Suggestions for a consumer-level printer that will scan to USBwithout a PC connection?

[davidd31415]

Hi,

I'm looking for a printer that will scan to a USB drive without a PC
connection.

I would like this because I've found printer drivers to be unusually
bloated. I install them on an old PC which does little more than
print. Opening a remote desktop connection and waiting for the old PC
to respond is never fun and I usually end up taking pictures instead
of scanning.

I'm looking for inexpensive. The HP C6180 is the least expensive I've
found so far, at $300. I'm not quite sure if it will scan without PC
connection yet but I do know it will scan to USB drive.

David

 

[davidd31415]

Hi,

I'm looking for a printer that will scan to a USB drive without a PC
connection.

I would like this because I've found printer drivers to be unusually
bloated.  I install them on an old PC which does little more than
print.  Opening a remote desktop connection and waiting for the old PC
to respond is never fun and I usually end up taking pictures instead
of scanning.

I'm looking for inexpensive.  The HP C6180 is the least expensive I've
found so far, at $300.  I'm not quite sure if it will scan without PC
connection yet but I do know it will scan to USB drive.

David

Thinking about this a bit more...

Since I started off hoping to buy an inexpensive printer for less than
$100, if anyone can recommend a color inkjet that has scanning
functionality and a very lightweight driver, I will consider
purchasing that as well.

An option I would be interested in paying a bit more for, at any
stage, is a document feeder. I would be surprised to find something
like this in the sub-$300 range though.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

I'm not really sure such a driver exists.

Scans are a file format (usually jpegs) but most use a TWAIN of similar
driver that involves the computer memory for temporary storage, and then
it can be written to disk via the TWAIN or other intelligent software.

I don't know that any scanner will make and store a file and then
directly communicate to and write to hard drive, or any other simple
memory devise, like a USB thumb drive.

I'm quite willing to be proven wrong, however.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

I don't know that any scanner will make and store a file and then
directly communicate to and write to hard drive, or any other simple
memory devise, like a USB thumb drive.

I'm quite willing to be proven wrong, however.

In order to do as the OP suggested, a AIO printer would need to have
support for networking, and be able to understand how to access a
shared folder, which I would agree, I'm not aware of any that exists.
The closest thing is what you suggest, I think Epson has scanners
which will scan to flash cards, and as such be accessible on the local
PC as a local drive, it just happens to be the scanner's local drive
as well.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

An option I would be interested in paying a bit more for, at any
stage, is a document feeder. I would be surprised to find something
like this in the sub-$300 range though.

I just bought an extra canon mp830 with document feeder for $155 from
buy.com, but they appear to be out of those. They do have the mp530
for $105 shipped

http://www.buy.com/prod/canon-mp530...er-canon-pixma-mp530/q/loc/101/202866378.html

It only has a 30 page document feeder, but it is a document feeder.

Canon closes out all their old models in September to make way for the
new models, which may or may not be improvements on the old one.

The usual problem with the sub $100 AIO units is the fact that
companies tend to use smaller more expensive per page cartridges on
the cheaper units, and standard sized on the larger ones. This is not
the case with the mp530, black is like $16 and 500-525 pages or about
3.2c/page @ 5% coverage.

But near as I'm aware it won't scan to a usb drive, or memory card on
the canons. I wasn't presented with the option.

If you're near a frys you might want to check out there deals.

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/BuyEpson/ccHome.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes
The Epson clearance store has a many solutions one with a sheet feeder
for under $100.
CX9400Fax -$65 shipped refurbished, $75 new from epson.com


The T068120 13ml black cartridge costs $20 with an estimated 245-370
page yield, I'd guess 6c/page or so which is to be expected on a sub
$100 unit.
I don't know if it supports scanning to memory cards.

The RX500/RX595 were the first Epson unit that I'm aware of that
offered scanning to memory cards termed "Scan to Card" technology.

-----------------------

Kodak 5300, a unit I've never seen or used, reports to have scan to
card ability, and I presume by extension the 5500 would have it, which
is $200 with autodoc feeder.

The price for consumables on the Kodak are reasonable, a $10 black @
about 2.5c/page. Color I don't know about.

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message
<[email protected]>

Canon closes out all their old models in September to make way for the
new models, which may or may not be improvements on the old one.

I usually have a budget (based on comparison shopping), so when Sep/Oct
comes around and Canon brings out their new lineup, I can usually take
my existing budget, but by getting last year's model I can go up a step
in quality/features/whatever.

I've yet to regret this technique.

 

[William R. Walsh]

Hi!

In order to do as the OP suggested, a AIO printer would need to have
support for networking, and be able to understand how to access a
shared folder, which I would agree, I'm not aware of any that exists.

The HP OfficeJet 9130 will do this. I wouldn't rush out to get one unless
you absolutely must. It's nothing more than a temperamental piece of junk (a
"multimalfunction device" if you will) when it comes to the fax function,
and both scanning and printing are mediocre at best.

A considerably fancier and more expensive product is the LaserJet M5035 MFP,
which can scan to network shares, its internal hard disk or e-mail. It will
scan in color and seems to do pretty well, although 300DPI appears to be the
limit.

William

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

I usually have a budget (based on comparison shopping), so when Sep/Oct
comes around and Canon brings out their new lineup, I can usually take
my existing budget, but by getting last year's model I can go up a step
in quality/features/whatever.

I've yet to regret this technique.

Yes, 4 years back or so, they were offering the mp750 online for $100,
which was the same price as the ip4000. Spiffy deal for something
with a sheet feeder, but no fax.

Now, it's the mp830 or mp530, which to be fair the mp830 jumped up in
price come October.

The only drawback is if Canon happens to offer a spiffy new feature,
like switching to 1pl & 5pl drops rather than 2 & 5, or offering 1, 2,
and 5pl drops rather than just 1 &2. But most of their advancements
are geared toward photo printing, not next which remains pretty much
unchanged, save the option for duplex printing which IMHO isn't a
useful feature.

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message
<[email protected]>

Yes, 4 years back or so, they were offering the mp750 online for $100,
which was the same price as the ip4000. Spiffy deal for something
with a sheet feeder, but no fax.

I did the exact same combination myself, mp750 which eventually went to
my mom when I got the mp830 that now darkens my desk.

Now, it's the mp830 or mp530, which to be fair the mp830 jumped up in
price come October.

I got the mp830, my mom got the mp530 when she somehow damaged the
mp750. Oddly, I paid less, just dumb luck, got it at a substantial
discount at what I think might have been a store mistake.

If we'd had our truck instead of our little Audi (which could barely
even fit the mp830 box) I'd have stocked up and made a killing selling
them on eBay, even offering free shipping I'd have beaten the going eBay
price at the time.

The only drawback is if Canon happens to offer a spiffy new feature,
like switching to 1pl & 5pl drops rather than 2 & 5, or offering 1, 2,
and 5pl drops rather than just 1 &2.

Even so, unless the feature is worth the $100-$200 savings...

But most of their advancements
are geared toward photo printing, not next which remains pretty much
unchanged, save the option for duplex printing which IMHO isn't a
useful feature.

It's weird, I thought the same about duplex printing until had that
option. I don't think I'll buy another printer without it.

That being said, I have a colour duplexing laser, so my inkjet needs are
only for the occasional photo.

I bought my MP830 because it was the same price as the cheapest sheet
fed scanner, and far cheaper then any duplexing scanner I could find,
the printer is somewhere between an added bonus and a waste of otherwise
unused space.

One day I might even get a landline, in which case the fax will come in
handy, but until then, it makes a nice scanner and an occasional
photocopier.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

I got the mp830, my mom got the mp530 when she somehow damaged the
mp750. Oddly, I paid less, just dumb luck, got it at a substantial
discount at what I think might have been a store mistake.

Could be, or could be they were encouraged to clear out the "old"
models in favor of the "new" models. This is odd as they have the MX
class models, one is actually on par with the mp750, well, no photo
black on the MX700 IIRC, but the same resolution head. It has
networking, which is a big bonus, but aside from that, the mp750 was
equal or slightly better printer.

Even so, unless the feature is worth the $100-$200 savings...

It is worth that IF you need that feature. I find the 1pl model does
better for Japanese text, specifically the furigana, the little
characters above the big ones. I imagine that the medium resolution
does a slightly better job on certain paper. A savings of $100 is
meaningless if you just spend $100 a short time later, but I'm sure
for most people, they would be pleased saving such a HUGE chunk from
the get go.

It depends on the person, and their wants/needs.

It's weird, I thought the same about duplex printing until had that
option. I don't think I'll buy another printer without it.

I flip the paper. Problem solved. I find that the duplex feature
cuts down printing speed by quite alot, Canon depends on the smaller
dye black for printing duplex, and sucks the paper back in the
printer. I find the quality of text better if I print odds and
evens. But again if you find it useful, who am I to argue, I can see
how it would be.

I bought my MP830 because it was the same price as the cheapest sheet
fed scanner, and far cheaper then any duplexing scanner I could find,
the printer is somewhere between an added bonus and a waste of otherwise
unused space.

Yes, that's the thing. The prices for these models on closeout is
unbelievable. the mp530 I can find for $105 shipped, which for a
printer isn't a bad price. For a sheet fed scanner it's a stellar
price.

One day I might even get a landline, in which case the fax will come in
handy, but until then, it makes a nice scanner and an occasional
photocopier.

Yes, perhaps that's why this time around it's the fax models that are
getting the super duper price treatment. Fax is becoming pointless in
lieu of PDF to e-mail, or any number of web->fax services.

But I think we have gotten way off topic. which is

Printers that permitting scanning to USB or network share. That
simply is NOT an option on Canons. Canons are good printers, good for
text, good for photos. They offer semi decent scanners, but IMHO they
lack alot of software integration of features.

 

[measekite]

I'm not really sure such a driver exists.

Scans are a file format (usually jpegs) but most use a TWAIN of similar
driver that involves the computer memory for temporary storage, and then
it can be written to disk via the TWAIN or other intelligent software.

I don't know that any scanner will make and store a file and then
directly communicate to and write to hard drive, or any other simple
memory devise, like a USB thumb drive.

I'm quite willing to be proven wrong, however.

That is a rarity.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

In message
<53f3e848-4e3b-40bc-9c9b-d1fa4287f...@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>


This assumes your software is capable of printing odd/even pages easily,
not all does.

Print pages 1, 3, 5...9999
Print pages 2, 4, 6....10000

Microsoft supports this syntax, in fact I've not met an OS that
doesn't.

This depends on the printer, on my colour laser, it drops me from 12ppm
to 10 sides per minute, which isn't much of a drop, and is a heck of a
lot faster then pulling the tray and re-inserting pages.

Ahhhh... ok I see duplexing on a laser. No dry time is required and
it is easier than flipping the pages. On an inkjet flipping is more
practical as the first page printed has dried for a longer period of
time.

I'm not sure I've ever duplexed on my MP830, I got the laser between the
MP750 and MP830.

The mp750 duplexes, as does the mp830. Quality of print goes down
with duplex mode, and it mixes the dye and pigment to increase the dry
time and prevent bleeding from top to bottom. Print speed goes down,
not just due to flipping, but due to it using the smaller head to
print text, in conjunction to the bigger head.

I "might" use the canon feature if it took the printed page, shoved it
somewhere, and then reprinted starting with the first printed, but
really if I need duplex I could go laser.

I should be more clear.

I don't find duplex mode on inkjets to be a useful feature. I find
flipping the pages saves time and doesn't affect print quality. Laser
duplex is handy.

 

[measekite]

Print pages 1, 3, 5...9999
Print pages 2, 4, 6....10000

Microsoft supports this syntax, in fact I've not met an OS that
doesn't.

Will not work with web pages.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

Will not work with web pages.

Oh wow, Measekete might have a valid point. I have to admit I've not
tried this with web pages since I don't as a rule print web pages for
archive. I do PDF web pages for archive, but not print them. If I
print a web page, I want it fast and as such do it single sided.
Further I take the junk pages, flip them, and print again before they
go into the recycling.

However if web browsers don't allow you to print odd and even pages,
well, that would be a bug and it should be reported, though printer
support in web pages is pretty limited. It would strike me as odd if
the add on, Canon EZ web print, didn't allow printing of odds and
evens.

 

[measekite]

Oh wow, Measekete might have a valid point. I have to admit I've not
tried this with web pages since I don't as a rule print web pages for
archive. I do PDF web pages for archive, but not print them. If I
print a web page, I want it fast and as such do it single sided.
Further I take the junk pages, flip them, and print again before they
go into the recycling.

However if web browsers don't allow you to print odd and even pages,
well, that would be a bug and it should be reported, though printer
support in web pages is pretty limited. It would strike me as odd if
the add on, Canon EZ web print, didn't allow printing of odds and
evens.

You do not understand the concept of web page. It is not a physical page
like letter or legal. A web page is one that when you press the a link is
a length that is sent of what ever size. A new page is sent from the web
server when requested by the browser.

So one web page can be of a length that can comprise multiple letter sized
or even legal sized paper pages. So since when you press the print button
in your browser you are actually printing one web page there is not
concept of even or odd. 1 is always odd.

The only way this can be changed is for a special program to count lines
and that may be difficult because of graphics.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

The only way this can be changed is for a special program to count lines
and that may be difficult because of graphics.

If what you say is true, than any software wouldn't work because of
the fact that screen resolution is different than print resolution.
In fact, the aspect ratio is totally different between print and
screen resolution.

In web pages, pages are rendered at print resolution. If the software
does this is a predictable way, then it's a non-issue. If first
rendering is the same as the second rendering, NOT AN ISSUE. If the
second rendering is different than the first rendering, could be an
issue.

What you say "could be" difficult, but that doesn't change the fact
that printing is a VERY common application, and as such a lot of
design hours have been spent developing print engines. If you print
two copies of the same document at different times, they tend to be
the same even if you're printing from something like notepad or
wordpad. However, I would agree that print support in web software
tends to be rather basic, and flaky. This is rather why there are
addons which do a better job.

I have to admit, I don't print web pages beyond a few pages, and as
such I can't speak whether it's truly and issue or not. Web->print
support SUCKS so I imagine it could be.

Different web browsers handle printing different. Opera for example
defaults to landscape, and keeps the backdrop. This'll suck up the
ink without a doubt, esp on black pages. Firefox by default ditches
the backdrop, and goes portrait. But regardless, web->print support
tends to be very flaky and as such Measekite did actually for one have
a point. I'd have to test his assertion.

 

[TJ]

If what you say is true, than any software wouldn't work because of
the fact that screen resolution is different than print resolution.
In fact, the aspect ratio is totally different between print and
screen resolution.

In web pages, pages are rendered at print resolution. If the software
does this is a predictable way, then it's a non-issue. If first
rendering is the same as the second rendering, NOT AN ISSUE. If the
second rendering is different than the first rendering, could be an
issue.

What you say "could be" difficult, but that doesn't change the fact
that printing is a VERY common application, and as such a lot of
design hours have been spent developing print engines. If you print
two copies of the same document at different times, they tend to be
the same even if you're printing from something like notepad or
wordpad. However, I would agree that print support in web software
tends to be rather basic, and flaky. This is rather why there are
addons which do a better job.

I have to admit, I don't print web pages beyond a few pages, and as
such I can't speak whether it's truly and issue or not. Web->print
support SUCKS so I imagine it could be.

Different web browsers handle printing different. Opera for example
defaults to landscape, and keeps the backdrop. This'll suck up the
ink without a doubt, esp on black pages. Firefox by default ditches
the backdrop, and goes portrait. But regardless, web->print support
tends to be very flaky and as such Measekite did actually for one have
a point. I'd have to test his assertion.

I just checked with Firefox and Linux, and you COULD print in that
fashion, but it would require a separate print run for each printer
page. For example, a four-page webpage would require you to print #1,
then #3, then flip the paper and print 2 and 4. A messy and bothersome
proposition, to be sure.

However, if using an HP printer with Linux, it's possible to set the
printer driver to do the odd/pause-for-flip/even operation from there,
then set it back afterward. It will also turn the automatic duplexer on
and off, if your printer is so equipped.

The Canon driver for Linux might not be so enlightened.

TJ

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

I just checked with Firefox and Linux, and you COULD print in that
fashion, but it would require a separate print run for each printer
page. For example, a four-page webpage would require you to print #1,
then #3, then flip the paper and print 2 and 4. A messy and bothersome
proposition, to be sure.

Well, I would agree for lasers. Autoduplexing does save some hassle
esp for small print runs. But inkjets, pages require some heavy dry
time. You can either refeed a web page to duplex, cutting down on the
time, or flip the pages your self. If you flip your self, you don't
refeed a freshly printed page, and the last page printed will be the
most dry in a run.

Four pages, you're right, a pain. 100 pages, well, no big deal. It's
rather why for web pages, I just print simplex, and reuse my paper.

In the old dot matrix days, when everything was given via a text file,
I had handy dandy software that would split the file into odds and
evens, inserting a form feed at the end of each page. Again, a hassle
but as dot matrix printers didn't support duplex, it make sense.

While I feel Measekete had a valid point, I did question whether or
not he was being totally truthful. It may be in internet explorer the
support for printing is so bad that printing page 2 wouldn't result in
the same page 2 as when you printed 1+2.

 

[TJ]

Well, I would agree for lasers. Autoduplexing does save some hassle
esp for small print runs. But inkjets, pages require some heavy dry
time. You can either refeed a web page to duplex, cutting down on the
time, or flip the pages your self. If you flip your self, you don't
refeed a freshly printed page, and the last page printed will be the
most dry in a run.

I splurged and bought a duplexer attachment last year for my Deskjet
5650 on Ebay for around $20. As it turned out, the same duplexer will
work on the Officejet 6110 that I bought later, a nice surprise. When
auto-duplexing is turned on, the driver pauses printing after the first
page while the ink dries. Another nice surprise is that the length of
the pause is dependent on the amount of ink used on that page. It works
well, and I consider it $20 well-spent.

Four pages, you're right, a pain. 100 pages, well, no big deal. It's
rather why for web pages, I just print simplex, and reuse my paper.

In the old dot matrix days, when everything was given via a text file,
I had handy dandy software that would split the file into odds and
evens, inserting a form feed at the end of each page. Again, a hassle
but as dot matrix printers didn't support duplex, it make sense.

I wrote a print utility that would do the same thing back in my Atari
8-bit days. While I had a source of cheap paper, it bothered me to waste
it by using only one side. I had a shareware program that would reformat
lengthy(for then)text files into two-or three-column pages, and print
all or odd then even pages. I even had an option to print the columns in
superscript mode. It was hard to read, but you could really pack in the
text on a page.

While I feel Measekete had a valid point, I did question whether or
not he was being totally truthful. It may be in internet explorer the
support for printing is so bad that printing page 2 wouldn't result in
the same page 2 as when you printed 1+2.

The only things I hear about IE that surprise me are the very few "good"
things I hear. The same could be said for Measekite.

TJ

 

[measekite]

I splurged and bought a duplexer attachment last year for my Deskjet
5650 on Ebay for around $20. As it turned out, the same duplexer will
work on the Officejet 6110 that I bought later, a nice surprise. When
auto-duplexing is turned on, the driver pauses printing after the first
page while the ink dries. Another nice surprise is that the length of
the pause is dependent on the amount of ink used on that page. It works
well, and I consider it $20 well-spent.

I wrote a print utility that would do the same thing back in my Atari
8-bit days. While I had a source of cheap paper, it bothered me to waste
it by using only one side. I had a shareware program that would reformat
lengthy(for then)text files into two-or three-column pages, and print
all or odd then even pages. I even had an option to print the columns in
superscript mode. It was hard to read, but you could really pack in the
text on a page.

The only things I hear about IE that surprise me are the very few "good"
things I hear. The same could be said for Measekite.

TJ

On the length of the pause for HP990Cse you can vary that in the driver
settings in windows. Have not change the default in Linux.