crocker puts it, "We're all too well aware of the high cost of
> consumables", they /should/ be all that expensive.
>
> Maybe it's so, or maybe HP is headed by a centipede with Imelda Marco's
> inclinations and she's setting a real bad exemple as to the means of
> salvaging
> the company. Of course, I agree with Art Entlich that we shouldn't try
> to get you involved in this discussion, but is it still possible to get
> real-life figures instead of an irrelevant technical mumbo-jumbo from HP?
>
> Gee Bob, I hope you won't tell us that you know nothing about ink
> because you're specialising in the paper tray section of the inkjet
> division at HP!
>
> GP
>


-
January 3, 2005 3:17:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

jbuch wrote:
>
> You could address this same set of tricky questions and accusations to
> "a guy" at any inkjet printer manufacturing company.

Absolutely. But, tell me, who introduced the 2,000 pages toner vatridge on the
market? Suppose you'd have bought a Laserjet 1012 and found deep in the manual
what was nowhere on HP's site(1), which is, the capacity of the cartridge has
been cut down by 20%, wouldn't you fell cheated?

(1)
<http://www.shopping.hp.com/cgi-bin/hpdirect/shopping/sc...;
<http://www.shopping.hp.com/cgi-bin/hpdirect/shopping/sc...;

Hell, they don't even tell that the printer comes from an half-empty
cartridge. I believe Staples used to say this, but it seems the information
has disappeared recently:

<http://www.staples.ca/ENG/Catalog/cat_sku.asp?CatIds=86...;


On page 13 of the 2003 10K form(1)

(1) <http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/investor/financials/annual/200...;

in Stevens v. HP, you'll find out that HP is fighting a class action in 32
states for providing so-called "economy" cartridges without clearly indicating it.

Whether HP wins or not is not the point. What HP should wonder is if
ligitating in 32 states to ruin its reputation is any way to make money. Is
this way of spearheading the consumer's rip off the way HP has built its
reputation?

In an answer to my message, John McWilliams writes:

«Bob's presence in several related NGs is very welcome, but by no means does
he need to engage in defending his employer, the industry, or business in
general.»

and he's absolutely right. Bob Headtick doesn't owe me a cent and neither is
he in any way obliged to defend his company's figures. But then, I will have
to believe what people told me was their real live experience and, for me and
all those people, HP's reputation will be tarnished.

Now, are all companies playing hard ball to the same degree HP does? As I
said(1), though its graphics quality might not be quite as good, Samsung is
offering an apparently equivalent cartridge, with both toner and drum, with
50% more toner -- 3,000 pages instead of 2,000 -- for just a few dollars more.

(1) 10tgvr641gjrge0@corp.supernews.com

Of course, HP's cartridges being more expensive, they're very easy to find
from third party vendors, whereas Samsung's are not. Again, is this any way
for HP to make money?

If you check the 10K form more closely, you'll see HP is plainly stating that
competition is fierce on consumables. So, how come La Fiorina is acting as if
such wasn't the case? The centipede is ruining the company's reputation for a
few dollars more, just to justify her insane pay.

But why an I caring so much about HP, you'll ask.

It's not so much about about HP I am caring, but about all of America's
industrial structure. You asked that I compare HP's pricing practices with
that of other printing companies, and I just did it a little bit, but that's
not where the parallel is most evident: it's with other American, including
Canadian, corporations.

We learned recently that IBM has sold its consumers division to Lenovo. It's
not profitable enough, it seems. Still, Levono will do something out of it.
What American corporations like, apparently, it to concentrate on activities
where margins are high because it requires more knowledge.

But, actually, profits are often high just because the production is made at
China's wages and sold at America's prices. From the moment every American
company in a given field of activity is established in Asia, as is the case in
the computer industry now, the selling price drops equally for everybody and
the "mature industries" with "narrow margins" move to Asia, where the
infrastructure is more than ready to "meet the challenge" since America's
contribution was only in distributing.

And that's what La Fiorina, with the blessing of shareholders, is
participating to. The joke is on us!

All over America, administrators are pushing the post-war economic model to
its utmost absurdity. Though they think they toil tremendously, corporations
are getting fatter with no effort on their part and are getting as inefficient
as the public sector.

Bush sending tenths of billions down the drain in his self-devised war against
Irak while fossil fuels are agonizing the planet, instead of investing in new
technologies, is just the icing on the cake of decadence.

America's school system has been a total failure for more than three decades,
and now, it really shows. But maybe we'd be a wee bit better off if we had
enough common sense to understand it's better not to put centipedes at the
head of companies. And, with no jets, no jet lag :) 

> Many people here know that the business model for inkjets is to make the
> big money off of the cartridges.
>
> The razor business was an older example, where they used to sell the
> blade holder cheap or give it away, and then make money from all the
> blades you had to buy.

No comment on an industry whose greatest feat has been to contribute even more
to polluting the planet.

> Go find something useful to do. Anywhere but here, please.

Dear Dark Avenger, I feel so sorry about your attitude towards me. Your
reasoning is so articulate, it's a pure delight. From all your posts, it's
quite obvious you're the flagship of America's intellegentia.

But it's certainly your right not to appreciate my opinion. So, maybe you've
learned about filters? May I suggest you use them and disappear forever from
the list of my correspondants.

I'll try to manage without you.

GP
January 3, 2005 4:41:25 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Bob Headrick wrote:
> "GP" <gilpel@inverse.nretla.org> wrote in message
> news:10tgp7d8mm7kk67@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
>>Let's divide 19 ml by 450. That's 0.0422... ml per page. Now, since an
>>insulin
>>syringe is 1 cc and is divided in 100 units, 4 units is 0.04 ml. That's
>>really not a lot!
>>
>>So, here's my first question, Bob. Is there anywhere ob HP's site a page
>>printed at 5% coverage, so we can see what we're talking about? Or can you
>>tell us how many capital A, 12 cpi, Times roman, you can print on standard
>>paper with 0.04 ml of ink?
>
>
> http://www.hp.com/sbso/product/supplies/whybuy_iso.html shows an ISO page for
> laser cartridges. It does not look a lot different from the page used for
> inkjet cartridges.

Thanks for answering. I saw the print. It should have been larger, but we see
what 5% coverage looks like. Let's put it this way: it's not overloaded.

On the same page, one can read:

"HP also strongly endorses industry efforts to provide credible information
that helps customers make better-informed decisions."

I hope they come up with better arguments against Stevens in court! Nothing on
HP's site substantiate this pretention. (See my reply to jbuch.
10thl6eno8aeq56@corp.supernews.com )

> Typically the page coverage (for text) is less than 5% and typically a user
> will get more than the rated number of pages. If they are getting 200 pages
> they either have misestimated, are printing graphics or other heavy usage or
> are using lower fill cartridges such as the #27, 28.

To the reader:

#27 is a 10 ml black cartridge
#28 is an 8 ml color cartridge

I've never seen those cartridges for sale, so I doubt your second assumption
is correct. Lots of graphics? Hum... Black and white graphics are quite rare
nowadays. But maybe, while I was talking B&W, people thought color. And, when
people print color, they print pictures.

The C6657AN tri-color cartridge yields 400 *Based on 15% density. What's 15%
density? And, with a 3 color cartridge, let's hope the sky is not too blue :) 

So, let's say that, while HP certainly doesn't present pertinent information
adequately for laserjet printers, they're completely honest when it comes to
inkjet printing :) 

>>Second question. Is there any reason, other than the 5% coverage issue, that
>>shortens the cartridge life's?
>
>
> Yes, there are a number or reasons, which can include: driver settings, print
> modes (draft, normal, best), paper selection, storage conditions (time,
> temperature, humidity), time since last print job, whether the power is removed
> (such as with a power strip),

This is getting interesting. What happens when the power switched off? Purge?
How much ink? Are people advised not to power off their printer on a quick
set-up sheet, not the instruction manual, which many people do not read?

> whether cleaning cycles are run

At about which non-printing intervals must cleaning cycles be run? A week, a
month, six months?

> I would comment that for the most part people have no idea how much printing
> they actually do; comparing estimates from folks as to their printing with the
> reality as measures in the printer often results in very wide (>3X)
> discrepancies).

Don't you think most people know approximately how much paper they buy?

>>After we understand those basic facts, then, we can analyse if,
>>though, as Bill Crocker puts it, "We're all too well aware of the high cost
>>of consumables", they /should/ be all that expensive.

> I do not believe any of the above would help answer that question.

That's not what I said. I said one matter at a time.

> How much do you think HP has
> invested in production lines for the #56 cartridge? $1M? $10M? $100M? More?
> There is a lot more to designing a printing system than meets the eye.

Let's hope resellers don't manage to refill them at such a better price than HP :) 

GP
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 3, 2005 5:02:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

GP wrote:

Long one sided diatribe.

I hope that Bob and others ignore this and related threads put forward
by "GP". His anti-business hard on is awfully juvenile.

Bob's presence in several related NGs is very welcome, but by no means
does he need to engage in defending his employer, the industry, or
business in general.

--
John McWilliams
January 3, 2005 9:48:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 02:02:56 GMT, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net>
wrote:

>GP wrote:
>
>Long one sided diatribe.
>
>I hope that Bob and others ignore this and related threads put forward
>by "GP". His anti-business hard on is awfully juvenile.
>
>Bob's presence in several related NGs is very welcome, but by no means
>does he need to engage in defending his employer, the industry, or
>business in general.

GP is an idiot.
If he thinks that the business is so crooked, why doesn't he start
his own business selling ink cartridges for what he considers a fair
price.
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 3, 2005 12:07:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

GP wrote:
> jbuch wrote:

You need a hobby or something to add meaning to your life.
January 3, 2005 12:56:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:19:46 -0800, "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com> wrote:

>
>"GP" <gilpel@inverse.nretla.org> trolled in message
>news:10tgp7d8mm7kk67@corp.supernews.com...

<snip>

>http://www.hp.com/sbso/product/supplies/whybuy_iso.html shows an ISO page for
>laser cartridges. It does not look a lot different from the page used for
>inkjet cartridges.
>

<snip>

please don't feed the troll.
January 3, 2005 5:34:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Fred wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 02:02:56 GMT, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>GP wrote:
>>
>>Long one sided diatribe.
>>
>>I hope that Bob and others ignore this and related threads put forward
>>by "GP". His anti-business hard on is awfully juvenile.
>>
>>Bob's presence in several related NGs is very welcome, but by no means
>>does he need to engage in defending his employer, the industry, or
>>business in general.
>
>
> GP is an idiot.

I couldn't agree more. When HP's toner cartridges drop to 25 pages, HP's
salavation and redemption will be complete! Customers are just a bunch of
fools. Amen!

What your country needs is more La Fiorina to cut down on everything. Hurray,
for the 2 ounces gallon!

No pwoblem in ze United States. Just doing fine:

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Now if a few more hurling trolls would care to join in, it would sound even truer.

GP
January 4, 2005 2:38:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

GP wrote:

> Hell, they don't even tell that the printer (laserjet 1012) comes from an half-empty
> cartridge. I believe Staples used to say this, but it seems the
> information has disappeared recently:
>
> <http://www.staples.ca/ENG/Catalog/cat_sku.asp?CatIds=86...;

This is wrong. It seems what I checked was a reburbished printer, whose
description is not online anymore because a brand new printer now sells for
only 10$ more.

Let's see how easy it was to find the yield of the cartridge...

Nope, it wasn't in *Overview*, neither in *Specs*, even complete, of course
not in *Cartridges* & Paper, but in *Related products*, where one learns that:

An HP LaserJet 12A ultraprecise print cartridge is included with this printer.
Stock up on extra cartridges so you don't run out.

» HP LaserJet Q2612A Black Print Cartridge with Smart Printing Technology
Print up to 2,000 pages

http://www.shopping.hp.com/cgi-bin/hpdirect/shopping/sc...


Gee talk about a well organized site where the client knows exactly where to
get the info! And let's hope that a 12A is the same as a Q2612A!

To me "Related products" means products having a relation to the Laserjet
1012, i.e., other printers of the same kind. So, I didn't check the last tab.

Given that the cartridge, or engine, as Mr Entlich puts, costs close to half
the price of the printer(1) and does much of the job, only the laser and the
fuser remaining as main components outside the cartridge, is it appropriate to
name it a "Related Product"? Wouldn't it be nice if all pertinent information
was on the Overview page or, at least, the Specs page?

(1) The New Year sale has been extended until March, when new lines of
printers will appear, I guess. Does anybody know what they're going to look like?

Is HP shying that much from saying its cartridge yields only 2000 pages?

GP
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 4, 2005 10:43:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

GP wrote:
> GP wrote:
>

You still need a hobby or something to take up your excess time.

Perhaps a small pet.
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 4, 2005 8:01:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Just to clarify, in the case of HP cartridges, some of the parts that
might otherwise be considered part of the print engine are included and
replaced when the cartridge is replaced. That is not to imply that the
terms cartridge and print engine are interchangeable.

When one replaces an HP laser cartridge, one gets many new or at least
refurbished parts that are involved in the actual printing process.
Other printers may only replace the toner holder and toner when a
cartridge is replaced. The advantage of the HP design is that all those
parts are renewed on cartridge replacement, the potential disadvantage
can be cost.

Art

GP wrote:


> Given that the cartridge, or engine, as Mr Entlich puts, costs close to
> half the price of the printer(1) and does much of the job, only the
> laser and the fuser remaining as main components outside the cartridge,
> is it appropriate to name it a "Related Product"? Wouldn't it be nice if
> all pertinent information was on the Overview page or, at least, the
> Specs page?
January 4, 2005 8:01:54 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> GP wrote:
>
>
>> Given that the cartridge, or engine, as Mr Entlich puts it,

> Just to clarify, in the case of HP cartridges, some of the parts that
> might otherwise be considered part of the print engine are included and
> replaced when the cartridge is replaced. That is not to imply that the
> terms cartridge and print engine are interchangeable.

I understand this but, in the case of HP and of the Samsung ML-1740 -- I don't
know about other Samsung models -- the cartridge seems to be what you call the
engine.

ZDnet says:

«(..) the 1740's toner cartridge and imaging drum form one integrated unit
that glides easily into place, reducing maintenance but hiking refill costs.»

http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/Samsung_ML_1740/4514-3159_...

Still, for 6$ more, you get 1,000 pages -- 50% -- more than from HP's 1012
cartridge. At a quick glance, I can't find a ZDnet review on the HP 1012, but
I wonder how they would qualify the HP's toner cost.

Also, ZDnet does not seem to take into account that the drum, when it's
separate, does eventually have to be replaced. Given the price of the drum,
this means the end of the printer.

So, price-wise, at the entry-level, since it's $60 cheaper than a HP 1012
($129 vs $189 CAN), Samsung wins hands down, even with an original 1000 page
cartridge.

Unfortunately -- I'll do my coming out now :)  -- I bought an HP 1012. That's
how I learned about the 2000 page cartridge.

IMO, which is not to say a lot, it prints very well. In draft mode, the
graphics pretty much disappear, but the text is /very/ legible, just a bit
thinner.

At the present time, I'm afraid my security is a bit tight on my Slack system
and I can't ping localhost :) . Hence, I can't print. Because I might be
moving to Debian if Pat The Man Volkerding doesn't recuperate soon and if
Debian's new installer is such a wonder, I don't care much about the problem,
I print with Knoppix. (Which, BTW, is a wonder, even for Windows users!)

To say that setting up the printer was a breeze is certainly an
understatement. It went so fast, I don't really remember how it happened. I do
remember that, contrary to HP's instructions, it had to be connected *before*
the driver was installed. I suppose it's like for ethernet cards, it's easier
to configure under Linux than Windows. (For the ethernet card, you put the
card in the slot, you reboot, bingo!)

The printer was detected, even identified, if I remember well, on the first
printer USB port. I clicked the defaults to the end, and it printed. Knoppix
uses CUPS for printing, but the hl-1250 driver is also available for APSfilter.

The printer construction appears on the flimsy side but it has its own little
place on a table and there are no children in the house. Its not very well
shielded from the dust, so I put a cover over it.

So what am I yelling about, Mr Buch will say.

In a word, I didn't appreciate not to see clearly stated on HP's site that the
toner cartridge capacity has been cut off by 20%. I've already been dealing
with Canon, a master in the art of ripping off the customer on consumables and
I had sworn to myself that I'd stay clear of such unethical wags.

Then, reading the user manual, I found out that HP, which had been described
to me as a serious company, had taken the lead in the art of treachery. I
really didn't appreciate. Really!

Staples told me I could bring the printer back even if the cartridge was open,
but I had inquired just for learning about the company's stance on its
commitments. (Yes, I do like to know who I'm dealing with!)

With the little printing I do these days, I'll be lucky if the toner doesn't
die before the cartridge is empty. I don't have a car to bring the printer
back, I'm not sure other printers would be as easy to set-up, etc. So it makes
absolutely no sense to put both me and Staples through this circus for $189.
I'll keep the printer.

But, even though choosing the HP will most probably make no monetary
difference to me in the long run, had I known then what I know now, I would
have choosen a Samsung or a Brother. Just to deal with a company that plays
the game straight. I've owned a Samsung SyncMaster 950 monitor for more than 3
years now, and have been totally satisfied with it. So, it seems that Samsung
makes good products.

Someday, maybe as soon as next April, Samsung, Brother, or some other lesser
reputed company, will come with an engine as good as HP's. Who knows, they
might even understand the purpose of offering open-source drivers :)  What do
you believe will happen, Art?

When television appeared soon after WW II, studios were equiped with GE, RCA
and Conrac. Now, it's all Sony. Our first TV at home was a Traveler, our
second an RCA. Today, all TVs are made in Asia. McDonald-Douglas and
Lockheed-Martin survive tanks to the killing industry. Boeing is loosing huge
market shares to Airbus. GM, Ford and Chrysler are thriving in Asia with,
respectively, Suzuki, Mazda and Mitsubshi. As the deficit grows, the ISS
project is in very bad shape.

In Canada, there's next to nothing left of Nortel and Bombardier's shares have
been relegated to the rank of junk bonds. Quebecor has lost billions in the
Videotron adventure and Quebecor World is loosing market shares. East and west
fish stocks have dwindled into nothingness and paper companies are felling the
last trees in the boreal forest. As Richard Desjardins puts it, we'll pretty
soon be producing tongued and grooved peckers' holes. Thanks to Suncor and
friends, the plains are turning into a dust bowl.

Everybody /restructures/ laying off employees as if the ultimate goal was to
design a multinational corporation with three employees.

And all this, in large part, because of million dollars a year CEOs who can't
foresee beyond immediate profit. When does the carnage stop?

GP
January 4, 2005 10:21:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

GP wrote:

> The printer was detected, even identified, if I remember well, on the
> first printer USB port. I clicked the defaults to the end, and it
> printed. Knoppix uses CUPS for printing, but the hl-1250 driver is also
> available for APSfilter.

Since I was curious about how exactly the configuration had succeeded, I
rebooted into Knoppix. Because I had forgotten to save the configuration on a
floppy -- Knoppix is a Live-CD, right? -- I had a nice occasion to redo the
whole thing. Gee, it's a good thing the printer does blow apart is it's
connected and the driver is not loaded :) 

The printer is indeed /identified/ on the USB port, but you must nonetheless
choose it in a list afterwards. At least, in case you forget the name of the
printer, you know which to choose :) 

Err... The driver is not the hl-1250. I had scribbled that name on a piece of
paper, but it's a driver for Brother printers. The one suggested for the
Laserjet 1012 is Foomatic + hpijs.

Click to the end. Done. Save on a floppy :) 

GP
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 5, 2005 5:20:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"GP" <gilpel@inverse.nretla.org> wrote in message
news:10tm23di50rduac@corp.supernews.com...

Firstly, like Arthur Entlich, I was quite uncomfortable that Mr.
Headrick had been invited to take part in this thread. I too have
noticed the assistance that he provides to the ng. The ng's ability
to help people with problems will not be advanced if Mr. Headricks
employer withdraws his permission to contribute (or worse). This is
likely to happen if posters try to use him in any way to undermine or
bring into disrepute the company he works for.

I for one, would like to see Mr. Headrick *not* post to this thread,
in the wider interest of the ng. Collectively, the ng is quite
capable of working out for itself when a manufacturer is on the nose.
(I think the majority agree that all the inkjet manufacturers now
stink worse than a dead fish)!!

> I've already been dealing
> with Canon, a master in the art of ripping off the customer on
consumables and
> I had sworn to myself that I'd stay clear of such unethical wags.
>
> Then, reading the user manual, I found out that HP, which had been
described
> to me as a serious company, had taken the lead in the art of
treachery. I
> really didn't appreciate. Really!

Well, not IMO, Canon is still head and shoulders above HP in the art
of extracting near unbelievable margins on consumables. Lets face it,
all companies who produce a proprietary product are able to inflate
the price of spares, service or consumables more than they would
otherwise do. After all, there is no competition. But some (like
Canon), jack up their margins to obscene levels using a variety of
techniques.

> And all this, in large part, because of million dollars a year CEOs
who can't
> foresee beyond immediate profit. When does the carnage stop?

CEO's get their millions of dollars a year for judging just how far
they can screw the consumer, without triggering a backlash. They are
responding to their shareholders need to make a dollar and this is
unlikely to change.

When does the carnage stop? Never, unless legislation with teeth gets
enacted. Don't hold your breath.

Regards,
Hughy
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 6, 2005 3:34:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> I do not disagree with you regarding the disproportional pay scales
> given to workers versus executives in large US (and some other North
> American) companies today. How a CEO can be worth 200 or 500 times
the
> work value of someone on the "shop floor" is beyond my comprehension.


And how some people are paid millions of dollars a year for playing
a game for only a few minutes, maybe a couple times a week for a few
months per year.

> John Roth (and some others we have been discussing) are their
> willingness to not only take the absurd salaries given to them, but
to
> them demand bonuses in their pay strategy, in the false believe they
had

Like in sports (etc) one gets, what one can get. Problem that they get
it
isn't, I think, their asking -- but the willingness of the company
owners to
pay it.

> something to do with the rise. If that be true, then they should
also
> be forced to GIVE BACK that bonus when the company collapses. In
fact,

A lot if not most compensation to CEO's basially does that in that
their compensation tends to be heavily in options that are worthless
unless the stock prices are high (which is what his/her boss is
interested in), and usually is much higher than the stock's market
value
at the time the options are given.

> there should be a 5 year or 10 year averaging system, where the bonus
is
> in a secure escrow account and works on an ongoing last 5 year
average,
> and should the CEO leave or be removed before 5 years, the whole
thing
> is forfeited.
Then they'd always be fired after 4.9 years automatically. :-)

Mike
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 6, 2005 6:31:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Once again, to be more specific, the print engine is much more than even
the HP cartridge contains. The laser system, the electronics that run
it, and so on, all are part of it, and they are permanent to the printer
itself.

I won't respond to each issue you bring up, but I'll make a few summary
comments. The number of prints on gets out of a printer are only one
measurement. Speed, quality, reliability, durability, even how
different papers are handles, based upon the paper path design and
material used in the printer, all play a part in the value of the
printer. Certainly, different people will find different features more
or less valuable to them.

I do not disagree with you regarding the disproportional pay scales
given to workers versus executives in large US (and some other North
American) companies today. How a CEO can be worth 200 or 500 times the
work value of someone on the "shop floor" is beyond my comprehension.
Often CEOs seem to be swept up by the forces of the sector at a
particular time, and I believe a chimp could have been at the top and
the same thing would have happened. I do not personally believe that
John Roth at the top of Nortel during their meteoric rise made Nortel so
wealthy, anymore than I believe when it all collapsed like a house of
cards, he did it either. I think, in fact, he was relatively useless.
A better CEO would have been able to somewhat control those conditions
for a much smoother growth and decline. What I resent about CEOS like
John Roth (and some others we have been discussing) are their
willingness to not only take the absurd salaries given to them, but to
them demand bonuses in their pay strategy, in the false believe they had
something to do with the rise. If that be true, then they should also
be forced to GIVE BACK that bonus when the company collapses. In fact,
there should be a 5 year or 10 year averaging system, where the bonus is
in a secure escrow account and works on an ongoing last 5 year average,
and should the CEO leave or be removed before 5 years, the whole thing
is forfeited.

Anyway, I suppose the future will tell if companies like HP can get out
from under the tremendous addiction they have to consumable printer
goods or not.

Art


GP wrote:

> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
> > GP wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Given that the cartridge, or engine, as Mr Entlich puts it,
>
>> Just to clarify, in the case of HP cartridges, some of the parts that
>> might otherwise be considered part of the print engine are included
>> and replaced when the cartridge is replaced. That is not to imply
>> that the terms cartridge and print engine are interchangeable.
>
>
> I understand this but, in the case of HP and of the Samsung ML-1740 -- I
> don't know about other Samsung models -- the cartridge seems to be what
> you call the engine.
>
January 6, 2005 6:31:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> Once again, to be more specific, the print engine is much more than even
> the HP cartridge contains. The laser system, the electronics that run
> it, and so on, all are part of it, and they are permanent to the printer
> itself.

Art, when the hell will you stop top posting so we know what we're talking about?

> I won't respond to each issue you bring up, but I'll make a few summary
> comments. The number of prints on gets out of a printer are only one
> measurement. Speed, quality, reliability, durability, even how
> different papers are handles, based upon the paper path design and
> material used in the printer, all play a part in the value of the
> printer. Certainly, different people will find different features more
> or less valuable to them.

True, but most people do care for the cost -- which include both consumables
and the cost of the printer, hence durability -- and durability of prints.
Other considerations come afterward. Most don't care that much about the paper
path :)  and even, to a certain degree, speed.

> I do not disagree with you regarding the disproportional pay scales
> given to workers versus executives in large US (and some other North
> American) companies today.

I'm glad ro see there's at least one thing we agree upon!

> I do not personally believe that
> John Roth at the top of Nortel during their meteoric rise made Nortel so
> wealthy

What made them /look/ so wealthy is accounting treachery, whicj is all the
more tempting because of stick options, a practice that should be forbidden.
Otherwise, Nortel would still be the rock solid company it used to be.

> Anyway, I suppose the future will tell if companies like HP can get out
> from under the tremendous addiction they have to consumable printer
> goods or not.

And, when we find out, just as for Nortel, it's going to be too late. La
Fiorina will have done its job.
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 9, 2005 2:34:49 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

GP wrote:

> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>> Once again, to be more specific, the print engine is much more than
>> even the HP cartridge contains. The laser system, the electronics
>> that run it, and so on, all are part of it, and they are permanent to
>> the printer itself.
>
>
> Art, when the hell will you stop top posting so we know what we're
> talking about?
>

No plans to. Keeps everyone on their toes ;-)

>> I won't respond to each issue you bring up, but I'll make a few
>> summary comments. The number of prints on gets out of a printer are
>> only one measurement. Speed, quality, reliability, durability, even
>> how different papers are handles, based upon the paper path design and
>> material used in the printer, all play a part in the value of the
>> printer. Certainly, different people will find different features
>> more or less valuable to them.
>
>
> True, but most people do care for the cost -- which include both
> consumables and the cost of the printer, hence durability -- and
> durability of prints. Other considerations come afterward. Most don't
> care that much about the paper path :)  and even, to a certain degree,
> speed.
>

Most people I deal with care about numerous issues, Which ones depend
upon their needs and which are most pressing. For some, budget is
supreme, for others, quality or speed or cost per print may be much more
decisive.


Art
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 9, 2005 2:46:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Anoni Moose wrote:

> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>
>>I do not disagree with you regarding the disproportional pay scales
>>given to workers versus executives in large US (and some other North
>>American) companies today. How a CEO can be worth 200 or 500 times
>
> the
>
>>work value of someone on the "shop floor" is beyond my comprehension.
>
>
>
> And how some people are paid millions of dollars a year for playing
> a game for only a few minutes, maybe a couple times a week for a few
> months per year.
>
>

Luckily, other then money I have no power over, like tax money paying
sports franchises in subsidies or TV contracts, they do not get any of
my money. Sadly, apparently, many people are quite willing to pay them
massive amounts at gate receipt for the opportunity to watch these
people do their thing. Costly voyeurism in my opinion.

>>John Roth (and some others we have been discussing) are their
>>willingness to not only take the absurd salaries given to them, but
>
> to
>
>>them demand bonuses in their pay strategy, in the false believe they
>
> had
>
> Like in sports (etc) one gets, what one can get. Problem that they get
> it
> isn't, I think, their asking -- but the willingness of the company
> owners to
> pay it.
>
>
>>something to do with the rise. If that be true, then they should
>
> also
>
>>be forced to GIVE BACK that bonus when the company collapses. In
>
> fact,
>
> A lot if not most compensation to CEO's basially does that in that
> their compensation tends to be heavily in options that are worthless
> unless the stock prices are high (which is what his/her boss is
> interested in), and usually is much higher than the stock's market
> value
> at the time the options are given.
>
>

Stock prices do not necessarily reflect the value or viability of the
company... it is often only when the public (and more so, institutional
investors )determine a company is no longer worth what it was hyped to,
that the options start falling. Usually, the CEO has abandoned ship and
sold their share before then.


>>there should be a 5 year or 10 year averaging system, where the bonus
>
> is
>
>>in a secure escrow account and works on an ongoing last 5 year
>
> average,
>
>>and should the CEO leave or be removed before 5 years, the whole
>
> thing
>
>>is forfeited.
>
> Then they'd always be fired after 4.9 years automatically. :-)
>

I'm not so sure. A really good CEO is hard to find, and they would only
receive the first year's average on the fifth year. Replacing a CEO
isn't cheap.

Art
Anonymous
a b α HP
January 10, 2005 2:42:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 23:46:17 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
wrote:

>>
>>Anoni Moose wrote:
>> Like in sports (etc) one gets, what one can get. Problem that they get
>> it isn't, I think, their asking -- but the willingness of the company
>> owners to pay it.
>>

I think you are confusing the directors with the owners, and since
in many cases the directors are nominated by management, it is almost
as if they decide their own salary.

>Stock prices do not necessarily reflect the value or viability of the
>company... it is often only when the public (and more so, institutional
>investors )determine a company is no longer worth what it was hyped to,
>that the options start falling. Usually, the CEO has abandoned ship and
>sold their share before then.
>

Unless they get caught.

Geo
!