Test's on 3rd Party Inks

Canon supplied a guy I know with a new print head even after telling
them he was using Jet-Tec inks hoping they could suggest a method of
cleaning.

They asked him the 'usuals' and give him a referance number told him
to send a proof of purchase copy to Electroversal somewhere in the
Midlands along with the referance number, lo and behold a week later
a new head had arrived in spite of not using Canon ink.

My guess is the inlet nozzles from the cartridges were 'choked', he
never went beyond nozzle cleaning... otherwise he may have got it
working.

This guy was working abroad on a contract... he's now moved the
printer which was about a 10" away from a central heating radiator.
Good thinking for a person who works on Electrical distributor
systems.....!

I did say he would be better of with a laser, Canon didn't seem
concerned he was using non OEM inks.

Davy

Mike Berger wrote:

Accepted by whom? I find no evidence of this on Canon's, Epson's,
or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
won't cause damage or void warranties?

THEY NEVER SAID THAT


Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
by a few people who post in this newsgroup?

Frank wrote:


Excuse me Davy...but the relevance of this article has been greatly
diminished since it was penned over three years ago. 3rd party inks
are now accepted as being equivalent in all aspects (except cost) to
oem. No manufacturer will void any warranty because of their use.

Frank wrote:

Mike Berger wrote:

Accepted by whom? I find no evidence of this on Canon's, Epson's,
or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
won't cause damage or void warranties?

Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
by a few people who post in this newsgroup?

Frank wrote:


Excuse me Davy...but the relevance of this article has been greatly
diminished since it was penned over three years ago. 3rd party inks
are now accepted as being equivalent in all aspects (except cost) to
oem. No manufacturer will void any warranty because of their use.


Well Mike...just how big do you think the after market ink business
is? Would you say as big as or bigger than the oem market? Bigger than
"a few people who post in this newsgroup"? I'd guess both.

THIS ASSHOLE KNOWS NOTHING. HE ONLY GUESSES

More than a few who post here (self included) have used strictly after
market inks for almost ten years in our HP's, Canon's, Epson's and
Lexmark's that I am aware of. I've personally had 2 HP's, one Epson
and one Canon replaced under warranty over the years while using after
market inks and I told them up front what I was using.


BULL****

No where in any warranty from these manufacturers have I seen, read or
heard about warranties being voided by using after market inks.
Have you?
Frank

zakezuke wrote:

Accepted by whom? I find no evidence of this on Canon's, Epson's,
or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
won't cause damage or void warranties?

Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
by a few people who post in this newsgroup?



Magnuson Moss Warranty Act
US Code - Title 15, Chapter 50, Sections 2301-2312
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/...s/warranty.htm

Other countries have similar provisions. Basicly a MFG can not as a
condition of the warranty say you must use their consumables unless
they provide the product freely during the warranty period whether it
be car or printer.


Now if your printer failed and if it was a direct
result of using some other guy's product, sure they can deny the
warranty.

SEE HOW FRANKIE CRANKIE IS FULL OF ****. THERE IS NO CART BLANCHE

They just can't because you used the other guy's product,
not unless they want to take it up with the FTC or equilevent agency.

I disagree that the other guy's ink is equilivent in all aspects.
After all in all likelyhood the ink is protected by a patent and you
can't duplicate it exactly, unless the OEM decides to sell their stuff
in bulk aftermarket.

HA HA HA

In other cases ink totally different... like if
for example you wanted to shove pigment based inks down a dye printer
or use a solvent other than water, but this isn't your bargin hunter
equilivent ink. I feel it's more of a question of can you see the
difference, and if you can do you care.

At least I've got the wooden spoon out...!

Ders summat burnin in da kitchen - better go now...

Davy

here has some more info:
http://www.inkrepublic.com/members/o...hop/review.asp

That's you... and it doesn't seem to make sense to buy ink for a
printer on it's last legs in the first place.

I WOULD NOT BUY AFTERMARKET INK UNLESS MY PRINTLOAD WAS SO
ASTRONOMICALLY HIGH AND I WAS ABOUT TO GET A NEW PRINTER ANYWAY SO I
WOULD NOT CARE ABOUT THE PRINTCLOG I WOULD GET.

wrote:

here has some more info:
http://www.inkrepublic.com/members/o...hop/review.asp

MY PRINTER DOES NOT HAVE LEGS. IT DOES NOT STAND BUT SITS ON MY DESK
USING OEM INK.

zakezuke wrote:

That's you... and it doesn't seem to make sense to buy ink for a
printer on it's last legs in the first place.

Measekite said: removed per request

That was very smart... but you said you would only consider aftermarket
ink if you were to about to get a new printer, which is totally silly
to make an investment in ink if you don't plan to use all of it.
Perhaps you can pickup a goodwill printer and use aftermarket ink on
it... and actually see how long it takes to clog. Then you would
actually be able to say you have experence. Oh but because you were
treated unfairly by a few users you will continue to harrass others and
lie about products many of us use just because your ego can't stand it
when someone actually disagrees with you.