Canon I850 Ink Question

[Guest]

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

Maybe I'm using the wrong term when I say generic ink. It was cartiridges
that were made for Cannon printers and supposedly Cannon ink. Since it
wasn't Genuinue Cannon cartridges I referred to them as "generics." I order
the cartridges for cleaning the printer from the site you posted. I didn't
order any ink since I thought I better just make sure I can get the printer
going first. I'm keeping my fingers crossed since the place where I work
closed so I'm out of a job for now and won't have the extra money for a
printer. :-(
I appreciate all the help I've received for this group. I'll let you know
how I make out.

Gayle

 

[Guest]

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

"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in message
news:1hCQc.11592$Bb.225@lakeread08...
>
> "beezer" <beezer@rezeeb.moc> wrote in message
> news:9me5h05hjmk9l86d99qn5ujcu7bpjfdr2r@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:34:22 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
> >
> > >The OEM carts for this and all S, i and IP series have a break away
twist
> > >off cap which can not be re-attached (unless you care to glue it on!)
> >
> >
> > Thats silly
> >
>
> What's silly ???? The fact that someone thinks you can place these break
> away caps back on forming the needed air tight seal (which you can not). I
> don't find it half as silly as forcing harsh cleaners into the intake
ports
> on a precision printhead. Amazes me how many will do this and then post in
> these groups about the poor print quality they experienced with their
brand
> XXX printer.
> Or advice like don't by the generics, but instead get the bulk inks
> recommended by people here in the newsgroup. If you are buying bulk non
OEM,
> you are buying generic.
>

Thanks for setting all of us straight about the the caps. If you hadn't
given us the final and authoratative word, most of us would have blissfully
gone on our ignorant and uninformed path of successfully reusing the caps
and holding them on with rubber bands. I guess we'll all just have to quit
doing what has worked for years and only buy new OEM cartridges. How could
we have been so stupid?

Now, can you also explain why bulk ink from a known quality source equals
generic? Do you mean generic in the sense that all ink regardless of the
intended printer model comes from the same batch? Or do you mean generic as
in it has the same properties and formulation as OEM, but is manufactured by
a third party? Is that any different than with pharmaceuticals? Is there a
difference between brand name products Advil and Motrin vs. ibuprofen or
Benedryl vs. dyphenhydramine?

--
Ron Cohen


---
AVG reports Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 8/4/2004

 

[Guest]

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

"beezer" <beezer@rezeeb.moc> wrote in message
news:qmu5h01n3mvi0v8ooj8od9ugpetnadl8d1@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 22:45:37 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
>
> >What's silly ???? The fact that someone thinks you can place these break
> >away caps back on forming the needed air tight seal (which you can not).
I
> >don't find it half as silly as forcing harsh cleaners into the intake
ports
> >on a precision printhead. Amazes me how many will do this and then post
in
> >these groups about the poor print quality they experienced with their
brand
> >XXX printer.
> >Or advice like don't by the generics, but instead get the bulk inks
> >recommended by people here in the newsgroup. If you are buying bulk non
OEM,
> >you are buying generic.
>
>
>
> Buying proven generics that are formulated and matched to meet the
> standards of OEM ink is completely different than buying inks that
> claim to work in ALL printers...
>
> You do not know what you buy with those "Works in all printers" inks.
> Are they pigmented, too thick, too thin? who knows. If you buy
> formulabs ink which is proven time and time again, thats a different
> story.

Agreed, in the respect that no ink can possibly be formulated to provide
'optimum' results in all printers as there are different delivery methods in
use and even in the printers that use heat different temp requirements based
on drop size. I will also agree that many are successful with their use of
3rd party inks for varying lengths of time. From experience though I have
witnessed more failures from those that use them than those that do not.

>
> Used caps reinstalled with rubberbands offer as much or more
> compression as the original seal. Surely after 16 months of use I
> would have noticed leaking or drying if they were not.



>
> People don't want to buy a new printhead due to a difficult clog or
> brand new OEM ink when they run out. What they do want in here is
> economical refilling information and proven repair techniques.
>
> People come here for solutions to lower their cost of operation or
> perhaps fix their mistakes of buying unproven inks that cause
> clogging. They do not come here to be told to buy retail OEM products
> for their printers, thats a no brainer.
>

People come here to get solutions yes, saying they come here looking for 3rd
party ink is plain wrong. Many in fact are not aware till they come here and
someone tries to peddal their wares to them that they even exist.

>
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 07:29:15 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:

>
>Agreed, in the respect that no ink can possibly be formulated to provide
>'optimum' results in all printers as there are different delivery methods in
>use and even in the printers that use heat different temp requirements based
>on drop size. I will also agree that many are successful with their use of
>3rd party inks for varying lengths of time. From experience though I have
>witnessed more failures from those that use them than those that do not.

I am sure that is true. Afterall, television commercials, websites and
department stores offer kits that consumers are more readily to
purchase which may lead to failure.



>People come here to get solutions yes, saying they come here looking for 3rd
>party ink is plain wrong. Many in fact are not aware till they come here and
>someone tries to peddal their wares to them that they even exist.

I can not fully agree to that statement. I answered many posts from
people looking for ink cost relief. This is due to the fact that
refilling a printer with OEM inks result in 50 percent or more of the
retail cost of a new printer which is rediculous.

To help lighten the cost burden, myself and many others highly
recommend several distributors that offer these high quality inks at a
much lower cost than OEM. Time and time again, these inks provide
fantastic quality and perormance.

I certainly respect your opinons and experience of recommending OEM
products and supplies but quite frankly, I for one could not afford
them. I purchase proven papers at a mere cost of 30 cent per sheet
and inks at $3 per refill. I could not afford to purchase $60 of ink
per month along with $50 worth of paper.

Honestly, I never had a clog and I like the printer run its own
cleaning sequence. I do not initialize manual maintenance at all.

I did keep all my test photos (many many of them) from my OEM ink when
the printer was new. I continually compare the same photos and so far
my non OEM paper and ink still look as good as OEM paper and ink 18
months later.

Do I care if they last 30 yrs? naw. Im sure I will be reprinting as I
always do when new technology becomes available.

 

[Guest]

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

"Ron Cohen" <drc023@N^O+S~P^A^M.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news😛nDQc.2622$e22.326@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in message
> news:1hCQc.11592$Bb.225@lakeread08...
> >
> > "beezer" <beezer@rezeeb.moc> wrote in message
> > news:9me5h05hjmk9l86d99qn5ujcu7bpjfdr2r@4ax.com...
> > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:34:22 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >The OEM carts for this and all S, i and IP series have a break away
> twist
> > > >off cap which can not be re-attached (unless you care to glue it on!)
> > >
> > >
> > > Thats silly
> > >
> >
> > What's silly ???? The fact that someone thinks you can place these break
> > away caps back on forming the needed air tight seal (which you can not).
I
> > don't find it half as silly as forcing harsh cleaners into the intake
> ports
> > on a precision printhead. Amazes me how many will do this and then post
in
> > these groups about the poor print quality they experienced with their
> brand
> > XXX printer.
> > Or advice like don't by the generics, but instead get the bulk inks
> > recommended by people here in the newsgroup. If you are buying bulk non
> OEM,
> > you are buying generic.
> >
>
> Thanks for setting all of us straight about the the caps. If you hadn't
> given us the final and authoratative word, most of us would have
blissfully
> gone on our ignorant and uninformed path of successfully reusing the caps
> and holding them on with rubber bands. I guess we'll all just have to quit
> doing what has worked for years and only buy new OEM cartridges. How could
> we have been so stupid?

Your words not mine.
My response was prompted by several statements that you can place the cap
back on achieving the *same* air tight seal. This is simply NOT true. While
you may infact be using a rubber band, tape, nail gun or what ever you
choose to re attach the cap it is NOT as air tight as the original seal.

>
> Now, can you also explain why bulk ink from a known quality source equals
> generic? Do you mean generic in the sense that all ink regardless of the
> intended printer model comes from the same batch? Or do you mean generic
as
> in it has the same properties and formulation as OEM, but is manufactured
by
> a third party? Is that any different than with pharmaceuticals? Is there a
> difference between brand name products Advil and Motrin vs. ibuprofen or
> Benedryl vs. dyphenhydramine?
>

I can not explain why bulk ink from a known quality source *equals* generic
because not all inks are equal.
I can tell you that if you purchase an ink that is not contained in the
OEM's cartridge or tank (at least in the case of Canon) then you are buying
generic (also referred to as 3rd Party). This is because they do not sell
their ink in bulk to outside vendors so anything else would be a knock off
and not the original. In many cases YES the generics state they will work in
various models and manufactures printers. This IMO would definitely be one
to avoid as anyone that knows printers knows there are different delivery
methods of the ink from the printhead and therefore no 'one ink fits all'
solution. To answer this part of your question though I was referring to 3rd
party inks that claim to have the same properties and formulations as the
OEM. Each manufacture spends enormous amounts of money in to printhead
design and exacting formulation of an ink to provide optimum results with
that printhead on a given paper. Needless to say these formulas are well
guarded. So while they may be close to the OEM they are no more the SAME
than Coke or Pepsi.
As for your comparison with pharmaceuticals, sometimes there is NO
difference, sometimes there is. This is a totally different area with
different regulations and yes some actually license their formula to others.
Not the case with the Canon ink.

 

[Guest]

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

"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in news:X0TQc.12765$Bb.6443@lakeread08:

>
> "Ron Cohen" <drc023@N^O+S~P^A^M.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>
>
> I can not explain why bulk ink from a known quality source *equals*
> generic because not all inks are equal.
> I can tell you that if you purchase an ink that is not contained in
> the OEM's cartridge or tank (at least in the case of Canon) then you
> are buying generic (also referred to as 3rd Party). This is because
> they do not sell their ink in bulk to outside vendors so anything else
> would be a knock off and not the original. In many cases YES the
> generics state they will work in various models and manufactures
> printers. This IMO would definitely be one to avoid as anyone that
> knows printers knows there are different delivery methods of the ink
> from the printhead and therefore no 'one ink fits all' solution. To
> answer this part of your question though I was referring to 3rd party
> inks that claim to have the same properties and formulations as the
> OEM. Each manufacture spends enormous amounts of money in to printhead
> design and exacting formulation of an ink to provide optimum results
> with that printhead on a given paper. Needless to say these formulas
> are well guarded. So while they may be close to the OEM they are no
> more the SAME than Coke or Pepsi.
> As for your comparison with pharmaceuticals, sometimes there is NO
> difference, sometimes there is. This is a totally different area with
> different regulations and yes some actually license their formula to
> others. Not the case with the Canon ink.
>
>

As far as I know neither Canon (nor anyone else for that matter)
make their own inks. They're all manufactured by large (yes, 3rd
party) commercial ink manufactures to each printer manufacturer's
specifications. These commercial ink manufacturers are the experts
in the printing ink field, not printer makers. They obviously work
with the printer makers to come up with a stable formula.

Naturally, the formula is under licence and thus can't be sold
to wholesalers. But nothing stops them from altering the formula
a trace to make sales to wholesalers legit. Formulabs has often
been mentioned as one of these companies.

 

[Guest]

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

Ron Cohen wrote:
>
> "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in message
> news:1hCQc.11592$Bb.225@lakeread08...
> >
> > "beezer" <beezer@rezeeb.moc> wrote in message
> > news:9me5h05hjmk9l86d99qn5ujcu7bpjfdr2r@4ax.com...
> > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:34:22 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >The OEM carts for this and all S, i and IP series have a break away
> twist
> > > >off cap which can not be re-attached (unless you care to glue it on!)
> > >
> > >
> > > Thats silly
> > >
> >
> > What's silly ???? The fact that someone thinks you can place these break
> > away caps back on forming the needed air tight seal (which you can not). I
> > don't find it half as silly as forcing harsh cleaners into the intake
> ports
> > on a precision printhead. Amazes me how many will do this and then post in
> > these groups about the poor print quality they experienced with their
> brand
> > XXX printer.
> > Or advice like don't by the generics, but instead get the bulk inks
> > recommended by people here in the newsgroup. If you are buying bulk non
> OEM,
> > you are buying generic.
> >
>
> Thanks for setting all of us straight about the the caps. If you hadn't
> given us the final and authoratative word, most of us would have blissfully
> gone on our ignorant and uninformed path of successfully reusing the caps
> and holding them on with rubber bands. I guess we'll all just have to quit
> doing what has worked for years and only buy new OEM cartridges. How could
> we have been so stupid?
>
> Now, can you also explain why bulk ink from a known quality source equals
> generic? Do you mean generic in the sense that all ink regardless of the
> intended printer model comes from the same batch? Or do you mean generic as
> in it has the same properties and formulation as OEM, but is manufactured by
> a third party? Is that any different than with pharmaceuticals? Is there a
> difference between brand name products Advil and Motrin vs. ibuprofen or
> Benedryl vs. dyphenhydramine?
>
> --
> Ron Cohen
>
> ---
> AVG reports Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 8/4/2004

Ah, you missed another one of those nonsense arguments, specifically
that the same model brand name refrigerator sold by K-Mart or other
mass marketer is inferior to the machine bought at an upscales
appliance or home furnishing store.

 

[Guest]

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

"George E. Cawthon" <GeorgeC-Boise@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:411425E5.732F9354@worldnet.att.net...
>
>
> Ron Cohen wrote:
> >
> > "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in message
> > news:1hCQc.11592$Bb.225@lakeread08...
> > >
> > > "beezer" <beezer@rezeeb.moc> wrote in message
> > > news:9me5h05hjmk9l86d99qn5ujcu7bpjfdr2r@4ax.com...
> > > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:34:22 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >The OEM carts for this and all S, i and IP series have a break away
> > twist
> > > > >off cap which can not be re-attached (unless you care to glue it
on!)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thats silly
> > > >
> > >
> > > What's silly ???? The fact that someone thinks you can place these
break
> > > away caps back on forming the needed air tight seal (which you can
not). I
> > > don't find it half as silly as forcing harsh cleaners into the intake
> > ports
> > > on a precision printhead. Amazes me how many will do this and then
post in
> > > these groups about the poor print quality they experienced with their
> > brand
> > > XXX printer.
> > > Or advice like don't by the generics, but instead get the bulk inks
> > > recommended by people here in the newsgroup. If you are buying bulk
non
> > OEM,
> > > you are buying generic.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for setting all of us straight about the the caps. If you hadn't
> > given us the final and authoratative word, most of us would have
blissfully
> > gone on our ignorant and uninformed path of successfully reusing the
caps
> > and holding them on with rubber bands. I guess we'll all just have to
quit
> > doing what has worked for years and only buy new OEM cartridges. How
could
> > we have been so stupid?
> >
> > Now, can you also explain why bulk ink from a known quality source
equals
> > generic? Do you mean generic in the sense that all ink regardless of the
> > intended printer model comes from the same batch? Or do you mean generic
as
> > in it has the same properties and formulation as OEM, but is
manufactured by
> > a third party? Is that any different than with pharmaceuticals? Is there
a
> > difference between brand name products Advil and Motrin vs. ibuprofen or
> > Benedryl vs. dyphenhydramine?
> >
> > --
> > Ron Cohen
> >
> > ---
> > AVG reports Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 8/4/2004
>
> Ah, you missed another one of those nonsense arguments, specifically
> that the same model brand name refrigerator sold by K-Mart or other
> mass marketer is inferior to the machine bought at an upscales
> appliance or home furnishing store.

Ahh but in the case of inks you are NOT buying SAME make, brand, model.
In your example if you are then great, but that is RARELY the case as there
is usually some small change made to the product spec. In that type of
product though the change made has little impact on operation and often may
only be something in the line of only a 1 yr vs 3 yr warranty for example.

Let me also set something straight for all of you defensive 3rd party ink
marketers posing as 'I use it all the time it's great' consumers. I was not
knocking the use of 3rd party ink (though I do not use the stuff) there are
some good quality generics/3rd parties out there. I was simply pointing out
inaccuracies in the 'it's the exact same product' type statements. It is
misleading to those that do not know there is in fact a difference in
formulation and that it may have impact on quality or performance.

 

[Guest]

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

"Hipster" <hipster@dufous.net> wrote in message
news:WUTQc.80976$vX4.49303@cyclops.nntpserver.com...
> "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in news:X0TQc.12765$Bb.6443@lakeread08:
>
> >
> > "Ron Cohen" <drc023@N^O+S~P^A^M.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >>
> >
> > I can not explain why bulk ink from a known quality source *equals*
> > generic because not all inks are equal.
> > I can tell you that if you purchase an ink that is not contained in
> > the OEM's cartridge or tank (at least in the case of Canon) then you
> > are buying generic (also referred to as 3rd Party). This is because
> > they do not sell their ink in bulk to outside vendors so anything else
> > would be a knock off and not the original. In many cases YES the
> > generics state they will work in various models and manufactures
> > printers. This IMO would definitely be one to avoid as anyone that
> > knows printers knows there are different delivery methods of the ink
> > from the printhead and therefore no 'one ink fits all' solution. To
> > answer this part of your question though I was referring to 3rd party
> > inks that claim to have the same properties and formulations as the
> > OEM. Each manufacture spends enormous amounts of money in to printhead
> > design and exacting formulation of an ink to provide optimum results
> > with that printhead on a given paper. Needless to say these formulas
> > are well guarded. So while they may be close to the OEM they are no
> > more the SAME than Coke or Pepsi.
> > As for your comparison with pharmaceuticals, sometimes there is NO
> > difference, sometimes there is. This is a totally different area with
> > different regulations and yes some actually license their formula to
> > others. Not the case with the Canon ink.
> >
> >
>
> As far as I know neither Canon (nor anyone else for that matter)
> make their own inks. They're all manufactured by large (yes, 3rd
> party) commercial ink manufactures to each printer manufacturer's
> specifications. These commercial ink manufacturers are the experts
> in the printing ink field, not printer makers. They obviously work
> with the printer makers to come up with a stable formula.

Well here is your first problem, Canon (and one other I know of) do in fact
develope and produce their own inks.

>
> Naturally, the formula is under licence and thus can't be sold
> to wholesalers. But nothing stops them from altering the formula
> a trace to make sales to wholesalers legit. Formulabs has often
> been mentioned as one of these companies.

But as I have said already and you have just stated yourself, they alter the
formula. This means it is not the exact same quality as the OEM. And yes
when it comes to a 'slight' difference in ink formula, the results can be
significant.

 

[Guest]

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

PC Medic wrote:
> "Hipster" <hipster@dufous.net> wrote in message
> news:WUTQc.80976$vX4.49303@cyclops.nntpserver.com...
>
>>"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in news:X0TQc.12765$Bb.6443@lakeread08:
>>
>>
>>>"Ron Cohen" <drc023@N^O+S~P^A^M.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>
>>>I can not explain why bulk ink from a known quality source *equals*
>>>generic because not all inks are equal.
>>>I can tell you that if you purchase an ink that is not contained in
>>>the OEM's cartridge or tank (at least in the case of Canon) then you
>>>are buying generic (also referred to as 3rd Party). This is because
>>>they do not sell their ink in bulk to outside vendors so anything else
>>>would be a knock off and not the original. In many cases YES the
>>>generics state they will work in various models and manufactures
>>>printers. This IMO would definitely be one to avoid as anyone that
>>>knows printers knows there are different delivery methods of the ink
>>>from the printhead and therefore no 'one ink fits all' solution. To
>>>answer this part of your question though I was referring to 3rd party
>>>inks that claim to have the same properties and formulations as the
>>>OEM. Each manufacture spends enormous amounts of money in to printhead
>>>design and exacting formulation of an ink to provide optimum results
>>>with that printhead on a given paper. Needless to say these formulas
>>>are well guarded. So while they may be close to the OEM they are no
>>>more the SAME than Coke or Pepsi.
>>>As for your comparison with pharmaceuticals, sometimes there is NO
>>>difference, sometimes there is. This is a totally different area with
>>>different regulations and yes some actually license their formula to
>>>others. Not the case with the Canon ink.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>As far as I know neither Canon (nor anyone else for that matter)
>>make their own inks. They're all manufactured by large (yes, 3rd
>>party) commercial ink manufactures to each printer manufacturer's
>>specifications. These commercial ink manufacturers are the experts
>>in the printing ink field, not printer makers. They obviously work
>>with the printer makers to come up with a stable formula.
>
>
> Well here is your first problem, Canon (and one other I know of) do in fact
> develope and produce their own inks.
>
>
>>Naturally, the formula is under licence and thus can't be sold
>>to wholesalers. But nothing stops them from altering the formula
>>a trace to make sales to wholesalers legit. Formulabs has often
>>been mentioned as one of these companies.
>
>
> But as I have said already and you have just stated yourself, they alter the
> formula. This means it is not the exact same quality as the OEM. And yes
> when it comes to a 'slight' difference in ink formula, the results can be
> significant.

Ah but, but be careful. When you say "quality", it doesn't mean better
quality ingredients, it merely means the percentage of any one basic
industrial ingredient (which is what they are!) is slightly different.
There is no "exactly correct formula". They are all merely formulas that
provide, as mentioned, stable, relatively long-lasting, generally not
too clogging formulas. You cannot mathematically work out on paper the
perfect formula. That's an impossibilty! You can to some degree, but you
still have to play around with the igredients for a long time until
you're relatively happy that you've produced a suitable "standard"
product that actually works and isn't too harmful on the print head.

And for an ounce of that so called "original OEM" ink they want your
first born! Not if I can help it. I still have two photos side by
side (5x7), made a year and a half ago, one made with Canon ink and the
other with ink from Atlantic Inkjet. They are absolutely identical -
still. The Canon cartridges will set me back $100 CDN. A refill of the
4 cartridges using Atlantic's bulk inks, $5 CDN. With the money I'm
saving (about $1000 in ink last year), I can afford to buy the latest
printer model instead of wasting the money on ink.

-Talieyn

 

[Guest]

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

"Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:4114E6F6.6060508@netscape.net...
> PC Medic wrote:
> > "Hipster" <hipster@dufous.net> wrote in message
> > news:WUTQc.80976$vX4.49303@cyclops.nntpserver.com...
> >
> >>"PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote in news:X0TQc.12765$Bb.6443@lakeread08:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Ron Cohen" <drc023@N^O+S~P^A^M.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>I can not explain why bulk ink from a known quality source *equals*
> >>>generic because not all inks are equal.
> >>>I can tell you that if you purchase an ink that is not contained in
> >>>the OEM's cartridge or tank (at least in the case of Canon) then you
> >>>are buying generic (also referred to as 3rd Party). This is because
> >>>they do not sell their ink in bulk to outside vendors so anything else
> >>>would be a knock off and not the original. In many cases YES the
> >>>generics state they will work in various models and manufactures
> >>>printers. This IMO would definitely be one to avoid as anyone that
> >>>knows printers knows there are different delivery methods of the ink
> >>>from the printhead and therefore no 'one ink fits all' solution. To
> >>>answer this part of your question though I was referring to 3rd party
> >>>inks that claim to have the same properties and formulations as the
> >>>OEM. Each manufacture spends enormous amounts of money in to printhead
> >>>design and exacting formulation of an ink to provide optimum results
> >>>with that printhead on a given paper. Needless to say these formulas
> >>>are well guarded. So while they may be close to the OEM they are no
> >>>more the SAME than Coke or Pepsi.
> >>>As for your comparison with pharmaceuticals, sometimes there is NO
> >>>difference, sometimes there is. This is a totally different area with
> >>>different regulations and yes some actually license their formula to
> >>>others. Not the case with the Canon ink.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>As far as I know neither Canon (nor anyone else for that matter)
> >>make their own inks. They're all manufactured by large (yes, 3rd
> >>party) commercial ink manufactures to each printer manufacturer's
> >>specifications. These commercial ink manufacturers are the experts
> >>in the printing ink field, not printer makers. They obviously work
> >>with the printer makers to come up with a stable formula.
> >
> >
> > Well here is your first problem, Canon (and one other I know of) do in
fact
> > develope and produce their own inks.
> >
> >
> >>Naturally, the formula is under licence and thus can't be sold
> >>to wholesalers. But nothing stops them from altering the formula
> >>a trace to make sales to wholesalers legit. Formulabs has often
> >>been mentioned as one of these companies.
> >
> >
> > But as I have said already and you have just stated yourself, they alter
the
> > formula. This means it is not the exact same quality as the OEM. And yes
> > when it comes to a 'slight' difference in ink formula, the results can
be
> > significant.
>
> Ah but, but be careful. When you say "quality", it doesn't mean better
> quality ingredients, it merely means the percentage of any one basic
> industrial ingredient (which is what they are!) is slightly different.
> There is no "exactly correct formula". They are all merely formulas that
> provide, as mentioned, stable, relatively long-lasting, generally not
> too clogging formulas. You cannot mathematically work out on paper the
> perfect formula. That's an impossibilty! You can to some degree, but you
> still have to play around with the igredients for a long time until
> you're relatively happy that you've produced a suitable "standard"
> product that actually works and isn't too harmful on the print head.
>

When you say quality it can in fact mean either or both. This would depend
on the manufacture and how much they are willing to put into R&D to produce
a product that meats their exact quality standards (playing around as you
call it). And yes at the high end these formulas are very stringent, so
'exact' is not an unacceptable term to use. They (the OEM's) also tend to
formulate for best results with their paper and of course in their
particular printheads and that is why they often if not always recommend use
of their papers. Of course there is a marketing aspect, but papaer
recommendation is not ALL sales pitch as some would think. Photo papers
containg varying sizes of pores and the ink and droplet size is geared for a
specific type paper. Add to this the various types of coating used on the
glossy paper types and these all will interact diffently with different
inks. Certain inks may cause a magenta hue when used on a particular paper
requiring driver adjustments. Others may cause a cyan hue.

> And for an ounce of that so called "original OEM" ink they want your
> first born! Not if I can help it. I still have two photos side by
> side (5x7), made a year and a half ago, one made with Canon ink and the
> other with ink from Atlantic Inkjet. They are absolutely identical -
> still. The Canon cartridges will set me back $100 CDN. A refill of the
> 4 cartridges using Atlantic's bulk inks, $5 CDN. With the money I'm
> saving (about $1000 in ink last year), I can afford to buy the latest
> printer model instead of wasting the money on ink.

Again, I agree there may be some suitable inks out there for various people
and uses, but the formulas are not exact and that was what my comments were
about. By the way not sure what Canon Ink you are paying that for, but if
that is an honest figure that is more than 200% the cost in the U.S. even
with the exchange rate. I generally pay about $35 for a set on average.

 

[Guest]

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

PC Medic wrote:
> "Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:4114E6F6.6060508@netscape.net...
>
>
>>And for an ounce of that so called "original OEM" ink they want your
>>first born! Not if I can help it. I still have two photos side by
>>side (5x7), made a year and a half ago, one made with Canon ink and the
>>other with ink from Atlantic Inkjet. They are absolutely identical -
>>still. The Canon cartridges will set me back $100 CDN. A refill of the
>>4 cartridges using Atlantic's bulk inks, $5 CDN. With the money I'm
>>saving (about $1000 in ink last year), I can afford to buy the latest
>>printer model instead of wasting the money on ink.
>
>
> Again, I agree there may be some suitable inks out there for various people
> and uses, but the formulas are not exact and that was what my comments were
> about. By the way not sure what Canon Ink you are paying that for, but if
> that is an honest figure that is more than 200% the cost in the U.S. even
> with the exchange rate. I generally pay about $35 for a set on average.
>

In my neighborhood Canon BCI-3e and BCI-6 cartridges go for about $23
CDN (plus tax), each. We have 2 sales taxes, totaling 15%. That's $25.
I cannot afford Canon's ink, I must use compatible. Now if there was
a noticeable difference in print quality or the ink was obviously
causing my printer (print head) problems, I could see your point and
really wouldn't have an argument. But right now I'm getting the same
satisfying results with my compatible bulk inks as I would from
Canon brand inks - except I'm paying only about 5% of the cost of Canon
ink.

And even if there was some small chance of the ink causing long term
damage to the print head. I don't really care. The money I'm saving in
a year pays for several next printers.

Yes, there are all kind of grades of inks out there. My general rule
of thumb is not to buy them via eBay and avoid (like the plague)
anything labeled Universal inks (good for all printers).

I've stuck with my favorite supplier for many years and have experienced
- filled the carts with their inks in all 4 printer brands. And in all
cases they worked and matched perfectly.

-Taliesyn

 

[Guest]

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

"Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:4115221F.4080700@netscape.net...
> PC Medic wrote:
> > "Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
> > news:4114E6F6.6060508@netscape.net...
> >
> >
> >>And for an ounce of that so called "original OEM" ink they want your
> >>first born! Not if I can help it. I still have two photos side by
> >>side (5x7), made a year and a half ago, one made with Canon ink and the
> >>other with ink from Atlantic Inkjet. They are absolutely identical -
> >>still. The Canon cartridges will set me back $100 CDN. A refill of the
> >>4 cartridges using Atlantic's bulk inks, $5 CDN. With the money I'm
> >>saving (about $1000 in ink last year), I can afford to buy the latest
> >>printer model instead of wasting the money on ink.
> >
> >
> > Again, I agree there may be some suitable inks out there for various
people
> > and uses, but the formulas are not exact and that was what my comments
were
> > about. By the way not sure what Canon Ink you are paying that for, but
if
> > that is an honest figure that is more than 200% the cost in the U.S.
even
> > with the exchange rate. I generally pay about $35 for a set on average.
> >
>
> In my neighborhood Canon BCI-3e and BCI-6 cartridges go for about $23
> CDN (plus tax), each. We have 2 sales taxes, totaling 15%. That's $25.
> I cannot afford Canon's ink, I must use compatible. Now if there was
> a noticeable difference in print quality or the ink was obviously
> causing my printer (print head) problems, I could see your point and
> really wouldn't have an argument. But right now I'm getting the same
> satisfying results with my compatible bulk inks as I would from
> Canon brand inks - except I'm paying only about 5% of the cost of Canon
> ink.
>
> And even if there was some small chance of the ink causing long term
> damage to the print head. I don't really care. The money I'm saving in
> a year pays for several next printers.
>
> Yes, there are all kind of grades of inks out there. My general rule
> of thumb is not to buy them via eBay and avoid (like the plague)
> anything labeled Universal inks (good for all printers).
>
> I've stuck with my favorite supplier for many years and have experienced
> - filled the carts with their inks in all 4 printer brands. And in all
> cases they worked and matched perfectly.
>

In your position I may do the same as it seems for some reason the attic is
paying a great deal more than we do down here in the states. I pay $8-9 for
color and about $11 for black OEM's and 4.5% tax so an entire set costs me
MUCH less than you pay for a single cart. I can't help but wonder how much
of this is retailer mark up though.

Again many find an ink that suits there needs, and if this is your case
great. I personally stick with the OEM's.

 

[Guest]

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

On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 15:57:47 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:

>Again many find an ink that suits there needs, and if this is your case
>great. I personally stick with the OEM's.


Thats the point. If they were affordable at the rate that people use
them, we would all use OEM inks. I would be happy to use them myself,
but as I stated earlier, I will not shell out 60 plus dollars per
month at the rate I use ink.

If I printed an occasional photo I would have no need of a descent
printer as to my delight I may very well be happy throwing it on a
floppy and use the department store machines. Also, if my volume was
quite low, I would definately have no problem using OEM inks either.

 

[TR]

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

On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:49:58 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:


>That's odd as Epson is the one that has the built in chip and in the EU it
>is now being banned. Can't see how this would happen with a Canon

I never suggested that Canon does. Do you just quote for the hell of
it but do not actually read what you are quoting before you reply or
is it some other infliction?

Here again is what you quoted me saying and what I did say:

>> The OEM's, or some of them at least, have tried to build anti
>> tampering and/or all sorts of foul schemes into their carts

To anyone with two brain cells to bang together, the part where you
are quoting me as saying "The OEM's, or some of them at least" does in
no way say or imply that Canon would do the same. The 'Qualifier' in
the quote is where I said and you quoted me as saying "or some of them
at least". Now we could get more basic here so you might be led to an
elementary understanding of what a 'Qualifier' is... but, I don't
really have the time. I went through all of that close to 50 years ago
when in elementary school. However, you really need to take the time
and study up on it.

Let me try an put it in more simple terms for you....

You should ACTUALLY read the message you are replying to, especially
if you are going to quote it in your reply.

Or.... if you are going to message that someone said something they
never did, at least have the intelligence to NOT quote what they
actually said.

TR

 

[Guest]

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

**snip**

> >
> > In my neighborhood Canon BCI-3e and BCI-6 cartridges go for about $23
> > CDN (plus tax), each. We have 2 sales taxes, totaling 15%. That's $25.
> > I cannot afford Canon's ink, I must use compatible. Now if there was
> > a noticeable difference in print quality or the ink was obviously
> > causing my printer (print head) problems, I could see your point and
> > really wouldn't have an argument. But right now I'm getting the same
> > satisfying results with my compatible bulk inks as I would from
> > Canon brand inks - except I'm paying only about 5% of the cost of Canon
> > ink.

**snip**

> In your position I may do the same as it seems for some reason the attic
is
> paying a great deal more than we do down here in the states. I pay $8-9
for
> color and about $11 for black OEM's and 4.5% tax so an entire set costs me
> MUCH less than you pay for a single cart. I can't help but wonder how much
> of this is retailer mark up though.
>

As a dealer I can speak with some authority on the markup - At my store the
BCI-3 sells for $20.38 and the BCI-6 at $17.00 (Canadian dollars, 15% HST
extra). I have a small store but receive buying group contract prices when
buying ink (read - I buy at a good price)....our margin on these cartridges
is less than 20%. On every $100 sale of these inks we make less than $20.00
To put some perspective on this I can sell a generic/3rd party/compatible
cartridge for $5.00 and make more money than I can selling the $20.00
original.

The margin on inkjet cartridges is clearly on the manufacturers' side.
Several years ago in a trade magazine I read that HP made a whopping 89%
margin on their cartridges - A cartridge that a retailers sells for $50.00
costs HP in the range of $3.00 to produce....ink, casing, printhead,
packaging...$3.00!

All the best,

Jeff H

 

[TR]

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

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:18:33 GMT, "Jeff H" <Iamnot@home.ca> wrote:

>Several years ago in a trade magazine I read that HP made a whopping 89%
>margin on their cartridges - A cartridge that a retailers sells for $50.00
>costs HP in the range of $3.00 to produce....ink, casing, printhead,
>packaging...$3.00!

That's exactly what type of thing I was referring to in my:

"Corn Hole! Bend over and let me sell you another one..."

statement. Before getting my i960, I ran an HP952c and know first
hand at what "Some" of these OEM's are doing to the buying public when
it comes to ink cart costs.

Actually, on an HP forum there was an HP ringer on there defending
everything HP did while he was swearing up and down that he didn't
have any association with HP. According to him, the high costs of OEM
carts reflect the high costs associated with research & development.
The same tired old excuse the drug manufacturers use when trying to
justify the cost of a pill that sells for $5/each in the US but only
sells for a fraction of the US price across the two boarders.

Okay, I know that there has to be some built-in costs to pay for the
"research & development" of any product... But.... The HP example of
an 89% margin is nothing more than rape no matter what the Spin
Miesters and Ringers say.

And, as I said in my previous message.... "Some" of these OEM's are
incorporating so much anti-tamper proofing technology into their carts
that they can't even keep them running right... even in the pure
OEM/untampered/Right out of the OEM package state. HP's seem to be
the worse according to Staples. That's why I at least went with a
Canon for my HP replacement. Even though they (Canon) drill you a new
one with each replacement cart cost, the carts are not a conglomerate
mass of electronics/micro resisters and what not such as built into HP
carts. The Canon carts are simply Ink Wells, easy to refill at a
decent price.

Regards,
TR

 

[Guest]

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

"Jeff H" <Iamnot@home.ca> wrote in message
news:d0vRc.90508$Np3.4385874@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> **snip**
>
> > >
> > > In my neighborhood Canon BCI-3e and BCI-6 cartridges go for about $23
> > > CDN (plus tax), each. We have 2 sales taxes, totaling 15%. That's $25.
> > > I cannot afford Canon's ink, I must use compatible. Now if there was
> > > a noticeable difference in print quality or the ink was obviously
> > > causing my printer (print head) problems, I could see your point and
> > > really wouldn't have an argument. But right now I'm getting the same
> > > satisfying results with my compatible bulk inks as I would from
> > > Canon brand inks - except I'm paying only about 5% of the cost of
Canon
> > > ink.
>
> **snip**
>
> > In your position I may do the same as it seems for some reason the attic
> is
> > paying a great deal more than we do down here in the states. I pay $8-9
> for
> > color and about $11 for black OEM's and 4.5% tax so an entire set costs
me
> > MUCH less than you pay for a single cart. I can't help but wonder how
much
> > of this is retailer mark up though.
> >
>
> As a dealer I can speak with some authority on the markup - At my store
the
> BCI-3 sells for $20.38 and the BCI-6 at $17.00 (Canadian dollars, 15% HST
> extra). I have a small store but receive buying group contract prices
when
> buying ink (read - I buy at a good price)....our margin on these
cartridges
> is less than 20%. On every $100 sale of these inks we make less than
$20.00
> To put some perspective on this I can sell a generic/3rd party/compatible
> cartridge for $5.00 and make more money than I can selling the $20.00
> original.
>
> The margin on inkjet cartridges is clearly on the manufacturers' side.
> Several years ago in a trade magazine I read that HP made a whopping 89%
> margin on their cartridges - A cartridge that a retailers sells for $50.00
> costs HP in the range of $3.00 to produce....ink, casing, printhead,
> packaging...$3.00!
>

And if you believe that you have a lot to learn about business and believing
everything you read.
As a small shop you are also not buying direct from HP. There has been at
least one (if not more) other mark-ups taken place before you received your
pricing. Even major retailers do not buy direct and instead receive through
a distributor. Each contact along the entire chain gets their share of the
pie. One of the things that makes OEM's less costly is many of the middle
men are out of the picture.

 

[Guest]

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

"TR" <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote in message
news😱e5dh0let3rpkms8m7tg8eouk5v3lcc7l7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:49:58 -0400, "PC Medic" <NOT@home.net> wrote:
>
>
> >That's odd as Epson is the one that has the built in chip and in the EU
it
> >is now being banned. Can't see how this would happen with a Canon
>
> I never suggested that Canon does. Do you just quote for the hell of
> it but do not actually read what you are quoting before you reply or
> is it some other infliction?

Uhh, you do remember this thread was about the CANON i850, or is your
OldTimers flaring up???
And by the way, you generalized with the term 'OEM's which last time I
checked would include Canon. While you may not have specifically qualified
them, you also did not disqualify them as in the term 'with the exception of
Canon'.

>
> Here again is what you quoted me saying and what I did say:
>
> >> The OEM's, or some of them at least, have tried to build anti
> >> tampering and/or all sorts of foul schemes into their carts
>
> To anyone with two brain cells to bang together, the part where you
> are quoting me as saying "The OEM's, or some of them at least" does in
> no way say or imply that Canon would do the same. The 'Qualifier' in
> the quote is where I said and you quoted me as saying "or some of them
> at least". Now we could get more basic here so you might be led to an
> elementary understanding of what a 'Qualifier' is... but, I don't
> really have the time. I went through all of that close to 50 years ago
> when in elementary school. However, you really need to take the time
> and study up on it.

Ahh see, I was right.
Fact is I was quite aware of what you said, I responded with fact about
Epson (off topic for this thread) and Canon (on topic for this thread). This
means I replied with mention of multiple manufactures. This would qualify as
a plural or in other words OEM's. I believe that is the term you used I had
just broke it out to two specific examples. My apologies as my intent was
not to confuse you and that was purely accidental.

>
> Let me try an put it in more simple terms for you....
>
> You should ACTUALLY read the message you are replying to, especially
> if you are going to quote it in your reply.
>
> Or.... if you are going to message that someone said something they
> never did, at least have the intelligence to NOT quote what they
> actually said.
>

You do realize that what you have just stated here is technically
impossible.
You perhaps should ACTUALLY think before you type. You should also learn
that sometimes proper etiquette dictates you only quote the 'relevant'
portion of the original text so as not to waste time and bandwidth.

 

[TR]

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

Look Kid, I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with something
that doesn't read the messages it replies to... It still stands...
Read before you answer or don't quote what you don't read. Now spin
it all you want kid but it still stands...

TR

 

[Guest]

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

>
> And if you believe that you have a lot to learn about business and
believing
> everything you read.
> As a small shop you are also not buying direct from HP. There has been at
> least one (if not more) other mark-ups taken place before you received
your
> pricing. Even major retailers do not buy direct and instead receive
through
> a distributor. Each contact along the entire chain gets their share of the
> pie. One of the things that makes OEM's less costly is many of the middle
> men are out of the picture.
>
>

You're right, I buy from a distributor who in turn buys from HP Canada.
Their margin ranges from 3 - 8% on HP consumables.

Jeff H

 

[Guest]

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

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:18:33 GMT, Jeff H wrote:
> As a dealer I can speak with some authority on the markup - At my store the
> BCI-3 sells for $20.38 and the BCI-6 at $17.00 (Canadian dollars, 15% HST
> extra). I have a small store but receive buying group contract prices when
> buying ink (read - I buy at a good price)....our margin on these cartridges
> is less than 20%. On every $100 sale of these inks we make less than $20.00
> To put some perspective on this I can sell a generic/3rd party/compatible
> cartridge for $5.00 and make more money than I can selling the $20.00
> original.

Aehm - please tell some stupid non-business man how this can happen.

I'll assume the BCI-3 as sell 20 $, buy 16 $, gain 4$.

Now I assume that you need the same space to store the cartridge, the
same time to handle over the cartridge to the customer - and you say,
you make more profit on a $5 cartridge? Thus you page LESS THAN $1 for
the 3rd party device?

Or do you want to say that you have more complaints for original parts,
complaining from you to Canon, more loss of unsatisfied customers etc.,
since $2 earned on generic is worth more than $4 earned on Canon?

Business seems to be very different in Northern America than in old
Europe?

> The margin on inkjet cartridges is clearly on the manufacturers' side.
> Several years ago in a trade magazine I read that HP made a whopping 89%
> margin on their cartridges - A cartridge that a retailers sells for $50.00
> costs HP in the range of $3.00 to produce....ink, casing, printhead,
> packaging...$3.00!

Still better than the margin on music CDs or medicine ;-)

> All the best,
Same to you,
Martin

 

[Guest]

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

"Martin Trautmann" <t-use@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnchf3vv.ngj.t-use@ID-685.user.individual.de...
> On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:18:33 GMT, Jeff H wrote:
> > As a dealer I can speak with some authority on the markup - At my store
the
> > BCI-3 sells for $20.38 and the BCI-6 at $17.00 (Canadian dollars, 15%
HST
> > extra). I have a small store but receive buying group contract prices
when
> > buying ink (read - I buy at a good price)....our margin on these
cartridges
> > is less than 20%. On every $100 sale of these inks we make less than
$20.00
> > To put some perspective on this I can sell a generic/3rd
party/compatible
> > cartridge for $5.00 and make more money than I can selling the $20.00
> > original.
>
> Aehm - please tell some stupid non-business man how this can happen.
>
> I'll assume the BCI-3 as sell 20 $, buy 16 $, gain 4$.
>

You're right on the money...so to speak. A quick search on ebay shows
several auction about to close where the price per cartridge is around $1.00
each.

The only secret to buying 3rd party cartridges at a really cheap price is
that you normally have to purchase several thousand at a time ;-)

Which begs the question....why do OEM cartridges have to be over 10X the
cost of 3rd party cartridges?

Whoops, time out...OEM ink is of course the benchmark to which 3rd party
inks can only hope to come reasonably close and it does give consistent and
predictable results, also I concede that it does help subsidize printer cost
and R&D - I think what we have been trying to hash out is, "Where is the
line between paying a (fair) premium and robbery?"

My whole argument was in response to the speculation that retailers could be
partly to blame for the dear prices on OEM ink cartridges. If that was true
then surely at least one of the major retailers would decide to lowball ink
for the sake of increased traffic but we don't see that happening. Why
don't we ever see "Regular $19.99 on sale for $6.99"? Because on the retail
side OEM ink is very competitive. On the distribution side (the middle-man
between Retail and Manufacturer) margins are even tighter. Logically, the
high margins must be on the manufacturers' side where competition is not so
much of a factor.

>Still better than the margin on music CDs or medicine ;-)

Maybe I should be charging a dispensing fee for ink sales :^)

Cheers,

Jeff H

 

[Guest]

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

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:37:17 GMT, Jeff H wrote:
> Which begs the question....why do OEM cartridges have to be over 10X the
> cost of 3rd party cartridges?

The customer is willing to pay it - regardless of the concept (lexmark
printers, razor blades, petroleum lamps, free mobile phones, ...).
However, I still wonder why I had to pay > $ 500 (1100 DM) for my HP
DeskWriter, while its cartridge is the same price as any other $50
printer ;-)

> My whole argument was in response to the speculation that retailers could be
> partly to blame for the dear prices on OEM ink cartridges. If that was true
> then surely at least one of the major retailers would decide to lowball ink
> for the sake of increased traffic but we don't see that happening. Why
> don't we ever see "Regular $19.99 on sale for $6.99"?

I don't know about the US market. Here in Germany there's only little
official price protection: one is on books, the other (becoming more and
more liberal, but still very high) is on medicine.

However, there may be plenty of pressure on the dealer when the
manufacturer does not like his low prices: they will just stop delivery
to him. Examples here are e.g. tools from 'Festool' or perfumes (which
are sometimes sold on disount - the first one to observe this will run
to the shop, purchase as much as possible and will get a refund from the
manufacturer; There are hidden details on the flacon in order to track
and close the channel how the dealer received this stuff).

I suppose, the first one to deliver original cartridges at low prices
will be out of stock very soon.

Regards
Martin

 

[Guest]

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

Thanks for all the help with my Cannon i850 printer it is finally up and
running. I was almost ready to give up when I decide to give it one more
try. beezer thanks so much for the link for the cleaning solution that is
what did the trick. I didn't clean up initially so I left the cartridges
with the solution in the printer for several days figuring it was kind of
like soaking them. Then I ran the deep cleaning program poped the
cartridges back in and Hooray!!!!! it printed fine. You can't imagine the
look on my face as the page came out with print on it. I sure hope I don't
have another experience like that again. So now I'm a happy camper. BTW I
don't print photos so quality is not of the utmost to me. I do testing for
a person that writes software lessons and print somewhere around 120 pages a
month. That is a lot of printing and no way could I afford to buy OEM.
Beezer you said your favorite site for ink is www.alotofthings.com but I
don't see any blank cartrides there can you tell me where you get your
blanks or do you purchase their cartridges that are already filled and just
refill them when they empty. Let me know so I can get this straightened out
since I don't want to do printing with the cartridges I have now. Not worth
taking a chance on them. Thanks again for all the help I learned a lot from
this group.

--
Gayle