What this disagreement proves is that each company has a certain
percentage of bad product. Certainly even Canon acknowledged the
problems their printers had in reliability, which is why they started
over from scratch and put millions into R&D to come up with the i
series. I think the i series has some good value and good design, and
the tanks are indeed easier to refill, but even Canon seems to be moving
their model toward more costly ink cartridges.

The main weaknesses with Canon's printers a they do not handle
pigment inks well, and have never endorsed pigment inks, to my
knowledge, for these printers. They did some promotion about making
pigment inks but I don't think it ever came out.

Secondly, I warned when they first came out that the idea of a permanent
ink head using a resistance bubble jet or thermal technology seems like
a contradiction of terms. I expected head failures within 18-24 months
of purchase for heavier users, and it seems to be now doing just that.

I very much like the removable head for cleaning and the number of
nozzles makes the printer very fast, as well. I like how they reduced
dot size to allow for elimination of the light dye load inks, as well,
something again I predicted someone would do.

Epson and Canon together would possibly be able to produce a better than
product than either by themselves if they each adopted some aspects of
the others technology. However, in the long run, the two technologies
do not appear to have compatibility.

I still tend to believe the cold piezo head is more durable and
flexible, and with certain modifications, would be even more reliable.

If the clogging issue were better addressed, and it could be, the piezo
would be more reliable, more accurate, and overall allow for much more
variations of ink. There is a reason why the art segment and the ink
manufacturers has mostly looked to Epson piezo technology.

But in terms of image quality, all three majors are close and it comes
down to format wars, which I am not interested in engaging or fanning
the flames.


Art



Tim wrote:

Canon isn't dishonest. At least Canon doesn't use chips in their ink
cartridges like most other companies do to rip their customers off. And
many of the printers in the Canon line use clear tanks so you can see
exactly how much ink is left... unlike their competitors.

My Canon s820 has lasted longer than my previous Epson.

"GP" wrote in message
...

Was: CANON: DESIGNED TO FAIL by a dishonest company

About my old failing Canon BJ-300, I wrote:



It is not a 15 years old printer. It's a three weeks old printer! I've
seen some Laserjet 4 printers print more in 3 weeks as mine in 14
years. Consequently, when the glitch goes away, it prints perfectly.

I had to face one such planned glitch 8 years ago. (Cf. the little
sponge in the purge unit.) Canon told me the printer was dead. After I
pressured them into telling me how to fix their planned glitch, a 5
minute job got it working until now.

Comparing a BJ-300 to the plastic ink dispensers that Canon sells
nowadays does prove what kind of fuchhead you are.

It's slow, it doesn't print color, but it still fits my needs. I
wouldn't print in color even I had a color printer and I'm never in
such a rush.

Mickey answered:


How sad you are but there is hope. Maturity comes with age and 21 is
not too far away.

21 not too far away? Oh, this would be the nicest Christmas gift!
Unfortunately for your reasoning, if I was one of those kids who's been
taught ecology instead of how to use a screw driver, I probably would have
declared my printer obsolete soon as it first stopped working in 1996.

I suppose I got this attitude from one of my uncles, a mechanic who was
still driving his 1947 Chrysler around 1980. Not only did he keep his car
for more then 30 years before he sold it as a vintage car, but every time
a part would fail, he would consider fixing it before buying a new one.
Open the hood, take a look, consider: that was his attitude.

I still own his mini-dryer. In twenty years, I only had to change a switch
and a fan belt. My only regret is that, though the dryer will be 40 years
old in 2005, I can't any money from it as a vintage dryer


Are you aware that the HP LaserJet you mentioned is powered by a CANON
printer engine. All LaserJets have used CANON print engines.

"Have used." And now?

What you're saying here just goes to prove my point. The BJ-300 is a work
horse capable of delivering much more than the 12,000 sheets I got from
it. And Loosenut Boogs may rest assured that the stainless steel shafts
are not rusted, the rubber rollers are not degraded and no ink has spilled
on the printed circuits. This printer was mechanically made to last. So
what?

It seems that at the time of manufacture, Canon decided at the last minute
there was more money to be made with ink than printers. That's when the
change occured, Soon thereafter, the new Bubblejets came out at around
200$. So they had a problem on their hands with this printer designed the
good old way.

There were no one picoliter, or whatever, drops at that time and any ink
would do OK. So, they put a sponge in the purge unit that would at least
eventually block the most off-the-plate non-Canon inks, in order to sell
their 35$, 350 pages, cartridges.

In other words, they ****ed up the ink distribution system. But because
the printer had been costly to produce, they didn't lower the price. So,
the customer -- me , in this case -- ended up with an expensive unreliable
printer.

What was HP's approach with the Deskjet 500 at the same time? As I already
explained, it's one of the most rugged printer of all times, and it sold
at about 50$ less than the BJ-300. Millions of pages must have gone
through some of those printers. And the printhead being part of the
cartridge, it couldn't clog.

Of course, if was impossible, even less than now, to build a disposable
printhead of as good quality as a permanent one. When you looked at a
print made by a Deskjet, you could see minute droplets of ink around the
letters. And, of course, every magazine would confirm this.

So, I told myself, what was 50$ more to get better quality? Only later was
I to discover that the difference in quality would cost so much more and
so much pain in the ass.

A friend of mine had a Deskjet and used to buy plain Carter's ink, which
still sold in pharmacies at the time, and refilled her cartridges with a
seringe for her drafts.

"It must clog the head", I told her. "Of course, after 4 or 5 refills, it
does, she answered. I then have another new empty cartridge ready to
refill."

With the help of magazines, who hardly ever test long-term reliability,
I've been one of those Bozos who've been lured by Canon's so-called
high-technology. Too bad there isn't a law to forbid printer companies to
sell ink. The printers would certainly be more expensive, but the print
would finally come down to a lot less, with much less trouble.

Of course, I'm neither a printer, nor an industry specialist, and I
couldn't tell how HP is behaving since La Fiorina took control or how
Lexmarks does after IBM decided there was nothing to get out of it. But I
know one thing for su Canon has spearheaded this /revolution/ were the
customer has become the sucker.

And I know that, to this day, Canon has refused to acknowledge they sold
me a printer at yesterday's price with today's flaws. I know they went as
far as refusing to provide the information I needed. I'm sure they still
perfectly know about the flaw I'm experiencing today and are still
refusing to provide the few words of support I need.

I had only words of praise for Canon before I bought this printer. I still
own a Canon FTB-QL 35 mm camera and, though I haven't used it for quite
some time, it probably still works perfectly. But sometimes, companies
change. They're headed by /more efficient/ administrators invertors
learned to luv.

As a customer, I don't peculiarly appreciate Canon's way of management. As
a matter of fact, I now truly abhor this company. They might send as many
trolls they want, whether I tell my story long or short, it will get more
precise each and every time, and rest assured I'll get the message
through. Money talks!

In the meantime, the planet is dying and buying a Prius is really an
indecent way of acquiring an ecologist status. "Cutting-edge technology",
as Motor trend puts it, comes at an expense when repair time comes.

So here's my advice for the New Year to every sensible citizen of this
world. Stop preaching ecology, get a screwdriver and, if it's only a
glitch, it ain't broke, fix it!

GP