I need a mac compatible printer!

[chaslu]

I just bought my first imac desktop OS X and my old printer isn't compatible. I keep thinking I find a model, read the reviews and get confused all over again. I'm not particularly computer savvy...I just want a printer/scanner/copier that is easy to use, reliable, mac compatible, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Can anyone out there help me?

 

[Raz0rEdge]

Pretty much any printer should be Mac compatible..which printer do you have that isn't??

I've got a Brother HLN-2070N that I bought a long time before my Mac, and I can use that no problem from my Mac and my Linux machine before and from my wife's Win 7 laptop..

Just at first glance, this printer seems to fit your needs:
Newegg.com - HP Officejet 6500 Wireless CB057A Up to 32 ppm Up to 4800 x 1200 optimized dpi Wireless Thermal Inkjet MFC / All-In-One Color Printer - Printer - Inkjet Printers

Regards

 

[chscag]

When you go to the store to shop for a printer for your Mac, be sure to read the ads and info to see if it includes drivers and software for OS X. If it doesn't, stay away from it. Also make sure the drivers support the version of OS X you have or can be downloaded from the manufacturer's web site. (Probably Snow Leopard 10.6.X)

Generally, both HP and Canon are pretty good about supplying drivers and software for Mac OS X. I can't speak for other brands but I'm sure others will chime in and give you their say on it.

Regards.

 

[Collin Bl]

Third one i have ended up has been the simplest to set up and keep running and the Brother MMFC 885CW it will do wireless scanning from both the iMacs on our LAN. Ink seems to last and not be expensive as previous printers.
Just as an aside with Snow Leopard you can run Image Capture <in Apps folder> and use that for scanning - don't even need the Brother software.

 

[chas_m]

Broadly speaking, all Epson, Canon, Brother, HP and Lexmark printer are likely to be supported by Snow Leopard by this point.

It's far harder to find a consumer printer that ISN'T supported than one that is.

 

[bobtomay]

I would encourage you to look for a network printer.

In a house with multiple computers, having your printer connected to the router is a vastly superior solution and well worth the extra $50 or so that the printer will cost you.

 

[Chud]

Watch out for Brother MFC lasers though, as I have somewhat limited functionality with the MBP compared to the PC on the network. Even with all of the latest drivers straight from the Brother website I don't have the ability to manually duplex directly from the print page. I now have to print odd pages first, then reverse printing order and print the even pages. Of course that all depends on if I can get the MBP to actually print at all. Often it cannot find the printer, and when it does, the printer may go through a preparation cycle and then never print anything. If it does print, it will print one.......page........at.......a......time........

My PC desktop is about 8 years old and prints flawlessly through the network at high speed. Brother was not supporting Snow Leopard for a while and from what I am experiencing it would seem they are still not.

 

[osxx]

What bobtomay said it is the easiest and most trouble free way to go that allows for
all the functions besides complete status of ink,paper and diagnostics or at least thats
been my experience.

 

[Rottie]

I just bought my first imac desktop OS X and my old printer isn't compatible. I keep thinking I find a model, read the reviews and get confused all over again. I'm not particularly computer savvy...I just want a printer/scanner/copier that is easy to use, reliable, mac compatible, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Can anyone out there help me?

Hi there,

I use an Epson SX515W All In One (Printer/Scanner/Copier), which has the following connectivity options:
USB
Ethernet (10/100 interface)
WiFi

Can't recommend the printer highly enough.

Hope this info helps.

 

[PapaNoHair]

I use an Epson NX515 and love it. Epson seems to play with Mac better then the HP's that I have used in the past.