• big-banner-ad_2-sean
  • Video and Film
  • 4toner4
  • mse-big-new-banner-03-17-2016-416616a-tonernews-web-banner-mse-114
  • cartridgewebsite-com-big-banner-02-09-07-2016
  • Print
  • 05 02 2016 429716a-cig-clearchoice-banner-902x177
  • 2toner1-2
  • mse-big-banner-new-03-17-2016-416716a-tonernews-web-banner-mse-212
  • 7035-overstock-banner-902x177


 user 2009-06-23 at 11:58:56 am Views: 33
  • #22167
    Gadgets: In a competition for your money, it’s Kodak vs. HP printers
    no secret that the revenue generating portion of home printers is the
    ink. It’s not uncommon to spend more on replacement ink than the
    original cost of the printer.To meet the demands of consumers not
    wanting to spend an endless amount of money on ink, Kodak came out with
    a series of printers with cartridges considerably cheaper than most
    competitors. Recently, Kodak started an ad campaign attacking its
    competitors and the cost of their ink.Some highlights of the
    advertising campaign (to view, go to YouTube.com) include these

    - Drip by drip, your wallet is being drained every time you hit print on your inkjet printer.

    - Last year America paid the big printer companies $5 billion too much for ink.

    For what you pay to replace your inkjet printer ink this year, you
    could buy a brand new printer. Switch to Kodak and stop overpaying for

    Hewlett Packard contacted me about this ad campaign and
    offered to send me both a Kodak printer and comparable HP unit. Also
    offered was a good amount of ink and paper. HP purchased all the
    supplies through a third party vendor who shipped everything directly
    to me.
    There are a lot of technical reasons why one printer can be
    better than another but instead of getting into all of that, I decided
    to put the printers on a side-by-side test.The jury I selected was my
    wife’s local high school (Summit High School – Mansfield, Texas school
    district) photojournalism class, which prints non-stop and probably
    uses a good portion of its annual budget for ink.

    The printers
    were the Kodak ESP 7 and the HP Photosmart C6380 AiO. Current prices
    for each at BestBuy.com are $199. Both have internal media card readers
    for direct printing, so there was no need to connect either to a

    Replacement ink for the Kodak cost $9.99 for the
    black, $14.99 for a muli-color cartridge or $22.99 for the combo pack
    of both color and back cartridges. The HP ink is $9.99 for each
    individual color (cyan, magenta and yellow) or $29.99 for a color combo
    pack and $9.99 for the black.The ink for both of these printers is
    cheaper because, unlike many other printers, the print head is built
    into the printer itself, instead of into the ink cartridge. This
    results in not having to pay for a print head each time you buy an ink

    Highlights of both printers include borderless
    printing up to 8.5- by 11-inches, printing with internal memory card
    slots, USB 2.0 connections to a computer or wireless. Both units also
    copy and scan photos and documents have LCD displays built-in the front
    of the devices.Kodak specifications state users can print up to 2400 by
    9600 dpi resolution, while HP says users can print up to 600 by 600 dpi
    resolution in black; up to 9600 by 2400 optimized dpi in color.The
    actual cost per print is something that can and does vary from user to
    user. It’s very difficult to give an actual cost per print since
    different sizes use different color combinations.

    Each student
    was asked to log their name, date, size and time it took to print each
    photo for each printer. When they completed all their printing, each
    student also had to fill out a simple survey, with questions about
    which printer had better results in quality, speed and what they liked
    and didn’t like about each printer.

    Of the 16 surveys turned in,
    13 felt the HP printed the best quality photos. For speed, nine said
    the HP printed faster and when asked which printer they liked the best
    overall, 10 choose the HP.Alexis Escobedo said, “The Kodak printer, in
    just a short time, had a dirty head and left lines, while the HP stayed
    true to the image and had constant good quality.” She added that she
    “liked the colors in the first few prints and the ease of selecting a

    Another student, Monika Hoang, preferred the HP and
    pointed out she prefers “quality over speed.”I couldn’t agree more with
    that reasoning. Unless it’s drastic (minutes, etc.) I would never
    choose one printer over another based on the speed.When your print is
    hanging on a wall and it’s poor quality, are you going to tell
    everyone, “The print isn’t good, but it only took 10 seconds to
    print?”Hoang did add that while preferring the HP, “I thought the Kodak
    was easier to use.”Victoria Hensley preferred the Kodak but also agreed
    with the preference of quality over speed. She put on her survey, “I’d
    buy the Kodak because of the quality of the prints. The quality of the
    print is what counts, not the speed.” Hensley thought the colors of the
    Kodak were better along with being easier to use.The bottom line shows
    the students preferred the HP to the Kodak, but what did it cost? As
    mentioned, the cost per print is a difficult thing to calculate from
    user to user.What’s more important, cost, speed or quality? For this
    group of young aspiring photojournalists, they chose quality. Do you
    choose print speed, cost or quality? That’s your decision, but
    obviously there are options.