9 out of 9 people found this review helpful.
The Gillette Printer?
Date of Review: Oct 22, 2007
The Bottom Line: A good backup or portable printer/copier/scanner. If all you do is scan, it's a cheap, quality alternative to buying a $150 flatbed scanner. You'll want other image editing software, though.
I recently went on a 2-1/2 week R&R trip, and a printer and scanner were definitely not on my packing list. However, I happened to visit a library and in their archives found a plethora of documents and photos I could use for research. There were so many that paying for copies would have gotten into more money than I was willing to pay for B&W copies, and the librarians had no time for scanning.
The obvious answer was to buy a scanner. I went shopping for flatbed scanners because I have a printer/scanner at home. Every flatbed I found cost more than I would have paid for having photocopies made (which is to say, over $120). I investigated used scanners at a computer store, but none worked with Windows Vista, which is what runs the laptop I had with me. (Nothing by HP currently works with Vista, by the way. I did buy a used flatbed for twenty bucks, and downloaded the driver; it wouldn't function under Vista, though it did work with my XP system at home.)
So I found a local Wal-Mart and picked up a Lexmark X2500 (the only Vista-certified unit there) for $46.97 plus tax. Interestingly, the printer came with everything except the black ink cartridge. The color cartridge was supplied, but a note on the box stated, "Black cartridge sold separately." This made me think of the King C. Gillette marketing trick of selling shavers at little or no profit in order to create a market for double-edge razor blades. (If you check, you will find that the shavers were not all that inexpensive, but they did create a market.)
The cartridge $17.97, so in reality I paid about $66 for the printer/scanner. This is the first time I've encountered this situation, though I have seen printers sold without cables--a variation on the "monitor sold separately" gag. (Which is styled after the early 1920s practice of selling radio receivers without batteries or headsets.)
All of this begs the question: Is Lexmark selling printers cheap, letting retailers have most of the profit in order to make money on ink cartridges? No doubt they are making money on the carts, and it may well be that they won't last as long as the carts in my HP printer at home.
(Note: Other reviews here say you don't get much out of a cartridge with a Lexmark printer. Based on past experience, I can believe it. One Lexmark I bought--with cartridges--cost less than buying the two replacement carts!)
At least I'll have an emergency backup printer on hand when the HP gives out. Plus, the X2500 really is small enough to be portable. Maybe I'll pack it next time I travel by car, just to have it available.
The scanner functions fine, though the software is ill-designed; I can suggest a dozen ways to make the scanning process faster. Also, there are few editing features. But I don't rely on the software; I use Paint Shop Pro 8 to edit images. And as a standalone photocopier the machine does a good job, color or B&W. If you do a lot of library research and make a lot of copies, this little machine is worth it for the copier function alone. (It operates as a copier without being connected to a computer.)
Oh, yes: The paper feeds from the top. I'd prefer a bottom feed (holds more paper), but the setup as it is makes the printer more portable.
--Mike
http://www.michaelabanks.com
