On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:34 PM, James Lampert <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just because a technology is old, and maybe even technologically
obsolete, doesn't make it FUNCTIONALLY obsolete.
Yeah, but Twinax was flaky, problematic, slow, without available
replacement parts, etc. pp.
Matrix printers are even worse. Yes, switching from Matrix to Lasers
might require you to adjust one or the other business process, but the
benefits are always worth it. A new low end Matrix printer with IPDS
costs around 6000 CHF (IBM 4247). A typical workgroup class laser
printer with IPDS like a HP LaserJet 4250 or Lexmark T640 costs less
than that, is faster, has lower maintenance costs and requires no
intervention on day-to-day tasks.
There *are* things that Matrix printers can do better than lasers -
i'm not disagreeing there. But clinging to this old technology will
just bring even more pain when technology moves further ahead.
Recently, a customer bought an InfoPrint 6100 (i believe.. a huge
device anyway) that cost 25'000 CHF. And this device is slower than a
Laser for 5000 CHF.
All this because programmers didn't want to rework a few reports.
The Twinax issue is roughly the same. The HMC is superior to the
Twinax-Console in every aspect, even reliability (or does your Twinax
Console have dual powersupplies? Or can you have redundant Twinax
Consoles?). Of course, the HMC is expensive - IMO, it should be
included in the base price of the system (with the base price not
changing, of course).
midrange.com
