which printer ?

G

Guest

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

Hi all, im looking for recomendations for a home printer that does good
quality photo prints but has reasonably cheap ink. is there such a thing ?

TIA

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

Before you make up your mind, read the BBC article!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3626373.stm

Then go to your local PC store and look at the printers.... ask for samples
to be printed, only you can choose which you think is the best.
--
Cari
MS-MVP Windows Technologies - Printing/Imaging/Hardware
www.coribright.com

"Chris 159" <temp@cdelectrics.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cavbbf$j3a$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Hi all, im looking for recomendations for a home printer that does good
> quality photo prints but has reasonably cheap ink. is there such a thing
> ?
>
> TIA
>
> chris
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

How good and how cheap? The photo quality only needs to please you, and of
course only you know how much you are willing to spend on ink.
Jim
"Chris 159" <temp@cdelectrics.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cavbbf$j3a$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Hi all, im looking for recomendations for a home printer that does good
> quality photo prints but has reasonably cheap ink. is there such a thing
?
>
> TIA
>
> chris
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I've heard this is a great printer for photos, but how is it
(quality/economy) for everyday document printing?

"B. Peg" <bent*pegs69noospam*@att.net> wrote in message
news:S9IAc.92182$Gx4.67906@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Canon i960. About $169 on sale. Refills around $12 each.
>
> B~
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 20:22:10 GMT, "B. Peg"
<bent*pegs69noospam*@att.net> wrote:

>Canon i960. About $169 on sale. Refills around $12 each.
>
>B~
>

dont forget the $30 mail in rebate coupon off the canon site....
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:6LGAc.6825$kt1.787@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...
> How good and how cheap? The photo quality only needs to please you, and
of
> course only you know how much you are willing to spend on ink.
> Jim


not for me - thats the problem. my aunty has asked me to find out which to
get.

basically as good as you can get but cheap compared with the likes of
lexmark (i know - almost everything is cheap compared to them)

its one of those kind of questions that's difficult to answer really isnt it
:-/
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Chris 159" (temp@cdelectrics.freeserve.co.uk) writes:
> "Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:6LGAc.6825$kt1.787@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...
>> How good and how cheap? The photo quality only needs to please you, and
> of
>> course only you know how much you are willing to spend on ink.
>> Jim
>
>
> not for me - thats the problem. my aunty has asked me to find out which to
> get.
>
> basically as good as you can get but cheap compared with the likes of
> lexmark (i know - almost everything is cheap compared to them)
>
> its one of those kind of questions that's difficult to answer really isnt it
> :-/
>
>


Not really, as long as you are willing to do the majority of your printing
in black and white. Buy whatever ink-jet you want (I'm a Lexmark user and
don't refill) BUT watch the sales until you find a $100 sale (usually
after rebate) on a laser. I print one or two color an evening and mostly
laser for e-mail etc. I only go through a set of Lexmark carts about
every 6 months and toner once a year. I've found Lexmark to be reliable,
if expensive to reload, although Target has made it easier with periodic
$27-$27 sales on all Lexmark carts.

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

$30 rebate fron Canon or Amazon. Net cost $150. I just bought one. Great
prints.

Sabu

"B. Peg" <bent*pegs69noospam*@att.net> wrote in message
news:S9IAc.92182$Gx4.67906@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Canon i960. About $169 on sale. Refills around $12 each.
>
> B~
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 20:22:10 GMT, "B. Peg"
<bent*pegs69noospam*@att.net> wrote:

>Canon i960. About $169 on sale. Refills around $12 each.
>
>B~

!? That's only $245 Australian. From what I've seen, it's double
that price here. Any Australians here know where to buy it cheaper?

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

I have been in the toner and inkjet business locally since 1991. The average
person can't tell the in the picture quality of Canon, Epson and HP. I
highly recommend the HP inkjet printer for quality and reliability. If
something goes wrong with a HP printer, it can
easily be fixed. Notice I don't mention Lexmark...When you don't have
anything good to say about a printer its better to say nothing. Pete

PS..If your buying Laser printers..HP is the only answer. Just ask any
person who repairs printers.


"Chris 159" <temp@cdelectrics.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cavbbf$j3a$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Hi all, im looking for recommendations for a home printer that does good
> quality photo prints but has reasonably cheap ink. is there such a thing
?
>
> TIA
>
> chris
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Pete,

I do service printers (not as much as 10 years ago, but still do). While
HP's are definitely the EASIEST to get repaired, I personally feel their
quality of construction and reliability has fallen dramatically since the
days of the Series II (SX Engine) days.

HP 4000's are Jam-factories. Rollers don't last any time at all, especially
pickup rollers.

Any of their printers that use the instant-on fusers with the mylar covers
have real-life reliability issues in this area. It takes absolutely nothing
to tear one of these mylar covers, and HP refuses to sell you a $2
replacement mylar. The insist on you purchasing a compete fuser at a cost
of several hundred dollars in the case of the LaserJet 4200.

And what business HP has putting that fuser in a so-called Corporate,
workgroup class printer is beyond me.

Electronically they are sound. Mechanically they have fallen off terribly.

IMHO.

-Larry

"Pete" <ppremock1@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:vO_Ac.361989$M3.71099@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> I have been in the toner and inkjet business locally since 1991. The
average
> person can't tell the in the picture quality of Canon, Epson and HP. I
> highly recommend the HP inkjet printer for quality and reliability. If
> something goes wrong with a HP printer, it can
> easily be fixed. Notice I don't mention Lexmark...When you don't have
> anything good to say about a printer its better to say nothing. Pete
>
> PS..If your buying Laser printers..HP is the only answer. Just ask any
> person who repairs printers.
>
>
> "Chris 159" <temp@cdelectrics.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:cavbbf$j3a$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > Hi all, im looking for recommendations for a home printer that does good
> > quality photo prints but has reasonably cheap ink. is there such a
thing
> ?
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > chris
> >
> >
>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Larry wrote:
> Pete,
>
> I do service printers (not as much as 10 years ago, but still do). While
> HP's are definitely the EASIEST to get repaired, I personally feel their
> quality of construction and reliability has fallen dramatically since the
> days of the Series II (SX Engine) days.
>
> HP 4000's are Jam-factories. Rollers don't last any time at all, especially
> pickup rollers.
>
> Any of their printers that use the instant-on fusers with the mylar covers
> have real-life reliability issues in this area. It takes absolutely nothing
> to tear one of these mylar covers, and HP refuses to sell you a $2
> replacement mylar. The insist on you purchasing a compete fuser at a cost
> of several hundred dollars in the case of the LaserJet 4200.
>
> And what business HP has putting that fuser in a so-called Corporate,
> workgroup class printer is beyond me.
>
> Electronically they are sound. Mechanically they have fallen off terribly.
>
> IMHO.
>
> -Larry
>
> "Pete" <ppremock1@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:vO_Ac.361989$M3.71099@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
>>I have been in the toner and inkjet business locally since 1991. The
>
> average
>
>>person can't tell the in the picture quality of Canon, Epson and HP. I
>>highly recommend the HP inkjet printer for quality and reliability. If
>>something goes wrong with a HP printer, it can
>>easily be fixed. Notice I don't mention Lexmark...When you don't have
>>anything good to say about a printer its better to say nothing. Pete
>>
>>PS..If your buying Laser printers..HP is the only answer. Just ask any
>>person who repairs printers.
>>
>>
>>"Chris 159" <temp@cdelectrics.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:cavbbf$j3a$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>>>Hi all, im looking for recommendations for a home printer that does good
>>>quality photo prints but has reasonably cheap ink. is there such a
>
> thing
>
>>?
>>
>>>TIA
>>>
>>>chris
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
In the past 8 years I have gone with the first Epson Color Stylus
600/800 that did the best color photo prints back in 1996. The Epson 750
Photo was the first photo inkjet printer in the late 90's, then the
still widly used 1270/80 Photo printers with 6 colors in 1999, the first
dye ink Photo printer 2000P, the widly use by professionals 2200 Photo
and now the ink dye R800. I can't wait for the wide format version of
the R800 and I will be in heaven. I have had them all NEVER once w/
heavy daily output did one ever give one day of trouble. I had a next
day replacement policy with the 1270 and late 1280 Photo printers that
would put new replacement printer in my office if I had one go down.
Never needed it. I won't use anything else for photos.
BTW still have my 2200 set up with a Lyson Continuous ink system using
125 ml bottles for each color they outlast 10 or 12 cartridges. I never
throw away any cartidges with half full colors.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=LYBIFS2200&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=284444
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Larry <none@none.com> wrote:

> HP 4000's are Jam-factories. Rollers don't last any time at all, especially
> pickup rollers.

That is not the case with the ones I support, LJ4050s with a few 4000s
thrown in. The 4050 is the same as the 4000 except for a faster
formatter. On these printers, I see very few jams, except with 3x5
cards which they don't like much. Anything larger or not as thick does
fine: 8.5x11 card stock or 4x6 paper, no problem.

Rollers tend to get longer-than-rated life; many don't need replacement
at the standard 200,000 page service period. Fusers usually don't quite
make it to 200,000 pages; often more like 170,000-180,000. Fuser film
usually wrinkles and tears on the left border.

The busiest of these printers see around 20,000 pages per month. How
does that compare to the ones you're seeing problems on?

--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:16:42 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>In the past 8 years I have gone with the first Epson Color Stylus
>600/800 that did the best color photo prints back in 1996. The Epson 750
>Photo was the first photo inkjet printer in the late 90's, then the
>still widly used 1270/80 Photo printers with 6 colors in 1999, the first
>dye ink Photo printer 2000P, the widly use by professionals 2200 Photo
>and now the ink dye R800. I can't wait for the wide format version of
>the R800 and I will be in heaven. I have had them all NEVER once w/
>heavy daily output did one ever give one day of trouble. I had a next
>day replacement policy with the 1270 and late 1280 Photo printers that
>would put new replacement printer in my office if I had one go down.
>Never needed it. I won't use anything else for photos.
>BTW still have my 2200 set up with a Lyson Continuous ink system using
>125 ml bottles for each color they outlast 10 or 12 cartridges. I never
>throw away any cartidges with half full colors.
>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=LYBIFS2200&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=284444

LOL. You just mentioned owing 7 or 8 epsons in eight years, but not
one ever gave one day of trouble? Hm... If I bought a new car every
year, I could probably say the same thing about those too... : )
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Just Allan wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:16:42 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>In the past 8 years I have gone with the first Epson Color Stylus
>>600/800 that did the best color photo prints back in 1996. The Epson 750
>>Photo was the first photo inkjet printer in the late 90's, then the
>>still widly used 1270/80 Photo printers with 6 colors in 1999, the first
>>dye ink Photo printer 2000P, the widly use by professionals 2200 Photo
>>and now the ink dye R800. I can't wait for the wide format version of
>>the R800 and I will be in heaven. I have had them all NEVER once w/
>>heavy daily output did one ever give one day of trouble. I had a next
>>day replacement policy with the 1270 and late 1280 Photo printers that
>>would put new replacement printer in my office if I had one go down.
>>Never needed it. I won't use anything else for photos.
>>BTW still have my 2200 set up with a Lyson Continuous ink system using
>>125 ml bottles for each color they outlast 10 or 12 cartridges. I never
>>throw away any cartidges with half full colors.
>>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=LYBIFS2200&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=284444
>
>
> LOL. You just mentioned owing 7 or 8 epsons in eight years, but not
> one ever gave one day of trouble? Hm... If I bought a new car every
> year, I could probably say the same thing about those too... : )

If you had your own business where you run a minimum of 3 printers daily
8 hours a day, with two crews then you might be able to park your
mommies car and purchase your own new. Between photo restoration and
chromakey photo shoots (which you probably never heard of) at local
Sears, Pennys and other malls we keep our printers making money at the
location, during photo packet shoots and the pictures are handed to
customers on the spot. Our printers are a tool not a toy, thats why we
use continous ink supply systems. Thats also why we only use 100 year
archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
couple years. My 2200 has turned out over thousands of prints. My new
week old R800 has already done over 150 8x10 prints now.
BTW I own 3 vehicles, two being brand new. Has nothing to do with
purchasing something it's all about using what you have. I guess you
were LOL while eating a balony sandwhich purchased w/ food stamps. This
newsgroup is full of entrepreneurs in printing, try learning a
profession not skulking around a newsgroup dribbling worthless posts.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"sundance" <sundancekid17@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d4idnbRHXIThtEjdRVn-gQ@warpdrive.net...
> Just Allan wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:16:42 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In the past 8 years I have gone with the first Epson Color Stylus
> >>600/800 that did the best color photo prints back in 1996. The Epson 750
> >>Photo was the first photo inkjet printer in the late 90's, then the
> >>still widly used 1270/80 Photo printers with 6 colors in 1999, the first
> >>dye ink Photo printer 2000P, the widly use by professionals 2200 Photo
> >>and now the ink dye R800. I can't wait for the wide format version of
> >>the R800 and I will be in heaven. I have had them all NEVER once w/
> >>heavy daily output did one ever give one day of trouble. I had a next
> >>day replacement policy with the 1270 and late 1280 Photo printers that
> >>would put new replacement printer in my office if I had one go down.
> >>Never needed it. I won't use anything else for photos.
> >>BTW still have my 2200 set up with a Lyson Continuous ink system using
> >>125 ml bottles for each color they outlast 10 or 12 cartridges. I never
> >>throw away any cartidges with half full colors.
>
>>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=LYBIFS2200&is
=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=284444
> >
> >
> > LOL. You just mentioned owing 7 or 8 epsons in eight years, but not
> > one ever gave one day of trouble? Hm... If I bought a new car every
> > year, I could probably say the same thing about those too... : )
>
> If you had your own business where you run a minimum of 3 printers daily
> 8 hours a day, with two crews then you might be able to park your
> mommies car and purchase your own new. Between photo restoration and
> chromakey photo shoots (which you probably never heard of) at local
> Sears, Pennys and other malls we keep our printers making money at the
> location, during photo packet shoots and the pictures are handed to
> customers on the spot. Our printers are a tool not a toy, thats why we
> use continous ink supply systems. Thats also why we only use 100 year
> archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
> couple years. My 2200 has turned out over thousands of prints. My new
> week old R800 has already done over 150 8x10 prints now.
> BTW I own 3 vehicles, two being brand new. Has nothing to do with
> purchasing something it's all about using what you have. I guess you
> were LOL while eating a balony sandwhich purchased w/ food stamps. This
> newsgroup is full of entrepreneurs in printing, try learning a
> profession not skulking around a newsgroup dribbling worthless posts.

Not to pick a nit or anything, but don't you have your Dye and Pigment a bit
confused.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

DSphotog wrote:
> "sundance" <sundancekid17@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:d4idnbRHXIThtEjdRVn-gQ@warpdrive.net...
>
>>Just Allan wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:16:42 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>In the past 8 years I have gone with the first Epson Color Stylus
>>>>600/800 that did the best color photo prints back in 1996. The Epson 750
>>>>Photo was the first photo inkjet printer in the late 90's, then the
>>>>still widly used 1270/80 Photo printers with 6 colors in 1999, the first
>>>>dye ink Photo printer 2000P, the widly use by professionals 2200 Photo
>>>>and now the ink dye R800. I can't wait for the wide format version of
>>>>the R800 and I will be in heaven. I have had them all NEVER once w/
>>>>heavy daily output did one ever give one day of trouble. I had a next
>>>>day replacement policy with the 1270 and late 1280 Photo printers that
>>>>would put new replacement printer in my office if I had one go down.
>>>>Never needed it. I won't use anything else for photos.
>>>>BTW still have my 2200 set up with a Lyson Continuous ink system using
>>>>125 ml bottles for each color they outlast 10 or 12 cartridges. I never
>>>>throw away any cartidges with half full colors.
>>
>>>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=LYBIFS2200&is
>
> =REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=284444
>
>>>
>>>LOL. You just mentioned owing 7 or 8 epsons in eight years, but not
>>>one ever gave one day of trouble? Hm... If I bought a new car every
>>>year, I could probably say the same thing about those too... : )
>>
>>If you had your own business where you run a minimum of 3 printers daily
>>8 hours a day, with two crews then you might be able to park your
>>mommies car and purchase your own new. Between photo restoration and
>>chromakey photo shoots (which you probably never heard of) at local
>>Sears, Pennys and other malls we keep our printers making money at the
>>location, during photo packet shoots and the pictures are handed to
>>customers on the spot. Our printers are a tool not a toy, thats why we
>>use continous ink supply systems. Thats also why we only use 100 year
>>archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
>>couple years. My 2200 has turned out over thousands of prints. My new
>>week old R800 has already done over 150 8x10 prints now.
>>BTW I own 3 vehicles, two being brand new. Has nothing to do with
>>purchasing something it's all about using what you have. I guess you
>>were LOL while eating a balony sandwhich purchased w/ food stamps. This
>>newsgroup is full of entrepreneurs in printing, try learning a
>>profession not skulking around a newsgroup dribbling worthless posts.
>
>
> Not to pick a nit or anything, but don't you have your Dye and Pigment a bit
> confused.
>
>
Thanks for the correction, I whipped that reply out at 1am and it was a
long day at a day long photo shoot at Pamida Shopping Center. Just
yesterday I would say between the two photo printers we took with us
they together put out over 200 8x10s (averaged 20 different 8x10s in a
hour at the peak) which may not sound fast but each print was enhanced
and I have countless packages of 5x7s and wallet sheets to print up
starting Monday. I know there are lots of ppl that post negative on
Epsons but I can't, "not yet"!
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:06:54 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Thats also why we only use 100 year
>archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
>couple years.

You sure you've got that right. Don't you man use pigment not dye? The
figures I've seen show dye lasting a lot less time than pigment.

--

Hecate
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hecate <hecate@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<e8kcd0h37g2ss5r0ao1negnf3ad572l01h@4ax.com>...
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:06:54 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thats also why we only use 100 year
> >archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
> >couple years.
>
> You sure you've got that right. Don't you man use pigment not dye? The
> figures I've seen show dye lasting a lot less time than pigment.

If you like glossy prints, the difference isn't that big. Canon
dye inks (BCI-6 series) rate 38 years while Epson 2200 pigments
is rated 50 years on their corresponding glossy papers. Both
numbers in the same article with info from Wilhelm:

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,105461,pg,3,00.asp

Mike

p.s. - Canon dye ink cartrides cost about the same as Epson pigment
cartridges (roughly $10 ea). Don't know if print-yield is
different.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 21 Jun 2004 09:54:59 -0700, gewgle@yahoo.com (Anoni Moose) wrote:


>> You sure you've got that right. Don't you man use pigment not dye? The
>> figures I've seen show dye lasting a lot less time than pigment.
>
>If you like glossy prints, the difference isn't that big. Canon
>dye inks (BCI-6 series) rate 38 years while Epson 2200 pigments
>is rated 50 years on their corresponding glossy papers. Both
>numbers in the same article with info from Wilhelm:
>
>http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,105461,pg,3,00.asp
>
Interesting, though I'm not entirely convinced by Wilhelm.

>
>p.s. - Canon dye ink cartrides cost about the same as Epson pigment
> cartridges (roughly $10 ea). Don't know if print-yield is
> different.

I do know, however, that my Permajet CIS has approximately 8.9 times
as much ink per bottle for only 2.5 times the price ;-)

--

Hecate
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:09:04 +0100, Hecate <hecate@newsguy.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:06:54 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Thats also why we only use 100 year
>>archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
>>couple years.
>
>You sure you've got that right. Don't you man use pigment not dye? The
>figures I've seen show dye lasting a lot less time than pigment.

Exactly - he just got excited because someone proved the error in his
logic. I don't care HOW many thousand of prints he ran off in WHAT
business environment. The fact remains he said he's had no failures,
but has owned 7 or 8 printers in a few years. Ane now he justifies
why the printers failed, or no longer produced the quality they did
when new, effectively saying:

1. They don't fail. I've had no trouble.
2. The reason I've had no trouble is because I buy a new one every 12
months.

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

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:46:06 +1000, Just Allan
<justallan@COLDhotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:09:04 +0100, Hecate <hecate@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:06:54 -0500, sundance <sundancekid17@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Thats also why we only use 100 year
>>>archival dye-ink printers not a cheaper pigment ink that will fade in a
>>>couple years.
>>
>>You sure you've got that right. Don't you man use pigment not dye? The
>>figures I've seen show dye lasting a lot less time than pigment.
>
>Exactly - he just got excited because someone proved the error in his
>logic. I don't care HOW many thousand of prints he ran off in WHAT
>business environment. The fact remains he said he's had no failures,
>but has owned 7 or 8 printers in a few years. Ane now he justifies
>why the printers failed, or no longer produced the quality they did
>when new, effectively saying:
>
>1. They don't fail. I've had no trouble.
>2. The reason I've had no trouble is because I buy a new one every 12
>months.
>
Allan, that would be a logical assumption unless, of course, he's say
eight printers, four of which he used for the 4 years, and then four
new ones which he used for the next four years. ;-)

--

Hecate
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:16:01 GMT, "DSphotog"
<dsmith5knot@optonline.net> wrote:

>Not to pick a nit or anything, but don't you have your Dye and Pigment a bit
>confused.

You weren't nitpicking. (Neither was I by the way - the simple fact
is, his logic doesn't hold water.) Obviously the printers DID have a
day of trouble, or they wouldn't have been replaced by 7, 6, 5, 4, 3,
2, 1 - new printers.
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I don't have page counts, but they aren't that high.

I'm glad someone has few issues with these things :)

-Larry

"Warren Block" <wblock@wonkity.com> wrote in message
news:slrncdb6up.2pj2.wblock@speedy.wonkity.com...
> Larry <none@none.com> wrote:
>
> > HP 4000's are Jam-factories. Rollers don't last any time at all,
especially
> > pickup rollers.
>
> That is not the case with the ones I support, LJ4050s with a few 4000s
> thrown in. The 4050 is the same as the 4000 except for a faster
> formatter. On these printers, I see very few jams, except with 3x5
> cards which they don't like much. Anything larger or not as thick does
> fine: 8.5x11 card stock or 4x6 paper, no problem.
>
> Rollers tend to get longer-than-rated life; many don't need replacement
> at the standard 200,000 page service period. Fusers usually don't quite
> make it to 200,000 pages; often more like 170,000-180,000. Fuser film
> usually wrinkles and tears on the left border.
>
> The busiest of these printers see around 20,000 pages per month. How
> does that compare to the ones you're seeing problems on?
>
> --
> Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
 
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Just Allan <justallan@COLDhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<9ehhd0hv4p8606prduop2s0s6tjs8tl20h@4ax.com>...
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:16:01 GMT, "DSphotog"
> <dsmith5knot@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >Not to pick a nit or anything, but don't you have your Dye and Pigment a bit
> >confused.
>
> You weren't nitpicking. (Neither was I by the way - the simple fact
> is, his logic doesn't hold water.) Obviously the printers DID have a
> day of trouble, or they wouldn't have been replaced by 7, 6, 5, 4, 3,
> 2, 1 - new printers.

Unless he was using them for commercial production work. Printers like
the 2200, I think, are intended for home use where the total number
of prints in the life the printer is fairly modest. That's probably
why Epson makes multi-kilobuck inkjets for commercial use (that has lower
dpi, etc as well) that have larger ink cartridges, etc. He could just
be using them for other than their intended use.

Possibly, anyway.

Mike