Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
32 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
This machine is perfect for small offices, December 2, 2003
For our small office of 6 people, we have been looking for an office machine that is easy to operate, reliable, and cost-effective. The four contenders are HP 3330 MFP, Canon D680 imageClass, Brother MFC 9700, Brother MFC 8820D. They are all 4-in-1/5-in-1 machines(Fax, Laser printer, Scanner, Copier, Data/Fax modem) priced below US$800. Brother MFC 9700 is cheaper but comes with a 14.4k modem and only 8MB memory and a smaller flatbed; as the result it faxes and prints slower than MFC 8820D. The remaining three candidates all have excellent "pedigrees" and are well designed and built. However Brother MFC 8820D won at the end for the following outstanding reasons:1. The 'D' in 8820D stands for duplex copying and printing: It works seamlessly and effortless. There is no need for removing the paper tray manually (really tedious). Duplex "fax receive" saves 30% to 50% of paper by having fax printed on both sides. Now one can have some break from the cost of receiving junk faxes. 2. 32MB memory: This is more than enough for holding a lot of copies and faxes. Very good for large unattended jobs. The best part about this is again about cost. No immediate need to spend more money for upgrading the memory as is required for Canon D680 (measly 2 MB). 3. PC fax software for computer data/fax needs. 4. Expandability for network interface. 5. Digital paper count to indicate the no. of copies made and faxes received: good for cost management and safe guard against potential abuse of the machine by employees for personal uses. 6. Excellent ADF (automatic document feeder): we have not had any paper jam so far. 7. Very easy to program and operate: simple to use for beginners and sophisticated features for users who demand more advanced functions. 8. Last but not the least is the cheaper cost for its toner on a per page basis. There are only two minor drawbacks for us: 1. MFC 8820D's ADF/scanner does not scan a page from edge to edge. However this is true of all machines in this price range. Canon D680 omits the least at both margins. HP 3330 is the worst. 2. Large footprint. We had to relocate it to a different room in the office where there is enough space instead of putting it at a more convenient place where there is easier access. Nevertheless it's not too bad considering that it replaces 4 separate machines all at once. Besides it forces us to walk down the hallway and get some exercies!! ;--]
|
|
|
15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
This machine is perfect for small offices, December 2, 2003
For our small office of 6 people, we have been looking for an office machine that is easy to operate, reliable, and cost-effective. The four contenders are HP 3330 MFP, Canon D680 imageClass, Brother MFC 9700, Brother MFC 8820D. They are all 4-in-1/5-in-1 machines(Fax, Laser printer, Scanner, Copier, Data/Fax modem) priced below US$800. Brother MFC 9700 is cheaper but comes with a 14.4k modem and only 8MB memory and a smaller flatbed; as the result it faxes and prints slower than MFC 8820D. The remaining three candidates all have excellent "pedigrees" and are well designed and built. However Brother MFC 8820D won at the end for the following outstanding reasons:1. The 'D' in 8820D stands for Automatic duplex copying and printing: It prints on both sides of papers seamlessly and effortlessly. It is not necessary to remove the paper tray manually (a really tedious process in other machines). Duplex "fax receive" saves 30% to 50% in papers by printing faxes on both sides automatically. Now one can have some break from the cost of receiving junk faxes. This feature can be disabled if one-sides printing is desired. 2. 32MB memory: This is more than enough for holding a lot of copies and faxes. Very good for large unattended jobs. The best part about this is again about cost. No immediate need to spend more money for upgrading the memory as is required for Canon D680 (measly 2 MB). 3. PC fax software for computer data/fax needs. 4. Expandability for network interface. 5. Digital paper count to indicate the no. of copies made and faxes received: good for cost management and safe guard against potential abuse of the machine by employees for personal uses. 6. Excellent ADF (automatic document feeder): we have not had any paper jam so far. 7. Very easy to program and operate: simple to use for beginners and sophisticated features for users who demand more advanced functions. 8. Last but not the least is the cheaper cost for its toner on a per page basis. There are only two minor drawbacks for us: 1. MFC 8820D's ADF/scanner does not scan a page from edge to edge. However this is true of all machines in this price range. Canon D680 omits the least at both margins. HP 3330 is the worst. 2. Large footprint. We had to relocate it to a different room in the office where there is enough space instead of putting it at a more convenient place where there is easier access. Nevertheless it's not too bad considering that it replaces 4 separate machines all at once. Besides it forces us to walk down the hallway and get some exercies!! ;--]
|
|
|
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The best duplex laser-scanner-fax under $600, by far, October 21, 2005
... and I've seen lots. After getting burned (very badly) by a Sharp AL-1641CS, the Brother 8820D was a wonderful experience.
<ul>
<li>The five-line dot matrix LCD screen is essential -- a device without it is going to be very, very hard to use.
<li> The toner cartridge has a refill port on it (although Brother tells you not to use it)
<li> The interesting "top heavy" design looks a bit strange, but comes in very handy when you realize that you can put the small footprint all the way at the edge of a table/desk.
<li> The printer and ADF mechanisms appear to be quite heavy duty -- probably only one step below the HP 8100 (which IMHO, is the pinnacle of modern super-rugged office machinery)
<li> Color fidelity on the scanner is very good; better than most multifunction devices.
<li> The ADF is unbelievably fast when you scan at 100dpi grayscale -- I'm guessing here, but it must be in excess of 60 pages per minute. Paper literally flies through it. Color scans are much slower, but still quite reasonable.
<li> BROTHER SUPPORTS MACS
<li> BROTHER SUPPORTS LINUX
<li> Unlike one of the other reviewers, I've found that the device scans to within 3mm of all margins -- I just did a test run and it was within 1mm of most of the margins. I'm sort of amazed that it can get this close. I think part of this is that it doesn't use the same part of the flatbed glass for ADF scanning that it uses for flatbed scanning -- there's a special separate strip of glass that curves downward to help the paper feed more evenly.
<li> Very sharp, high quality output.
<li> This printer has a real CPU in it with a generous amount of memory. Nothing is more frustrating than shelling out for a device only to realize that its ability to act as a printer was a complete afterthought, and that it chokes whenever you try to print anything too complex (cough, cough, Sharp, cough).
</ul>
Negatives:
<ul>
<li> Paper curls a bit after printing, although every compact laser printer has this problem (due to high-temperature fusers). The paper generally flattens out after 5-10 minutes.
<li> The mac scanner driver causes Image Capture to crash if you try to use the ADF. This is pretty annoying. Other than this, the drivers are excellent -- unobtrusive, simple, and reliable. The bundled software is a steaming pile, but that's true of nearly every hardware product.
<li> It only holds half a ream of paper (250 sheets), so you're always left with these torn-open half-empty reams lying around. Unfortunately the second input tray (so you can put two half-reams in) is unjustifiably expensive.
<li> No postscript support.
</ul>
In short, if you need duplex printing, don't waste your time with any other multifunction -- this is the one you want. If you can live without duplex, the range of options you have is much larger, although I still don't know of a device that beats this one.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Saving...
