what's with my ink setup?

On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 21:52:32 -0500, TJ wrote:

IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote:
On Nov 15, 11:41 am, measekite wrote:

As a matter of fact some Jeeps are 2 or 3 years
old and have never been sold. Now that is way discontinued.

You do understand cars are a different product. A given car model
might remain relativly unchanged for 2-10 years. As you pointed out
you can save $3000 for a 1year old model, and so long as everything is
equal, save some minor trim changes, why the hell don't you buy the 1
year old model?

Now if they made major changes to the body, drive train, suspension,
accessories, then you would have a point, you "might" be getting
something less. However the reverse is true, why buy something "more"
if you are not going to use it?


Newer models aren't always better, either. The Atari 8-bit is a good


Not 100% of the time but most of the time. The Canon 50D is better than
the Canon 40D. The Canon XSi is better than the earlier version. The
Nikon D90 is better than the Nikon D80 and that was better than the D70s
and that was better than the D70. Most of the time.




example. The stock Atari 800 had a maximum of 48K of RAM, and BASIC was
contained on an insertable cartridge. It also had four joystick/paddle
ports, a tactile keyboard, two cartridge slots, and excellent video
output when used with a good monitor. The 800XL, which replaced it, had
64K of bank-switchable RAM and a built-in BASIC ROM that could be
switched in or out, but it had only two joystick/paddle ports, a mushy
keyboard, only one cartridge slot, and inferior video output compared to
the 800. The BASIC ROM had been rewritten in the XL line in an effort to
correct a couple of minor bugs in the original version. But in so doing,
a new bug was created that was much worse, and the ROMs couldn't be
replaced. They had to be disabled and an external cartridge used
instead. The power supply "brick" used with the XL line tended to fail
quicker than that used with the 800, too.

The XE line attempted to address many of the problems introduced with
the XLs, and did improve on many of them, but among Atari 8-bit
enthusiasts, the 800 is usually rated as the best of the bunch.

The first computer I ever owned was an 800 that I bought at a garage
sale for $75 in 1985. Later, I owned an 800XL, and then a 130XE. The XL
and XE had been hacked with third-party modifications that put them to
256K and 320K of RAM, respectively. Even though the 320K 130XE had much
more capability than the 800, I still consider the 800 to be the
superior computer.

TJ

On Nov 15, 6:57 pm, measekite wrote:

Measekite is just a liar.

No that is why we won the revolutionary war. We did not have aftermarket
bullets.

Actually that's not true. During the revolutionary war we didn't use
bullets, we used ball and muskets, bulk filled. Same with the French
revolutionary war, though in that case power supply was an issue, so
Napoleon mandated the solders dung was collected to manufacture
power. AFAIK there was no such thing to OEM power and balls, balls
were manufactured in the field. Now Smith and Wesson did patent the
metal bullet in 1854 IIRC, but these too could be refilled by the end
user if they so desired. However the flint lock musket was still used
in the civil war.

While I'm sure there are OEM bullets (S&W Magnum for example), I'm not
aware of any firearm that the warranty is void if you use someone
else's bullets.

On Nov 15, 6:52 pm, TJ wrote:

The first computer I ever owned was an 800 that I bought at a garage
sale for $75 in 1985. Later, I owned an 800XL, and then a 130XE. The XL
and XE had been hacked with third-party modifications that put them to
256K and 320K of RAM, respectively. Even though the 320K 130XE had much
more capability than the 800, I still consider the 800 to be the
superior computer.

TJ

I first owned a TI, followed by an ATARI 800xl. Due to a ground fault
it blew, but it had a Rambo, or rather something I soldered together
my self that was basically a rambo. I later got a MIO board with 1meg
of ram and scsi controller, and a 15meg HD.

I agree the Atari 800 was the superior computer since it had the
better graphics card. If it wasn't for the need for 64+k and the
expansion slot in the back for hardware like the ICD MIO board, I
would have stuck with it.

When the 386 came out, I decided to upgrade. I wanted an Amiga but it
was far out of my price range. A 386sx and retrofitting my Seagate
ST-419 drive was a far cheaper solution. Come to think about it, the
386 cost less than SCSI controller for my Atari.

This is what I don't get about Measekite. He seems to be an old fart,
and as such he should be perfectly famillar with the 80s and
computers. Often times printers were sold with Epson and IBM
compatibility modes, as well as their own "native" modes. If there
wasn't a driver for your printer, well, you depended on
"compatibility" which often meant that the advanced features were
useless. But it was a choice between cheaper printer with more
features, or a more spendy one with less features.

On Nov 15, 7:02 pm, measekite wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:06:47 -0800, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote:
On Nov 15, 11:41 am, measekite wrote:

As a matter of fact some Jeeps are 2 or 3 years
old and have never been sold. Now that is way discontinued.

You do understand cars are a different product. A given car model
might remain relativly unchanged for 2-10 years. As you pointed out
you can save $3000 for a 1year old model, and so long as everything is
equal, save some minor trim changes, why the hell don't you buy the 1
year old model?

Simple. Why should I buy a year old product when I can get a new product
for about the same price. I can buy new for maybe $100 more than a year
old one that has a real value of $5,000 less. Those are for the dummies
that think they save money buying crap ink. Look in the mirror and ask
yourself if you know one of them.


Define "real value". You're moving the goalposts once again.
If you can get last years model car for $3000 less, and it's the exact
same thing, it makes sense to consider it. If you plan to resell the
car after 3-5 years, you "might" want to consider the "new" one,
though odds are pretty good that the bluebook value isn't going to be
more than $3000 between the two models.

Case in point

2001 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $8,210
2002 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $9,100
Price difference $890 according to KBB Retail value 50,000 miles


2004 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $13,055
2005 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $13,380
Price difference $325 according to KBB Retail value 50,000 miles

For some reason KBB lists the 2007 CE 5speed at $14,505 and the 2008
at $13,730. Why, I have no clue.

Anyhow, Measekite, you proposed buying a "new" car over last year's
model even if the price difference was $3000. Given that models tend
to stay the same for 1-10 years with notable exceptions to trim and
such, why buy the new one if they are the same car? I would
understand if you're talking resale value, but is there going to be a
$3000 between two cars one year apart?

It's been a while since I shopped for a "new" car, in fact it was
1997. I was considering the corolla, and oddly enough the "new"
corolla was cheaper than a 1995/1996 one during the ever famous early
on dealer insentive. It was a choice between a $12000 used one, and a
$10,000 "new" one. Granted the new one was a stripper model, no CD
player, AC, or other accessories.

"Real value" is just a figment of your imagination. You have what you
pay for it, and what you can sell it for. If you could save $3,000 on
last years model, if we're talking corolla, well, that's a good deal
man.

On Nov 15, 6:56 pm, measekite wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:11:47 -0500, TJ wrote:
IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote:
On Nov 14, 9:13 pm, measekite wrote:
What do you think those discontinued Epson printers are

We clearly have a different definition of what discontinued means.
Yes, there are new models. However, the 4800 vs the 4880 doesn't look
like an improvement. Ultrachrome k3 inks, 8 tanks, 110ml each. They
are still being sold in stores (JVH and camera shops).

Perhaps one of you is confusing "discontinued" with "obsolete." Clearly,
a printer model may be discontinued (no longer manufactured) but not be
obsolete (no longer supported by the manufacturer).

TJ

Add no longer sold by the mfg also.

Near as I'm aware the 4800 is still manufactured. It's not listed as
a discontinued model, and if I phone up Epson, they will refer me to
someone who sells it. It's only discontinued when they say it is.

On Nov 15, 7:11 pm, measekite wrote:

Newer models aren't always better, either. The Atari 8-bit is a good

Not 100% of the time but most of the time. The Canon 50D is better than
the Canon 40D. The Canon XSi is better than the earlier version. The
Nikon D90 is better than the Nikon D80 and that was better than the D70s
and that was better than the D70. Most of the time.


The ip4500 looks like it's better than the ip4600 in terms of cost per
page and speed. It's hard to say if there is an improvement in the
ink since they tested it on new paper, and their numbers are only an
improvement for dark storage. In terms of lightfastness, there ISN'T
an improvement with the ip4600.

The i960 was "better" than the ip6000D in terms of speed, image
quality, printhead size.

I'm sure I can find tons of examples where the new version is just a
downgraded old version.

measher-****-head, the oem ink drinking asshole wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:07:47 -0800, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote:

And I thought you had greater intelligence. You are a typist that just
liked to type crap.
----------------------------------------------------
Oh no! Your fat, stupid, empty head just fell out of your useless dumb
ass (once again!)!
Re-insert!
You are the asshole idiot moron POS loser in this ng!

On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:49:41 -0800, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote:

On Nov 15, 7:02 pm, measekite wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:06:47 -0800, IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote:
On Nov 15, 11:41 am, measekite wrote:

As a matter of fact some Jeeps are 2 or 3 years
old and have never been sold. Now that is way discontinued.

You do understand cars are a different product. A given car model
might remain relativly unchanged for 2-10 years. As you pointed out
you can save $3000 for a 1year old model, and so long as everything is
equal, save some minor trim changes, why the hell don't you buy the 1
year old model?

Simple. Why should I buy a year old product when I can get a new product
for about the same price. I can buy new for maybe $100 more than a year
old one that has a real value of $5,000 less. Those are for the dummies
that think they save money buying crap ink. Look in the mirror and ask
yourself if you know one of them.


Define "real value". You're moving the goalposts once again.
If you can get last years model car for $3000 less, and it's the exact
same thing, it makes sense to consider it. If you plan to resell the
car after 3-5 years, you "might" want to consider the "new" one,
though odds are pretty good that the bluebook value isn't going to be
more than $3000 between the two models.

Case in point

2001 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $8,210
2002 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $9,100
Price difference $890 according to KBB Retail value 50,000 miles


2004 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $13,055
2005 Toyota Corolla 5speed CE 1.8l Engine $13,380
Price difference $325 according to KBB Retail value 50,000 miles

For some reason KBB lists the 2007 CE 5speed at $14,505 and the 2008
at $13,730. Why, I have no clue.

Anyhow, Measekite, you proposed buying a "new" car over last year's
model even if the price difference was $3000. Given that models tend



You can't. If you can bargain well there is far less different in price
than the depreciation loss between the two. It is for dummies.

to stay the same for 1-10 years with notable exceptions to trim and
such, why buy the new one if they are the same car? I would understand
if you're talking resale value, but is there going to be a $3000 between
two cars one year apart?

It's been a while since I shopped for a "new" car, in fact it was 1997.
I was considering the corolla, and oddly enough the "new" corolla was
cheaper than a 1995/1996 one during the ever famous early on dealer
insentive. It was a choice between a $12000 used one, and a $10,000
"new" one. Granted the new one was a stripper model, no CD player, AC,
or other accessories.

Stripper models are for the morons as well. The come ons and the laydowns.



"Real value" is just a figment of your imagination. You have what you
pay for it, and what you can sell it for. If you could save $3,000 on
last years model, if we're talking corolla, well, that's a good deal man.


Keep smokin weed

measekite wrote:

Simple. Why should I buy a year old product when I can get a new product
for about the same price. I can buy new for maybe $100 more than a year
old one that has a real value of $5,000 less. Those are for the dummies
that think they save money buying crap ink. Look in the mirror and ask
yourself if you know one of them.

So I guess your purchase selection philosophy boils down to this:

1. A new model is better than last year's model.
2. A higher price will get you more than a lower one.
3. New models carrying high prices are the best of both worlds.

OK, steering this discussion back to printers, let me propose this
scenario:

Your ip4000 finally gives up on you, and you're in the market for a new
printer. You go to the dealer and see three printers available that
exceed your requirements, whatever they may be. One of them is a the
latest mid-level model, the second is last year's mid-level model, and
the third is last year's high-level model. The first and third are the
same price, the second is significantly lower. All carry the same warranty.

Which one are you going to buy?

TJ

On Nov 16, 8:19 am, measekite wrote:
Anyhow, Measekite, you proposed buying a "new" car over last year's
model even if the price difference was $3000. Given that models tend

You can't. If you can bargain well there is far less different in price
than the depreciation loss between the two. It is for dummies.

There is only so much that you can bargain. You have what the dealer
pays for a car, and you have what they sell it for. There are
sometimes dealer incentives where the factory pays the dealer to sell
a car at a given time. For used cars, they either accept a trade in
or buy them at auction.

A car or truck will lose about 10% to 15% of it's value after the
first year of ownership. For a $15,000 car, that's $1500 to $2250.
If you are getting a $3000 kick back, that is greater than average
depreciation, plus you get the new warranty and all the spiffy options
you associate with a "new car" because it is a "new car".

It's been a while since I shopped for a "new" car, in fact it was 1997.
I was considering the corolla, and oddly enough the "new" corolla was
cheaper than a 1995/1996 one during the ever famous early on dealer
insentive. It was a choice between a $12000 used one, and a $10,000
"new" one. Granted the new one was a stripper model, no CD player, AC,
or other accessories.

Stripper models are for the morons as well. The come ons and the laydowns.

Well, every so often car dealers offer "deals" for a new car at an
unbelievable price, like 10% off factory invoice, but they only have
10 on the lot. A $10,000 "new" 1997 Corolla is a bargain. In fact it
was such a bargain it was cheaper than a used one, and there wouldn't
have been a issue selling it to a dealer for what you paid for it.

What don't you get in a stripper model? AC/Stereo and other
accessories. The price the dealer wants for a factory CD player is
going to be, well, more than you can get a base Blaupunkt for, and 10
years ago they didn't offer mp3 players or front accessory jacks
standard.

The main reason I consider stripper models because they are often
5speeds rather than automatic transmisions. I don't like
automatics.

"Real value" is just a figment of your imagination. You have what you
pay for it, and what you can sell it for. If you could save $3,000 on
last years model, if we're talking corolla, well, that's a good deal man.

Keep smokin weed

No, you're the one who's on crack. A Corolla is going to lose less
than 10% of it's value after a year, even a stripper model. If you
can get a $3000 kickback on a 1 year old new model, presuming $14000,
that's 21% savings, in excess of standard depreciation. If you're
thinking of a $30,000 car, a $3,000 savings on par with standard
depreciation. You "might" think twice.

But you want to spend extra money for the New New car, feel free.

All this tells me that you were once a used car dealer.