Oki and Brother -- keep or toss?

[Richard Steinfeld]

I have two Xerography-based printers that I'm trying to decide whether
to keep or junk when the time comes.

The first is a Brother HL-1050 laser printer. It's got about three reams
(1,500) pages left on the drum.

The second is an Okidata 12i. This is an LED printer. In other words,
it's exactly the same as a laser printer, except that the image is
created on the drum by an array of teentsy light emitting diodes. This
machine probably has about 12,000 pages of remaining drum life. It has
built-in PostScript (like my first Oki). However, I've yet to need the
PostScript ability.

Both of these printers have a resolution of 600 x 12,000 dpi, which
means that they build up the image from striated toner particles that
are shaped like tiny dowels. Toner like this is almost impossible to get
sourced by third parties; when I've found third-party toner or refilled
cartridges, the cost has bene so high as to be non-competive with OEM.
You don't get much toner for your money.

I really like the principle of the LED printer -- creating the image is
done with no moving parts -- very cool! The OKI is very solid and feels
very well made. I like many things about the design; for example, paper
is kept away from dust. Print quality is excellent for text; not so
wonderful for photos, which often suffer from minor unevenness and minor
streaking. Oki has been wonderful about support: they replaced an
earlier troublesome printer (one that was based on an unreliable type of
toner) with this one way, way after the warranty.

Drums seem to last a long time, but when it comes time to replace one,
it's time to move money into the checking account: the drum price is at
least $165, and maybe closer to $195.

The Brother feels much flimsier -- lots of thin squirmy plastic in the
housing. Print quality seems crisper than the OKI. It's fast! There's no
paper tray; instead, there's an open mouth at the top -- where your
paper sits out there supported by a rack and gets dirty. I got this
machine used, cheap, and a dirt had transfered to the drum -- which may
come clean with a few printed pages (or it may be damaged from the
dirt). The replacement drum will cost at least $135 -- these drums don't
last near as long as Oki's.

I've learned that for my needs, 600x600 dpi is just fine.

The question is, "What then?"
I'd like feedback about whether it'll be better to keep these printers
and replace the expensive consumables, or toss them and buy new
machines. I've used three different HP "industrial-strength" office
machines, and frankly, I've been spoiled. I also like the low cost of
the third-party consumables for the commercial HP machines, as well as
the quality of those third-party recyled cartridges.

My use is light, mostly, with short periods of intense printing.

Thanks.

Richard

 

[me]

I have two Xerography-based printers that I'm trying to decide whether
to keep or junk when the time comes.

The first is a Brother HL-1050 laser printer. It's got about three
reams (1,500) pages left on the drum.

The second is an Okidata 12i. This is an LED printer. In other words,
it's exactly the same as a laser printer, except that the image is
created on the drum by an array of teentsy light emitting diodes. This
machine probably has about 12,000 pages of remaining drum life. It has
built-in PostScript (like my first Oki). However, I've yet to need the
PostScript ability.

Drums seem to last a long time, but when it comes time to replace one,
it's time to move money into the checking account: the drum price is at
least $165, and maybe closer to $195.

Have you looked into remanufactured ones? A quick scan of Mr Ebay,
revealed a drum for £60 for the OKI as well as various toner options.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

Both of these printers have a resolution of 600 x 12,000 dpi, which

means that they build up the image from striated toner particles that
are shaped like tiny dowels. Toner like this is almost impossible to get
sourced by third parties; when I've found third-party toner or refilled
cartridges, the cost has bene so high as to be non-competive with OEM.
You don't get much toner for your money.

I assume you mean 600 x 1,200 dpi. I am also not sure your assumption
about how this is achieved is accurate. Resolution can be measured in
both an x and y matrix. One is usually controlled by the number of LEDS
(in the case of the OKI) or number of sampling points in the case of the
Brother going horizontally. The vertical resolution may be determined
by the number or speed of the movement of the drum rotational speed
versus the raster movement. This doesn't require special dowel shaped
toner to be accomplished. Instead it can be very ordinary toner
particles with random semi-spherical shape and size.

Factors such as temperture the toner will melt and bond at, amount of
particle charge required, darkness, etc, are more typically the issues
involved in determining which toner will work.

There are some websites which provide vague cross-references of toner
type and model of printer which might help to determine which will be
more competitive to run.

Art

 

[Warren Block]

I have two Xerography-based printers that I'm trying to decide whether
to keep or junk when the time comes.

The first is a Brother HL-1050 laser printer. It's got about three reams
(1,500) pages left on the drum.

The second is an Okidata 12i. This is an LED printer. In other words,
it's exactly the same as a laser printer, except that the image is
created on the drum by an array of teentsy light emitting diodes. This
machine probably has about 12,000 pages of remaining drum life. It has
built-in PostScript (like my first Oki). However, I've yet to need the
PostScript ability.

Both of these printers have a resolution of 600 x 12,000 dpi, which
means that they build up the image from striated toner particles that
are shaped like tiny dowels.

600 x 1200, ITYM. My impression is that it isn't from the the toner but
because it's easier to modulate a laser for side-to-side resolution
(1200) than a paper feed motor for lengthwise resolution. (Or just add
more LEDs to an array.)

Toner like this is almost impossible to get sourced by third parties;
when I've found third-party toner or refilled cartridges, the cost has
bene so high as to be non-competive with OEM. You don't get much
toner for your money.

A search on for Oki 12I toner shows prices between $10 and $30 for a
2,000-page cartridge. That's pretty reasonable for these home-type
printers.

I really like the principle of the LED printer -- creating the image is
done with no moving parts -- very cool! The OKI is very solid and feels
very well made.

Oki stuff is generally better made than Brother stuff. As for laser
versus LED, I've never found a difference. Both print fine, never had a
failure with either.

Drums seem to last a long time, but when it comes time to replace one,
it's time to move money into the checking account: the drum price is at
least $165, and maybe closer to $195.

The separate toner/drum printers all seem to have this problem. The
toner is cheap, the drum costs almost as much as the whole printer. And
the drum often doesn't last as long as claimed. Could be that the
manufacturer is trying to make money off the supplies like inkjets,
could be that it's a result of cost reduction; probably some of both.

I'd like feedback about whether it'll be better to keep these printers
and replace the expensive consumables, or toss them and buy new
machines. I've used three different HP "industrial-strength" office
machines, and frankly, I've been spoiled. I also like the low cost of
the third-party consumables for the commercial HP machines, as well as
the quality of those third-party recyled cartridges.

My use is light, mostly, with short periods of intense printing.

I'd buy inexpensive toner for the Oki and use it until the drum goes,
then shop for a used HP 4nnn-series laser to replace it.

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

I assume you mean 600 x 1,200 dpi.

Correct. My bad.

I am also not sure your assumption

about how this is achieved is accurate. Resolution can be measured in
both an x and y matrix. One is usually controlled by the number of LEDS
(in the case of the OKI) or number of sampling points in the case of the
Brother going horizontally. The vertical resolution may be determined
by the number or speed of the movement of the drum rotational speed
versus the raster movement. This doesn't require special dowel shaped
toner to be accomplished. Instead it can be very ordinary toner
particles with random semi-spherical shape and size.

Please don't assume that I made an assumption!
My "assumption" was based on Oki's advertising, complete with pictures
of the dowel-shaped toner particles.

Perhaps you are correct about the Brother, however: I do not have any
information about their toner, just their claimed resolution.

Factors such as temperture the toner will melt and bond at, amount of
particle charge required, darkness, etc, are more typically the issues
involved in determining which toner will work.

Yes. I got an early lesson about this from the first Oki LED printer
that I bought (in the 4 series), where Oki botched the technology very
badly; it was their first attempt at transforming their LED process into
a lower-energy, lower voltage, lower-polluting version. The result was
self-destructing drums; my new printer came right out of the box with a
trashed drum. Many people had similar experiences with these and other
Oki devices, printers, fax machines, etc., using the same imaging
components. I believe that the environment could make the problem worse
(high humidity, salt in the fog, where I live). Achieving their
environmental goal, Oki missed the mark badly on practicality and
durability. It must have been an awful corporate lesson to have to eat
this. And a lot of customers were turned off forever.

To their credit, years after I'd put my hopeless Oki 4 model in its box,
having gotten perhaps 1.5 reams of good printing out of its
warranty-replaced drum, Oki replaced my machine _seven years_ after I'd
bought it. The replacement has been quite stable.

The issue of the environmental changes in laser printer technology is an
interesting one; I have not seen this covered anywhere in my travels.
It's been quite a transformation.

I'm thinking back on my HP 2/3 printer's original technology --
electricity-guzzling (to fuse the hard toner into the paper),
ozone-spewing (due to the high-voltage corona -- a factor of the toner,
charge to get the toner onto the drum, etc.). A great printer, except
that you'd better have all your windows open if you don't want a sore
throat from the ozone; and perhaps if your electricity provider is a
public one with decent rates. These printers were supplied with
consumable ozone filters; some people who rebuild these machines don't
even know about the ozone filter. And most of the non-HP filters, if you
can find one, are no good: they'll work for about a week, if that. Built
like a tank, very cheap to feed, but impractical where I live.

Time marches on.

Richard

There are some websites which provide vague cross-references of toner
type and model of printer which might help to determine which will be
more competitive to run.

Thanks. Know of any?

Richard

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

Warren Block wrote:

....

600 x 1200, ITYM.

You are correct.

My impression is that it isn't from the the toner but

because it's easier to modulate a laser for side-to-side resolution
(1200) than a paper feed motor for lengthwise resolution. (Or just add
more LEDs to an array.)




A search on for Oki 12I toner shows prices between $10 and $30 for a
2,000-page cartridge. That's pretty reasonable for these home-type
printers.

I haven't come across a $10 price (??), but paid about $22 for OEM
cartridges from a place in Erie, Pa. All the refilled carts I found on
the web were in the $18 range. Their customer service was awful; their
packing an insult begging an injury (I don't respect people who charge
for good shipping and then hurl my toner cartridges out in a paper bag).

Oki stuff is generally better made than Brother stuff. As for laser
versus LED, I've never found a difference. Both print fine, never had a
failure with either.




The separate toner/drum printers all seem to have this problem. The
toner is cheap, the drum costs almost as much as the whole printer. And
the drum often doesn't last as long as claimed. Could be that the
manufacturer is trying to make money off the supplies like inkjets,
could be that it's a result of cost reduction; probably some of both.

This is my take. I'd swear that Oki is raising their drum prices with
inflation, which makes the whole exercise even more frustrating.

I'd buy inexpensive toner for the Oki and use it until the drum goes,
then shop for a used HP 4nnn-series laser to replace it.

I have used the large HP 4 printers in a corporate setting -- very
impressive machines, and the feeding costs are low! There seem to be
lots and lots of excellent refilled cartridges out there with dependable
drums in them.

Richard

 

[Arthur Entlich]

Older machines were "paid for" up front years ago, (you actually paid
for the cost of the machine and a decent profit for the company when you
bought the unit) but the new business model is to basically give the
machine away for free or cost, and then make the profit on consumables.
In order to avoid a major discrepancy between the prices on the older
consumables and the new ones, which are tremendously overpriced to
produce the otherwise nearly non-existent profit, they have raised the
price of older consumables as well.

Art

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

Older machines were "paid for" up front years ago, (you actually paid
for the cost of the machine and a decent profit for the company when you
bought the unit) but the new business model is to basically give the
machine away for free or cost, and then make the profit on consumables.

My opinion is that this is a detestable business model. I'd certainly
rather have printers that are honestly priced; I'd be willing to pay
more up front than to be ripped off in perpetuity. One article that I
read (I think that it was PC-World) said that the average cost of OEM
ink for the Hewlett-Packard printer that they tested is 16 cents per
page. And we think that gasoline is overpriced!

Putting chips in cartridges and other obstructive practices are de-facto
restraint-of-trade, which is anti-competitive and illegal in the USA.
Once you have bought such a printer, they've got you. Maybe they've
learned marketing from drug pushers.

Is any manufacturer offering honestly-priced printers and their consumables?

Richard

 

[measekite]

My opinion is that this is a detestable business model. I'd certainly
rather have printers that are honestly priced; I'd be willing to pay
more up front than to be ripped off in perpetuity. One article that I
read (I think that it was PC-World) said that the average cost of OEM
ink for the Hewlett-Packard printer that they tested is 16 cents per
page. And we think that gasoline is overpriced!

Putting chips in cartridges and other obstructive practices are
de-facto restraint-of-trade, which is anti-competitive and illegal in
the USA. Once you have bought such a printer, they've got you. Maybe
they've learned marketing from drug pushers.

while i do not like having to pay more for a cart with a chip they do
have a right to design their printing system any way they want. if you
do not like the way it is designed then you can:

file a lawsuit against them for designing a printer you do not like

do not buy their printer

Is any manufacturer offering honestly-priced printers and their
consumables?

it is all honestly priced. the ink happens to be price too high. now
if some mfg/formulator would mfg a quality prefilled cart and market it
under their own name and sell it in all venues at about $5.00 a cart
then the market would be able to track the performance and if good would
force the oems to reduce their ink prices. unfortunatly the only
company that may have a chance of doing that is sensinent and they are
choosing to go another route. pantone is another company but they serve
a niche market and their prices are also very high.

 

[Ian]

it is all honestly priced. the ink happens to be price too high. now
if some mfg/formulator would mfg a quality prefilled cart and market it
under their own name and sell it in all venues at about $5.00 a cart
then the market would be able to track the performance and if good would
force the oems to reduce their ink prices. unfortunatly the only
company that may have a chance of doing that is sensinent and they are
choosing to go another route. pantone is another company but they serve
a niche market and their prices are also very high.

I hope the aftermarket ink manufacures never market thier own
cartridges. Otherwise suckers like you will never buy OEM, and the OEM
will stop making printers.

 

[Stanley Krute]

Hi Richard

Is any manufacturer offering honestly-priced printers and their
consumables?

No. Folks in general won't buy higher-priced printers. Folks in general are
fairly oblivious to ink/toner costs. Folks in general drive markets.
Market-responsive
manufacturers tend to thrive; market-ignorant manufacturers tend to melt.

-- stan

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

Hi Richard




No. Folks in general won't buy higher-priced printers. Folks in general are
fairly oblivious to ink/toner costs. Folks in general drive markets.
Market-responsive
manufacturers tend to thrive; market-ignorant manufacturers tend to melt.

-- stan

OK. My experience with audio equipment backs this up -- there's just so
much consumer garbage out there with flashing lights. The real
professional gear tends to be a lot more honest. Which brings me back to
printers.

I'll submit that bona-fide office printers, especially those bought for
corporate use, are honestly-priced; and so are their consumables. The
printers are more expensive due to their heavy-duty construction (in
other words, quality). The "industrial" laser machines that I've used
are built and perform like tanks. Perhaps what we should all be buying
for our printers are reconditioned used office printers. So, instead of
flimsy consumer crap, we could use strong, reliable machines for just a
little more money; maybe even cheaper than the rickety junk that I see
at Costco.

How about that?

Are there good "industrial strength" inkjet printers with good
consumable prices?

Richard

 

[Lou]

My opinion is that this is a detestable business model. I'd certainly
rather have printers that are honestly priced; I'd be willing to pay
more up front than to be ripped off in perpetuity. One article that I
read (I think that it was PC-World) said that the average cost of OEM
ink for the Hewlett-Packard printer that they tested is 16 cents per
page. And we think that gasoline is overpriced!

Putting chips in cartridges and other obstructive practices are de-facto
restraint-of-trade, which is anti-competitive and illegal in the USA.
Once you have bought such a printer, they've got you. Maybe they've
learned marketing from drug pushers.

Is any manufacturer offering honestly-priced printers and their consumables?

Richard

Guy named Gillette started it all with a thing called the safety razor arond 100
years ago.
Razor is cheap but blades make profits)

Industrial printers may print more in a day than home users print in a month.
Big companies have purchasing departments to watch costs.

Lou

 

[Arthur Entlich]

Yeap, I agree with you, and have "campaigned" on this for years to no avail.

Sadly, there are not many, if any, still using the older pricing model.
Consumer grade color lasers printers have become some of the worst.

Art

 

[Gary Tait]

One article that I
read (I think that it was PC-World) said that the average cost of OEM
ink for the Hewlett-Packard printer that they tested is 16 cents per
page. And we think that gasoline is overpriced!

To be fair, it could have been a Head-On-Cart printer, where you buy a new
head each time. Then again TMK, most laser printers include some degeree of
consumable componentry in the cartridge, rather than some reservoir of
toner powder.

I do remember a box of (likely aftermarket) toner for my old NEC printer
costing $22, where a rebuilt HP drum cart cost $70 or so.