Talk:HP LaserJet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

History[edit]

The history section was going pretty well (a bit markety-sounding, but not too bad) and then it suddenly stops. No LaserJet 1000? LaserJet 1100? 1200? The high-end machines? When did HP first make a model with an MSRP lower than US$1,000? $500? The article could do with expansion, IMO. (And the removal of some of the marketing-speak. :) ). 205.157.110.11 03:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The second entry on the 2000s section reads:
"In September 2001, HP entered the low-end laser printer market with the introduction of the LaserJet 1000. It was the first sub-$250 LaserJet and the lowest priced monochrome HP LaserJet printer to date. Offered 10 ppm, HP Instant-on fuser, 600-dpi with HP REt boosting output effectively to 1200dpi, 2.5 cent cost per page, and 7,000-page monthly duty cycle."
What kind of high-end machines do you mean? LaserJet 9055/9065/9085 MFPs are mentioned. Those are pretty high-end in HP standards (high-duty copiers/printers). ---Majestic- 03:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Clone[edit]

This page is pretty much identical to [1] They even link to the Wikipedia images and include on their page: Copyright ©2008 Abitech Systems Ltd and a CopyScape DO NOT COPY notice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.1.7 (talk) 00:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

http://www.internet-ink.co.uk/articles/hp-toner-cartridges.htm
Updated link to the page, and all their images still link from Wikipedia. DMahalko (talk) 06:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

4/4M memory and other memory[edit]

The memory for the 4 and 4M is 72 pin, not proprietary. I maxed the RAM on a 4M simply by breaking the presence detect 'zero ohm resistors' off the SIMM boards using a pair of needle nose pliers. The 2100 series uses proprietary 100 pin EDO SODIMMs. The 4000 series uses proprietary 100 pin SDRAM SODIMMs. Bizzybody (talk) 09:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I have upgraded my LJ 4 and LJ 4+ printers with normal 72pin FP SIMMs. As long as the SIMMs have 70ns RAM and SPD resistors, all is fine. Both have 2MB onboard RAM and 2 x 8MB SIMMs installed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.120.38.253 (talk) 11:45, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

PostScript SIMMs[edit]

PostScript SIMMs are often specific to certain models. For example the PostScript SIMM for a 4 will not work in a 4+ Bizzybody (talk) 09:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Used by terrorists[edit]

I have removed the section since the make and model of cartridge used to hide the explosives is inconsequential to the incident and as such has no relevence here. wjematherbigissue 00:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Agree, it doesn't belong here. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Supreme -- how odd that you would be at this page. I'm used to seeing both of you on jihadi-related matters. But HP? In any event, what is the basis for your view?--Epeefleche (talk) 00:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what brand of laser printers that was used to hide bombs. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Why are you of that view? In other words, what is the basis of your view?--Epeefleche (talk) 00:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Quite simply they could have used a toner cartidge from any other manufacturer, Kyocera, Xerox, Canon, Dell, Brother, etc. Unless there is a source that states that there is a specific reason why HP LaserJet cartridges were chosen. wjematherbigissue 01:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't know that. How do you know that? Do you have inside information? What I do know, however, is that RSs thought the information important enough that they published it. And, even more to the point, that Interpol thought it important enough that it circulated it to its 188 member nations, and posted it for the public to see.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:03, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Of course it was published in that context as it is entirely relevant information to the incident in question, but that simply does not equate to being relevant to the product in question other than being a trivial footnote. If there is a source that discusses HP or HP LaserJets as its primary subject that sees fit to mention the incident then I'd be interested to see it. wjematherbigissue 01:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
  • If the model and make were irrelevant, they would not be reported by RSs. Reported by Interpol. Sent by Interpol to 188 member nations. And posted by Interpol on its public website. Plus, I see by a revert recently, which WJE again reverted that another editor (though notably new) is also of the opinion that material belongs, so there does not appear to be a consensus for its removal. Finally, WJE's comment about his interest in an article with this as the main focus is entirely irrelevant -- that's the standard for a stand-alone article, of course, not for mention in this article. Very different things.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:01, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
You are demonstating why HP LaserJet is properly mentioned in the article regarding the incident, not why the incident should be mentioned here. There are only so many way to say the same thing. For inclusion, the incident must have some relevance to HP LaserJet. (Have HP released a statement regarding the incident? Have their sales slumped as a result? That kind of thing.) There is nothing to show such a connection. Until there is, it should stay out. wjematherbigissue 08:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
It is irrelevant. I have inside information on the construction of toner cartridges made by all manufacturers, and amazingly enough they all have large storage compartments inside them that could be filled with other substances. Some printers even have extra capacity cartridges for even more black prints than usual. (Hmm, I wonder if anyone has tried adding food coloring to cocaine and putting it in toner cartidges..)
It sounds like Epeefleche is clueless about the technology of printers and copiers. I would suggest not editing articles about technology you don't know anything about, other than some blurb you read in a news article. DMahalko (talk) 15:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

HP LaserJet 5 Picture[edit]

I noticed there's no photo of an HP LaserJet 5 on this article, or the HP LaserJet 5 article. As I own one, I could take a 10.1 megapixel photo of it. Would that be of any interest, or is that unnecessary? I also can shrink the photo if needed. Racecar56 (talk) 05:50, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

First Color LaserJet?[edit]

The article first states that the first Color LaserJet was in 1994, then later says it was in 1991. Which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trent021 (talkcontribs) 09:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

As of 2016, Canon supplies both mechanisms and cartridges for all HP's laser printers[edit]

This statement is no longer correct on HP newer laser printers that contain a drum system.69.36.67.122 (talk) 03:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)