Re: [photo-3d] Not buying a printer

[Mike Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jim Harp wrote:
> 

> Printer technology is progressing so quickly that for me it makes more sense
> to get prints done on  Moto-Foto's 370 than to drop a few hundred bucks on a
> printer that will be obsolete within a year and have little resale value.

This also is an argument not to buy a computer at all!  :-)  I don't know
about others, but I'd have a printer whether I printed images on them
or not.  Most of my printing (albeit still fairly low volume) is B&W 
text "plain" prints, and I'm definitely
not going to upload that to a web-site to have them snail-mail me the
printouts, even if it's free!  So "counting" the capital costs for photo
printing is only a partially "valid" accounting practice, I think.

> It would be interesting to do a comparison factoring in costs of printer
> cartridges (overpriced rip-offs that they are) 

Mfgr's will admit to this too, as well as tell you about how they
make zero money or even lose money selling you the printer itself.
They're in the Gillette mode of sales.

Mike K.

P.S. - One does NOT have to replace a unit when it becomes obsolete
       (everybody throw away their 50's stereo cameras yet?), only when
       it's not longer useful.  My computer is still a grossly obsolete
       slow-as-a-frozen-slug AMD K6-3 400-Mhz system, but it's still
       useful.  My dyesub printer is getting "old" as well, but it's doing
       fine as well - I haven't been lusting after any new one (yet).