🚀 go-pugleaf

On 7 Jan 1998 07:07:41 GMT, "scott russell"
<rs-russell@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>6 Jan 98 
>
>I would apperciate hearing from anyone who has experience using the ALPS
>MD-1000.
>
>What has your experience been like so far?
>
>Any problems, or complaints?
>
>What are its best and worst features in your opinion?
>
>How does it compare to the HP 722 or 890,  or the Epson 800?
>
>Would you buy the ALPS MD-1000 again if you had to replace it? .. or after
>having used it for a few months?

Scott:

I've been using the MD=1000 for several months. There are lots of good
things to like about this printer, and there are some negatives too,
so you really need to think about how you will use it. One advantage
for me to the MD=1000 is that I don't use color frequently, so an
inkjet might sit unused for days or weeks, possibly causing liquid ink
to dry out or print heads to become clogged. In this scenario, the
ALPS dry inks are nice to have.

Here's a repost of comments I made about the MD-1000 in another
newsgroup a while back. (You might want to search deja-news for
additional posts.) This might help:

"Not to dispute any of Jack's comments, but here's a look at the
MD-1000 from another owner, since Jack didn't comment much about this
printer other than to say he returned it quickly. (I tried the
BJC-7000 for about a week and then returned it, so some of my remarks
about the MD-1000 are in comparison with this printer.)

There's lot that can be said about the MD-1000--some good and some
not-so-good, but the best things all have to do with the dry ink
technology this printer uses. If you like the kind of output that this
ink is able to produce on plain paper, then you're going to love the
ALPS. Otherwise, you'll be happier with a traditional inkjet. One of
the things I dislike about inkjets is that, when printing a fairly
sizable image on anything other than high gloss or photo film-type
paper, the wet ink saturates the fibers of the paper and usually
produces a kind of wrinkled look (especially visible when you turn the
paper over) that has an unmistakable "home office" look to it...it
just doesn't look like a professional job, in my view. although many
people aren't bothered. If you don't like this "wet" look, then you
may really like the kind of output you can get with the MD-1000, since
you can get this "dry" output on plain laser paper. In addition:

1. The MD-1000 produces the best-looking text output of any printer
I've used....better than my 600 dpi LaserJet 4 output, since the pages
are perfectly flat, without the heat curl typically produced by a
laser printer.

2. For calendars, greeting cards, etc., the MD-1000 can use special
metallic inks and even white ink for printing on colored paper. I
haven't tried these, but samples I saw in the store looked pretty
snazzy.

As for photo-realistic output, I have on my desk the 3.75 x 8.5 inch
color brochure with the photo of the MD-1000 on the front. I scanned
the front cover of this brochure with a low-end scanner (HP 4p) that I
calibrated for the MD-1000. I printed this from Photoshop using RGB
(not CMYK) settings at 600 dpi on Canon's HR 101 paper...not
photoquality paper, but more expensive than regular laser. The printed
output is quite good...you have to look twice to see the original when
placed side-by-side; and I think that if this image had been printed
on ALPS photorealistic paper with the ALPS finish cartridge at 1200
dpi, the result would be even better.

Having said all that, it's possible to get quite mediocre output from
this printer...there are lots of settings in the driver and it take a
bit of experimentation to find what works best. Although you can get
good results on plain laser paper (unlike many inkjets, such as the
BJC-7000), the MD-1000 doesn't do well on paper than has any kind of
texture, such as a recylced or cover stock paper. With those papers,
the BJC-7000 produced far superior output, while the MD-1000's output
was very poor, indeed.

(If cost is any consideration, keep in mind that the MD-1000--with the
$50 ALPS rebate--can be had for nearly half the price of the Canon
BJC-7000.)"

Hope this helps!!

Don
______________________________
Don Henson
dhenson@henson.microserve.com
______________________________