If you have any experience with this particular all-in-one, what do you
think of it?

cheers,

Henry

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 07:53:38 +0200, (E-Mail Removed) (Henry) wrote:

>If you have any experience with this particular all-in-one, what do you
>think of it?
>
>cheers,
>
>Henry


I've had it for a few months, and it's been very good. I bought it
originally for it's fax, scan, and network features, but it's turned
out to be a better printer than the Epson 870 I had, with better print
quality on text and colour. It's definitely a great deal for the
price, without feeling cheaply made.

Jak Crow <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I've had it for a few months, and it's been very good. I bought it
> originally for it's fax, scan, and network features, but it's turned
> out to be a better printer than the Epson 870 I had, with better print
> quality on text and colour. It's definitely a great deal for the
> price, without feeling cheaply made.

Thanks for your comments.

I've been looking for the right all-in-one for over a year. My quest
started when our old fax-modem crapped out. Since the wife has been
remarking off and on for the past few years that it would be nice to
have a scanner; and since I have been thinking recently that a colour
printer might be fun (we have a LaserJet for workaday duties); and since
the idea that the overlapping technologies involved made a
multi-function device such a logical offering had hit me over ten years
ago (resulting, at that time, in bafflement as to why the machines
available in the marketplace were so few and so bad)--all this motivated
me to launch a new round of research at the end of 2002.

The first thing I found was the disappointing lack of true ALL-in-one
machines, by which I mean _with fax_. For me, three out of four just
won't do--and I'd bet there are nine three-way devices out there for
every four-way model. Then, I started thinking that as long as I'm
getting this thing, I might as well get one that I can put on my
three-computer 100base-T home LAN, so built-in ethernet became a big
plus. At one point I came -> <- this close to buying the HP 2210 because
the prospect of six-colour photo printing was exciting, but before I
knew it the 2210 was withdrawn. The newer 2510 appears to be just as
capable--but lately I've been troubled by reports of HP price-gouging on
ink supplies.

Thus, when I heard about this new Brother, I thought that perhaps I
could trade off the six-colour photo-quality printing (I won't be doing
much of it anyway) in favour of the individually-replaceable ink tanks.
(HP's 'replace three colours when one runs out' system does rankle
somewhat.) Your comment that the 3820CN prints better than an Epson 870
is interesting (although, I must admit, I'm not particularly familiar
with Epson printers, so I don't know how impressive that comparison
should be taken to be).

Anyway, thanks again for your remarks. Perhaps someone else will join
the discussion?

cheers,

Henry

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:44:45 +0200, (E-Mail Removed) (Henry) wrote:

>The first thing I found was the disappointing lack of true ALL-in-one
>machines, by which I mean _with fax_. For me, three out of four just
>won't do--and I'd bet there are nine three-way devices out there for
>every four-way model. Then, I started thinking that as long as I'm
>getting this thing, I might as well get one that I can put on my
>three-computer 100base-T home LAN, so built-in ethernet became a big
>plus. At one point I came -> <- this close to buying the HP 2210 because
>the prospect of six-colour photo printing was exciting, but before I
>knew it the 2210 was withdrawn. The newer 2510 appears to be just as
>capable--but lately I've been troubled by reports of HP price-gouging on
>ink supplies.

Yes. I noticed the lack of FAX features on many of the all-in-ones,
even though they, IMO, tried to appear as if they did have FAX. I
actually specifically avoided looking at HPs because they're too
expensive, I don't like chipped ink carts (Brother's don't have
chips), HP drops support for their hardware very quickly when the next
"latest and greatest" comes out, and I just don't like HP as a
company.

>Thus, when I heard about this new Brother, I thought that perhaps I
>could trade off the six-colour photo-quality printing (I won't be doing
>much of it anyway) in favour of the individually-replaceable ink tanks.
>(HP's 'replace three colours when one runs out' system does rankle
>somewhat.) Your comment that the 3820CN prints better than an Epson 870
>is interesting (although, I must admit, I'm not particularly familiar
>with Epson printers, so I don't know how impressive that comparison
>should be taken to be).

The 870 is pretty old at this point, Epson stopped doing drivers for
it in 2001, and it has been passed up by newer printers that cost
1/4th what I paid for it at the time. I haven't had a chance to bang
out a really high res photo on the 3820, but everything I've printed
so far looks pretty much the same as what I was getting from the 870,
except text is significantly better on the 3820.

Jak Crow <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> and it has been passed up by newer printers that cost
> 1/4th what I paid for it at the time.

But that's always the way, innit? I have a little 'sculpture' here on my
desk made out of four one-meg RAM SIMMs that I paid $200 each for, back
in '89.

Again, thanks for your comments about the 3820. The local dealer says he
expects to get one in about a month's time and it will go for about 300
euro. I will give it a close look.

cheers,

Henry