Is original Samsung laser cartridge designed to fail quickly?

[JP]

I think you have hit the nail on the head with Samsung. I can't see
why I should fork out £50 for a decent Samsung cartridge in addition
to my £50 for the printer. The bargain £50 I paid suddenly turns
into £100.

Maybe the desktop Samsung ML-1510 (and similar models) are worth £100
but I would guess that the alternatives are quite possibly more
competitive.

Does anyone have any recommended home/small office mono laser
printers which are good for refilling?

Having lost out once on refilling, why bother.
For the sake of trying to save a few quid why trash your machine?

Just go with one that has cheap catridges.
Oki for example, and you'll get a years on site warranty.
A website with continued support, after sales service, technical help etc
etc.
All these are lacking from Samsung as I've said loads of times.

 

[kony]

Having lost out once on refilling, why bother.

Because it'd be silly to buy a low-end printer and plan to
buy replacement cartridges for it long-term? For a couple
hundred more (printer cost), the cartridges may hold enough
toner to make 3X the pages. In the long run a cheap printer
may have failed as well. 1 year warranty as you mention
below is not so useful, more important is the build quality
of more expensive priners so the issue is not how long it's
warrantied but rather how long it's expected to last AFTER
the warrant is up.

For the sake of trying to save a few quid why trash your machine?

Trash your machine? Do you trash your machine? If so it
seems an OKI is not a good choice at all, since most people
with Samsung or many other brands aren't doing anything
remotely like "trash your machine".

Just go with one that has cheap catridges.
Oki for example, and you'll get a years on site warranty.
A website with continued support, after sales service, technical help etc
etc.
All these are lacking from Samsung as I've said loads of times.

You sound a bit like a shill. For the most part, it's not
hard to randomly buy a samsung or oki or whatever (major
brand) and expect it to be fine. It's only when one looks
to spend least amount possible that they then realize there
is no free lunch, *something*, some kind of corners were cut
to get to that low price-point.



Shouldn't you write "not that specific samsung" AND "no
other really cheap printer either"? Low-end lasers have
drifted towards being more like Inkjets, in that they almost
give away the printer to sell carts. If you're not going to
spend enough to get printer plus good cart, you're not going
to get both on the same purchase.

 

[JP]

Because it'd be silly to buy a low-end printer and plan to
buy replacement cartridges for it long-term? For a couple
hundred more (printer cost), the cartridges may hold enough
toner to make 3X the pages. In the long run a cheap printer
may have failed as well. 1 year warranty as you mention
below is not so useful, more important is the build quality
of more expensive priners so the issue is not how long it's
warrantied but rather how long it's expected to last AFTER
the warrant is up.

What an utter load of rubbish
The difference between a bottom of the range Oki and the next one or two
models up is purely whistles and bells.
Things like Internal network cards, serial interfaces, bigger memory,
envelope feeders. Since they are designed not for the single user but 5
people workgroups. (things I imagine to the vast majority on this NG are
utterly worthless)
They are all built with the same 25k pages life toner drum and share many of
the same components. See the oki Series 4000 brochure on the oki web site
Your point about high capacity cartridges is also utterly superfluous, since
the of costs per page are practically identical.

The point about warranties was pointing out the advantages of a company like
oki (over samsung) that backs up their products with aftersales service, as
evidenced by the oki web site.

Trash your machine? Do you trash your machine? If so it
seems an OKI is not a good choice at all, since most people
with Samsung or many other brands aren't doing anything
remotely like "trash your machine".

As in putting in the wrong toner.
If you didn't selectively snip you 'may' have understood the context of
this.

You sound a bit like a shill. For the most part, it's not
hard to randomly buy a samsung or oki or whatever (major
brand) and expect it to be fine. It's only when one looks
to spend least amount possible that they then realize there
is no free lunch, *something*, some kind of corners were cut
to get to that low price-point.

So you understood what I said about assesing the potential life-time costs
did you?

Shouldn't you write "not that specific samsung" AND "no
other really cheap printer either"? Low-end lasers have
drifted towards being more like Inkjets, in that they almost
give away the printer to sell carts. If you're not going to
spend enough to get printer plus good cart, you're not going
to get both on the same purchase.

These comments werent made by me.
Threads read far more easily and logically if people dont mis-snip all over
the place.

 

[kony]

What an utter load of rubbish
The difference between a bottom of the range Oki and the next one or two
models up is purely whistles and bells.

Then the next one or two are crap also and all of that line
should be avoided if long-term or high duty use is in mind.

Things like Internal network cards, serial interfaces, bigger memory,
envelope feeders. Since they are designed not for the single user but 5
people workgroups. (things I imagine to the vast majority on this NG are
utterly worthless)

Perhaps you should stop imagining. It's quite common for
those in tehcnical computer groups to have discovered LAN a
decade or more ago and have several systems, a real need to
network them.

However, this is beside the point that one can throw a
network interface into any low end printer and doesn't do
anything to improve the quality of the base printer. In the
log run cheapest printers taking small cartridges are a
false economy for a workgroup setting that prints in any
significant volume.

They are all built with the same 25k pages life toner drum and share many of
the same components. See the oki Series 4000 brochure on the oki web site
Your point about high capacity cartridges is also utterly superfluous, since
the of costs per page are practically identical.

You are naive. 25K drum is nothing, I've gotten over 50K
off larger carts' drums. They come with more than twice the
page per cart. capacity at less than twice the price and
print more pages per $ too.

The point about warranties was pointing out the advantages of a company like
oki (over samsung) that backs up their products with aftersales service, as
evidenced by the oki web site.

So it's basically a marketing blurb mean to create a false
perception of value. Who buys a cheap printer then wants to
fool with continually buying replacement parts for it so
they can continue paying a premium for cartridges again as
you suggest they should? Sorry but the low-end OKI is made
better by being further cost-reduced, rather than any theory
you might have about after-sales support.

As in putting in the wrong toner.
If you didn't selectively snip you 'may' have understood the context of
this.

It's still not "trash your machine". Colorful nonsense
doesn't help sell OKI printers, why not stick to the typical
shill role of being conservative?

So you understood what I said about assesing the potential life-time costs
did you?

I understand that a low-end OKI or Samsung are very poor
choices, as are same more costly models in the same family
that just have more memory or network interface but the same
print engine. So do most businesses, more expensive
printers don't exist just for the heck of it.

These comments werent made by me.
Threads read far more easily and logically if people dont mis-snip all over
the place.

I never claimed they were, it was obvious enough regardless
of your preference to let messages get overbloated.