Review of the HP LJ3030 AiO/MFP
- From: "Ben" <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Aug 2006 12:53:01 -0700
[I appologize that I lack the time to make this more concise]
This review will mainly be focused on the use of the HP LaserJet 3030
(an all-in-one or multifunction with laser printer, color scanner, FAX,
and copy capabilities) with MacOS X (10.2+) systems. This printer is
part of a line of multifunction lasers that also includes the 3015,
3020, and 3380. This review may also be relevant to those evaluating
the replacement line (LJ 3050, 3052, 3055, 3390) as well as either line
under Windows.
Market: SOHO; this is a desktop all-in-one/multifunction. Everyone
knows that all-in-one devices like this are compromises. Enterprises
will either go with multiple single-function devices (e.g. a LaserJet
1320 and Epson Perfection 4490 for a small group, etc) or bigger
multifunctions (e.g. HP 9500mfp or Xerox WorkCentre M24). Pure home
users want to print Christmas cards and photos. This printer is for
people who want 1) high quality laser printing, 2) basic scanning, FAX,
copying, or all the above in a compact unit that operates with the
convenience of a single device.
Pros: Decent quality hardware for the price, PostScript, sharp scans,
standalone FAX and copying never failed
Cons: HP's AiO USB design, bad drivers/software, useless support,
abandoned users
The critical flaw of this unit is HP's AiO USB design. The design
choice complicates the drivers/software necessitating extensive driver
development for each OS and then continuous revisions to keep up with
OS updates. I can think of several other approaches that would have
enabled multifunction connectivity with simpler host requirements.
HP's approach committed it to high overhead, long-term driver
development.
Unfortunately, management at HP has refused to understand the
consequences of their decisions because they've resisted the commitment
of resources to keep up with this driver development. The latest MacOS
X drivers for this printer date to the first quarter of 2004. The
drivers on the website essentially date to first quarter of 2004
(V.5.9.5). Windows users have done a little better -- the Windows
drivers for this product were updated in mid-2005.
Perhaps there is nothing left to improve for Windows users, but the Mac
drivers weren't even good enough in 2004. HP's V.5.9.5 software
package for the 3030 included a TWAIN driver but it only supported the
MacOS X 10.1.x TWAIN driver architecture. Worse, there was (still is)
a bug in the drivers that makes printing unreliable. Manual feed
doesn't work. I will be posting fixes and workarounds for these bugs
in another post.
Or maybe HP overcommitted resources to driver development. My biggest
complaint about HP's drivers is that they are just too big and
complicated. Other manufacturers support their PostScript
multifunctions with a PPD, possibly a few PDEs (why Apple now requires
Printer Dialog Extensions to use advanced features of PostScript
printers is beyond me), and a TWAIN driver (which under MacOS X 10.2+
is actually a subdirectory or bundle). HP has a 27MB Installer that
leaves droppings all over your hard drive (don't expect the uninstaller
to clean it all up either). But Mac users are lucky. HP's "Full
Software Solution" for Windows users weighs in at 367MB.
Think HP has learned their lesson with the HP 3050/3052/3055/3390 line?
The "Full Software Solution" for Mac weighs in at 112MB. For Windows
its up to 383MB. Aren't there Linux distributions that are smaller?
What does HP do with all these bits? I don't know what they do on the
Windows side, but on the Mac side they've decided that they need to add
extensions to your kernel to make everything work. Though the
extensions appear minor, HP just shouldn't be messing with my kernel
for this kind of product. That's just guaranteeing incompatibility
with future versions of the OS.
On the other hand, you would think that with 112MB of Installer, HP
could at least support several different lines of printers in one
driver package. Perhaps a unified driver model as other hardware
manufactures now promote (because it saves them money in the long-run
and simplifies support)? HP instead has the V.5.9.5 drivers for the
3015/3020/3030/3380 line, the V.6.0 drivers for various color Laserjets
mfps, and now the V.7.0 drivers just for the 3050/3052/3055/3390 line.
Unfortunately, V.7.0 drivers are the only ones that (claim to) fully
support MacOS X 10.4 and Intel-based Macs. Those of you on the V.6.0
drivers? Most but not everything will work with 10.4. The V.6 drivers
came out Nov/Dec 2005 so of course there is no Intel/Universal binary
support (I guess HP didn't signup for one of those development machines
from Apple). Its less clear why the V.6 drivers don't fully support
MacOS X 10.4 (which shipped 4 or 5 months prior to the final revision
of the V.6 drivers).
Of course Windows-based enterprise users wouldn't put up with this
which is why HP created the Universal Print Driver for Windows. It
bypasses your normal windows printing drivers. Problem: HP created
slightly different quirky drivers for every printer they ship.
Solution: HP creates a new driver that bypasses your OS to simplify the
problem they created. Unless you also use printers from other
manufacturers. In which case your users now have one interface for HP
printers and one for printers of every other manufacturer.
In any case, the result should be clear. Bundled with your printer are
overly complicated drivers that are almost guaranteed to break with
each major (and sometimes minor) OS release. Considering the LaserJet
3055: how certain are you that HP's current drivers will work with
MacOS X 10.5 (or Windows Vista)? When do you think HP will get around
to providing you updates that work? Do you think HP's driver writers
will be focusing on your (then) 12-18 month old printer or their
latest, greatest product (which will probably require yet another new
driver version that only supports this new hardware)?
HP's tech support is generally useless. Despite drivers that clearly
are out-of-date and lacking support for current versions of the OS,
they will suggest things like "plug and unplug the device", "reinstall
the drivers", "reinstall the OS', blah blah blah. They will of course
never admit that the problem is that their drivers are broken and
they've abandoned you as a customer.
Somewhere in all this, I forgot to mention that the "HP
Communications.app" (HP's daemon/service required in order to connect
to the scanner either by network or USB) chews 3% of the CPU. That's
when you're not using the printer or scanner. That's when its just
sitting idle chewing 3% of your CPU. When you actually try to scan, it
tends to consume >80% of the CPU. To transfer data back to the
computer at USB 1.1 speeds.
As a treat for Windows users, the HP drivers that monitor your toner
level and stuff? That's actually an entire (Apache) web server with
Tomcat Java servlet support. In a former life, I used to install that
stack for programmers writing enterprise applications. HP installs
that on any PC with a USB-connected LaserJet so that the unit looks and
configures like a JetDirect-enabled LaserJet. By the way, my friend's
toner level monitor/web server broke after some Microsoft security
update a few months ago. Hopefully, HP's distribution doesn't add any
security holes to your system.
One hardware design limitation/defect/flaw: there is only one input
tray: Tray 1. Tray 1 does double duty as the manual input tray. There
is no separate manual feed so the printer can't tell if you've loaded
the manual feed or its just the normal paper in tray 1. So what they
do is make you press "Enter" for each manual feed page. Since most
programs don't let you change manual feed mid-document, most documents
are either all manual feed or all automatic. So if you submit at 10
page document for manual feed (e.g. on bond paper), you'll have to hit
Enter before each of the 10 page. Or just put the paper in the manual
feed slot but not select manual feed (which is probably how most people
use their manual feed anyway). I mention this because I am used to
smarter printers, but this design limitation is probably acceptable for
99% of buyers in the target market.
I never mentioned the good parts of this printer. I'm happy with the
print quality. Overall printing performs similar to a LaserJet 1300.
As others have said, scans are sharp and colors aren't bad. Not
graphic design good but fine for SOHO. The standalone FAX and copier
work fine.
Summary: I would not buy this printer again because of the misguided
design and faulty software. I would have to rule out all other
alternatives to buy its successor, the LaserJet 3055, because I have no
reason to believe that it won't have the same problems in the long run.
Alternatives you may wish to evaluate include the Samsung SCX-4521F
(SPL not PostScript) and the Brother MFC-7820N on the low-end.
Mid-range competitors include the Brother MFC-8460N, the MFC-8860DN,
and the Xerox PE120i. On the high-end there is the Samsung SCX-5530FN
(not widely available yet), Ricoh Aficio 1515MF, and the Xerox
WorkCentre 4118X. These last two are more SO than SOHO. I have no
experience with any of these.
.
- Prev by Date: ImageWriter "direct text" from OS X?
- Next by Date: Fixes to the HP LaserJet 3020/3030 PPD for Mac
- Previous by thread: ImageWriter "direct text" from OS X?
- Next by thread: Fixes to the HP LaserJet 3020/3030 PPD for Mac
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
