Has Epson also gone downhill? The first one I bought lasted 11 years, so about 3 years ago I replaced it with another Epson.
Epson with the eco tank. It's like 12 bucks for several years of ink and the thing just works.
What ink are you getting for $12?? Even allowing for quite a bit of poetic licence, this seems ridiculously cheap.
It's just a bottle of ink that you pour into the tank. You can find generic ones for $7-8.
My wife prints 1-2 boxes of paper per year in color. About 10% of those are photograph quality. A laser printer wouldn't cut it for the photographs so I got her an ecotank.
The tanks hold 130ml of ink so they last a long time. The largest HP cartridge held like 49ml of ink of I recall correctly. Most of them had under 10ml.
If you print infrequently or an absolute ton (like an office) a laser printer is better. If you print a case or two of paper per year and photographs, the inkjet is better.
Oh, I know how they work - we have an ET-8550. I just didn't realise generic ink could be so cheap. My wife sells prints of her photographs and artwork so is a bit "cautious" about her ink and only uses genuine Epson at $25 per 70ml. I just looked on Amazon and found that generic ink can be had for around $6-7 per 70ml ($40 for a 6-pack) - wow!
What ink are you getting for $12
That investment in a squid and giant aquarium is paying for itself, I tells ya! 😛
I threw mine from the balcony when it stopped me from scanning documents because one of the cartridges was empty.
Been with Brother ever since.
I’ve never had that issue with either Epson I’ve owned. Scans just fine without ink.
What I heard is that Epson is even better than Brother and the ink is even cheaper, but the printers are much more expensive and repairs are slow, so Brother is probably better for casual individual user.
For ink jet you buy Epson, for laser buy Brother
People should also consider no printer and just use a local place, like FedEx stores or a local library, for the handful of times you need to print per year. Maybe it won't work for you, but consider how much you would dump into any printer compared to the cost per page at a shop. You're going to be spending a lot more for the convenience of printing at home.
I've still been having good experiences with new Epson printers. Epson and brother good, hp needs to be sued to the stone age.
We've had trouble with Brother products as well unfortunately
Did it include the manufacturer trying to lock everyone in to a pay-to-print racket?
Is Canon half-decent?
I have a cannon at home. It was super cheap and super reliable, and no possibility for an internet connection.
Same with me. I had trouble getting that anti-pale-yellow-dot program to work with it though. Still can't do it :(
I don't have any recent experience with them but they used to be. I haven't used their laser offerings but it looks like they're about on par with Brother from a quick Google search.
That's a real thing. Buy Brother, brother.
Has Epson also gone downhill? The first one I bought lasted 11 years, so about 3 years ago I replaced it with another Epson.
Epson with the eco tank. It's like 12 bucks for several years of ink and the thing just works.
What ink are you getting for $12?? Even allowing for quite a bit of poetic licence, this seems ridiculously cheap.
It's just a bottle of ink that you pour into the tank. You can find generic ones for $7-8.
My wife prints 1-2 boxes of paper per year in color. About 10% of those are photograph quality. A laser printer wouldn't cut it for the photographs so I got her an ecotank.
The tanks hold 130ml of ink so they last a long time. The largest HP cartridge held like 49ml of ink of I recall correctly. Most of them had under 10ml.
If you print infrequently or an absolute ton (like an office) a laser printer is better. If you print a case or two of paper per year and photographs, the inkjet is better.
Oh, I know how they work - we have an ET-8550. I just didn't realise generic ink could be so cheap. My wife sells prints of her photographs and artwork so is a bit "cautious" about her ink and only uses genuine Epson at $25 per 70ml. I just looked on Amazon and found that generic ink can be had for around $6-7 per 70ml ($40 for a 6-pack) - wow!
That investment in a squid and giant aquarium is paying for itself, I tells ya! 😛
I threw mine from the balcony when it stopped me from scanning documents because one of the cartridges was empty.
Been with Brother ever since.
I’ve never had that issue with either Epson I’ve owned. Scans just fine without ink.
What I heard is that Epson is even better than Brother and the ink is even cheaper, but the printers are much more expensive and repairs are slow, so Brother is probably better for casual individual user.
For ink jet you buy Epson, for laser buy Brother
People should also consider no printer and just use a local place, like FedEx stores or a local library, for the handful of times you need to print per year. Maybe it won't work for you, but consider how much you would dump into any printer compared to the cost per page at a shop. You're going to be spending a lot more for the convenience of printing at home.
I've still been having good experiences with new Epson printers. Epson and brother good, hp needs to be sued to the stone age.
We've had trouble with Brother products as well unfortunately
Did it include the manufacturer trying to lock everyone in to a pay-to-print racket?
Is Canon half-decent?
I have a cannon at home. It was super cheap and super reliable, and no possibility for an internet connection.
Same with me. I had trouble getting that anti-pale-yellow-dot program to work with it though. Still can't do it :(
I don't have any recent experience with them but they used to be. I haven't used their laser offerings but it looks like they're about on par with Brother from a quick Google search.