PDA

View Full Version : Opinions please: HP or XEROX color laser?




Moof1904
Feb 1, 2006, 12:15 PM
Long post, but this first paragraph sums it up: I'm looking to buy a color laser printer for home/home office use and I've narrowed my selection down to the HP Laserjet 3800 dtn or the Xerox Phaser 6350DT. Both are in the same relative price range and offer the key features I'm looking for (color laser, PostScript support, buit-in networking, automatic duplexing, three paper trays/drawers, cross-platform though 90% Mac). I welcome feedback on these two choices and on HP versus Xerox printers in an OSX environment.

(The rest of the post is just details on what I've found and I'm thinking thus far, so skip it if you want.)

I have an HP 5500 series laserjet at work and it's a workhorse. Very little trouble in the two years that I've been here and 40 people print to it every day. If this printer is an indication, the HP laser printers are very reliable.

I'm very impressed, however, with what I read and see about the Xerox Phaser printers and I've found that the Phaser 6350DT has very similar functions for the same relative price range.

The Xerox is true PostScript level 3 and the HP is only emulation. I know PS emulation is pretty darned good these days and I don't really believe this will be much of an issue for my use. I'd love to hear if anyone else has different experiences with PostScript versus PostScript emulation on recent printers.

A sore spot for my wife is printing envelopes. If whatever printer we choose can't print business (#10 I believe they're called) envelopes quickly easily and reliably, she'll smash the printer with a hammer and toss the shattered pieces to the street below.

I've been on the HP web site looking for drivers and docs and such and it sucks. It can't find crap on there. This would make me very grumpy if I were looking for firmware updates or drivers or docs at 11pm with a deadline looming. The Xerox site, on the other hand, is a dream. I just went there and in 30 seconds found drivers, print guides, user documentation, etc., for the Phaser. This suggests a more positive user experience with the Xerox.

So, Gang, I welcome any opinions. Xerox or HP? Customer satisfaction? Reliability? Envelope printing? OSX support? (95%+ of the printing will be from our three home networked Macs with occassionaly PC printing.)

I welcome thoughts, suggestions, etc.

Many thanks.



cubist
Feb 1, 2006, 12:39 PM
You should consider the Xerox (nee Tek) dye-sub printers. The ink cost is much, much less. I have an old Tek 540 Plus and, while it's been reliable, toner cartridges are hard to find, accessories are expensive, and it's really not very fast.

Or, consider a B&W laser, with a secondary printer for the color stuff.

dmw007
Feb 1, 2006, 01:30 PM
I am by no means an expert on printers (especially laser printers). However, I have had nothing but good experiences from using multiple HP printers. As far as reliability, HP printers seem to be a good deal. Could be the same for Xerox- I just don't have any experience using their products.

Sorry, I have little to offer in terms of advice. :o

ATD
Feb 1, 2006, 01:32 PM
I have an HP Laserjet and I have worked with a Xerox Phaser. The Laserjet is a good printer but the Xerox Phaser is an excellent printer. I have not worked with it a lot but when I have used it I found it to be fast, the color was dead on and because of the way it lays ink on even cheap paper looks good. If I had to buy another printer it would be the Xerox Phaser.

Moof1904
Feb 1, 2006, 01:48 PM
Most of what we'll be printing seems to lend itself more to color laser than to solid ink. We don't want any issues with ink that can be scratched off or could flake. Plus, the ability to write on top of the color output with a pen, marker, etc. is important. I'm pretty much settled on color laser versus solid ink.

How about the OSX compatibility between HP and Xerox? Are they both pretty friendly to OSX?

Studawg7
Feb 1, 2006, 01:55 PM
ive only had experience with the HP 2500 laserjet series. I am not impressed with the build quality as it broke within the first 6 months of use. That was a light use as our lab group was only 5 people at the time. Granted they were quick to send a replacement, which happened to be a refurb instead of a brand new one. At least this one has been doing well for over a year now. But i was really dissappointed with the weak design that they had for the tray loader. It could be b/c this is the cheaper model, but it still costs a lot.

Moof1904
Feb 1, 2006, 01:58 PM
Y'all think Apple's RAM is expensive?!?!? Check this out.

The Xerox site sells 256 meg chips and 512 meg chips for their printers.

They cost $812 and $976, respectively.

That's positively criminal. I wonder if it's possible to go to Crucial and buy it or if they do something slimey to make it impossible to buy memory from anyone except them.

Anyone know?

>>>I just checked the newsgroups and I found a couple of posts that said the RAM is standard (and in one case, a poster said that the factory RAM still had the "Crucial" label on it), but if there's a service issue and Xerox finds a third-party RAM chip in the printer that's causing the problem, they'll demand that I pay for the service call. That seems reasonable. One of the first things I'd do to troubleshoot a misbehaving printer is pull the RAM one strip at at time to see if bad RAM was the problem...

ATD
Feb 1, 2006, 02:03 PM
Most of what we'll be printing seems to lend itself more to color laser than to solid ink. We don't want any issues with ink that can be scratched off or could flake. Plus, the ability to write on top of the color output with a pen, marker, etc. is important. I'm pretty much settled on color laser versus solid ink.

How about the OSX compatibility between HP and Xerox? Are they both pretty friendly to OSX?

The ink stays on the Xerox very well but you will have trouble writing on top of any area that has ink coverage.

dops7107
Feb 1, 2006, 02:22 PM
We have an HP 2550N here at work. IMO, it is competent as a printer but:

1) OSX drivers/software are not as functional as fow Windows - that is, you can't find out how much toner is remaining without printing three expensive pages to find out

2) This may be common with most prosumer colour lasers, but 1 colour page = 4 pages on the imaging drum (the most expensive bit of the consumables). Grayscale is difficult to enable and keep enabled on anything not running Tiger, as far as I can tell (it's a mystery to me).

3) While we're on consumables... you are forced to replace a single toner cartridge before you carry on printing, should one run out. No colour = no grayscale either. An dang, they're pricey. £50 a cartridge.

So if this is indicative of HP as a whole... well if I were buying another printer, I'd check out a Xerox, as well as others.

EDIT: Oh yeah... we have never been able to print natively out of Photoshop 7. We get pages and pages of gibberish. Driver updates, diff versions of OS X... no change. Have to print to pdf first. Very annoying.

Studawg7
Feb 1, 2006, 03:49 PM
3) While we're on consumables... you are forced to replace a single toner cartridge before you carry on printing, should one run out. No colour = no grayscale either. An dang, they're pricey. 50 a cartridge.



I have to agree, that is one of the most annoying things about the 2500 we have.

ATD
Feb 1, 2006, 04:11 PM
I have to agree, that is one of the most annoying things about the 2500 we have.


It almost seems cheaper to buy another printer than replacing all 4 toners. ;)

kiwi-in-uk
Feb 1, 2006, 05:29 PM
Most of what we'll be printing seems to lend itself more to color laser than to solid ink. We don't want any issues with ink that can be scratched off or could flake. Plus, the ability to write on top of the color output with a pen, marker, etc. is important. I'm pretty much settled on color laser versus solid ink.

How about the OSX compatibility between HP and Xerox? Are they both pretty friendly to OSX?
I agree regarding your preference of toner rather than solid ink. I had one of those for a while. The problem was not the ink cracking, but going soft and smudging in hot weather.

Apart from that the Xerox colour and colour software was streets ahead of a colour HP (toner) at the time (five years ago) although obviously that might have changed.

I don't know how well Xerox drivers work on OS X. My (five year old) experience with their Windows drivers was favourable compared with HP.

Demon Hunter
Feb 1, 2006, 07:46 PM
I never hear about Xerox consumer printers. I guess they market almost entirely to corporations and small business, since sub $1k color lasers are a new thing...

Moof1904: I've actually done a lot of research on Xerox printers recently. They receive excellent reviews from CNET, and two in particular -- the Phaser 6120/N (http://www.macworld.com/2005/12/reviews/xeroxphaser6120/index.php) (color laser) and Phaser 8500/DN (solid-ink) -- were rated highly by Macworld. I also downloaded the driver for the 8500, just to see. They don't use Apple's Installer, but I'm picky. ;)

I'm shopping for a printer myself, so I'm interested in what others have to say... and without stealing from your thread, maybe I can introduce a few more questions for anyone who owns a solid-ink Phaser:


Is solid-ink as economical as they claim, compared to toner?
Is the lower output quality significant, compared to laser?
Is the wax annoying in small quarters? Noxious? How much free-space is needed around the printer for ventilation?


I'm looking for a color printer which can output medium quantities (200-500) of flyers, with good speed and economy. I like the idea of solid-ink because my flyers will implement basic color, so if I run out of blue, I can just pop in another blue ink block.

The Phaser 6120/N looks great ($450), but the cost of toner is, well, yeah.

CanadaRAM
Feb 1, 2006, 07:52 PM
Y'all think Apple's RAM is expensive?!?!? Check this out.
The Xerox site sells 256 meg chips and 512 meg chips for their printers.
They cost $812 and $976, respectively.
That's positively criminal. I wonder if it's possible to go to Crucial and buy it or if they do something slimey to make it impossible to buy memory from anyone except them.

Yes, you can get Xerox and HP printer memory from a good third-party memory seller. PM me for more info when you have narrowed your model selection.

kiwi-in-uk
Feb 1, 2006, 08:43 PM
Is solid-ink as economical as they claim, compared to toner?
Is the lower output quality significant, compared to laser?
Is the wax annoying in small quarters? Noxious? How much free-space is needed around the printer for ventilation?



As I said earlier, my experience is now five years old, but for what it's worth ...
1) In Australia the colour blocks were expensive but the black blocks were free. Overall it worked out much cheaper.
2) At the time the colour was better than laser, and resolution was about the same.
3) Could not smell the wax. The room needs to be ventilated as for any hot-running equipment, but apart from that I don't recall any special environmental needs. The only caution (and it is spelled out very clearly in the manual) is to turn the printer off and let the wax cool & set before moving the printer - otherwise the wax spills inside the printer and can lead to expensive repairs.

yankeefan24
Feb 1, 2006, 09:00 PM
I am by no means an expert on printers (especially laser printers). However, I have had nothing but good experiences from using multiple HP printers. As far as reliability, HP printers seem to be a good deal. Could be the same for Xerox- I just don't have any experience using their products.

Sorry, I have little to offer in terms of advice. :o

same here. I have been using the same hp all in one for years*, and the only problem i have had with it is routing it through my airport express. I think thats the airport's problem, but its not a big problem at all. I have had nothing but good experience with hp printers and i would reccomend them to everyone.

*i have had more than 1. Just saying i've had my current one for years.

Demon Hunter
Feb 1, 2006, 10:30 PM
As I said earlier, my experience is now five years old, but for what it's worth ...
1) In Australia the colour blocks were expensive but the black blocks were free. Overall it worked out much cheaper.
2) At the time the colour was better than laser, and resolution was about the same.
3) Could not smell the wax. The room needs to be ventilated as for any hot-running equipment, but apart from that I don't recall any special environmental needs. The only caution (and it is spelled out very clearly in the manual) is to turn the printer off and let the wax cool & set before moving the printer - otherwise the wax spills inside the printer and can lead to expensive repairs.

Thanks for that.

I just received my Phaser 8550 samples, and, well I'm not sure what I think. The color is vibrant, but there are grainy "CMYK" dots everywhere, literally every inch of the page (something I expected from an ink-jet, not a $900 solid-ink). It really subtracts from the otherwise beautiful sheen... the glossy text is marvelous. That being said, the resolution seems poor, but I'm not a printer expert.

emmawu
Feb 1, 2006, 11:21 PM
I WISH I could afford a Xerox laser color printer. i went to a color management class offered by Apple and the Xerox printer blew everything out of the water. The Rep told me Xerox loves Apple and quoted a price way beyond my price range. It was a beautiful machine. Maybe in the next lifetime.

kiwi-in-uk
Feb 2, 2006, 12:22 AM
Thanks for that.

I just received my Phaser 8550 samples, and, well I'm not sure what I think. The color is vibrant, but there are grainy "CMYK" dots everywhere, literally every inch of the page (something I expected from an ink-jet, not a $900 solid-ink). It really subtracts from the otherwise beautiful sheen... the glossy text is marvelous. That being said, the resolution seems poor, but I'm not a printer expert.
Now that you mention it I do remember the dots. IIRC they did not affect me at the time because most of the work was text with solid colour highlights but few photos. There were no dots in the white spaces.
It might be worthwhile trying to find a demo machine.

Moof1904
Feb 2, 2006, 08:31 AM
Thanks for all the great feedback. I have a friend with the HP 3800 so I've hammered on that printer quite a bit. Sometime between now and the end of the weekend I'm going to try and find a local dealer with a demo of the Xerox Phaser that compares. Both are right around $1500 for the features that I'm looking for. I have to say that I'm leaning towards the Xerox at this point, largely because of their color management and what I perceive as a more friendly user experience.

I'll post some more after my hands-on comparison of the two.

saunders45
Feb 2, 2006, 03:58 PM
We just got a Xerox Phaser 8500 las week and it kicks ass. Long story short, we were tired of waiting forever for color pages for company docs, and this thing is the freakin bomb. Sweet web interface, bonjour friendly, it really is a cool printer. I would highly recommend the Phaser.

saunders45
Feb 2, 2006, 04:00 PM
Oh, and it takes standard 200 pin SO-DIMM Ram chips too. I threw in an extra stick I had from my powerbook and it worked great.

Moof1904
Feb 2, 2006, 04:08 PM
Oh, and it takes standard 200 pin SO-DIMM Ram chips too. I threw in an extra stick I had from my powerbook and it worked great.

Sweet.

RacerX
Feb 2, 2006, 05:04 PM
How about the OSX compatibility between HP and Xerox? Are they both pretty friendly to OSX?My experience with HP is that they try to reinvent the wheel as far as the system's print services are concerned. I had so many problems with one client that I ended up pulling all the HP software and used GIMP print to connect to her HP laser printer.

All my clients with Xerox printers have no problems at all.

Demon Hunter
Feb 3, 2006, 01:27 AM
We just got a Xerox Phaser 8500 las week and it kicks ass. Long story short, we were tired of waiting forever for color pages for company docs, and this thing is the freakin bomb. Sweet web interface, bonjour friendly, it really is a cool printer. I would highly recommend the Phaser.

5 seconds to print... Xerox definitely has bragging rights. And better acceleration than my car. :cool:

I had so many problems with one client that I ended up pulling all the HP software and used GIMP print to connect to her HP laser printer.

I found that hilarious. Go HP.

Black&Tan
Feb 3, 2006, 09:05 AM
..and I'm going to add my 2 cents.

I just spent the better part of a month researching printers, my judging criteria was color accuracy, postscript, networking, and printing quality. I'm a graphic designer by trade, and am doing a lot of freelance work at home, so accuracy and quality is very important to me. Speed is not very important, at this time (I'm coming from an inkjet with Postscript emulation software, that takes forever!).

I looked at HP, but really didn't want to deal with PS emulation. So I really looked at Xerox. We've got a number of them here at work, the Phaser 740, 780 and 6300. They're workhorses, and the 740 and 780 are old enough to REALLY require a service contract. But we also print at least a hundred pages a week through them both.

So I looked at the 6120 and the 8500. I found a local dealer who was willing to remain open late so I can run some color comparisons between the two printers. I also had a "true" printed piece (from a local printer) to compare to the laser runouts. I set both printers to SWOP press emulation and compared the results. The 8500 blues were too yellow, they came out muddy. The 6120 blues were spot on. Both printers had a difficult time with screens of Pantone colors. The text on the 6120 was a bit heavy. The 8500 did have a dot pattern that was discernable upon close examination and there were definite areas on the actual built in test samples where the color was breaking apart. In defence of the 8500, this was a well used unit. I've printed out business card comps with a dark green PMS (on the 6120) and that was more accurate than my inkjet RIP.

In regards to paper options, there were a LOT of pre-set profiles built into the 6120, including multiple paper (government letter??) and envelope sizes. Not sure about the 8500. On both printers, the maximum paper size is legal, 8.5 x 14.

The 6120 has a true resolution of 600 dpi, with software interpolation to 2400dpi. I believe the 8500 is also 600 dpi.

My concern with the 8500 was the solid ink cartidges (or crayons). There are 4 individual cleaning cycles for this printer. That a printer would need 4 different cleaning cycles scares me. Unless you're printing a lot of paper a week, the melted ink could pose a problem. And I did read a few reports of seapages.

Ultimately, I decided that laser was a better choice, based on the number of prints I anticipate doing, the color accuracy, and the printout quality. I bought the 6120 and after using it for a few weeks, I'm very pleased. It's currently networked to an OS9 machine via ethernet, and I had no problems with installation. It will be hooked up to an OSX box shortly, but not yet. I don't anticipate any driver problems at this time, I'm using the aforementioned printers (740, 780) at work with Panther. The printer is a little noisy when printing or cycling down, but at idle, its practically silent.

I hope this helps...

Moof1904
Feb 3, 2006, 09:51 AM
This is fantastic information. Thank you for the detailed and helpful post. I'm hoping to find a local dealer who will allow me to print some test pages that I've put together.

Black&Tan
Feb 3, 2006, 12:20 PM
I recommend a high res pdf file (with pictures, photographs and text for output testing), as it should be cross-platform, and have all the required artwork and fonts.

Also, color is very subjective, unless you have a standard to compare it to. So if you have a matchprint or printed piece to proof it against, you'll be in good shape. If you have a relationship with any printers in your area, they may be help you out with this.

Moof1904
Feb 3, 2006, 01:13 PM
I made a quick dash at lunch to CompUSA and to Fry's (for those of you to whom these names mean anything) and neither of them have Xerox Phasers on display.

Does anyone know a retail storefront that stocks Xerox Phasers? I know a bunch of the mail order places carry them, but retail dealers seem to be scarce...


Edit: Never mind. I went to the Xerox site and they have a link to find a local dealer. Once again, I'm very impressed with the Xerox site.

Black&Tan
Feb 3, 2006, 02:02 PM
I was equally impressed with my local dealer. Remaining open late so I could run some color tests is definitely noteworthy.

Demon Hunter
Feb 4, 2006, 03:27 PM
Ultimately, I decided that laser was a better choice, based on the number of prints I anticipate doing, the color accuracy, and the printout quality.


Great information, thank you! :)

I have a few questions if you don't mind...

How does the 6120 compare to the 8500 in terms of black text output/quality? Or compared to a 1200 dpi monochrome laser, like the Phaser 3500?

You said the 6120 prints heavy text, which I also read in the Macworld review. Does this look bad? If I'm printing a lot of text, in addition to limited color (like a flyer with black text and one color), would this still be a good option?

What's your average prints per week? The 8500 seems more capable of large output, but I could be wrong. It's hard to tell from the website.


It's very hard to find this information, much less from a Mac user. I really appreciate it!

dvdh
Feb 4, 2006, 10:09 PM
for an architecture office that I formerly worked in (IKOY Architects) and I looked at colour lasers, production inkjets, and LED printers from Canon, HP, and XEROX. Early on our office ruled out the inkjets based on the cost of volume output and print time delivery. However, for the sake of colour output comparison, we really wanted the something that would gives us the image quality like that of an inkjet (in this case the comparison was against an Epson 2000p). We sent out an bunch of test files to the various dealers with specs for paper compared the prints. In general the HP images were strongly biased to the cyans (had a similar issue the HPs at the university I was a session instructor at). The XEROX (we looked at the Phaser 7300 and 7700) seemed to produce the best colour range and balance on the widest variety of media. The Canons were solid performers as well, but the one (can't remember the model #) in the price range of the Phaser didn't do a full bleed. In the end the decision was to go with the Phaser 7300 based on the colour quality, price point, the capacity to print full bleed.

Black&Tan
Feb 6, 2006, 10:08 AM
Great information, thank you! :)

I have a few questions if you don't mind...

How does the 6120 compare to the 8500 in terms of black text output/quality? Or compared to a 1200 dpi monochrome laser, like the Phaser 3500?

You said the 6120 prints heavy text, which I also read in the Macworld review. Does this look bad? If I'm printing a lot of text, in addition to limited color (like a flyer with black text and one color), would this still be a good option?

What's your average prints per week? The 8500 seems more capable of large output, but I could be wrong. It's hard to tell from the website.


It's very hard to find this information, much less from a Mac user. I really appreciate it!

Upon comparing the text quality between the 8500 and 6120, they both print text a bit heavily. This is more apparent at 7 points or less. If I had to choose one over the other for text only, I would go with the 8500. Currently, I've found that the 6120 is printing black text using all 4 colors (C, M, Y, K) instead of just black. This may account for the heavy text. When I get some time to sit down and play, I'll try to figure this out. It may be an application issue, printer settings (Generate true or rich blacks?), or a driver issue. This doesn't bother me right now, as I think it can be resolved by playing with the settings....

I have no idea how the text compares to the 3500, but the 3500 may have the nudge if it prints at a "true" 1200 dpi, as the 6120's true resolution is 600, interpolated to 2400dpi.

My average output is about 50 sheets a week. Not a lot, but that's another reason why I went with the laser (and at 50 sheets a week, my consumables are far less than an inkjet, and my toner cartridges should last a year or more). No standing ink to gum up the works. Every time you turn the 8500 on, it has to melt the "crayons." If you leave the printer on, where does the melted material remain? And what keeps this material melted at the optimum temperature if you're going to stop printing overnight or for a day or two. I think the temperature would be critical, too hot and it burns. Too cold and it solidifies, possibly clogging the nozzles. (These are my opinions, not guarantees of operation). I've had too many issues with my Epson C80 inkjet printer, with clogged nozzles and ink leaks, both internally and on the paper. And in my mind, that's really what the 8500 is, an inkjet printer using melted "crayons" instead of ink. Ultimately, I think it boils down to quantity. If you're printing hundreds of pages a week, then the 8500 should be great. But if you're going to have idle periods, or don't print in quantity, then the 8500 may be a bit too much for you.

kiwi-in-uk
Feb 6, 2006, 05:40 PM
... Every time you turn the 8500 on, it has to melt the "crayons." If you leave the printer on, where does the melted material remain? And what keeps this material melted at the optimum temperature if you're going to stop printing overnight or for a day or two. I think the temperature would be critical, too hot and it burns. Too cold and it solidifies, possibly clogging the nozzles. (These are my opinions, not guarantees of operation). I've had too many issues with my Epson C80 inkjet printer, with clogged nozzles and ink leaks, both internally and on the paper. And in my mind, that's really what the 8500 is, an inkjet printer using melted "crayons" instead of ink. ...
Unless the technology has changed dramatically in the last four or so years, I seem to recall that the wax printers have an "idle" mode (like many other "fast start printers", including Canons HPs etc) and keep the wax warm. The only time you turn the power off is when you are moving the printer, or leaving it for an extended period (the printer has a controlled power-down cycle that melts and flushes the wax from the channels before it switches off). If you follow the instructions then there is never any problem with clogging, nor burning. IIRC (and you would need to verify this yourself from spec sheets) power consumption is roughly the same as toner based fast start laser printers. Again, if you follow the operating instructions you shouldn't experience spills - either internally or on the paper.

jimw
Jun 11, 2006, 01:06 AM
I just bought one for personal use a few days ago. I chose this model after researching color laser printers for months. This research included providing files for Xerox to print for me on the 6120, 8550, and 6350. The 6300 was a hands down winner with the 6120 a close second. Xerox printers come with full toner cartridges instead of "starters." - at least that is what they told me. So you supposedly get full use of the cartridges instead of having to buy a complete set of new ones shortly after buying the printer. A set of cartridges can equal the cost of the printer on the low cost machines. Xerox had the lowest cost per page of any of the printers in its class.

I turned thumbs down on the 8500 series (the solid ink series) due to print quality, color balance, contrast, high ink use during startup, image cracking and image fading. As far as I know the 8500 series is the only solid ink system Xerox is currently selling. The rest are true laser printers. Minor issues include bogus "low toner" messages that is supposed to go away in another 100 pages of print, higher toner usage than expected, along with size, weight and cost. However filing for the rebat was relatively easy as rebates go as it all can be done online along with email.

You can read my full review and sales experience on epinion under the Xerox Phaser 6300 listing.

BTW for Mac users. While the booklet feature is not supported by Xerox on a Mac, CocoaBooklet , a donationware program works extremely well as a substitute.

I particularly avoided HP because of the historically pathetic customer service and support I received from them when I once owned their inkjets.

Let us also not forget the fact that at one time they totally abandoned to Mac and all their Mac customers for years, reintroducing Mac support only when it suited their predatory financial interests. And what did they tell all of their previous Mac customers requesting driver updates? They told them that no updates were available and there were not going to be any. Their solution - go out and buy a new HP printer. Thousands of perfectly good printers were sent to the scrap-heap because HP refused to update the drivers. As a loyal Mac user, HP is not a company that I wish to do business with.

tunedby
Jun 11, 2006, 12:46 PM
In my work (print and packaging design) we have the Xerox phaser 6200 and the HP3700.

1. The Xerox has more features to allow you to save ink (draft color quality and draft grey). The HP have just two (full quality, grey). The HP consumes more ink.
2. I have compared the colors from xerox with final offset prints, and they are closer than the HP. That is why we use the Xerox as color previewer, and the HP for single documents. The HP has vibrant colors compared to the xerox, so single documents looks good . The xerox looks nice too, but we prefer to save the ink for proofs to the customer.

3. we have to put the HP in USB port, because the Ethernet port is unstable. The Xerox never lost the signal.

If you need more information let me know.

MacFan25863
Jun 12, 2006, 01:16 AM
If you haven't already, I would also check out Konica Minoltia. I just bought a 5450 DL from them, and it is an amazing printer. And they tend to be quite a bit more affordable than HP.

kiteflyer
Jun 19, 2006, 01:52 AM
I have a 3 year old Xerox Phaser 7700 tabloid printer and it does quite well.
I got it because at the time the reviewers gave it top scores. In fact, Macworld mag said they liked it so much they bought one! It is ironic that some of the best equipment is not available in "normal" stores. I also read a review somewhere that made me think Ricoh is also worth considering.

Bill