A caution on Canon printers

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
wrotenews:hG13e.5379$FN4.1033@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:

> There is a big difference. The 5th Photo dye black cartridge enhances
> many of the prints. You are not mixing black from the color ink tanks.
> It is on sale after rebate at Frys for $100.00.
>
> Mapanari wrote:
>
>>"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrotenews:Qb16d.9719$0j.86@lakeread07:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I just got the iP4000 and love it.
>>>Had an old S520 (4 years old) that started grinding about 1 in 10 times
>>>I would use it after kids yanked a paper jam out of it.
>>>After calling to see if cost effective to get repaired Canon offered me
>>>10% off the iP4000 and shipped it next day to my door free of charge.
>>>Not a bad printer for $137 !!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>I just bought the iP3000 because I see not much diference between the
>>two and I paid $52 shipping to my door, after $20 rebate.
>>
>>So far I like it, but will letchew all no later....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

When you are a top posting geekazoid, no one has a clue to what you are
talking about or whom you're responding to.

Top posting makes you look, well, like an AOL refugee or a former WebTVer.

--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

PC Medic wrote:

> "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns962DA3A7349D1mapi@216.168.3.64...
>
>>David Chien <chiendh@uci.edu> wrotenews:d2keo3$pv$2@news.service.uci.edu:
>>
>>
>>>>Yah, that's like battery and tire warrenties or class action suits
>>>>payouts...worthless.
>>>
>>> With most new inkjet printers easily on sale for <$50 (ie. the price
>>>of a new set of color + black ink cartridge), why even worry?!?
>>>
>>> When it breaks or even runs out of ink, simply toss the old printer
>>>(or donate), and buy a new one! Can be cheaper than buying a new set of
>>>cartridges (when the sales have printers going for <$40), and you'll
>>>never have to worry about breaking the printer!
>>>
>>> =)
>>>
>>> Heck, I'd just stock up on replacement printers instead of cartridges
>>>even with sales! (ie. instead of swapping out used for new carts,
>>>simply swap out old for new printer)
>>>
>>
>>Eyup.
>>
>>I've got a handful of Canon carts here from printers people just threw
>>away, and I refilled them and if I get low on my printing, I just pop open
>>the lid and walla! Fresh carts for me! Pennies to refill.
>>
>
>
> eyaup, then when the printhead clogs you run to the forum and slam the
> printer manufacture because the printer you pumped 3rd party ink through
> clogged.
>

We may, if it's the printer's fault.

I use non OEM inks and do not observe this clogging phenomenon that you
keep scaring people with. My old Epson 740, yes. It would clog the
minute you turned your back. So we know it's not the ink, it's the
printer.

-Taliesyn

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns962DA3A7349D1mapi@216.168.3.64...

snipped

> My big question is, can I use the BJ6 blk cart (pigment) in my iP3000 BJ3
> blk (dye) slot and print with that instead?
>
> The iP4000 has a seperate cart slot for both.
> The iP3000 is almost the exact same printer, but only a slot for one blk
> BJ3 cart.
> --
> ---Mapanari---

This was answered by me a few days ago in one of your previous postings. The
answer to the above is NO!!!!
BJ6 blk cart (pigment)??? I think you mean BCI-6 and those are dye based
cartridges, not pigment. The iP3000 does not have a slot for a BCI-6BK. It
only has three slots for BCI-6 tanks and they are cyan, magenta and yellow.
Black is a composite of the three and in some instances the pigmented black
from the BCI-3eBK is also used. Notice the size difference between the
BCI-3eBK and a BCI-6 tank. The BCI-3 is almost double the width of the
BCI-6. To say the iP3000 is almost the exact same printer as the iP4000 is
true only in regards to the exterior case and the fact that both are labeled
Canon. Since the printhead is the heart of an inkjet, there is a
considerable difference between a four tank model and a five tank model.
Saying they are almost the exact same printer would be similar to saying a 4
cyl Honda Accord is the same as a V6 Accord. Both look the same on the
outside, both run great but the engines are totally different.
--
Ron Cohen

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Now, wait a minute here... How do we "know it's not the ink, it's the
printer."

Are you claiming you are using the same ink in your Canon printer as you
were using in your Epson 740?

Is so, then you are/were using a wrong formulation in one or both.
However, if you are stating you used 3rd party inks in both the Epson
740 and the Canon and only the Epson clogged, perhaps the problem was
that the 3rd party ink used in the Epson wasn't as compatible as the ink
used in the Canon ink? Is it even from the same source? Or maybe you
didn't refill the Epson cartridges properly and they developed air
pockets, or maybe...

I don't know how you can draw the conclusion you do, not to mention the
740 came out 7 years ago.

Art


Taliesyn wrote:


>
> We may, if it's the printer's fault.
>
> I use non OEM inks and do not observe this clogging phenomenon that you
> keep scaring people with. My old Epson 740, yes. It would clog the
> minute you turned your back. So we know it's not the ink, it's the
> printer.
>
> -Taliesyn

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in message news:<V%_3e.13751$%d7.8712@lakeread03>...
> >
> > I've been in and around the computer business since 1985 and I can tell
> > you
> > that Canon has always been known for this scurvy trick of the printheads.
> >
>
Well, you know what. Things have gotten more interesting. That Epson
C86 I bought six months ago is now my third C86. Yes, two printers
have failed within that timeframe, failing to print yellow and
magenta. Exact same fault with them both after only light use. (yes, I
did print every week, thanks, just to keep the heads ticking over!).
I'm also fifty guid (that's 100 USD) down in 'genuine Epson'
cartridges because all the head cleans and reservoir primes done to
try & fix the two printers consumed a full set of cartridges. I've
posted more about this on another thread. Meanwhile the Samsung laser
printer I bought (for 50 quid) is soldiering on nicely. A new toner
catridge for this is the price of the printer but I plan to refill it
- after all, what have I got to lose?.

I kinda wish Kyocera would go into the inkjet market since they
apparently have the lowest consumable cost for laser printers (so they
say).

As for Canon. Look, you made the printhead replaceable. It just clips
in. Then you cunningly decided not to make it available as an end-user
consumable after all, so that apart from having to order it specially
from Canon resellers, it costs a fortune. That's not terribly ethical,
ok?. I hope, when this damn planet starts to fry, you realise that in
your own small, mean-minded way,you helped destroy the environment.

 

[Larry]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <2b20cd9f.0504041309.4aef0ff3@posting.google.com>, ajmayo@my-
deja.com says...
> As for Canon. Look, you made the printhead replaceable. It just clips
> in. Then you cunningly decided not to make it available as an end-user
> consumable after all, so that apart from having to order it specially
> from Canon resellers, it costs a fortune. That's not terribly ethical,
> ok?. I hope, when this damn planet starts to fry, you realise that in
> your own small, mean-minded way,you helped destroy the environment.
>

They (CANON) made it replaceable so that any time during the warranty you
could call 'em up and they could send one to you.

I believe they are still warrantying for a year arent they???

If it quits after a year, go buy the replacement model.

Epson requires service to replace the print head, not a good idea as far as
Im concerned.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:11518g05omc9709@corp.supernews.com...
> PC Medic wrote:
>
>> "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns962DA3A7349D1mapi@216.168.3.64...
>>
>>>David Chien <chiendh@uci.edu> wrotenews:d2keo3$pv$2@news.service.uci.edu:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Yah, that's like battery and tire warrenties or class action suits
>>>>>payouts...worthless.
>>>>
>>>> With most new inkjet printers easily on sale for <$50 (ie. the price
>>>>of a new set of color + black ink cartridge), why even worry?!?
>>>>
>>>> When it breaks or even runs out of ink, simply toss the old printer
>>>>(or donate), and buy a new one! Can be cheaper than buying a new set of
>>>>cartridges (when the sales have printers going for <$40), and you'll
>>>>never have to worry about breaking the printer!
>>>>
>>>> =)
>>>>
>>>> Heck, I'd just stock up on replacement printers instead of cartridges
>>>>even with sales! (ie. instead of swapping out used for new carts,
>>>>simply swap out old for new printer)
>>>>
>>>
>>>Eyup.
>>>
>>>I've got a handful of Canon carts here from printers people just threw
>>>away, and I refilled them and if I get low on my printing, I just pop
>>>open
>>>the lid and walla! Fresh carts for me! Pennies to refill.
>>>
>>
>>
>> eyaup, then when the printhead clogs you run to the forum and slam the
>> printer manufacture because the printer you pumped 3rd party ink through
>> clogged.
>>
>
> We may, if it's the printer's fault.
>
> I use non OEM inks and do not observe this clogging phenomenon that you
> keep scaring people with. My old Epson 740, yes. It would clog the minute
> you turned your back. So we know it's not the ink, it's the
> printer.
>

Not scaring (or even trying to scare) anyone about the use of 3rd party
inks.
It just amuses me how many I see come here and to other groups or forums
whining about printer manufactures and the lousy printers they make cause it
dies after only 6 months, has poor quality prints, etc. only to find they
are using 3rd party inks and papers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Larry" <lastingimagery@comcast.dotnet> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cbb7a7a343440fe98996f@news.comcast.giganews.com...
> In article <2b20cd9f.0504041309.4aef0ff3@posting.google.com>, ajmayo@my-
> deja.com says...
>> As for Canon. Look, you made the printhead replaceable. It just clips
>> in. Then you cunningly decided not to make it available as an end-user
>> consumable after all, so that apart from having to order it specially
>> from Canon resellers, it costs a fortune. That's not terribly ethical,
>> ok?. I hope, when this damn planet starts to fry, you realise that in
>> your own small, mean-minded way,you helped destroy the environment.
>>
>
> They (CANON) made it replaceable so that any time during the warranty you
> could call 'em up and they could send one to you.
>
> I believe they are still warrantying for a year arent they???

Yes they are and get the 2 year extended for another $49 as I did and it
also covers the printhead. So I have nothing to worry about but ink for 3
years.
>
> If it quits after a year, go buy the replacement model.
>

And at a discount shipped to your door.

> Epson requires service to replace the print head, not a good idea as far
> as
> Im concerned.
>

Epson isn't a good idea based on my experience. Though that was many years
back.

 

[Larry]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <8Kk4e.13846$%d7.5714@lakeread03>, NOT@home.net says...
>
> Epson isn't a good idea based on my experience. Though that was many years
> back.
>

I have an Epson (R200) as well as all my Canons, and I only got it because it
prints cds/dvds. If it werent for that, I wouldnt have bought it.. I do use
it for photo prints too, but only to keep the print head clear.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In general you can clean a clogged Epson printhead at home,
inexpensively and easily.

The heads usually (although not always) outlast other parts of the printer.

Art


Larry wrote:

> In article <2b20cd9f.0504041309.4aef0ff3@posting.google.com>, ajmayo@my-
> deja.com says...
>
>>As for Canon. Look, you made the printhead replaceable. It just clips
>>in. Then you cunningly decided not to make it available as an end-user
>>consumable after all, so that apart from having to order it specially
>>from Canon resellers, it costs a fortune. That's not terribly ethical,
>>ok?. I hope, when this damn planet starts to fry, you realise that in
>>your own small, mean-minded way,you helped destroy the environment.
>>
>
>
> They (CANON) made it replaceable so that any time during the warranty you
> could call 'em up and they could send one to you.
>
> I believe they are still warrantying for a year arent they???
>
> If it quits after a year, go buy the replacement model.
>
> Epson requires service to replace the print head, not a good idea as far as
> Im concerned.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
wrotenews:u_84e.171157$fc4.121992@edtnps89:

> Interesting...
>
> I've owned a 880 since it came out. I have used both Epson and 3rd
> party ink cartridges with it, though I never bothered to refill any
> (yet). For someone who has no time, or patience, as you claim, I'm
> amazed how you "wasted" all that time refilling cartridges. I have no
> idea what type of ink you used, if you had a clue how to refill Epson
> cartridges, how old the ink was you used, etc. I can tell you the
> description you supply is typical of problems due to incorrectly filling
> the cartridges (creating air pockets), or using cartridges that have
> been refilled so many times that the sponges in them have become clogged
> with dried ink.
>
> Oh... the punch line... I have literally NEVER had to as much as run a
> cleaning cycle on the 880 (other than the cycle it does on start up).
> The 880 is one of, if not my best, Epson printer in terms of ease of use
> and low ink usage.
>
> It appears you had a printer that worked "fine" for about a year on 3rd
> party refill inks. I'm guessing during that year, you went through
> numerous refills, and probably never replaced the cartridges once.
>
> BTW: does "about a year" mean more than a year, or less than one? The
> manufacturer's warranty is typically one year. As to paying $35 to ship
> it, you have expensive shipping in your part of the world, I guess, and,
> you got the printer for less than the cost of the ink cartridges (or
> apparently, the cost of shipping it once), so I'm amazed at how angry
> you are about it.
>
> LOL,
>
> Art
>
>

I'm angry because I used to sell them, like I already tolt ya, and they
were nothing but problem and mediocre to ok printing.

I've had HP most of the time and I've never had the constant problems all
the time with them, and Consumer Reports bears me out.

In this last month's issue, HP and Canon are way on top and all the epsons
and Lexmarks round out the bottom.

The one I bought happens to be the second best Canon there is, and an HP
was top, but the diference is basically consumer preferences between the
two.

And btw...I printed out a photo on photo paper, borderless btw, with my
Canon, and it looks better actually than Ritz Camera (wait 6 days for
developing) prints!

I'm angry because I was constantly hassling with that POS and now I'm happy
and will never, ever, never ever buy another POS Epson again, nor a
Lexmark.

--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrotenews:11518g05omc9709
@corp.supernews.com:

> PC Medic wrote:
>
>> "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns962DA3A7349D1mapi@216.168.3.64...
>>
>>>David Chien <chiendh@uci.edu> wrotenews:d2keo3$pv$2
@news.service.uci.edu:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Yah, that's like battery and tire warrenties or class action suits
>>>>>payouts...worthless.
>>>>
>>>> With most new inkjet printers easily on sale for <$50 (ie. the price
>>>>of a new set of color + black ink cartridge), why even worry?!?
>>>>
>>>> When it breaks or even runs out of ink, simply toss the old printer
>>>>(or donate), and buy a new one! Can be cheaper than buying a new set
of
>>>>cartridges (when the sales have printers going for <$40), and you'll
>>>>never have to worry about breaking the printer!
>>>>
>>>> =)
>>>>
>>>> Heck, I'd just stock up on replacement printers instead of
cartridges
>>>>even with sales! (ie. instead of swapping out used for new carts,
>>>>simply swap out old for new printer)
>>>>
>>>
>>>Eyup.
>>>
>>>I've got a handful of Canon carts here from printers people just threw
>>>away, and I refilled them and if I get low on my printing, I just pop
open
>>>the lid and walla! Fresh carts for me! Pennies to refill.
>>>
>>
>>
>> eyaup, then when the printhead clogs you run to the forum and slam the
>> printer manufacture because the printer you pumped 3rd party ink through
>> clogged.
>>
>
> We may, if it's the printer's fault.
>
> I use non OEM inks and do not observe this clogging phenomenon that you
> keep scaring people with. My old Epson 740, yes. It would clog the
> minute you turned your back. So we know it's not the ink, it's the
> printer.
>
> -Taliesyn
>

People who scream and shrill like little raped 9 year old girls about bulk
ink and aftermarket carts are either working for one of those printer
companies, stupid, have to pee sitting down and are in 1st grade or all the
above.

Then there is the common phenom of "ownership" where people take ownership
of a brand and get "brand loyalty" because they need to defend their
purchase so as not to look or appear stupid.

This is why morons run around telling us how reliable their Dodges are and
how you must use Monster Cable and that Sony is the best and Lava soap is
much much better and Irish Spring soap.

Someone buys an Epson, and it seems to work ok, and then if it has some
problems they have to defend it instead of being rational and a man and
owning up to making a mistake; they continue instead to defend it.

It's a common phenom....like voting: Most people surveyed say that most
politicans can't be trusted and they're all crooks; and yet when asked
about their own congressman, "Oh, he's diferent, I like him!".

Ownership.

--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrotenews:9Gk4e.13845$%d7.5636@lakeread03:


>
> Not scaring (or even trying to scare) anyone about the use of 3rd party
> inks.
> It just amuses me how many I see come here and to other groups or forums
> whining about printer manufactures and the lousy printers they make
> cause it dies after only 6 months, has poor quality prints, etc. only to
> find they are using 3rd party inks and papers.
>
>
>
>

Oh, so now it's the big bad paper's fault also?

Must be that offbrand Weyerhauser paper that is 89 bright instead of 90
bright!

Speaking of being amused.....



--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrotenews:%2%3e.13754$%d7.7000@lakeread03:

>
> "David Chien" <chiendh@uci.edu> wrote in message
> news:d2keo3$pv$2@news.service.uci.edu...
>>> Yah, that's like battery and tire warrenties or class action suits
>>> payouts...worthless.
>>
>> With most new inkjet printers easily on sale for <$50 (ie. the price
>> of
>> a new set of color + black ink cartridge), why even worry?!?
>>
>> When it breaks or even runs out of ink, simply toss the old printer
>> (or
>> donate), and buy a new one! Can be cheaper than buying a new set of
>> cartridges (when the sales have printers going for <$40), and you'll
>> never have to worry about breaking the printer!
>>
>> =)
>>
>> Heck, I'd just stock up on replacement printers instead of cartridges
>> even with sales! (ie. instead of swapping out used for new carts,
>> simply swap out old for new printer)
>
> This may make sense if you are always buying the bottom of the line
> models.
>
>
>

Yah, those crafty manufacturers, using the same carts in all their models
but somehow the $50 printer is soooo much less quality than the $400
printer!

I actually would pay extra if a printer would come out with a coffee holder
some day!


--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I never argue with people's successes. If you found some printers that
meet your needs and accomplish what you wish, I think that's great.

However, your simplification of the Epson story based upon your
experience with one printer, and the inconsistencies within your story
leave me having to defend the product.

You can prefer on brand over another, and do so with personal good
reason. When you make blanket statements that are not accurate in
general (such as the ones you made about the ink and gasoline) and you
offer suspect comments on your printer, I am left having to question
your motives.

The reason there is so much disagreement about inkjet printers is
because there is no perfect inkjet printer on the market (yet, at
least). Each brand has certain features and drawbacks, most of which
have been argued ad infinitum here. I only wish people to find the
correct product that best suits their individual needs. Image
permanent, quality, speed of printing, reliability and cost of printer
and consumables, availability of various consumables, etc, all enter
into the equation.

Basically, inkjet printing is not about black or white, but a gradient
of greys ;-)

Art

Mapanari wrote:

> Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
> wrotenews:u_84e.171157$fc4.121992@edtnps89:
>
>
>>Interesting...
>>
>>I've owned a 880 since it came out. I have used both Epson and 3rd
>>party ink cartridges with it, though I never bothered to refill any
>>(yet). For someone who has no time, or patience, as you claim, I'm
>>amazed how you "wasted" all that time refilling cartridges. I have no
>>idea what type of ink you used, if you had a clue how to refill Epson
>>cartridges, how old the ink was you used, etc. I can tell you the
>>description you supply is typical of problems due to incorrectly filling
>>the cartridges (creating air pockets), or using cartridges that have
>>been refilled so many times that the sponges in them have become clogged
>>with dried ink.
>>
>>Oh... the punch line... I have literally NEVER had to as much as run a
>>cleaning cycle on the 880 (other than the cycle it does on start up).
>>The 880 is one of, if not my best, Epson printer in terms of ease of use
>>and low ink usage.
>>
>>It appears you had a printer that worked "fine" for about a year on 3rd
>>party refill inks. I'm guessing during that year, you went through
>>numerous refills, and probably never replaced the cartridges once.
>>
>>BTW: does "about a year" mean more than a year, or less than one? The
>>manufacturer's warranty is typically one year. As to paying $35 to ship
>>it, you have expensive shipping in your part of the world, I guess, and,
>>you got the printer for less than the cost of the ink cartridges (or
>>apparently, the cost of shipping it once), so I'm amazed at how angry
>>you are about it.
>>
>>LOL,
>>
>>Art
>>
>>
>
>
> I'm angry because I used to sell them, like I already tolt ya, and they
> were nothing but problem and mediocre to ok printing.
>
> I've had HP most of the time and I've never had the constant problems all
> the time with them, and Consumer Reports bears me out.
>
> In this last month's issue, HP and Canon are way on top and all the epsons
> and Lexmarks round out the bottom.
>
> The one I bought happens to be the second best Canon there is, and an HP
> was top, but the diference is basically consumer preferences between the
> two.
>
> And btw...I printed out a photo on photo paper, borderless btw, with my
> Canon, and it looks better actually than Ritz Camera (wait 6 days for
> developing) prints!
>
> I'm angry because I was constantly hassling with that POS and now I'm happy
> and will never, ever, never ever buy another POS Epson again, nor a
> Lexmark.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

That first paragraph is just plan offensive in about 10 different ways.

Even if the rest of the posting has something to say, I imagine you lost
a big section of your potential audience by your opening comments.

Art

Mapanari wrote:


>
>
> People who scream and shrill like little raped 9 year old girls about bulk
> ink and aftermarket carts are either working for one of those printer
> companies, stupid, have to pee sitting down and are in 1st grade or all the
> above.
>
> Then there is the common phenom of "ownership" where people take ownership
> of a brand and get "brand loyalty" because they need to defend their
> purchase so as not to look or appear stupid.
>
> This is why morons run around telling us how reliable their Dodges are and
> how you must use Monster Cable and that Sony is the best and Lava soap is
> much much better and Irish Spring soap.
>
> Someone buys an Epson, and it seems to work ok, and then if it has some
> problems they have to defend it instead of being rational and a man and
> owning up to making a mistake; they continue instead to defend it.
>
> It's a common phenom....like voting: Most people surveyed say that most
> politicans can't be trusted and they're all crooks; and yet when asked
> about their own congressman, "Oh, he's diferent, I like him!".
>
> Ownership.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Certainly some papers will lead to poor quality prints (which is what
the poster states) and I'll go a step further and suggest they might
also lead to early failure of the dye inks.

Art

Mapanari wrote:

> "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrotenews:9Gk4e.13845$%d7.5636@lakeread03:
>
>
>
>>Not scaring (or even trying to scare) anyone about the use of 3rd party
>>inks.
>>It just amuses me how many I see come here and to other groups or forums
>>whining about printer manufactures and the lousy printers they make
>>cause it dies after only 6 months, has poor quality prints, etc. only to
>>find they are using 3rd party inks and papers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Oh, so now it's the big bad paper's fault also?
>
> Must be that offbrand Weyerhauser paper that is 89 bright instead of 90
> bright!
>
> Speaking of being amused.....
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
wrotenews:rxa6e.20892$7Q4.13680@clgrps13:


> However, your simplification of the Epson story based upon your
> experience with one printer, and the inconsistencies within your story
> leave me having to defend the product.

> Art


\.................


>>
>> I'm angry because I used to sell them, like I already tolt ya, and they
>> were nothing but problem and mediocre to ok printing.
>>
>> I've had HP most of the time and I've never had the constant problems
>> all the time with them, and Consumer Reports bears me out.
>>
>> In this last month's issue, HP and Canon are way on top and all the
>> epsons and Lexmarks round out the bottom.
>>
>> The one I bought happens to be the second best Canon there is, and an
>> HP was top, but the diference is basically consumer preferences between
>> the two.
>>
>> And btw...I printed out a photo on photo paper, borderless btw, with my
>> Canon, and it looks better actually than Ritz Camera (wait 6 days for
>> developing) prints!
>>
>> I'm angry because I was constantly hassling with that POS and now I'm
>> happy and will never, ever, never ever buy another POS Epson again, nor
>> a Lexmark.
>>
>


What part of this post of mine did you have your reading comprehension
problem with? 1st paragraph? Last? All?

"Simplification"? Wtf more do you want? President Bush, twenty two
dancing nakid transgender simpletons waving red flags and pointing to the
bottom of my post and in the background an upwelling sound track from the
movie "Gladiator", with starburst shells going off all around and neon
signs shattering with bursts of electronic sparks?

--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net> wrotenews:7Fa6e.20895$7Q4.2304
@clgrps13:

> Certainly some papers will lead to poor quality prints (which is what
> the poster states) and I'll go a step further and suggest they might
> also lead to early failure of the dye inks.
>
> Art
>

Oh the horror! The adversity of it all! Dos wasscally pwapers!

Acid papers, exploding papers, cheap paper, unformulated paper, knockoff
paper, refurbished paper, returned and put back into brand new shrink wrap
paper!
Ex toilet paper recycled and oh my gosh, can it be? The Gutenburg bible
paper washed in bleach and sold on the black market to those wily chinks
who turned around and packaged it up as photo paper by simply diping them,
and the papyri they got from Egypt, into a simmering bath of mongolian
sheppard's urine and white clay, then dried on the show boat over here and
sold to unsuspecting Americans!

The horror of it all.
There otter be a law.



--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
wrotenews:OCa6e.20894$7Q4.101@clgrps13:

> That first paragraph is just plan offensive in about 10 different ways.
>
> Even if the rest of the posting has something to say, I imagine you lost
> a big section of your potential audience by your opening comments.
>
> Art
>
> Mapanari wrote:
>
>
My usage of harse visual usage bothers you? Have you ever asked yourself
why?




--
---Mapanari---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I shmucks could fly

you would be squadron leader.

Mapanari wrote:

>Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net> wrotenews:7Fa6e.20895$7Q4.2304
>@clgrps13:
>
>
>
>>Certainly some papers will lead to poor quality prints (which is what
>>the poster states) and I'll go a step further and suggest they might
>>also lead to early failure of the dye inks.
>>
>>Art
>>
>>
>>
>
>Oh the horror! The adversity of it all! Dos wasscally pwapers!
>
>Acid papers, exploding papers, cheap paper, unformulated paper, knockoff
>paper, refurbished paper, returned and put back into brand new shrink wrap
>paper!
> Ex toilet paper recycled and oh my gosh, can it be? The Gutenburg bible
>paper washed in bleach and sold on the black market to those wily chinks
>who turned around and packaged it up as photo paper by simply diping them,
>and the papyri they got from Egypt, into a simmering bath of mongolian
>sheppard's urine and white clay, then dried on the show boat over here and
>sold to unsuspecting Americans!
>
>The horror of it all.
>There otter be a law.
>
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The posting is full of generalizations and inaccuracies, and you mislead
by omission. Come to think of it, this is a pattern with you.

Go ahead and call me a bunch of foul names, if it makes you feel better.
It adds to the quality of your credibility ;-)

Art

Mapanari wrote:

> Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
> wrotenews:rxa6e.20892$7Q4.13680@clgrps13:
>
>
>
>>However, your simplification of the Epson story based upon your
>>experience with one printer, and the inconsistencies within your story
>>leave me having to defend the product.
>
>
>>Art
>
>
>
> \.................
>
>
>
>>>I'm angry because I used to sell them, like I already tolt ya, and they
>>>were nothing but problem and mediocre to ok printing.
>>>
>>>I've had HP most of the time and I've never had the constant problems
>>>all the time with them, and Consumer Reports bears me out.
>>>
>>>In this last month's issue, HP and Canon are way on top and all the
>>>epsons and Lexmarks round out the bottom.
>>>
>>>The one I bought happens to be the second best Canon there is, and an
>>>HP was top, but the diference is basically consumer preferences between
>>>the two.
>>>
>>>And btw...I printed out a photo on photo paper, borderless btw, with my
>>>Canon, and it looks better actually than Ritz Camera (wait 6 days for
>>>developing) prints!
>>>
>>>I'm angry because I was constantly hassling with that POS and now I'm
>>>happy and will never, ever, never ever buy another POS Epson again, nor
>>>a Lexmark.
>>>
>>
>
>
> What part of this post of mine did you have your reading comprehension
> problem with? 1st paragraph? Last? All?
>
> "Simplification"? Wtf more do you want? President Bush, twenty two
> dancing nakid transgender simpletons waving red flags and pointing to the
> bottom of my post and in the background an upwelling sound track from the
> movie "Gladiator", with starburst shells going off all around and neon
> signs shattering with bursts of electronic sparks?
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net> wrotenews:X6M7e.28734$VF5.24979@edtnps89:

> Gee, Mapanari, you should certainly be judging Michael Dell, after all,
> I'm sure you are a self made billionaire and also see the future with a
> crystal ball.

I don't have to be a child molestor to know it's wrong, nor do I have to be a
woman to know that giving birth is painful.

You're a typical lightwieght....your only recourse in a one sided arguement
that you're losing badly, is to come out with your trump card "Well, if
you're not a bowling ball, how can you possibly know what its like to be
one?".


--
---Mapanari---

 

[BURT]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:q835e.20474$zl.4472@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> PC Medic wrote:
>
>>"Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:1153snth2tn3u5a@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>>>>>eyaup, then when the printhead clogs you run to the forum and slam the
>>>>>>printer manufacture because the printer you pumped 3rd party ink
>>>>>>through clogged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>We may, if it's the printer's fault.
>>>>>
>>>>>I use non OEM inks and do not observe this clogging phenomenon that you
>>>>>keep scaring people with. My old Epson 740, yes. It would clog the
>>>>>minute you turned your back. So we know it's not the ink, it's the
>>>>>printer.
>>>>>
>
> Maybe and maybe not! There are a lot of people out there who buy ink from
> many sources. It is quite possible that a few of the sources sell ink
> from some manufacturer that will pose far less problems it at all. The
> rest are sold by a bunch of hawkers and whores who just want to make a
> buck at anyones expense. Even the few that cause little or no problems
> may not be consistent from batch to batch. www.inksupply.com, touted by
> neil slade, had problems with their yellow ink and ruined a whole bunch of
> Canon Printheads.

Sorry, Measie - it wasn't MIS yellow that was a problem. Go back and read
those posts again. It was another vendor. Are you having short term memory
problems? Early dementia? OR is this just a bit of your own confusion that
you gleefully spread on the NG.
>
(snip)

 

[BURT]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The good Transalvania Doctor did me a great favor when he put this 71 year
old brain in my 25 year old body. Just think about that combination - The
experience and wisdom to see through all your nonsense and the youthfulness
to withstand your withering but futile attacks and continue to fight for the
rights of people on this NG to get the truth instead of your (hopefully well
intentioned, but) illogical line of reasoning. You, on the other hand,
seem to have the ossified gray matter of someone much older than me who
stubbornly holds on to a view regardless of the facts, and the behavior of a
ten year old in a playground shouting match with many of your unkind and
crude retorts.

BTW, just remember, Noah was an amatuer, the Titanic was built by
professionals. Don't put too much stock in how a web site looks.

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:FMkbe.6948$J12.1040@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>Call me anything you like. That would put me in good company with all the
>>other people you've dissed. just try to be accurate when you give advice
>>on the NG. Glad my 71 year old brain stored enough data to point out
>>your error.
>
> And how old are you? :-D
>
>>I would hate to see a company suffer unfairly because of one of your
>>posts.
(snip)