Re: Printers Revisited

From: Ellen Theisen <ellent_at_olympus_dot_net>
Date: Sat May 22 2004 - 20:38:33 CDT

I thought the idea was to let the counties use whatever hardware they could
get inexpensively for the election. If so, having detailed printer specs
could be a problem, couldn't it?

Ellen Theisen
www.votersunite.org
Join with us! Sign up at http://www.votersunite.org/signup.asp

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Dechert" <alan@openvotingconsortium.org>
To: <voting-project@lists.sonic.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: [voting-project] Printers Revisited

> David,
>
> > I got to looking online for pictures of different printer models, just
> > to see if there was anything I wasn't familiar with by way of paper
> > paths/trays/etc. Basically, it seems as I thought.
> >
> We bought an HP 1300 for the demo for $350. These can now be had for
around
> $300.
>
> > But looking at some models got me thinking about whether it would it
> > might be worth using Postscript printers from the start, thereby
> > removing Ghostscript/CUPS from the toolchain.
> >
> The 1300 does PS Level 2 emulation--works great.
>
> The ballot comes out 8 seconds after hitting print. It easily handles
legal
> sized paper (or A4) if we need that. The print quality is great (1200 x
> 1200). Recommended duty cycle is 10,000 pages per month which means it
has
> a real value for use beyond using in the voting booth.
>
> Alan D.
>
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:57 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT