Product Reviews

At the end of 1997 two inkjets were launched that shook up the market with unheard-of resolution and print quality: the Epson Stylus Color 600 and 800. Last year was less dramatic. Epson's two main competitors - Lexmark and HP - caught up, and the three continued to up the ante in the quality stakes. But it was a year of consolidation and refinement, rather than dramatic technological advance. So it is with HP's latest printer, the DeskJet 880C, which replaces the 720C (reviewed in our December 1998 issue).

Like the 720C, and the rest of HP's DeskJet range, the 880C's maximum resolution is still a mere 600x600dpi, compared to Lexmark's 1,200x1,200 and Epson's 1,440x720 (as with the Stylus Photo 750, reviewed on page 45). However, HP claims that its refined PhotoREt II system, which enables the printer to vary the size of ink droplets fired at the page and, therefore, the colour intensity, means that the many ink tones and high resolutions favoured by other manufacturers are not required.

The differences between the 880C and the 720C are threefold. First, the 880C can now fire even smaller dots at the page, right down to a claimed eight picolitres per dot. This should mean less ink bleed and saturation on cheaper paper, as well as smoother and more subtle shading. The second is the printer's use of pigmented black ink, which means crisper, blacker and generally more laser-like text output on all paper types. Lexmark's inkjets

ADVERTISEMENT

have been using the same recipe for some time now, producing the best inkjet text output around.

Third, the 880C has shrunk. It retains the same elegant front-loading feed tray of most HP inkjets, a system that locates the input tray where most inkjets have their output trays. The paper is fed through a tight, U-shaped paper path and emerges at the front as well. The 880C takes up even less space than the already compact 720C.

Installation is via parallel port or USB (the latter requiring Windows 98 or 95 OSR 2.1). USB installation wasn't as smooth as it should have been, but was at least aided by a nice setup poster. Build quality is up to HP's high standards.

As you might expect, the small improvements over the 720C equate to a similarly minimal advance in print quality. To the inexperienced, the 880C looks impressive: its photographic reproduction is good on glossy, as well as coated and plain paper, and you have to look hard before distinguishing the dots. But despite HP's every effort, it seems it cannot keep up with Epson on this front. Placed next to photographic output from the Stylus Photo 750, that of the 880C looks darker, over-saturated with colour and a lot coarser. Details, especially in dark areas, are missed by the 880C where the 750 picks them up, and lighter areas of shading begin to look distinctly 'dotty' on close inspection.

Happily, the HP has its strong points: text printing and speed. The use of pigment-based ink gives very black, crisp text. And the 880C produced 25 pages of text in around six and a half minutes - an impressive four pages per minute. It also printed a full size A4 photograph on glossy paper at maximum resolution in ten minutes: nearly three minutes faster than the Epson 750.

At just £219, the 880C performs well for the price. If you want the very best print quality, you will be better off with the Epson Stylus Photo 750. But if you want still very good quality at higher speed - for instance, in a home office environment - the 880C is hard to beat.