All-in-one laser printer recommendation

[Doug]

On 03/17/2014 10:02 AM, Tim wrote:
> Tim:
>>> Sodding printers, designed by bastards incorporated.
> g:
>> i was told many years ago that short stack was because of problems
>> of feeding sheets from a large stack.
> Wasn't a problem for our high speed photostat machine (back when they
> were called that, rather than photocopier).  Trying to remember how much
> you could stack into it, but it had to be at least four reams.
>
> I can well imagine that for low volume printers, you don't want a lot of
> paper stashed in them, absorbing moisture and fumes, and decomposing as
> modern paper is want to do.  But you ought to, at least, be able to put
> a full ream into the large office printers.
>
> We were given a modern HP laser printer, last year.  Tested it out, and
> white steam comes out with the page (well, actually condensation, since
> steam is invisible).  Printing was definitely "hot off the presses."
> It'd been left somewhere where the paper had absorbed a lot of moisture,
> and printing heated up the paper to the point it cooks it out with the
> page.  It did make for a rather impressive event as a page popped out.
>
>> also was so one could watch the secretary bend over more often to get
>> paper. ;-)
> LOL, and tut.
>
That story reminds me of a printer I had that kept its paper supply
semi-vertical, so as to feed it by gravity to the print mechanism, and
the paper would absorb moisture from the air and fall over, and
not feed right. Your paper should at least be stored horizontally,
and preferably in a  protected (covered) tray. It will still have access
to the atmosphere, but the warmth of the mechanism may help
keep it more dry, and it will not expose the under sheets to the
air, as my old floppy device did. I also had a cheap fax machine
that did the same thing.
I don't know if anybody still makes one like that, but if so, then
don't buy it!

--doug

--doug