If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
measekite wrote:
TJ wrote: Duff wrote: I do not think there are enough idiots out there who are in love with Microsoft Windows even though they need to use it for various reasons. Yeah, like only 92 percent of the market is totally sold with Microsoft. And the number is growing daily. You want to use Microsoft products because they're the best for you? Fine, go ahead. But don't do it because everybody else is doing it. That argument didn't work when you were a kid, did it? If 92% of all lemmings follow others over a cliff, it is the 8% that don't that survive to continue the species. ha ha ha "Market share" is a function of marketing prowess, and not necessarily the quality of the product. Oh Yeah the MS babies just like to sit on their Duff. ah ha ha ha Sometimes, breaking away from the masses is the best thing to do. It was for me. For business I have to use Windows but for personal use I did have to put up with some driver difficulties and find replacements form some lousy Windows software that did do the job but I do not get the crash of the day and have to worry about a deluge of viruses. Oh...My...Gawd. You've become a Linux advocate! Excuse me while I check the news...Hell freezing over like that must be creating quite a stir! TJ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:34:52 -0500, CBFalconer
wrote: kony wrote: Tony wrote: ... snip ... Not sure I should have bothered however, it seems to me that once some people have established a view they are completely immovable; ?? hardly a path to enlightenment! First of all, if you can't respecty usenet conventions of not top-posting, you shouldn't be allowed on usenet at all. Tony appears to be a reasonable person, and doesn't deserve this sort of treatment. I suspect he will respond quite nicely to convincing arguments. You may be right, but at some point you have to look at both sides of the coin. Anyone can start doing the right thing after having done wrong... and be given some patience for that, but the flipside is anyone can also start doing the wrong thing after having done right. In the end, it's just text. If someone doesn't have thick skin then I apologize for offense, but I'd have to also feel that handling people with kid-gloves only works to a certain point, and thick skin doesn't grow all by itself. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
TJ wrote: measekite wrote: TJ wrote: Duff wrote: I do not think there are enough idiots out there who are in love with Microsoft Windows even though they need to use it for various reasons. Yeah, like only 92 percent of the market is totally sold with Microsoft. And the number is growing daily. You want to use Microsoft products because they're the best for you? Fine, go ahead. But don't do it because everybody else is doing it. That argument didn't work when you were a kid, did it? If 92% of all lemmings follow others over a cliff, it is the 8% that don't that survive to continue the species. ha ha ha "Market share" is a function of marketing prowess, and not necessarily the quality of the product. Oh Yeah the MS babies just like to sit on their Duff. ah ha ha ha Sometimes, breaking away from the masses is the best thing to do. It was for me. For business I have to use Windows but for personal use I did have to put up with some driver difficulties and find replacements form some lousy Windows software that did do the job but I do not get the crash of the day and have to worry about a deluge of viruses. Oh...My...Gawd. You've become a Linux advocate! Excuse me while I check the news...Hell freezing over like that must be creating quite a stir! Not really. I recommend Windows for 95% of my customers and friends because of the market penetration and Windows as lousey as it is is good enough for what they want to do and the ease of them purchasing hardware has a lot to do with that. However, I do recommend firefox, thunderbird, open office, picasa and a few other basic applications that are the same in Windows as Linux. Then from an application point of view it will be easier to go to Linux should the need and timing arise. But for printers I still recommend Canon unless they just want business documents and them I offer them a choice between HP or Canon. Personally I like Canon, Epson and HP in that order. For Linux if they just need business documents and will most likely never or rarely do photos then HP is the one to get. For me,however it is Canon. However for a wide format printer for photos in Linux I still do not know except I do favor the Canon Pro 9000. TJ |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
"kony" wrote in message ... On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:34:52 -0500, CBFalconer wrote: kony wrote: Tony wrote: ... snip ... Not sure I should have bothered however, it seems to me that once some people have established a view they are completely immovable; ?? hardly a path to enlightenment! First of all, if you can't respecty usenet conventions of not top-posting, you shouldn't be allowed on usenet at all. Tony appears to be a reasonable person, and doesn't deserve this sort of treatment. I suspect he will respond quite nicely to convincing arguments. You may be right, but at some point you have to look at both sides of the coin. Anyone can start doing the right thing after having done wrong... and be given some patience for that, but the flipside is anyone can also start doing the wrong thing after having done right. In the end, it's just text. If someone doesn't have thick skin then I apologize for offense, but I'd have to also feel that handling people with kid-gloves only works to a certain point, and thick skin doesn't grow all by itself. Kony - My responses to you have less to do with Tony than they have with you. I have respect for those who "handle" (relate to) others in a kind, non-abusive, civil manner. I certainly understand escalating your response if the person with whom you are discussing an issue lacks civility or becomes abusive. Your tone, from the start, was combative and accusative. No need for someone to be "thick skinned" and experience offensive responses. All of us who participate in usenet and other internet-based forums realize that some respondants are less civil than others. In part, this is a product of the anonymity of the medium. Face-to-face, less of the dialogue would be abrasive. Why not imagine that when you enter into a usenet dialogue you are actually speaking directly to an individual or group of people. That is not "handling" people with kid gloves - it is just common courtesy. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
kony wrote:
If someone doesn't have thick skin then I apologize for offense, but I'd have to also feel that handling people with kid-gloves only works to a certain point, and thick skin doesn't grow all by itself. You've just entered my killfile. I have no more time to waste with your arrogant stupidity. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
Burt wrote:
"kony" If someone doesn't have thick skin then I apologize for offense, but I'd have to also feel that handling people with kid-gloves only works to a certain point, and thick skin doesn't grow all by itself. Kony - ... Your tone, from the start, was combative and accusative. No need for someone to be "thick skinned" and experience offensive responses. All of us who participate in usenet and other internet-based forums realize that some respondants are less civil than others. In part, this is a product of the anonymity of the medium. Face-to-face, less of the dialogue would be abrasive. Why not imagine that when you enter into a usenet dialogue you are actually speaking directly to an individual or group of people. That is not "handling" people with kid gloves - it is just common courtesy. Burt, You're correct, of course. However, I think that we've wasted enough "ink" reasoning with this combative troll. He has to fight; he has to win. Period. Disengage. I've killfiled him, and submit that the rest of us do likewise. Richard |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 18:18:37 GMT, "Burt"
wrote: You may be right, but at some point you have to look at both sides of the coin. Anyone can start doing the right thing after having done wrong... and be given some patience for that, but the flipside is anyone can also start doing the wrong thing after having done right. In the end, it's just text. If someone doesn't have thick skin then I apologize for offense, but I'd have to also feel that handling people with kid-gloves only works to a certain point, and thick skin doesn't grow all by itself. Kony - My responses to you have less to do with Tony than they have with you. I have respect for those who "handle" (relate to) others in a kind, non-abusive, civil manner. I certainly understand escalating your response if the person with whom you are discussing an issue lacks civility or becomes abusive. Your tone, from the start, was combative and accusative. No need for someone to be "thick skinned" and experience offensive responses. It seems you are a little beyond reason here, thinking that ultimately you are going to judge the way another replies. I hope that was a kind, non-abusive, civil manner. If you persist in trying to judge the way another replies, it is not surprising that people wouldn't be as kind, non-abusive, and civil. Sometimes, it is wrong to try to sugar coat something that shouldn't taste sweet. All of us who participate in usenet and other internet-based forums realize that some respondants are less civil than others. In part, this is a product of the anonymity of the medium. Face-to-face, less of the dialogue would be abrasive. True, face to face the conversation would often turn out differently. You'd be mistaken if you feel only my exchange in the conversation would have been different. I will in fact clearly tell someone when they are irresponsible, when their actions have a potential to negatively effect others. THAT is far more significant, IMO, than some text on usenet. Why not imagine that when you enter into a usenet dialogue you are actually speaking directly to an individual or group of people. That is not "handling" people with kid gloves - it is just common courtesy. Why not imagine that courtesy is a two way street. When someone selectively, probably deceptively brushes aside facts, the entire conversation may need to stop and refocus until that is addressed. It is equally discourteous in a face to face conversation to completely ignore what the other person said and disagree with no justification or counter evidence. When doing so promotes something that can cause problems for others as well, the dialog has already sunk below a courteous level. Why just imagine, instead of actually looking at the history of mankind. Truth, justice, all those grand ideals we humans have seldom come nor are maintained with only courtesy. Your ideas, when taken out of context, conflict with reality. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 11:16:40 -0800, Richard Steinfeld
wrote: Burt wrote: "kony" If someone doesn't have thick skin then I apologize for offense, but I'd have to also feel that handling people with kid-gloves only works to a certain point, and thick skin doesn't grow all by itself. Kony - ... Your tone, from the start, was combative and accusative. No need for someone to be "thick skinned" and experience offensive responses. All of us who participate in usenet and other internet-based forums realize that some respondants are less civil than others. In part, this is a product of the anonymity of the medium. Face-to-face, less of the dialogue would be abrasive. Why not imagine that when you enter into a usenet dialogue you are actually speaking directly to an individual or group of people. That is not "handling" people with kid gloves - it is just common courtesy. Burt, You're correct, of course. Yes, how dare a person be "combative" instead of agreeing with another who shows no real consideration of facts or of the impact on others. Grow up, this is a conversation. If words make your eyes or ears bleed, you have been in isolation a little too long I suspect. It is not as though every other word was four letters in my replies, and sometimes people need a little kick in the pants to get their conversation back on track. If I think someone is being less than considerate or deceptive, I will state that. They are welcome to elaborate on their position, and to stop selectively ignoring evidence towards their own agenda. When someone tries to always steer a conversation back towards a goal instead of taking it as it comes, looking at facts instead of ignoring them, it is a dead giveaway that there is an agenda. Is it always a polite discourse with someone having an agenda? No. If that could always be accomplished by being polite, what a great thing that would be. When you are polite and someone already refuses to discuss facts instead _choosing_ to ignore direct evidence, they are either mentally defective or choosing to do so. Nobody is perfect, if overlooking facts was an oversight, or consideration of the impact of something on others wasn't thought out, that much can be overlooked. It's when something is repeatedly mentioned and still an attempt to sweep truth and fact under the rug, that civility has already degraded in the conversation. However, I think that we've wasted enough "ink" reasoning with this combative troll. He has to fight; he has to win. Period. Disengage. I've killfiled him, and submit that the rest of us do likewise. Richard Good for you, it's a bit like putting your hands over your ears and singing la la la la la. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text? Off Topic
measekite wrote:
I recommend Windows for 95% of my customers... But for printers I still recommend Canon unless they just want business documents and them I offer them a choice between HP or Canon. So, for how long have you been a floor salesman at Staples? Is this just during the Holiday period that you'll be hawking the printers, or a long-term thing? -Taliesyn |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
What inkjet printer prints the best text?
B. Schneier wrote:
Most of my printing involves documents and legal briefs. There is some color printing for brochures and stuff I find on the Internet. Can someone recommend a color ink jet that prints laser-like text and is reasonably fast. Thanks in advance, BS How many pages per month would be color and what percentage of a page would be colored? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What inkjet printer prints the best text? | B. Schneier[_2_] | General | 145 | December 31st 07 03:13 AM |
Canon i860 prints graphics but not text | N. Morrow | Printers | 4 | August 2nd 07 01:01 PM |
Canon s520 prints one text on many ones - please help | Dido | Printers | 2 | November 13th 03 07:28 PM |
HP deskjet 940c: no longer prints text | Larry Ort | Printers | 0 | October 1st 03 11:05 PM |
text or greyscale prints : cheapest way ? | wrb | Printers | 3 | September 19th 03 12:18 PM |