Suggestions for a consumer-level printer that will scan to USB without a PC connection?
in [Printers]
|
From: measekite on 10 Oct 2008 15:42 On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:58:34 -0700, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: > On Oct 9, 2:24 pm, DevilsPGD <spam_narf_s...(a)crazyhat.net> wrote: >> In message >> <53f3e848-4e3b-40bc-9c9b-d1fa4287f...(a)i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com> >> IntergalacticExpandingPanda <intergalacticexpandingpa...(a)hotmail.com> >> was claimed to have wrote: >> >> >I flip the paper. Problem solved. >> >> 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. Will not work with web pages. > > >> 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.
From: IntergalacticExpandingPanda on 10 Oct 2008 20:39 On Oct 10, 12:42 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > > > 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. 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.
From: measekite on 11 Oct 2008 12:11 On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:39:29 -0700, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: > On Oct 10, 12:42 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: >> >> > 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. > > 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.
From: IntergalacticExpandingPanda on 11 Oct 2008 12:57 On Oct 11, 9:11 am, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > 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.
From: TJ on 12 Oct 2008 08:44
IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: > On Oct 11, 9:11 am, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > >> 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. > > > > > 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 |