New B&W Laser Printer Suggestion?

[mdahc]

I'm considering buying a low end ($200-300) B&W laser printer. I've been considering the Lexmark 234 or 234N, which, for some reason, are only available at PCConnection.com, and the HP LaserJet 1012. A professor at the university for which I work has a LaserJet 1012, and it's relatively fast. Yet, it seems rather cheaply built. Upon further consideration, I've dealt with both brands at different jobs. At my former job, they strictly used Lexmark laser printers, and I can't remember a single one malfunctioning or even getting a paper jam (I'm sure they had their problems, but I just can't remember ever experiencing any). At my present workplace, which strictly uses HP, I can't begin to count the number of times I've had to fix or replace drum kits, rollers, and the like or have a printer technician come in to fix some of the high end color laserjets we have.

On another note, the one thing I don't like about Lexmark laser printers is that their toner cartridges seem to be quite a bit more expensive (i.e. the 234 & 234N's cartridges are about $100 whereas the 1012 cartridges are about $60-70).

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[beverage]

the 1300 (1320 being the current model) series from HP is much better than the 1012

 

[LED]

I've had my Samsung ML-1430 for about 2 years and am quite pleased with it...spent about $100 for it and had to refill it once for another $60...Since they have released the Samsung 1740 Laser B&W.

 

[mdahc]

I haven't really looked at Samsung, so I'll check on their printers. As far as the 1300 goes, I think the Lexmark 234N is a little better value (both are around $300). You get built-in Ethernet connectivity, double the 1300's memory, and it's rated at 27ppm (vs. the 1300's 18ppm). I know that refers to draft resolution, but it's still faster. Thanks for the input.

 

[wseyller]

Hp laser are ususally a better value than lexmark. Parts for lexmark printer are extremely higher than Hp parts. You will save more with Hp toner too. Most all the lexmarks you find their cartridge is going to have a chip. When the toner has been used the chip will expire and the chip would have to be replaced in order to refill. This is a high cost for remanufacter and simply makes the price of a remanufactured cartridge go up $15 or $20 dollars. Most of the Hp printers that are out do have a chip as well on the cartridge. The good thing is that the chip is not necessary for the cartridge to print. Without the chip it would stop functions such as toner low and toner out signal and other unimportant items. Basically without the chip you would only know about toner out when you see the toner print lightly on the page. I have to say though this is not good if the printer is on the network in an office enviroment where the user is not able to observe the printer personally. If you were to send a 200 page print job and your toner is out you would waste a lot of paper and time. The entire Imaging Technology Council (ITC) which is the industry in which good remanufactures and cartridge component vendors participate in suggests that people buy HP and not lexmark. Lexmark tries keep their cartridge out of the hands of remanufactures. HP is the same, but not nearly as much as Lexmark. They have used illegal means to keep the remanufacturing industry out. The industry is fighting back and is on a good path so far, but it will take a while.

 

[mdahc]

Originally posted by: wseyller
Hp laser are ususally a better value than lexmark. Parts for lexmark printer are extremely higher than Hp parts. You will save more with Hp toner too. Most all the lexmarks you find their cartridge is going to have a chip. When the toner has been used the chip will expire and the chip would have to be replaced in order to refill. This is a high cost for remanufacter and simply makes the price of a remanufactured cartridge go up $15 or $20 dollars. Most of the Hp printers that are out do have a chip as well on the cartridge. The good thing is that the chip is not necessary for the cartridge to print. Without the chip it would stop functions such as toner low and toner out signal and other unimportant items. Basically without the chip you would only know about toner out when you see the toner print lightly on the page. I have to say though this is not good if the printer is on the network in an office enviroment where the user is not able to observe the printer personally. If you were to send a 200 page print job and your toner is out you would waste a lot of paper and time. The entire Imaging Technology Council (ITC) which is the industry in which good remanufactures and cartridge component vendors participate in suggests that people buy HP and not lexmark. Lexmark tries keep their cartridge out of the hands of remanufactures. HP is the same, but not nearly as much as Lexmark. They have used illegal means to keep the remanufacturing industry out. The industry is fighting back and is on a good path so far, but it will take a while.

Holy crap. I didn't know all that. Thanks for the background info. I guess I've decided to go with HP. You're right. Lexmark replacement costs are just too high.

 

[wseyller]

Oh and keep in mind that that some of the new small samsung seem to be good so far. I have not seen many problems with them so far, and have rebuilt a few of the cartridges for them, although not all remanufacturers would make these as they are a niche cartridge and have similiar imaging tech to lexmark, but they would probably outsource from other remanufacturers. HP cartridges are the most common the the remanufacturing industry and any remanufacters that has been around long enough will do most any HP in house.