search AntBlog701
inside AntBlog701
* AntTunes701 - your music guide.

* my Flickr

28 March, 2010

Brother MFC-8890DW

Firstly, sorry for the month-late delay. I should've posted this in mid February, however, I was extremely busy to do the write up.

Brother MFC-8890DW

Don might remember that I asked his recommendation about a laser printer last year. As mentioned before, we've been printing really a lot. We've been using the colour laser printer (Epson AcuLaser C1100N) for our daily printing needs, although we've switched a lot of printing to monochrome mode (mainly to speed up the printing as well as to save some colour toners).

After some calculation, it makes sense (to Don: this means saving) for us to get a multi-function monochrome laser printer. One of the reason was that Laurent's bulky Sharp photocopier (from the 80s) was dead time long ago, and using the scanner to do the photocopying is a very stupid idea for high volume as the scanning speed is extremely slow. Furthermore, the running cost (per page) for this new machine is less than half of the same monochrome printing on the Epson colour laser printer. I factored in both high capacity black toners as well as drum/photoconductor.

Brother MFC-8890DW

So the decision was made. We got a Brother MFC-8890DW, it's a scanner, copier, fax machine, and best of all, a wireless device and comes with very handy duplex units (for both scanning and printing).

The ADF (automatic document feeder) with duplex scanning/copying/printing is a very useful feature. A printer without duplex feature built-in simply makes people less willing to print on both sides. We can't agree less that getting a printer that has a duplex built-in is an important step to conserve the environment.

A built-in wireless networking is also very handy, giving the multi-function printer a freedom to be located anywhere where there's a power point (socket) and covered by the wireless network. Of course is a designed for networking, you don't need to have a special computer just for the printer to function.

Other features? Although it is only black and white, it has a much higher resolution and faster printing than the Epson colour laser. The outputs are clearly noticeably sharper.

We also decided to use this Brother MFC-8890DW as a fax machine, which means the 2007's Brother MFC-240C has to go. I appreciate Rev. Dr. Wu Yi kindly accept the MFC-240C.

I have a feeling that Don would be interested in knowing exactly how many printers Laurent and I have. I will list below to save Don time.
There's the tiny list of printers and other types of printers:

  • laser printers
    Epson AcuLaser C1100N (colour laser printer, blog entry)
    Brother MFC-8890DW (black and white multi-function laser printer, this entry)
  • inkjet printers
    Epson Stylus Photo R230 (A4 inkjet, blog entry)
    Epson Stylus Photo 1410 (A3 inkjet, blog entry)
  • label printers
    Brother P-touch 1280 (labal, blog entry)
    Brother QL-570 Label Printer (address label printer, blog entry)
  • photo printer
    Canon Selphy CP740 (compact photo printer, 4x6 inch, no blog entry)

That's all. Still far less than the number of computers Don owns.
(to Don: Antony is poor.)

I also apologise for the messiness in the room. Like I said, I've been unusually busy. Those photos were taken on the day we received the machine.

This entry has Lightbox effect enabled. Click on the thumbnails for larger photos.

related blog entries:
printing like hell (7 September, 2009)
Epson 1410 (Epson Stylus Photo 1410, 10 August, 2009)
Brother label printer (Brother QL-570 Label Printer, 12 May, 2009)
Epson AcuLaser C1100 (Epson AcuLaser C1100N, 1 May, 2007)
new toy - Brother P-touch 1280 (Brother P-touch 1280, 27 April, 2007)
hello Epson (Epson Stylus Photo R230, 13 March, 2007)
hello Brother (Brother MFC-240C, 22 January, 2007)

Posted by Antony on 28 March 2010 1:49 PM | gadget

more March 2010 blogs. (or 2010 blogs)
from iTunes Store:
comments
Please keep in mind that I still only have a LaserJet 1100 - that's it. It's not only greyscale, but parallel and 11 years old.
Well, I found a LaserJet 1300 three days ago, it's been listed on Craigslist since then but haven't found anybody to buy it yet.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 29 March 2010 5:14 AM.
It is without a doubt that the number of computers is far more impressive than the number of printers.
Posted by Antony on 29 March 2010 8:43 AM.
Remember: I am resourceful, only paid for one of the computers. You are rich, paid for ALL of the printers. In fact, you've spent more on printers than I have on computers.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 29 March 2010 1:32 PM.
Free goodies aren't generally available to dark skinned people like me.
Posted by Antony on 29 March 2010 2:31 PM.
That printer (as well as two CRT monitors, which I didn't want) were both freely available to whomever wanted to pick them up. There was no way for those inanimate objects to determine the skin color of their collector.
(P.S. you are white.)
Posted by Don_HH2K on 29 March 2010 11:44 PM.
Without a doubt, in general speaking a computer is worth much more than a printer. You have a lot more computers than the number of printers I have.
Posted by Antony on 30 March 2010 11:35 PM.
You are assuming that my computers are "worth" anything. Only two of them are in sellable condition (or anyone would want them, since they are so old), and neither of those two sell for as much as this new printer of yours.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 31 March 2010 5:07 AM.
You missed out the key part again, I said "in general speaking", which a computer is worth more than a printer.
If they are not worth anything why do you keep getting more of the 'worthless' items to expend the list?
Posted by Antony on 31 March 2010 11:41 AM.
You always take too general a view on things instead of looking at the specific case you are dealing with or referring to.
I keep getting more of them because, sometimes, you can get $15 or $20 for one of them. If not, they're also a great source of free parts.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 31 March 2010 12:26 PM.
We also need to look at the 'big picture'. Computers are generally cost much more than a printer. You have lots more computers than the amount of printers I have. I am sure this comparison is damn simple, even primary school kids know the answer.
Posted by Antony on 1 April 2010 12:11 AM.
The "big picture" model works until you try to conclude something very specific based on it. Computers in general are more expensive than printers, but both of us are exceptional cases where I have cheap computers and you have expensive printers (to Antony: this is the part you did not take into consideration).
Of course, when I give you this sort of logic, you instantly deny it and imply that I am incapable of the same thought process as primary school kids. Geez.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 1 April 2010 4:01 AM.
By the end of the day, you have more computers than the amount of computers I have. You also have more (computers + printers) than the amount of (computers + printers) I have.
I did not say that you are 'incapable' of the same thought process as primary school kids, but with some simple comparisons, you seem to 'think too much'.
Posted by Antony on 1 April 2010 7:49 AM.
I still fail to understand why you only consider raw numbers.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 1 April 2010 11:37 AM.
Because it is the easiest form of comparison.
Posted by Antony on 1 April 2010 7:03 PM.
The easiest, and also the most inaccurate.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 2 April 2010 1:06 PM.
I believe your American university education have taught you to keep things simple.
Keeping the things simple = inaccurate?
Amount of computers VS amount of computers, or computer's clock speed VS computer's clock speed. Can't be any simpler.
Posted by Antony on 2 April 2010 3:44 PM.
It's not about keeping it simple, but rather making a thorough analysis that doesn't make incorrect conclusions.
"Amount of computers VS amount of computers" is a misleading statistic, as not all computers are equal. This is where you would compare specs or similar.
"Computer's clock speed VS computer's clock speed" is also a misleading statistic, as not all CPUs are equal. A Core i7 running at just 2GHz is much faster than a 3GHz Pentium 4; take a look at benchmarks if you don't believe me.
Posted by Don_HH2K on 3 April 2010 10:54 PM.
post a comment
TypeKey:
|
|



(You may use following HTML tags for comment formatting:
a href, b, i, br, strong, em, blockquote. two blank lines for a new paragraph.)


(Due to recent comment spamming, I need to take some actions. I apologise for inconvenience.)

:
disclaimer
AntBlog701 is an Antony Shen personal weblog. This blog does not represent SillyDog701. This blog may represent Antony Shen's thoughts or things happened around him. You may not use any contents from this blog to accuse Antony Shen. Antony Shen makes no guarantee about the accuracy of this blog.
sponsored links:

inside SillyDog701
* SillyDog701 (front door) - main SillyDog701.
* Message Centre (forums)
* Netscape Browser Archive
* Browser Version Guide
* MacCentre701, Macintosh news and informaiton centre.
- features: H.264 and other codecs comparison
* MozInfo701, Mozilla information and resource centre.
* Switch, simple steps to switch to the browser you can trust.
* Communicator Tips, featured in dynamic HTML presentation.
* Feedback

search SillyDog701
links:


download iTunes
Get a Blogging Platform built to Grow with Your Business. Download Movable Type Now!

AntBlog701 is proudly powered by
Movable Type.
Page URL: http://ant.sillydog.org/blog/2010/003333.php
[AntBlog701] [AntGallery701 (photos)] [AntTunes701 (music)]
[SillyDog701] [Netscape] [MozInfo701] [MacCentre701][Search] [Feedback] [About SillyDog701] [Sitemap]
Copyright © 2003 - 2015 Antony Shen. All rights reserved. Copyright Notice. Privacy Statement.
Made on a Mac
support AntBlog701