Page 1 of 1

Slow Printing from MLS on LaserJet 1320

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 7:57 pm
by russjones
Our ward was just given a new LaserJet 1320 from the stake for our MLS computer. I used the HP install CD and the drivers installed with no problem. When we print reports or directories the print jobs take much longer than with our old LaserJet 1020. It will print one page, pause, print another page. It is quite a long process. I looked at the settings on the printer and it shows 16 MB of memory on the printer but only 5.58 MB available. The print jobs of the directories are sometimes 15 - 20 MB. So my guess is the printer is running out of memory.

Any thoughts on how to remedy this?

Thanks,
Russ Jones

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:15 pm
by WelchTC
Check out [thread=253]this thread[/thread].

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:18 pm
by daddy-o-p40
We ran into a similar issue in our stake. I'd call MLS support and ask them if this is related to the printer driver. I specifically remember a PCL5 vs PCL6 driver issue.

Slow printing HP 1300 - solved

Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 10:41 pm
by rickhellewell-p40
Change to the PCL5 driver (download from www.hp.com). This will speed up printing quite a bit.

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:33 pm
by bhofmann
In our situation, the printer was hooked up with a serial cable and updating drivers didn't help. We share the building with another ward and they changed to a USB cable and things went much faster.

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 3:54 pm
by russellhltn
bhofmann wrote:In our situation, the printer was hooked up with a serial cable and updating drivers didn't help.
I didn't think any modern laser printers supported serial.

I'd think parallel should be fast enough, but it may depend on what mode it was operating in.

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:42 am
by bhofmann
RussellHltn wrote:I didn't think any modern laser printers supported serial.

I'd think parallel should be fast enough, but it may depend on what mode it was operating in.
It might be parallel because it is a fairly new printer(2 years old). Let's just say it was not USB and changing it to USB seemed to help.

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:31 pm
by russellhltn
bhofmann wrote:Let's just say it was not USB and changing it to USB seemed to help.
It may depend on the printer or computer port. I ran tests with an older printer (I think a 1300). You'd need a stop watch to see the difference - if any.