I have enormous respect for dot matrix printers. They're easy to repair and service, the tech is relatively simple, it's cheap, it's parts are cheap, its supplies are cheap. It's way more sustainable than any other printer: both the printer itself in its manufacturing and the ribbons themselves. The waste they produce is also much less polluting than any other printer.

▲

hn_throwaway_99 an hour ago | parent [-]

They also kind of suck. I'm not one for "the latest and greatest", but their output quality is atrocious compared to modern printers, they're loud AF, and I'm guessing it may have existed but I never saw a dot matrix that didn't have the perforated edge for feeding.

▲

WhyNotHugo 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Dot matrix can handle regular A4 paper since the late nineties.

They're noisier than ink printers, but non-industrial quality can be pretty reasonable for office-level noises.

Quality certainly isn't on par with laser printers, but for text (both Latin and CJK), it's perfectly clear.

▲

taneq 39 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I think that’s a product of their time rather than the dot matrix tech itself. Paper feeding is hard. Tractor strips made it easier.

	▲	dragontamer 23 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Dot Matrix are still used in outdoor / high humidity environments in USA. A lot of car shops with regular 100% humidity conditions will swear by dot matrix + tractor for feeding paper + printing. Plus, the carbon copy forms are guaranteed to be exact carbon copies which also leads to legal guarantees about copies of paper being provably exactly the same in the court of law.
	▲	bitwize 15 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Pen plotters could accept sheets of A4 and very precisely position them since at least the 80s. I'm surprised that dot-matrix printers didn't adopt similar technologies sooner, though it could be because by the mid-80s dot-matrix printers were the budget option, fanfold paper with the tractor strips was still abundant, and it was much easier to just stick with the cheaply manufacturable technologies rather than take the risk of innovation with a product that wouldn't sell upmarket anyway.