Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3rd Party Ink - PC World Excerpts

Tags:
  • Printers
  • Peripherals
Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 5:21:14 AM

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

This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)

We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and
clogged up printheads. The impact of generic inks on printer warranties
is ambiguous. And if you frequently print photographs, you should steer
clear of these inks: The prints might look fine, but Wilhelm reported
that none of the clone inks he tested came close to matching the
permanence of brand-name inks.


Third-party vendors have already grabbed more than 16 percent of
cartridge sales, Forrest says, and that percentage is growing. Printer
vendors contend that third-party inks can cause myriad problems--some of
which, they say, may surface only after prolonged use of the
generics--ranging from poor print quality and durability to printer
damage. Third-party vendors counter that printer companies simply want
to scare consumers out of straying from the branded inks, which the
third-parties claim are overpriced in order to subsidize the
artificially inexpensive printers.

In general, most of the third-party inks printed text on plain paper as
decently as the printer manufacturers' cartridges did . Results weren't
as good for high-resolution shots on the printer vendors' long-lasting
photo papers, but four out of the nine aftermarket brands we
tested--Amazon Imaging's ink for the Canon, G&G's ink for the Epson, and
Carrot Ink's cartridge and InkTec's cartridge-refill kit for the
HP--yielded prints of comparable quality to those made with printer
manufacturer inks. Of the clones, only the OA100 inks for the Canon
produced photos significantly worse than those made with a brand-name ink.

But some inks, even those that made good-looking pictures, didn't always
work well. All three aftermarket black inks for the Epson C82--OA100
(purchased from PrintPal <http://www.printpal.com/welcome.html&gt;), G&G
(from Computer Friends <http://www.cfriends.com/&gt;), and the no-name ink
whose package had only a rainbow logo (also from Computer
Friends)--plugged up the printhead nozzles so quickly and consistently
that we had to abort some of our tests. But the color inks from these
three companies all worked well in the Epson printer. (We bought a
fourth brand of aftermarket ink, Print-Rite, for the C82 but dropped it
from our tests, as the printer wouldn't install any of the cartridges.)

Clogs and Messes

Several OA100 cartridges purchased from PrintPal, most notably the black
and cyan, frequently plugged the nozzles on the Canon S900's printhead,
causing wide blank stripes in documents.

The HP DeskJet 3820's cartridges integrate the printhead and ink supply
in one unit that can't be replicated legally, so third-party vendors
simply refill used 3820 cartridges. A Printek cartridge we bought from
PrintPal had no ink in the magenta tank, but we were able to complete
our quality and yield tests with other cartridges. Wilhelm was unable to
print all four colors satisfactorily with any of the Printek cartridges
from PrintPal, but was able to test the same brand of cartridges from
another vendor, Top Inkjet <http://www.topinkjet.com/&gt;.

We also tried refilling our own HP cartridges with an InkTec kit that we
bought from Print Country <http://www.printcountry.com/&gt;. What a mess!
It dripped ink everywhere, but when we finally refilled our cartridges
the ink made decent-quality prints. At Wilhelm Imaging Research,
however, the prints produced using the kit were so poor in quality that
Wilhelm did not test them for permanence.

And it was in permanence that third-party inks fell short.

Do-it-yourself refill kits offer the greatest savings, if you're willing
to brave the messy refill process

Often, aftermarket retailers buy prepackaged inks from
manufacturers--many of them in China--which makes it difficult for the
retailers to know exactly what they're getting. But some third-party ink
companies do exercise direct control over their products. Gary Miller,
Amazon Imaging's sales vice president, says his company makes its inks
and uses cartridges made of polypropylene, a high-quality material that
printer vendors use, instead of cheaper plastics that can damage the ink
if it's stored for several months.

*********************************************************************************************
Buying third-party ink online can be frustrating. Some retailers' Web
sites don't identify products by name, only by printer or cartridge
compatibility, so getting a steady supply of an ink you like can be a
challenge. Computer Friends, whose generic inks are unidentified on its
Web site, sent us G&G ink to fill most of our initial order for Epson
C82-compatible ink but completed the order later with a different brand.
*********************************************************************************************

Worth the Risks?

In the meantime, judging from our experience, finding a reasonably
priced substitute for brand-name ink can be a risky business. If top
quality and print longevity aren't of paramount importance, you can save
money using no-name inks--but you may have to spend a lot of time
cleaning clogged printheads. Still, some users may find the savings
justify the hassles.

If print quality--and especially durability--are a top concern, however,
you're better off playing it safe by gritting your teeth and shelling
out for brand-name inks.

More about : 3rd party ink world excerpts

May 23, 2005 6:24:08 AM

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

Willhelms tests were done some time ago with ink brands (labels if you
prefer) that none of the people reporting on this NG use. I would welcome
similar tests done by Wilhelm or a similar reputable testing firm comparing
Canon OEM inks vs. Formulabs and MIS inks among others. Measekite quotes
his famous successful "prints laying on his desk for nine months" fade test
with prints done with Canon OEM inks and I can attest to the fact that
prints I have made with MIS inks that are hanging on my wall or displayed in
albums have passed the same test successfully. The prints with these inks
compare very favorably with OEM inks in a side-by-side comparison.

Measekite and I are in agreement that some third party products can cause
problems with print heads. What he doesn't like to acknowledge is that some
third party inks are quite good, have been purchased and used by the people
he demeans by calling us the aftermarket club, and have been purchased over
a period of years from vendors who have proven to be very reliable. He is
relentless in posting negatives about our very positive experience with
third party products and then accuses us of proseltyzing for their use when
we respond to his negatives or answer questions posed on this NG about such
products. Now that I have responded I assume he will proceed to lay out his
liteny of rants about Brand name vs. labels and call the vendors his
usual-innuendo laden, mean-spirited names. Can I save you the trouble and
time of responding, Measekite, by just referring people to your numerous
previous postings about this issue?

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
> AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>
> We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
> prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
> encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and clogged
> up printheads. The impact of generic inks on printer warranties is
> ambiguous. And if you frequently print photographs, you should steer clear
> of these inks: The prints might look fine, but Wilhelm reported that none
> of the clone inks he tested came close to matching the permanence of
> brand-name inks.
>
>
> Third-party vendors have already grabbed more than 16 percent of cartridge
> sales, Forrest says, and that percentage is growing. Printer vendors
> contend that third-party inks can cause myriad problems--some of which,
> they say, may surface only after prolonged use of the generics--ranging
> from poor print quality and durability to printer damage. Third-party
> vendors counter that printer companies simply want to scare consumers out
> of straying from the branded inks, which the third-parties claim are
> overpriced in order to subsidize the artificially inexpensive printers.
>
> In general, most of the third-party inks printed text on plain paper as
> decently as the printer manufacturers' cartridges did . Results weren't as
> good for high-resolution shots on the printer vendors' long-lasting photo
> papers, but four out of the nine aftermarket brands we tested--Amazon
> Imaging's ink for the Canon, G&G's ink for the Epson, and Carrot Ink's
> cartridge and InkTec's cartridge-refill kit for the HP--yielded prints of
> comparable quality to those made with printer manufacturer inks. Of the
> clones, only the OA100 inks for the Canon produced photos significantly
> worse than those made with a brand-name ink.
>
> But some inks, even those that made good-looking pictures, didn't always
> work well. All three aftermarket black inks for the Epson C82--OA100
> (purchased from PrintPal <http://www.printpal.com/welcome.html&gt;), G&G
> (from Computer Friends <http://www.cfriends.com/&gt;), and the no-name ink
> whose package had only a rainbow logo (also from Computer
> Friends)--plugged up the printhead nozzles so quickly and consistently
> that we had to abort some of our tests. But the color inks from these
> three companies all worked well in the Epson printer. (We bought a fourth
> brand of aftermarket ink, Print-Rite, for the C82 but dropped it from our
> tests, as the printer wouldn't install any of the cartridges.)
>
> Clogs and Messes
>
> Several OA100 cartridges purchased from PrintPal, most notably the black
> and cyan, frequently plugged the nozzles on the Canon S900's printhead,
> causing wide blank stripes in documents.
>
> The HP DeskJet 3820's cartridges integrate the printhead and ink supply in
> one unit that can't be replicated legally, so third-party vendors simply
> refill used 3820 cartridges. A Printek cartridge we bought from PrintPal
> had no ink in the magenta tank, but we were able to complete our quality
> and yield tests with other cartridges. Wilhelm was unable to print all
> four colors satisfactorily with any of the Printek cartridges from
> PrintPal, but was able to test the same brand of cartridges from another
> vendor, Top Inkjet <http://www.topinkjet.com/&gt;.
>
> We also tried refilling our own HP cartridges with an InkTec kit that we
> bought from Print Country <http://www.printcountry.com/&gt;. What a mess! It
> dripped ink everywhere, but when we finally refilled our cartridges the
> ink made decent-quality prints. At Wilhelm Imaging Research, however, the
> prints produced using the kit were so poor in quality that Wilhelm did not
> test them for permanence.
>
> And it was in permanence that third-party inks fell short.
>
> Do-it-yourself refill kits offer the greatest savings, if you're willing
> to brave the messy refill process
>
> Often, aftermarket retailers buy prepackaged inks from manufacturers--many
> of them in China--which makes it difficult for the retailers to know
> exactly what they're getting. But some third-party ink companies do
> exercise direct control over their products. Gary Miller, Amazon Imaging's
> sales vice president, says his company makes its inks and uses cartridges
> made of polypropylene, a high-quality material that printer vendors use,
> instead of cheaper plastics that can damage the ink if it's stored for
> several months.
>
> *********************************************************************************************
> Buying third-party ink online can be frustrating. Some retailers' Web
> sites don't identify products by name, only by printer or cartridge
> compatibility, so getting a steady supply of an ink you like can be a
> challenge. Computer Friends, whose generic inks are unidentified on its
> Web site, sent us G&G ink to fill most of our initial order for Epson
> C82-compatible ink but completed the order later with a different brand.
> *********************************************************************************************
>
> Worth the Risks?
>
> In the meantime, judging from our experience, finding a reasonably priced
> substitute for brand-name ink can be a risky business. If top quality and
> print longevity aren't of paramount importance, you can save money using
> no-name inks--but you may have to spend a lot of time cleaning clogged
> printheads. Still, some users may find the savings justify the hassles.
>
> If print quality--and especially durability--are a top concern, however,
> you're better off playing it safe by gritting your teeth and shelling out
> for brand-name inks.
>
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 11:21:34 AM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
> AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>
> We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
> prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
> encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and
> clogged up printheads.

Well I haven't seen these problems with the ink I've been using for 6 years
but..

The moral of the story is to buy two printers....

1) An expensive photo printer model which you only use for photos and which
you fit with the manufacturers ink carts.

2) A chepo printer from a company like HP (heads built into carts) that you
refill and use for all your text and general printing.

The money you save using third party ink in 2) should help pay for 1) but I
haven't done the sums.
Related resources
May 23, 2005 1:04:22 PM

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

For the open minded.

"CAN be frustrating"
"SOME retailers' Web sites"
"CAN cause myriad problems"
"SOME inks, even those that made good-looking pictures"
"CAN be a risky business"

Lots of "Can's" and "Some's" here - no absolutes in the entire excerpt.
No surprise of course, many of us repeatedly say that there are good and there
are bad. Choose the reputable suppliers and you will be no worse off than you
are with OEM inks, but you will save money! The real cost of ownership for an
inkjet printer is extremely high and saving money is a non trivial endeavour.

PC World is no less open to persuasion from OEM vendors than any other
publication, we don't know who prompted this article.
As in all things read both sides of the story and make a balanced judgement.
One article does not a gospel make!

Tony
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 5:34:57 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
> AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)

Anyone who wants to read the original article - its here
http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,111767,00.... - measekite must
of missed the part that says "Copying, reproduction, retransmission, or
redistribution of any material contained in this PCWorld.com area in whole
or in part or in any medium or form is prohibited without express
permission."
May 23, 2005 5:34:58 PM

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

Ivor Floppy wrote:
> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
>>AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>
>
> Anyone who wants to read the original article - its here
> http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,111767,00.... - measekite must
> of missed the part that says "Copying, reproduction, retransmission, or
> redistribution of any material contained in this PCWorld.com area in whole
> or in part or in any medium or form is prohibited without express
> permission."
>
>
Copyright laws don't make any sense to this moron, nor did the article
when he tried to read it.
I've kill filed him but I can assure you his childish, immature and
obscene replies will be forthcoming.
Frank
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 5:57:08 PM

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

CWatters wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
>>AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>
>>We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
>>prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
>>encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and
>>clogged up printheads.
>>
>>
>
>Well I haven't seen these problems with the ink I've been using for 6 years
>but..
>
>The moral of the story is to buy two printers....
>
>1) An expensive photo printer model which you only use for photos and which
>you fit with the manufacturers ink carts.
>
>2) A chepo printer from a company like HP (heads built into carts) that you
>refill and use for all your text and general printing.
>
>The money you save using third party ink in 2) should help pay for 1) but I
>haven't done the sums.
>
>

The problem with that is most people use more ink for photo printing.

>
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 6:05:22 PM

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

Tony wrote:

>For the open minded.
>
>"CAN be frustrating"
>"SOME retailers' Web sites"
>"CAN cause myriad problems"
>"SOME inks, even those that made good-looking pictures"
>"CAN be a risky business"
>
>Lots of "Can's" and "Some's" here - no absolutes in the entire excerpt.
>No surprise of course, many of us repeatedly say that there are good and there
>are bad. Choose the reputable suppliers
>

Suppliers that will not put (in writing on their websites) what they are
selling you and just all their product compatible are not all that
reputable. You never know what you are getting and if you are getting
the same thing as the previous order.

>and you will be no worse off than you
>are with OEM inks,
>

provided you do not have a head clog. If your print fades somewhat
earlier just print another.

>but you will save money! The real cost of ownership for an
>inkjet printer is extremely high and saving money is a non trivial endeavour.
>
>PC World is no less open to persuasion from OEM vendors than any other
>publication, we don't know who prompted this article.
>As in all things read both sides of the story and make a balanced judgement.
>One article does not a gospel make!
>
>Tony
>
>

There is no reputable other side. There are no really independent head
on comparative review by a reputable organization. Consumer Reports may
be one but they have not done an appropriate study. All we have is
about 6 to 12 tinkerers known as the AfterMarket Club who have had some
independent experiences and most claim not to have had trouble.
May 23, 2005 7:33:42 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Cqlke.617$rY6.584@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
(snip)

> Suppliers that will not put (in writing on their websites) what they are
> selling you

Wrong - Alotofthings states very clearly that they use Formulabs but you
disparage them without ever having done business with them.


and just all their product compatible are not all that
> reputable. You never know what you are getting and if you are getting the
> same thing as the previous order.
>
>>and you will be no worse off than you are with OEM inks,
>
> provided you do not have a head clog. If your print fades somewhat
> earlier just print another.
>
>>but you will save money! The real cost of ownership for an inkjet printer
>>is extremely high and saving money is a non trivial endeavour.
>>
>>PC World is no less open to persuasion from OEM vendors than any other
>>publication, we don't know who prompted this article.
>>As in all things read both sides of the story and make a balanced
>>judgement. One article does not a gospel make!
>>
>>Tony
>>
>
> There is no reputable other side. There are no really independent head on
> comparative review by a reputable organization. Consumer Reports may be
> one but they have not done an appropriate study. All we have is about 6
> to 12 tinkerers

Tinkerers - Measekite's disparaging term for successful users of third party
inks/carts

6 to 12 third party users reporting successful use as opposed to one
Measekite who has never used any of these third party ink/cart products but
delights in putting down the vendors, products, and people who use them in
an effort to discourage others.

>known as the AfterMarket Club

Aftermarket club - Measekite's disparaging term for users of aftermarket ink
and carts

> who have had some

Wrong - considerable experience, not "some" experience. Many years of use by
several peoples on this NG.

> independent experiences and most claim not to have had trouble.

Wrong - all have had no more problems with selected third party products
than experienced with OEM inks/carts

Measekite's monologue continues!!!!
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 8:31:43 PM

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

measekite wrote:

>
>
> Taliesyn wrote:
>
>> measekite wrote:
>>
>>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>>> the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>>
>>
>> And "we" should believe it like you're quoting some unarguable fact.
>
>
>
> I guess the "we" is an ommission that you are a member also.

I don't know what your problem is to people saving money and getting
satisfactory print results. Is it jealousy? Do you envy the fact that
I'm doing it and you can't? Does it bother you that I stick all kinds
of "unknown substances" in my printer and still manage to keep printing?
Do you wish you had the guts? Why are you trying to force me to use OEM
inks if I don't want to? Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
explanatory? Because I personally don't give a damn what you stick in
your goddam little used printer.

Those who use 3rd party inks have long ago compared results with OEM
inks and discovered that the differences were either not there or were
small enough that they didn't justify using OEM ink that cost a hell of
a lot more. As I have said many times ... I can refill with bulk ink at
a cost of $5 (for all 5 cartridges) or buy 5 cartridges at a cost of
$125 (Wal-Mart) Canadian dollars. The difference in print output is very
small to negligible, and certainly not worth the $120 difference - or
more that half the cost of my printer. Half the cost of the printer is
pure theft on the part of Canon. I don't like my pockets being picked.
Charge me a reasonable price and I'll buy OEM ink. What is reasonable?
Hmmmmm..... $5 CDN a cartridge, or about $4 US. At that rate it's about
10% of the cost of the printer (with Canadian taxes). That's fair.

>
>>
>> You're about 10 years behind us in research, "Mr. Research Analyst."
>>
>> There's nothing here that those of us who have been refilling or buying
>> generics for the last 10 YEARS
>
>
> Since you were 7?

No, but your juvenile response to a serious argument shows us your IQ.

-Taliesyn
May 23, 2005 8:31:44 PM

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

Taliesyn wrote:
> measekite wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Taliesyn wrote:
>>
>>> measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>>>> the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> And "we" should believe it like you're quoting some unarguable fact.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess the "we" is an ommission that you are a member also.
>
>
> I don't know what your problem is to people saving money and getting
> satisfactory print results. Is it jealousy? Do you envy the fact that
> I'm doing it and you can't? Does it bother you that I stick all kinds
> of "unknown substances" in my printer and still manage to keep printing?
> Do you wish you had the guts? Why are you trying to force me to use OEM
> inks if I don't want to? Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
> explanatory? Because I personally don't give a damn what you stick in
> your goddam little used printer.
>
> Those who use 3rd party inks have long ago compared results with OEM
> inks and discovered that the differences were either not there or were
> small enough that they didn't justify using OEM ink that cost a hell of
> a lot more. As I have said many times ... I can refill with bulk ink at
> a cost of $5 (for all 5 cartridges) or buy 5 cartridges at a cost of
> $125 (Wal-Mart) Canadian dollars. The difference in print output is very
> small to negligible, and certainly not worth the $120 difference - or
> more that half the cost of my printer. Half the cost of the printer is
> pure theft on the part of Canon. I don't like my pockets being picked.
> Charge me a reasonable price and I'll buy OEM ink. What is reasonable?
> Hmmmmm..... $5 CDN a cartridge, or about $4 US. At that rate it's about
> 10% of the cost of the printer (with Canadian taxes). That's fair.
>
>>
>>>
>>> You're about 10 years behind us in research, "Mr. Research Analyst."
>>>
>>> There's nothing here that those of us who have been refilling or buying
>>> generics for the last 10 YEARS
>>
>>
>>
>> Since you were 7?
>
>
> No, but your juvenile response to a serious argument shows us your IQ.
>
> -Taliesyn

Hey Taliesyn, this guy is a real sicko, wacko moron. Nobody believes any
of his bullshit.
Frank
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 8:42:12 PM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:Cqlke.617$rY6.584@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>(snip)
>
>
>
>>Suppliers that will not put (in writing on their websites) what they are
>>selling you
>>
>>
>
>Wrong - Alotofthings states very clearly that they use Formulabs but you
>disparage them without ever having done business with them.
>
>
> and just all their product compatible are not all that
>
>
>>reputable. You never know what you are getting and if you are getting the
>>same thing as the previous order.
>>
>>
>>
>>>and you will be no worse off than you are with OEM inks,
>>>
>>>
>>provided you do not have a head clog. If your print fades somewhat
>>earlier just print another.
>>
>>
>>
>>>but you will save money! The real cost of ownership for an inkjet printer
>>>is extremely high and saving money is a non trivial endeavour.
>>>
>>>PC World is no less open to persuasion from OEM vendors than any other
>>>publication, we don't know who prompted this article.
>>>As in all things read both sides of the story and make a balanced
>>>judgement. One article does not a gospel make!
>>>
>>>Tony
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>There is no reputable other side. There are no really independent head on
>>comparative review by a reputable organization. Consumer Reports may be
>>one but they have not done an appropriate study. All we have is about 6
>>to 12 tinkerers
>>
>>
>
>Tinkerers - Measekite's disparaging term for successful users of third party
>inks/carts
>
>6 to 12 third party users reporting successful use as opposed to one
>Measekite who has never used any of these third party ink/cart products but
>delights in putting down the vendors, products, and people who use them in
>an effort to discourage others.
>
>

ATTENTION NEW NG READERS:

If you track all of these success stories about AfterMarket inks on this
NG over a 2 to 3 week period of time you will find that all of these
success stories come from a handful of tinkerers that I have
collectively called the AfterMarket Club. Burt is their president and
Frankie is their parrot.

>
>
>>known as the AfterMarket Club
>>
>>
>
>Aftermarket club - Measekite's disparaging term for users of aftermarket ink
>and carts
>
>
>
>>who have had some
>>
>>
>
>Wrong - considerable experience, not "some" experience. Many years of use by
>several peoples on this NG.
>
>
>
>>independent experiences and most claim not to have had trouble.
>>
>>
>
>Wrong - all have had no more problems with selected third party products
>than experienced with OEM inks/carts
>
>Measekite's monologue continues!!!!
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 8:45:56 PM

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

Frank wrote:

> Ivor Floppy wrote:
>
>> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>>> the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone who wants to read the original article - its here
>> http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,111767,00.... -
>> measekite must of missed the part that says "Copying, reproduction,
>> retransmission, or redistribution of any material contained in this
>> PCWorld.com area in whole or in part or in any medium or form is
>> prohibited without express permission."
>>
>>
> Copyright laws don't make any sense to this moron, nor did the article
> when he tried to read it.
> I've kill filed him but I can assure you his childish, immature and
> obscene replies will be forthcoming.
> Frank


Frankie Crankie's mom respects the copyright law. There is only one of
him. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :-D
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 8:54:00 PM

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

You need to learn to attribute your quotes. If you are going to lift a
copyrighted article, the least you should do (better is getting
permission, if possible) is to state where the information came from and
the author, is given.

measekite wrote:

> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
> AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>
> We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
> prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
> encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and
> clogged up printheads. The impact of generic inks on printer warranties
> is ambiguous. And if you frequently print photographs, you should steer
> clear of these inks: The prints might look fine, but Wilhelm reported
> that none of the clone inks he tested came close to matching the
> permanence of brand-name inks.
>
>
> Third-party vendors have already grabbed more than 16 percent of
> cartridge sales, Forrest says, and that percentage is growing. Printer
> vendors contend that third-party inks can cause myriad problems--some of
> which, they say, may surface only after prolonged use of the
> generics--ranging from poor print quality and durability to printer
> damage. Third-party vendors counter that printer companies simply want
> to scare consumers out of straying from the branded inks, which the
> third-parties claim are overpriced in order to subsidize the
> artificially inexpensive printers.
>
> In general, most of the third-party inks printed text on plain paper as
> decently as the printer manufacturers' cartridges did . Results weren't
> as good for high-resolution shots on the printer vendors' long-lasting
> photo papers, but four out of the nine aftermarket brands we
> tested--Amazon Imaging's ink for the Canon, G&G's ink for the Epson, and
> Carrot Ink's cartridge and InkTec's cartridge-refill kit for the
> HP--yielded prints of comparable quality to those made with printer
> manufacturer inks. Of the clones, only the OA100 inks for the Canon
> produced photos significantly worse than those made with a brand-name ink.
>
> But some inks, even those that made good-looking pictures, didn't always
> work well. All three aftermarket black inks for the Epson C82--OA100
> (purchased from PrintPal <http://www.printpal.com/welcome.html&gt;), G&G
> (from Computer Friends <http://www.cfriends.com/&gt;), and the no-name ink
> whose package had only a rainbow logo (also from Computer
> Friends)--plugged up the printhead nozzles so quickly and consistently
> that we had to abort some of our tests. But the color inks from these
> three companies all worked well in the Epson printer. (We bought a
> fourth brand of aftermarket ink, Print-Rite, for the C82 but dropped it
> from our tests, as the printer wouldn't install any of the cartridges.)
>
> Clogs and Messes
>
> Several OA100 cartridges purchased from PrintPal, most notably the black
> and cyan, frequently plugged the nozzles on the Canon S900's printhead,
> causing wide blank stripes in documents.
>
> The HP DeskJet 3820's cartridges integrate the printhead and ink supply
> in one unit that can't be replicated legally, so third-party vendors
> simply refill used 3820 cartridges. A Printek cartridge we bought from
> PrintPal had no ink in the magenta tank, but we were able to complete
> our quality and yield tests with other cartridges. Wilhelm was unable to
> print all four colors satisfactorily with any of the Printek cartridges
> from PrintPal, but was able to test the same brand of cartridges from
> another vendor, Top Inkjet <http://www.topinkjet.com/&gt;.
>
> We also tried refilling our own HP cartridges with an InkTec kit that we
> bought from Print Country <http://www.printcountry.com/&gt;. What a mess!
> It dripped ink everywhere, but when we finally refilled our cartridges
> the ink made decent-quality prints. At Wilhelm Imaging Research,
> however, the prints produced using the kit were so poor in quality that
> Wilhelm did not test them for permanence.
>
> And it was in permanence that third-party inks fell short.
>
> Do-it-yourself refill kits offer the greatest savings, if you're willing
> to brave the messy refill process
>
> Often, aftermarket retailers buy prepackaged inks from
> manufacturers--many of them in China--which makes it difficult for the
> retailers to know exactly what they're getting. But some third-party ink
> companies do exercise direct control over their products. Gary Miller,
> Amazon Imaging's sales vice president, says his company makes its inks
> and uses cartridges made of polypropylene, a high-quality material that
> printer vendors use, instead of cheaper plastics that can damage the ink
> if it's stored for several months.
>
> *********************************************************************************************
>
> Buying third-party ink online can be frustrating. Some retailers' Web
> sites don't identify products by name, only by printer or cartridge
> compatibility, so getting a steady supply of an ink you like can be a
> challenge. Computer Friends, whose generic inks are unidentified on its
> Web site, sent us G&G ink to fill most of our initial order for Epson
> C82-compatible ink but completed the order later with a different brand.
> *********************************************************************************************
>
>
> Worth the Risks?
>
> In the meantime, judging from our experience, finding a reasonably
> priced substitute for brand-name ink can be a risky business. If top
> quality and print longevity aren't of paramount importance, you can save
> money using no-name inks--but you may have to spend a lot of time
> cleaning clogged printheads. Still, some users may find the savings
> justify the hassles.
>
> If print quality--and especially durability--are a top concern, however,
> you're better off playing it safe by gritting your teeth and shelling
> out for brand-name inks.
>
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 8:57:05 PM

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

The attribution should be in the body of the message, not just in the
subject in the header.

Art

measekite wrote:

> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
> AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>
> We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
> prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
> encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and
> clogged up printheads. The impact of generic inks on printer warranties
> is ambiguous. And if you frequently print photographs, you should steer
> clear of these inks: The prints might look fine, but Wilhelm reported
> that none of the clone inks he tested came close to matching the
> permanence of brand-name inks.
>
>CUT<
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 9:03:56 PM

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

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> You need to learn to attribute your quotes. If you are going to lift
> a copyrighted article, the least you should do (better is getting
> permission, if possible) is to state where the information came from
> and the author, is given.


Look at the header

>
> measekite wrote:
>
>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>> the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>
>> We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some
>> produce prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But
>> we also encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality
>> prints and clogged up printheads. The impact of generic inks on
>> printer warranties is ambiguous. And if you frequently print
>> photographs, you should steer clear of these inks: The prints might
>> look fine, but Wilhelm reported that none of the clone inks he tested
>> came close to matching the permanence of brand-name inks.
>>
>>
>> Third-party vendors have already grabbed more than 16 percent of
>> cartridge sales, Forrest says, and that percentage is growing.
>> Printer vendors contend that third-party inks can cause myriad
>> problems--some of which, they say, may surface only after prolonged
>> use of the generics--ranging from poor print quality and durability
>> to printer damage. Third-party vendors counter that printer companies
>> simply want to scare consumers out of straying from the branded inks,
>> which the third-parties claim are overpriced in order to subsidize
>> the artificially inexpensive printers.
>>
>> In general, most of the third-party inks printed text on plain paper
>> as decently as the printer manufacturers' cartridges did . Results
>> weren't as good for high-resolution shots on the printer vendors'
>> long-lasting photo papers, but four out of the nine aftermarket
>> brands we tested--Amazon Imaging's ink for the Canon, G&G's ink for
>> the Epson, and Carrot Ink's cartridge and InkTec's cartridge-refill
>> kit for the HP--yielded prints of comparable quality to those made
>> with printer manufacturer inks. Of the clones, only the OA100 inks
>> for the Canon produced photos significantly worse than those made
>> with a brand-name ink.
>>
>> But some inks, even those that made good-looking pictures, didn't
>> always work well. All three aftermarket black inks for the Epson
>> C82--OA100 (purchased from PrintPal
>> <http://www.printpal.com/welcome.html&gt;), G&G (from Computer Friends
>> <http://www.cfriends.com/&gt;), and the no-name ink whose package had
>> only a rainbow logo (also from Computer Friends)--plugged up the
>> printhead nozzles so quickly and consistently that we had to abort
>> some of our tests. But the color inks from these three companies all
>> worked well in the Epson printer. (We bought a fourth brand of
>> aftermarket ink, Print-Rite, for the C82 but dropped it from our
>> tests, as the printer wouldn't install any of the cartridges.)
>>
>> Clogs and Messes
>>
>> Several OA100 cartridges purchased from PrintPal, most notably the
>> black and cyan, frequently plugged the nozzles on the Canon S900's
>> printhead, causing wide blank stripes in documents.
>>
>> The HP DeskJet 3820's cartridges integrate the printhead and ink
>> supply in one unit that can't be replicated legally, so third-party
>> vendors simply refill used 3820 cartridges. A Printek cartridge we
>> bought from PrintPal had no ink in the magenta tank, but we were able
>> to complete our quality and yield tests with other cartridges.
>> Wilhelm was unable to print all four colors satisfactorily with any
>> of the Printek cartridges from PrintPal, but was able to test the
>> same brand of cartridges from another vendor, Top Inkjet
>> <http://www.topinkjet.com/&gt;.
>>
>> We also tried refilling our own HP cartridges with an InkTec kit that
>> we bought from Print Country <http://www.printcountry.com/&gt;. What a
>> mess! It dripped ink everywhere, but when we finally refilled our
>> cartridges the ink made decent-quality prints. At Wilhelm Imaging
>> Research, however, the prints produced using the kit were so poor in
>> quality that Wilhelm did not test them for permanence.
>>
>> And it was in permanence that third-party inks fell short.
>>
>> Do-it-yourself refill kits offer the greatest savings, if you're
>> willing to brave the messy refill process
>>
>> Often, aftermarket retailers buy prepackaged inks from
>> manufacturers--many of them in China--which makes it difficult for
>> the retailers to know exactly what they're getting. But some
>> third-party ink companies do exercise direct control over their
>> products. Gary Miller, Amazon Imaging's sales vice president, says
>> his company makes its inks and uses cartridges made of polypropylene,
>> a high-quality material that printer vendors use, instead of cheaper
>> plastics that can damage the ink if it's stored for several months.
>>
>> *********************************************************************************************
>>
>> Buying third-party ink online can be frustrating. Some retailers' Web
>> sites don't identify products by name, only by printer or cartridge
>> compatibility, so getting a steady supply of an ink you like can be a
>> challenge. Computer Friends, whose generic inks are unidentified on
>> its Web site, sent us G&G ink to fill most of our initial order for
>> Epson C82-compatible ink but completed the order later with a
>> different brand.
>> *********************************************************************************************
>>
>>
>> Worth the Risks?
>>
>> In the meantime, judging from our experience, finding a reasonably
>> priced substitute for brand-name ink can be a risky business. If top
>> quality and print longevity aren't of paramount importance, you can
>> save money using no-name inks--but you may have to spend a lot of
>> time cleaning clogged printheads. Still, some users may find the
>> savings justify the hassles.
>>
>> If print quality--and especially durability--are a top concern,
>> however, you're better off playing it safe by gritting your teeth and
>> shelling out for brand-name inks.
>>
May 23, 2005 9:33:09 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:EJnke.653$rY6.135@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
(snip)
>>
>
> ATTENTION NEW NG READERS:
>
> If you track all of these success stories about AfterMarket inks on this
> NG over a 2 to 3 week period of time you will find that all of these
> success stories come from a handful of tinkerers that I have collectively
> called the AfterMarket Club. Burt is their president and Frankie is their
> parrot.
>
(snip)

Since Measekite is calling your attention to this issue, you should
absolutely follow his advice and review all of his posts regarding
aftermarket products. You will find that he has never done business with
the vendors he vilifies nor has he ever used any of their products. You
will find very few posts from people that can absolutely attribute their
printer problems to use the third party products (except in the case of some
of the Epson pigmented inks). You will find the majority of his responses,
when he runs out of reasonable comments, to be obscene and child-like - more
like a school yard bully than a reasonable adult. Please read posts from
Arthur Entlich, Tony, Taliesyn, and Ron Cohen for a more balanced view by
people with years of experience with third party inks and carts. You will
also notice that the vast majority of my posts on this issue are responses
to Measekite's mean-spirited, subjective rants on this subject and are
efforts to give a more balanced, informative view based on my actual
experience. His is a one-man campaign to do battle with anyone who reports
success with select vendors and their products.
May 23, 2005 9:34:39 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8Nnke.656$rY6.350@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Frank wrote:
>
>> Ivor Floppy wrote:
>>
>>> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>>>> the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Anyone who wants to read the original article - its here
>>> http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,111767,00.... - measekite
>>> must of missed the part that says "Copying, reproduction,
>>> retransmission, or redistribution of any material contained in this
>>> PCWorld.com area in whole or in part or in any medium or form is
>>> prohibited without express permission."
>>>
>>>
>> Copyright laws don't make any sense to this moron, nor did the article
>> when he tried to read it.
>> I've kill filed him but I can assure you his childish, immature and
>> obscene replies will be forthcoming.
>> Frank
>
>
> Frankie Crankie's mom respects the copyright law. There is only one of
> him. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :-D

For those new to this NG, this is another example of Measekite's childish
responses. Consider the source in reading his advice on this NG.
May 23, 2005 9:36:35 PM

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

Better yet, it is more than sufficient to post the link and let people read
it for themselves rather than "cherry-pick" the article to support your
viewpoint and possibly misquote the article when copying the portion you
post.

"Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:BXnke.1456708$8l.1012942@pd7tw1no...
> The attribution should be in the body of the message, not just in the
> subject in the header.
>
> Art
>
> measekite wrote:
>
>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of the
>> AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>
>> We found that third-party inks can save you money, and that some produce
>> prints on a par with the output of printer vendor inks. But we also
>> encountered third-party inks that produced poor-quality prints and
>> clogged up printheads. The impact of generic inks on printer warranties
>> is ambiguous. And if you frequently print photographs, you should steer
>> clear of these inks: The prints might look fine, but Wilhelm reported
>> that none of the clone inks he tested came close to matching the
>> permanence of brand-name inks.
>> CUT<
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 11:25:36 PM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:EJnke.653$rY6.135@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>(snip)
>
>
>>ATTENTION NEW NG READERS:
>>
>>If you track all of these success stories about AfterMarket inks on this
>>NG over a 2 to 3 week period of time you will find that all of these
>>success stories come from a handful of tinkerers that I have collectively
>>called the AfterMarket Club. Burt is their president and Frankie is their
>>parrot.
>>
>>
>>
>(snip)
>
>Since Measekite is calling your attention to this issue, you should
>absolutely follow his advice and review all of his posts regarding
>aftermarket products. You will find that he has never done business with
>the vendors he vilifies nor has he ever used any of their products. You
>will find very few posts from people that can absolutely attribute their
>printer problems to use the third party products
>

THIS IS TOTAL BULLSHIT!

> (except in the case of some
>of the Epson pigmented inks). You will find the majority of his responses,
>when he runs out of reasonable comments, to be obscene and child-like - more
>like a school yard bully than a reasonable adult. Please read posts from
>Arthur Entlich, Tony, Taliesyn, and Ron Cohen for a more balanced view by
>people with years of experience with third party inks and carts.
>

Are they a few of your Club Members? And some card carrying members of
the AFTERMARKET Club are actual vendors. Since I exposed they they have
not posted much. I wonder why.

>You will
>also notice that the vast majority of my posts on this issue are responses
>to Measekite's mean-spirited, subjective rants on this subject and are
>efforts to give a more balanced, informative view based on my actual
>experience. His is a one-man campaign to do battle with anyone who reports
>success with select vendors and their products.
>
>

I never disputed that you are satisfied with MIS 3rdparty inks and are
content to buy a black box. You know that everytime you order from
inksupply you can never be sure you are getting what you had before.
Just sit on your pompous ass and espout your evangical bullshit.

>
>
>
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 11:27:14 PM

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

When is the Reverend going to put me in his delete file? The old fart
has nothing better to do.

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:8Nnke.656$rY6.350@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Frank wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Ivor Floppy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>>>>>the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Anyone who wants to read the original article - its here
>>>>http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,111767,00.... - measekite
>>>>must of missed the part that says "Copying, reproduction,
>>>>retransmission, or redistribution of any material contained in this
>>>>PCWorld.com area in whole or in part or in any medium or form is
>>>>prohibited without express permission."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Copyright laws don't make any sense to this moron, nor did the article
>>>when he tried to read it.
>>>I've kill filed him but I can assure you his childish, immature and
>>>obscene replies will be forthcoming.
>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>>Frankie Crankie's mom respects the copyright law. There is only one of
>>him. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :-D
>>
>>
>
>For those new to this NG, this is another example of Measekite's childish
>responses. Consider the source in reading his advice on this NG.
>
>
>
>
May 23, 2005 11:35:21 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Q6qke.770$rY6.122@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:EJnke.653$rY6.135@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>(snip)
>>
>>>ATTENTION NEW NG READERS:
>>>
>>>If you track all of these success stories about AfterMarket inks on this
>>>NG over a 2 to 3 week period of time you will find that all of these
>>>success stories come from a handful of tinkerers that I have collectively
>>>called the AfterMarket Club. Burt is their president and Frankie is
>>>their parrot.
>>>
>>>
>>(snip)
>>
>>Since Measekite is calling your attention to this issue, you should
>>absolutely follow his advice and review all of his posts regarding
>>aftermarket products. You will find that he has never done business with
>>the vendors he vilifies nor has he ever used any of their products. You
>>will find very few posts from people that can absolutely attribute their
>>printer problems to use the third party products
>>
>
> THIS IS TOTAL BULLSHIT!
>
>> (except in the case of some of the Epson pigmented inks). You will find
>> the majority of his responses, when he runs out of reasonable comments,
>> to be obscene and child-like - more like a school yard bully than a
>> reasonable adult. Please read posts from Arthur Entlich, Tony, Taliesyn,
>> and Ron Cohen for a more balanced view by people with years of experience
>> with third party inks and carts.
>
> Are they a few of your Club Members? And some card carrying members of the
> AFTERMARKET Club are actual vendors. Since I exposed they they have not
> posted much. I wonder why.

We are so fortunate to have you exposing people! Who the hell are you? A
combination of the CIA and a sleazy tabloid radio talk host? None of these
people are vendors. You are so adamant in your views about your Canon i960
and OEM inks that we all suspect that YOU are the shill or vendor.
So---stop YOUR spamming. I just exposed you. (God forbid that we should
see you exposed!)
>
>>You will also notice that the vast majority of my posts on this issue are
>>responses to Measekite's mean-spirited, subjective rants on this subject
>>and are efforts to give a more balanced, informative view based on my
>>actual experience. His is a one-man campaign to do battle with anyone who
>>reports success with select vendors and their products.
>
> I never disputed that you are satisfied with MIS 3rdparty inks and are
> content to buy a black box. You know that everytime you order from
> inksupply you can never be sure you are getting what you had before. Just
> sit on your pompous ass and espout your evangical bullshit.

As expected, more school-yard, obscene comments when logic fails him.
>
>>
>>
May 23, 2005 11:36:31 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:m8qke.772$rY6.339@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> When is the Reverend going to put me in his delete file? The old fart has
> nothing better to do.

Too bad we have to follow your posts constantly to prevent your nonsensical
misinformation from appearing to be anything but your own rant from personal
bias.
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:8Nnke.656$rY6.350@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Ivor Floppy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:eeake.293$rY6.35@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members of
>>>>>>the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said here.
>>>>>>:-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Anyone who wants to read the original article - its here
>>>>>http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,111767,00.... - measekite
>>>>>must of missed the part that says "Copying, reproduction,
>>>>>retransmission, or redistribution of any material contained in this
>>>>>PCWorld.com area in whole or in part or in any medium or form is
>>>>>prohibited without express permission."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Copyright laws don't make any sense to this moron, nor did the article
>>>>when he tried to read it.
>>>>I've kill filed him but I can assure you his childish, immature and
>>>>obscene replies will be forthcoming.
>>>>Frank
>>>>
>>>Frankie Crankie's mom respects the copyright law. There is only one of
>>>him. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :-D
>>>
>>
>>For those new to this NG, this is another example of Measekite's childish
>>responses. Consider the source in reading his advice on this NG.
>>
>>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 12:52:19 AM

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

Taliesyn wrote:

> measekite wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Taliesyn wrote:
>>
>>> measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members
>>>> of the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said
>>>> here. :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> And "we" should believe it like you're quoting some unarguable fact.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess the "we" is an ommission that you are a member also.
>
>
> I don't know what your problem is to people saving money and getting
> satisfactory print results. Is it jealousy? Do you envy the fact that
> I'm doing it and you can't?


You must me a young idiot. What is stopping me?

> Does it bother you that I stick all kinds
> of "unknown substances" in my printer and still manage to keep printing?


I do not care if you piss in the carts.

> Do you wish you had the guts? Why are you trying to force me to use OEM
> inks if I don't want to?

You can use what you want to. If you like doing business with these
hawkers. I guess if I printed that much I might have to consider
something also.

> Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
> explanatory? Because I personally don't give a damn what you stick in
> your goddam little used printer.


What makes you thing God dammed my printer. How do you know there is a
God. And if so you do not even know if God created man or Man created God.

>
> Those who use 3rd party inks have long ago compared results with OEM
> inks and discovered that the differences were either not there or were
> small enough that they didn't justify using OEM ink that cost a hell of
> a lot more.


I never said Canon, HP, and Epson inks were priced fair in relation to
the costs of production.

> As I have said many times ... I can refill with bulk ink at
> a cost of $5 (for all 5 cartridges) or buy 5 cartridges at a cost of
> $125 (Wal-Mart) Canadian dollars. The difference in print output is very
> small to negligible, and certainly not worth the $120 difference - or
> more that half the cost of my printer. Half the cost of the printer is
> pure theft on the part of Canon.


Yes it is. And don't forget about Epson and HP.

> I don't like my pockets being picked.


If she was beautifule and she picked real hard you might like it.

> Charge me a reasonable price and I'll buy OEM ink.


I agree with that.

> What is reasonable?
> Hmmmmm..... $5 CDN a cartridge, or about $4 US. At that rate it's about
> 10% of the cost of the printer (with Canadian taxes). That's fair.

So you would pay more than $1.00 a cart ($4.00 CN) for OEM ink. Must be
a reason for that.

I even think $5.00 US is fair.

>
>>
>>>
>>> You're about 10 years behind us in research, "Mr. Research Analyst."
>>>
>>> There's nothing here that those of us who have been refilling or buying
>>> generics for the last 10 YEARS
>>
>>
>>
>> Since you were 7?
>
>
> No, but your juvenile response to a serious argument shows us your IQ.
>
> -Taliesyn
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 1:41:56 AM

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

Frank wrote:

> Taliesyn wrote:
>
>> measekite wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Taliesyn wrote:
>>>
>>>> measekite wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This seems to sum it all up! Of course the card carrying members
>>>>> of the AfterMarket Club will not agree with most of what is said
>>>>> here. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And "we" should believe it like you're quoting some unarguable fact.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess the "we" is an ommission that you are a member also.
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't know what your problem is to people saving money and getting
>> satisfactory print results. Is it jealousy? Do you envy the fact that
>> I'm doing it and you can't? Does it bother you that I stick all kinds
>> of "unknown substances" in my printer and still manage to keep printing?
>> Do you wish you had the guts? Why are you trying to force me to use OEM
>> inks if I don't want to? Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>> explanatory? Because I personally don't give a damn what you stick in
>> your goddam little used printer.
>>
>> Those who use 3rd party inks have long ago compared results with OEM
>> inks and discovered that the differences were either not there or were
>> small enough that they didn't justify using OEM ink that cost a hell of
>> a lot more. As I have said many times ... I can refill with bulk ink at
>> a cost of $5 (for all 5 cartridges) or buy 5 cartridges at a cost of
>> $125 (Wal-Mart) Canadian dollars. The difference in print output is very
>> small to negligible, and certainly not worth the $120 difference - or
>> more that half the cost of my printer. Half the cost of the printer is
>> pure theft on the part of Canon. I don't like my pockets being picked.
>> Charge me a reasonable price and I'll buy OEM ink. What is reasonable?
>> Hmmmmm..... $5 CDN a cartridge, or about $4 US. At that rate it's about
>> 10% of the cost of the printer (with Canadian taxes). That's fair.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're about 10 years behind us in research, "Mr. Research Analyst."
>>>>
>>>> There's nothing here that those of us who have been refilling or
>>>> buying
>>>> generics for the last 10 YEARS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since you were 7?
>>
>>
>>
>> No, but your juvenile response to a serious argument shows us your IQ.
>>
>> -Taliesyn
>
>
> Hey Taliesyn, this guy is a real sicko, wacko moron. Nobody believes
> any of his bullshit.
> Frank

You are a PRICK
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 1:52:33 AM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:E6ske.833$rY6.349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
[..]

>> Hey Taliesyn, this guy is a real sicko, wacko moron. Nobody believes any
>> of his bullshit.
>> Frank

He's a typical usenet troll - when anything resembling a reasoned argument
fails; result to abuse.

> You are a PRICK

See what I mean?
May 24, 2005 1:52:34 AM

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

Ivor Floppy wrote:
> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:E6ske.833$rY6.349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> [..]
>
>
>>>Hey Taliesyn, this guy is a real sicko, wacko moron. Nobody believes any
>>>of his bullshit.
>>>Frank
>
>
> He's a typical usenet troll - when anything resembling a reasoned argument
> fails; result to abuse.
>
>
>>You are a PRICK
>
>
> See what I mean?
>
>
>
>
>
Yeah, nothing new. You just know this guy has no job, no friends, no
brains and this ng is his total life, besides owning only two printers.
I've never seen anything intelligent come out of his pathetic mouth.
His childish bullshit responses is the best he can do.
Frank
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 2:02:50 AM

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

Ivor Floppy wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:E6ske.833$rY6.349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>[..]
>
>
>
>>>Hey Taliesyn, this guy is a real sicko, wacko moron. Nobody believes any
>>>of his bullshit.
>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>
>He's a typical usenet troll - when anything resembling a reasoned argument
>fails; result to abuse.
>
>

Your nose is brown from kissing Frankie Crankie's Ass

>
>
>>You are a PRICK
>>
>>
>
>See what I mean?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 4:09:53 AM

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

On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
wrote:
>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>explanatory?

C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 4:09:54 AM

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

Hecate wrote:

>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>explanatory?
>>
>>
>
>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>
>

Were you 8 before you were7?

> --
>
>Hecate - The Real One
>Hecate@newsguy.com
>Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>
>
May 24, 2005 6:31:44 AM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Hecate wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>explanatory?
>>
>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>
>
> Were you 8 before you were7?

I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about seven or
eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your responses shows
more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you found the fountain of
youth and you have nearly regressed to the level of ma-ma and da-da. Keep
it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>
>> --
>>
>>Hecate - The Real One
>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>
May 24, 2005 6:31:45 AM

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

Burt wrote:
> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>
>>Hecate wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>explanatory?
>>>
>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>
>>
>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>
>
> I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about seven or
> eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your responses shows
> more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you found the fountain of
> youth and you have nearly regressed to the level of ma-ma and da-da. Keep
> it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>
>>>--
>>>
>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>
>
>
>
hehehehe...yeah he's on a diet trying to get back to his original birth
weight...somewhere around 7 oz's.
Frank
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 8:26:40 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Hecate wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>explanatory?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>>
>>
>
>I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about seven or
>eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your responses shows
>more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you found the fountain of
>youth and you have nearly regressed to the level of ma-ma and da-da. Keep
>it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>
>

Up Urs

>>>--
>>>
>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 8:28:08 AM

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

Frank wrote:

> Burt wrote:
>
>> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>
>>> Hecate wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>> explanatory?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>
>>>
>>> Were you 8 before you were7?
>>
>>
>>
>> I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about
>> seven or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your
>> responses shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think
>> you found the fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to
>> the level of ma-ma and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid
>> of you soon.
>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Hecate - The Real One
>>>> Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>> you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
> hehehehe...yeah he's on a diet trying to get back to his original
> birth weight...somewhere around 7 oz's.
> Frank


Your dick is half of that and your brain is inside your dick.
heheheheheHAHAHAHAHA :-D :-D :-D
May 24, 2005 9:04:22 AM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:s3yke.948$rY6.234@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Frank wrote:
>
>> Burt wrote:
>>
>>> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hecate wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>>> explanatory?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Were you 8 before you were7?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about
>>> seven or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your
>>> responses shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you
>>> found the fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to the level
>>> of ma-ma and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Hecate - The Real One
>>>>> Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>>> you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> hehehehe...yeah he's on a diet trying to get back to his original birth
>> weight...somewhere around 7 oz's.
>> Frank
>
>
> Your dick is half of that and your brain is inside your dick.
> heheheheheHAHAHAHAHA :-D :-D :-D

Another Measekite "brilliant" response. Take note, all NG participants, of
the infantile character we deal with here.
May 24, 2005 9:05:43 AM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42yke.947$rY6.349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Hecate wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>>explanatory?
>>>>>
>>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>>>
>>
>>I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about seven
>>or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your responses
>>shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you found the
>>fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to the level of ma-ma
>>and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>>
>
> Up Urs

When logic fails him he resorts to infantile, crude, innane verbal jabs.
Sad.
>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 9:31:20 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:s3yke.948$rY6.234@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Frank wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Burt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hecate wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>>>>explanatory?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about
>>>>seven or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your
>>>>responses shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you
>>>>found the fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to the level
>>>>of ma-ma and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>hehehehe...yeah he's on a diet trying to get back to his original birth
>>>weight...somewhere around 7 oz's.
>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>>Your dick is half of that and your brain is inside your dick.
>>heheheheheHAHAHAHAHA :-D :-D :-D
>>
>>
>
>Another Measekite "brilliant" response. Take note, all NG participants, of
>the infantile character we deal with here.
>
>

I thought the evangelist was going to put me in his do not read file but
I just intrigue him too much.

>
>
>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 9:32:15 AM

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

This shmuck promised to put me in his do not read file but he just loves me.

Burt wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:42yke.947$rY6.349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Burt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hecate wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>>>explanatory?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about seven
>>>or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your responses
>>>shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you found the
>>>fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to the level of ma-ma
>>>and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Up Urs
>>
>>
>
>When logic fails him he resorts to infantile, crude, innane verbal jabs.
>Sad.
>
>
>>>>>--
>>>>>
>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
May 24, 2005 10:45:55 AM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:I_yke.973$rY6.170@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:s3yke.948$rY6.234@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Burt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>>>>>explanatory?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about
>>>>>seven or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your
>>>>>responses shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you
>>>>>found the fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to the
>>>>>level of ma-ma and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid of you
>>>>>soon.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>--
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>hehehehe...yeah he's on a diet trying to get back to his original birth
>>>>weight...somewhere around 7 oz's.
>>>>Frank
>>>>
>>>Your dick is half of that and your brain is inside your dick.
>>>heheheheheHAHAHAHAHA :-D :-D :-D
>>>
>>
>>Another Measekite "brilliant" response. Take note, all NG participants,
>>of the infantile character we deal with here.
>
> I thought the evangelist was going to put me in his do not read file but I
> just intrigue him too much.

Disgust is more like it. Nothing you have posted is intrigueing. Don't pat
yourself on the back.
>
>>
>>
May 24, 2005 10:46:58 AM

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

Feh! (Measekite understands this one). Translates to Ughh!!

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:z%yke.975$rY6.827@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> This shmuck promised to put me in his do not read file but he just loves
> me.
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:42yke.947$rY6.349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Burt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:r7uke.865$rY6.688@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hecate wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 23 May 2005 16:31:43 -0400, Taliesyn <taliesyn4@netscape.net>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you work for Canon, or is that self-
>>>>>>>explanatory?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>C'mon, even Canon won't employ 5 year olds..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Were you 8 before you were7?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I think that was my first "dirty joke." I believe I was just about
>>>>seven or eight years old at the time. The lack of maturity of your
>>>>responses shows more with each of your stupid one liners. I think you
>>>>found the fountain of youth and you have nearly regressed to the level
>>>>of ma-ma and da-da. Keep it up and perhaps we will be rid of you soon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Up Urs
>>>
>>
>>When logic fails him he resorts to infantile, crude, innane verbal jabs.
>>Sad.
>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 3:28:37 PM

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

PC World, like other magazines, is probably 'influenced' to a large
degree by the makers of printers who advertise in their magazines.

Really now - one look at the CIS Continuous Ink Cartridge feed system or
the B&W Pizeography system and the many, many satisfied users (see Yahoo
Groups -> Epson inkjet forum and elsewhere), and you'd realize that with
properly made 3rd party inks, you can get excellent, trouble-free results.

---

I'd take any of Wilhelm-Research's results with a grain of salt.

Why?

Before the reported Epson 870/etc. Orange Fading incident
(www.p-o-v-image.com has info), they reported prints to last for years
from these printers -- yet, in fact, many users immediately found, like
I did, that prints faded within weeks, even indoors!

Heck, even Epson called up many 870/etc. owners then to offer a FULL
buyback of the affected printers as a result (even me).

Naturally, after this 'incident', Wilhelm 'adjusted' all of their
results saying their old 'methods' were not so good because it didn't
take into account some of these environmental factors.

Well, gosh, darn -- you'd think any company that's been hired by Kodak
and others to test print longevity for years earlier would have sat some
Ph.D down for a moment, okay, a few minutes, and think things through!

Like where are the prints most likely displayed and kept by a consumer?

That alone would have made them realize that they'd have humidity,
ozone, and other factors -- like really! how many people do keep their
prints and negatives in a cold-room, temp & humidity controlled forever?!?

Just unrealistic.

---

Anyways, despite what Wilhelm has said about all of the latest photo
printers, thankfully, Japanese computer magazines are much more
objective -- the recent Digital Camera magazine tests this year have
placed the latest photo printers from Epson and Canon to the test in
both indoor and outdoor lit conditions.

What did they find?

In under three months, all of them faded! Canon's had noticable orange
fading; even the clear-coated Epson prints (the printers that apply a
final clear coat) had a measurable degree of fading.

---

Keep in mind that chemically and physically, ALL dye-based inks like
they use in most printers today will break down quickly when exposed to
light, humidity, etc. Even pigmented inks will break down, too.

(Here, thankfully, companies like www.inkjetmall.com are realistic and
report the degree of fading found in their 3rd party archival inks --
they don't pull wool over your eyes and make you believe you can get
decades of non-fade prints.)

---

As for the 3rd party inks. Keep in mind that printers are often cheaper
than new ink cartridge sets, selling for <$50 on sale (see
www.fatwallet.com/c/18/). If you don't refill, why buy new cartridges?
Just replace the printer, which comes with new carts!

Or if you are printing quite a lot, continuous ink feed systems are the
way to go aside from a color laser printer at $299+.
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 4:20:02 PM

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

However, you neglect to mention the other side of this coin.

1) Many who use after market inks successfully just have no interest in
bothering in your petty little war.

2) You seem to represent the other side of this battle relatively on
your own, and you have No experience at all with 3rd party inks, nor do
you have more than apocryphal stories without any valid research or
statistics, making your statements nothing more than your opinion. So
in an argument between an individual with neither any personal
experience nor any valid science versus a group of individuals who have
used both OEM and 3rd party inks over a period of years, your viewpoint
(along with it's libelous statements) don't appear to carry any weight
whatsoever.

If you were reasoned at all about this, and stated that some 3rd party
inks are inferior to OEM and may not justify the price differential, I
don't think anyone could fault you. However, you make blanket
statements which cannot be backed up with fact. And even when the so
called "branding" you "demand" of 3rd party vendors is revealed, rather
than seeing this as a step toward better communications between the
vendor and his clients, and having resolved one of the issue you claim
to have with 3rd party ink vendors, you continue to libel the company in
question. That, in itself, points to your taking a vindictive stand
against one or more companies, which once again points to libel.

I would strongly suggest that you reconsider continuing what has become
a vendetta against a few smaller vendors who you have neither knowledge
or basis to make accusations or derogatory statements about.

Art


measekite wrote:


> ATTENTION NEW NG READERS:
>
> If you track all of these success stories about AfterMarket inks on this
> NG over a 2 to 3 week period of time you will find that all of these
> success stories come from a handful of tinkerers that I have
> collectively called the AfterMarket Club. Burt is their president and
> Frankie is their parrot.
>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 4:41:49 PM

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

As I mentioned in another posting, that is NOT adequate attribution, in
fact, you republished the majority of, if not the complete copyrighted
article without permission from the copyright owner.

Quoting a small section of a work, be it a book, website, or article,
may be covered under "fair use" within the copyright legislation if it
is used to illustrate, educate or editorialize upon. But your use would
not fall into that category. It's straight copyright violation.

I'd suggest more care in the future. You could have, and probably
should have used a link.

Art

measekite wrote:

>
>
> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>> You need to learn to attribute your quotes. If you are going to lift
>> a copyrighted article, the least you should do (better is getting
>> permission, if possible) is to state where the information came from
>> and the author, is given.
>
>
>
> Look at the header
>
>>
>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 4:54:20 PM

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

Irwin Peckinloomer wrote:

>In article <N8fke.341$kS3.187@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
>measekite@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>>Frank wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Burt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>For me the math is pretty simple: I bought a Canon i960 4 months ago for
>$89 + $20 shipping. I've done 7 cartridge refills at half a buck each
>(labeled and dated tru-color ink from alotofthings.com).
>
alotofcrap

>Photos look
>exactly like they did on the original Canon ink. Figuring $10 for Canon
>cartridges, I'll be $199 ahead when the warranty runs out, so if my head
>dies on the 366th day, I can buy a new printer & still be 90 bucks or so
>ahead. If it dies before then, I'm covered by warranty, and even better
>off. Every day it lasts past 1 year, I'm still farther ahead. I don't
>see a downside to this, except for the effort of refilling (about as
>hard & messy as putting gas in the car)!
>
>
And that is Bullshie. Burt welcomes Mr Pecker to the AfterMarket Club
as a new member.
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 5:02:30 PM

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

Interesting, Burt, I read these postings in the order they appear in the
newsgroup and respond to them individually in the order in which they
were received.

I'm noticing that you have come to some of the very same conclusions I
have, on numerous issues this past day or two, although you responded
sooner than I to them.

Just so measekite doesn't get paranoid, Burt and I did not have any
interchange regarding these issues, we just seem to have come to the
same conclusions at about the same time, coincidentally.

Art



Burt wrote:

> Better yet, it is more than sufficient to post the link and let people read
> it for themselves rather than "cherry-pick" the article to support your
> viewpoint and possibly misquote the article when copying the portion you
> post.
>
> "Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:BXnke.1456708$8l.1012942@pd7tw1no...
>
>>The attribution should be in the body of the message, not just in the
>>subject in the header.
>>
>>Art
>>
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 5:09:33 PM

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

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> However, you neglect to mention the other side of this coin.
>
> 1) Many who use after market inks successfully just have no interest
> in bothering in your petty little war.
>
> 2) You seem to represent the other side of this battle relatively on
> your own, and you have No experience at all with 3rd party inks, nor
> do you have more than apocryphal stories without any valid research or
> statistics, making your statements nothing more than your opinion. So
> in an argument between an individual with neither any personal
> experience nor any valid science versus a group of individuals who
> have used both OEM and 3rd party inks over a period of years, your
> viewpoint (along with it's libelous statements) don't appear to carry
> any weight whatsoever.
>
> If you were reasoned at all about this, and stated that some 3rd party
> inks are inferior

I said most not all and that is true. The vast majority of the public
do not refill carts.

> to OEM and may not justify the price differential, I don't think
> anyone could fault you. However, you make blanket statements which
> cannot be backed up with fact. And even when the so called "branding"
> you "demand" of 3rd party vendors is revealed, rather than seeing this
> as a step toward better communications between the vendor and his
> clients, and having resolved one of the issue you claim to have with
> 3rd party ink vendors, you continue to libel the company in question.
> That, in itself, points to your taking a vindictive stand against one
> or more companies, which once again points to libel.
>
> I would strongly suggest that you reconsider continuing what has
> become a vendetta against a few smaller vendors who you have neither
> knowledge or basis to make accusations or derogatory statements about.
>
> Art
>
>
> measekite wrote:
>
>
>> ATTENTION NEW NG READERS:
>>
>> If you track all of these success stories about AfterMarket inks on
>> this NG over a 2 to 3 week period of time you will find that all of
>> these success stories come from a handful of tinkerers that I have
>> collectively called the AfterMarket Club. Burt is their president
>> and Frankie is their parrot.
>>
May 24, 2005 10:09:21 PM

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

Irwin - almost word-for-word my post just a short time ago in response to
Measekite. Makes sense to me.

"Irwin Peckinloomer" <semimoto@spamforYahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cfc74f3893ef8cb989694@news.aracnet.com...
> In article <N8fke.341$kS3.187@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
> measekite@yahoo.com says...
>>
>>
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>> > Burt wrote:
>> >
> For me the math is pretty simple: I bought a Canon i960 4 months ago for
> $89 + $20 shipping. I've done 7 cartridge refills at half a buck each
> (labeled and dated tru-color ink from alotofthings.com). Photos look
> exactly like they did on the original Canon ink. Figuring $10 for Canon
> cartridges, I'll be $199 ahead when the warranty runs out, so if my head
> dies on the 366th day, I can buy a new printer & still be 90 bucks or so
> ahead. If it dies before then, I'm covered by warranty, and even better
> off. Every day it lasts past 1 year, I'm still farther ahead. I don't
> see a downside to this, except for the effort of refilling (about as
> hard & messy as putting gas in the car)!
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 10:48:30 PM

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

"David Chien" <chiendh@uci.edu> wrote in message
news:D 6vrob$o24$1@news.service.uci.edu...
[..]
> Keep in mind that chemically and physically, ALL dye-based inks like they
> use in most printers today will break down quickly when exposed to light,
> humidity, etc. Even pigmented inks will break down, too.
>

Also keep in mind that traditional photos produced using chemicals only have
an estimated lifespan of 20 years or so - which in practice is often much
shorter when exposed to light.

My parents have some colour photos displayed in a frame on the wall - it
gets no direct sun, yet there is noticeable fading and colour shift.. and
its only about 4 years old. They also have a 16"x20" B/W photo printed on
Ilford RC paper about 20 years ago.. and that too has almost faded away to
nothing.
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 3:31:31 AM

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

On Tue, 24 May 2005 18:48:30 GMT, "Ivor Floppy" <Ivor@somewhere.uk>
wrote:

>My parents have some colour photos displayed in a frame on the wall - it
>gets no direct sun, yet there is noticeable fading and colour shift.. and
>its only about 4 years old. They also have a 16"x20" B/W photo printed on
>Ilford RC paper about 20 years ago.. and that too has almost faded away to
>nothing.
>
That suggests incredibly bad processing of the print. You can get B&W
prints from the 1860's which are still as clear as a bell.


--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 3:36:31 AM

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

On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:28:37 -0700, David Chien <chiendh@uci.edu>
wrote:

>PC World, like other magazines, is probably 'influenced' to a large
>degree by the makers of printers who advertise in their magazines.
>
>Really now - one look at the CIS Continuous Ink Cartridge feed system or
>the B&W Pizeography system and the many, many satisfied users (see Yahoo
>Groups -> Epson inkjet forum and elsewhere), and you'd realize that with
> properly made 3rd party inks, you can get excellent, trouble-free results.
>
>---
>
>I'd take any of Wilhelm-Research's results with a grain of salt.
>
Which is why I prefer:

http://www.livick.com/method/inkjet/pg1.htm

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
Related resources
!