Digital BW, The Print

Hello Mitch,

>Here's another perspective on the 2200 . . . I've been told by techs  
>who repair huge numbers of Epsons that the 2200 is a MUCH more solid  
>machine than the 2400 . . .    They recommend that anyone replacing a  
>2200 go right to the 3800, which is also considered (by them) very  
>reliable   The 3800 is  bigger, of course, and more money -- but not  
>hugely more than the 3800.

FWIW, I had a 2200 for 23 months when the paper feed mechanism died,
and there have been several other similar reports over past couple of
years.  That's the only weak point I'm aware of.  Otherwise it was a
super printer.  My 2400 is now at 28 months and going strong, with
nary a peep or whimper.  I don't doubt what they told you, but purely
on mechanical terms for me the 2400 has outperformed the 2200.  

But surely they have reasons for saying that.  If you get a chance to
talk to them again it would be nice to have some specifics

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm