![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Removed the following:
I'm struggling to see what the significance of this is to dot matrix printers. IIRC, sound artists have used all manner of sounds, from flushing toilets to industrial jackhammers to whales mating, as part of their constructions. Has Sue Harding's work using the printer sounds become particularly well-known? -- Robert Merkel 13:20, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I can't remember -- did 24-pin printers come first, or printer 'NLQ'? I know third-party software offered NLQ-like capabilities before NLQ-fonts were built into printers. Regardless, I do know Epson eventually added NLQ to its 9-pin printers.
I'm looking for photo software that will create a dot matrix effect with jpeg and other files 05:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC) whicky1978 05:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Is this sentence correct?-
If we assume that an 80-column printout also has 80 lines, that gives (potentially) 1600 (oops... thanks Atlant) 6400 characters per page. At one-third full, let's say that's 500 2000 characters per page on average.
One million characters is only 2000 500 pages. That's the equivalent of just four normal-sized packs a single ream of A4/legal paper.
This sounds improbably low.
Fourohfour 20:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
which one storage device is best to use(hdd, dat,zip,cd'setc) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arun.mahlan ( talk • contribs) .
Please do not carry out editing debates in the body of the article - even as comments. This is where that discussion belongs.
What's going on here is that the title is poorly worded. One person reads "The unenlarged region" to mean "The entire image" (which could easily be 4.6 centimeters - and nobody would remotely imagine could be 4.5 millimeters!) - the other person reads it as "The unenlarged version of the letter 'e' in the image" - which couldn't remotely be 4.5 centimeters - and for which 4.5 millimeters is probably reasonable.
So - stop arguing about it - and rewrite the text to make the interpretation of this less ambiguous. That is why we use the 'talk' page and not the article for these discussions.
SteveBaker 16:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
A few points;
Anyway, this edit probably was genuine- but it was still wrong, and passed uncommented into the edit history. Big deal? In one sense, no; but it's this sort of minor slippage that builds up and damages Wikipedia. I'd characterise edits such as this one (reverted here) as potentially dangerous, whether or not they're meant to be subtle vandalism. Fourohfour 17:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The only reference listed here is this gigantic timeline of an entire company's contributions to the technological world. However, I've done ctrl f (searched) the site for either impact or dot (by itself) to see where it could be used as a source and have found nothing. I realize that this is the company that pioneered the device, but, would anyone have any more useful sources to cite from? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by R0cko ( talk • contribs) 05:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
Per Epson's technical manual for the FX-80 [1], the italic font was an actual second set of glyphs contained in the printer memory, not a processing effect. Given the extent to which later printers tried to mimic the FX-80, is the claim in the article completely false or just not of general application? — 78.105.17.36 ( talk) 23:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I am merely a reader of this page. I have no expertise apart from having owned a few of these, including the Epson MX-80 pictured.
My question is that the last few sections of the article seem to contradict each other. I've read them several times, and can't figure out how I'm reading it wrong. So if correct, perhaps they should be re-written to be more clear to readers like me.
My issue is that the Disadvantages section states that Dot Matrix Printers have "comparatively lower speed" But in "The Future of DMP" it says that owners "are not easily convinced to go for printers based on other technologies because of the speed advantage of dot-matrix printers."
I can't imagine what the phrase "Because of the speed advantage" could mean. Can it be re-written by someone who actually understands what the original author was trying to say? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rev Tie Dye ( talk • contribs) 00:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The term 'draft mode' appears in two places in the article, but it's never explained at all.
Typical output from a dot matrix printer operating in draft mode.
and
Not surprisingly, all printers retained one or more 'draft' modes for high-speed printing.
It appears to be a significant subject, but it doesn't appear anywhere else in the article. — Marvin talk 17:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
This section includes a statement about monopoly pricing of ink for inkjet printers. This statement is outside of this article's subject, and no citation backing this claim appears. It strikes me as biased, and I recommend it be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew.todd.brown ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I am a bit surprised that the article equates "dot matrix printer" with "needle impact printer". A dot matrix printer is any printer that forms hardcopy using a dot matrix (a raster), using any suitable technology (which may or may not include needles and may be impact, non-impact, or even contactless), as opposed to printers using types (daisywheel, selectric, and chain printers), vector-based drawing (some "plotter" printers by Sharp come to mind) and traditional photo-typesetting.
Common laser printers, inkjet printers, thermal printers, electroerosion printers, dye sublimation printers, etc.are all dot matrix printers (though not impact printers). Needle impact printers are just one very specific technology that falls into the dot matrix printer class - even back in the day (1980s) when needle impact printers were prevalent, this difference was commonly understood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.189.58.12 ( talk) 09:23, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
When i came to Canada from manchester, while in the airport i had the living daylights scared out of me when one went off nearby where i was sitting. I asked the woman about it and she said that they probibly are going to keep using dot matrix printers well into the forseeable future. They've had that Epson there sisne at least 2008-2009. Is this an indication of the future of dot matrix printing in your oppinions? Or will Manchester airport be the odd one out?
Eric Ramus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.195.166.103 ( talk) 13:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Dot matrix printers which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 05:35, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
What the purpose of Dot matrix printer? Isn't this page describe the same concept? Tucvbif ( talk) 13:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Srleffler Joyous! Ost316 TocMan
I have merged the articles as per this consensus. I've made sure no detail or source from the other article has been left unaccounted for and everything's been put inline in this article, including categories. --
Chiffonr (
talk)
15:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Reverted content that was WP:PROMOTION and WP:CITE. While Tally may have been a producer of dot matrix printers, the inclusion, with no citation of noteworthiness appears promotional. If an editor wants to add it back, go for it, so long as Tally can be cited as a significant contributor to early dot-matrix tech as was Centronics, Epson, OKI, etc. • Bobsd • ( talk) 16:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Removed the following:
I'm struggling to see what the significance of this is to dot matrix printers. IIRC, sound artists have used all manner of sounds, from flushing toilets to industrial jackhammers to whales mating, as part of their constructions. Has Sue Harding's work using the printer sounds become particularly well-known? -- Robert Merkel 13:20, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I can't remember -- did 24-pin printers come first, or printer 'NLQ'? I know third-party software offered NLQ-like capabilities before NLQ-fonts were built into printers. Regardless, I do know Epson eventually added NLQ to its 9-pin printers.
I'm looking for photo software that will create a dot matrix effect with jpeg and other files 05:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC) whicky1978 05:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Is this sentence correct?-
If we assume that an 80-column printout also has 80 lines, that gives (potentially) 1600 (oops... thanks Atlant) 6400 characters per page. At one-third full, let's say that's 500 2000 characters per page on average.
One million characters is only 2000 500 pages. That's the equivalent of just four normal-sized packs a single ream of A4/legal paper.
This sounds improbably low.
Fourohfour 20:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
which one storage device is best to use(hdd, dat,zip,cd'setc) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arun.mahlan ( talk • contribs) .
Please do not carry out editing debates in the body of the article - even as comments. This is where that discussion belongs.
What's going on here is that the title is poorly worded. One person reads "The unenlarged region" to mean "The entire image" (which could easily be 4.6 centimeters - and nobody would remotely imagine could be 4.5 millimeters!) - the other person reads it as "The unenlarged version of the letter 'e' in the image" - which couldn't remotely be 4.5 centimeters - and for which 4.5 millimeters is probably reasonable.
So - stop arguing about it - and rewrite the text to make the interpretation of this less ambiguous. That is why we use the 'talk' page and not the article for these discussions.
SteveBaker 16:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
A few points;
Anyway, this edit probably was genuine- but it was still wrong, and passed uncommented into the edit history. Big deal? In one sense, no; but it's this sort of minor slippage that builds up and damages Wikipedia. I'd characterise edits such as this one (reverted here) as potentially dangerous, whether or not they're meant to be subtle vandalism. Fourohfour 17:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The only reference listed here is this gigantic timeline of an entire company's contributions to the technological world. However, I've done ctrl f (searched) the site for either impact or dot (by itself) to see where it could be used as a source and have found nothing. I realize that this is the company that pioneered the device, but, would anyone have any more useful sources to cite from? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by R0cko ( talk • contribs) 05:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
Per Epson's technical manual for the FX-80 [1], the italic font was an actual second set of glyphs contained in the printer memory, not a processing effect. Given the extent to which later printers tried to mimic the FX-80, is the claim in the article completely false or just not of general application? — 78.105.17.36 ( talk) 23:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I am merely a reader of this page. I have no expertise apart from having owned a few of these, including the Epson MX-80 pictured.
My question is that the last few sections of the article seem to contradict each other. I've read them several times, and can't figure out how I'm reading it wrong. So if correct, perhaps they should be re-written to be more clear to readers like me.
My issue is that the Disadvantages section states that Dot Matrix Printers have "comparatively lower speed" But in "The Future of DMP" it says that owners "are not easily convinced to go for printers based on other technologies because of the speed advantage of dot-matrix printers."
I can't imagine what the phrase "Because of the speed advantage" could mean. Can it be re-written by someone who actually understands what the original author was trying to say? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rev Tie Dye ( talk • contribs) 00:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The term 'draft mode' appears in two places in the article, but it's never explained at all.
Typical output from a dot matrix printer operating in draft mode.
and
Not surprisingly, all printers retained one or more 'draft' modes for high-speed printing.
It appears to be a significant subject, but it doesn't appear anywhere else in the article. — Marvin talk 17:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
This section includes a statement about monopoly pricing of ink for inkjet printers. This statement is outside of this article's subject, and no citation backing this claim appears. It strikes me as biased, and I recommend it be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew.todd.brown ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I am a bit surprised that the article equates "dot matrix printer" with "needle impact printer". A dot matrix printer is any printer that forms hardcopy using a dot matrix (a raster), using any suitable technology (which may or may not include needles and may be impact, non-impact, or even contactless), as opposed to printers using types (daisywheel, selectric, and chain printers), vector-based drawing (some "plotter" printers by Sharp come to mind) and traditional photo-typesetting.
Common laser printers, inkjet printers, thermal printers, electroerosion printers, dye sublimation printers, etc.are all dot matrix printers (though not impact printers). Needle impact printers are just one very specific technology that falls into the dot matrix printer class - even back in the day (1980s) when needle impact printers were prevalent, this difference was commonly understood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.189.58.12 ( talk) 09:23, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
When i came to Canada from manchester, while in the airport i had the living daylights scared out of me when one went off nearby where i was sitting. I asked the woman about it and she said that they probibly are going to keep using dot matrix printers well into the forseeable future. They've had that Epson there sisne at least 2008-2009. Is this an indication of the future of dot matrix printing in your oppinions? Or will Manchester airport be the odd one out?
Eric Ramus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.195.166.103 ( talk) 13:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Dot matrix printers which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 05:35, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
What the purpose of Dot matrix printer? Isn't this page describe the same concept? Tucvbif ( talk) 13:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Srleffler Joyous! Ost316 TocMan
I have merged the articles as per this consensus. I've made sure no detail or source from the other article has been left unaccounted for and everything's been put inline in this article, including categories. --
Chiffonr (
talk)
15:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Reverted content that was WP:PROMOTION and WP:CITE. While Tally may have been a producer of dot matrix printers, the inclusion, with no citation of noteworthiness appears promotional. If an editor wants to add it back, go for it, so long as Tally can be cited as a significant contributor to early dot-matrix tech as was Centronics, Epson, OKI, etc. • Bobsd • ( talk) 16:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)