Print Classy Discs with the Dymo DiscPainter

>As the owner of an early Epson printer that handled CDs, I found it an incredibly involved process... I never used it again.

>The DiscPainter makes it really easy and really quick, and I've printed far more discs. It also offers much better quality.

Karen's comment exemplifies a situation that many of us find ourselves in from time to time: I tried a 1.0 product from vendor A several years ago, and it sucked. I now use a 2.0 product from vendor B, and it is much better. I tell myself that I don't have the time, money, or energy to compare it to vendor A's current 4.7 product, nor the anecdotally superior 3.5 product from vendor C.

With luck, I get help on making multi-product comparisons from TidBITS and/or TidBITS Talk. On the current topic, I can agree that early Epson disc printing hardware and software sucked. But reading Adam's description, the Discus for Dymo software is scarcely better. I judge that Epson's software surpassed it three years ago. There are certainly better software choices available now, including those mentioned by Adam, those from Epson and Canon, and printing from graphics programs like Photoshop, Canvas and InDesign.

Adam's article gives less to go on in comparing the disc printing hardware quality. At a guess, all the currently available options will print very nicely. As a one-trick pony, the Dymo printer might have advantages in ease of use, but Adam's description doesn't make it sound outstanding in that department. The cost of the printer and the cost of consumables seem to be significantly above several of the Canon and Epson options. Although I print quite a few disks, it is still an advantage to me to have a good, general purpose inkjet printer that will also print discs, rather than that plus a dedicated disc printer. And I would reiterate Karen's point that having an occasional-use disc printer increases the chances of cartridges or heads drying out.

I wish Adam had been able to compare his experience with the Dymo, an Epson and a Canon in a single article. But since I have experience with recent Epsons and Canons, he gave me enough information to be confident that the Canon Pixma (my first choice) or an Epson meet my needs better than the Dymo would.

Derek Roff

At 4:52 AM -0800 12/12/08, derek wrote:
>With luck, I get help on making multi-product comparisons from
>TidBITS and/or TidBITS Talk. On the current topic, I can agree that
>early Epson disc printing hardware and software sucked. But reading
>Adam's description, the Discus for Dymo software is scarcely better.
>I judge that Epson's software surpassed it three years ago. There
>are certainly better software choices available now, including those
>mentioned by Adam, those from Epson and Canon, and printing from
>graphics programs like Photoshop, Canvas and InDesign.

Yeah, Discus just isn't that impressive. But there are plenty of
other pieces of software that will do the job, so I wasn't terribly
bothered by that.

>Adam's article gives less to go on in comparing the disc printing
>hardware quality.

Pretty much none, since I've never laid eyes on another of these
printers or their output. I was interested in reviewing the
DiscPainter because I've used sticky labels and LightScribe and
wasn't impressed with either one.

> At a guess, all the currently available options will print very
>nicely. As a one-trick pony, the Dymo printer might have advantages
>in ease of use, but Adam's description doesn't make it sound
>outstanding in that department.

Some people have said that switching between paper and discs in some
of the other printers is a fuss.

>The cost of the printer and the cost of consumables seem to be
>significantly above several of the Canon and Epson options. Although
>I print quite a few disks, it is still an advantage to me to have a
>good, general purpose inkjet printer that will also print discs,
>rather than that plus a dedicated disc printer. And I would
>reiterate Karen's point that having an occasional-use disc printer
>increases the chances of cartridges or heads drying out.

Yes, the main downside of the DiscPainter, as I said in the article,
is the price of a one-trick pony.

>I wish Adam had been able to compare his experience with the Dymo,
>an Epson and a Canon in a single article. But since I have
>experience with recent Epsons and Canons, he gave me enough
>information to be confident that the Canon Pixma (my first choice)
>or an Epson meet my needs better than the Dymo would.

One thing that is nice about the DiscPainter is that it's small. We
already have an Epson inkjet for photos and the like, along with an
Epson AcuLaser for most of our printing, and another large printer
would just be a waste of space. So there may be people for whom the
price is worthwhile because it's a small device. Or perhaps there are
other printers that are similar - I just don't know.

For excellent printer reviews from Rick LePage (ex of Macworld),
check out Printerville at <http://www.printerville.net/>.

cheers... -Adam

--
Look into my head; follow me on Twitter. http://twitter.com/adamengst
_____________________________________________________________________
Adam C. Engst: I publish TidBITS and Take Control, write books,
acetidbits.com and make useful introductions in the Mac industry.
My work: http://www.tidbits.com/ and http://www.takecontrolbooks.com/