Multifunction Printer Recommendation?

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone out
on me. Clogged printheads?

<Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>

If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction printer?
I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and
copying.

Thanks,

bruce
41 answers Last reply
More about multifunction printer recommendation
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    I've been using the Canon MP780 for 3-4 months. It has proved to be a
    very well designed unit. The document feeders works extremely well. It
    also has four ink tanks. I use compatible cartridges which makes
    printing extremely economical and it also prints great photos. So far,
    I can't say one bad thing about it.

    Bruce wrote:
    > After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone out
    > on me. Clogged printheads?
    >
    > <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >
    > If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction printer?
    > I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and
    > copying.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > bruce
  2. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the best
    of breed on both.

    Bruce wrote:

    >After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone out
    >on me. Clogged printheads?
    >
    ><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >
    >If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction printer?
    >I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and
    >copying.
    >
    >Thanks,
    >
    >bruce
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Bruce wrote:
    >
    > After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone out
    > on me. Clogged printheads?
    >
    > <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >
    > If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction printer?
    > I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and
    > copying.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > bruce

    I've only just gone through all this - the Brother I had didn't like
    printing photos, even though it's supposed to do a good job of it.

    Fortunately, I am returning and getting a full credit for it.

    I did quite a bit of research on this one, and have decided on the new
    Epson RX620.

    I can't comment on it until Tuesday, but it seems to be a good machine.


    Odie
    --
    Retrodata
    www.retrodata.co.uk
    Globally Local Data Recovery Experts
  4. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Bruce wrote:
    > After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone out
    > on me. Clogged printheads?
    >
    > <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >
    > If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction printer?
    > I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and
    > copying.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > bruce
    If you switch to an HP printer, you will probably never have a clogged head again. There
    is a variety of options at various prices. I just replaced an older HP printer with one I
    got for $89.99 at Costco, with a fax and sheet scanner. The photo prints are excellent,
    but it does not have separate color ink tanks.
  5. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    measekite wrote:
    > Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the best
    > of breed on both.

    What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?

    > Bruce wrote:
    >
    >> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >> out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>
    >> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>
    >> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >> scanning, and copying.
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >>
    >> bruce
    >>
    >>
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in
    news:co-dnW4_nKVaDwffRVn-sA@comcast.com:

    > I've been using the Canon MP780 for 3-4 months. It has proved to be a
    > very well designed unit. The document feeders works extremely well.
    > It also has four ink tanks. I use compatible cartridges which makes
    > printing extremely economical and it also prints great photos. So
    > far, I can't say one bad thing about it.
    >
    > Bruce wrote:
    >> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >> out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>
    >> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>
    >> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >> scanning, and copying.
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >>
    >> bruce

    Do you know if the iP4000, which I like, is the same as the MP760, but
    without the scanner and card readers? Do both use 5 tanks (black and
    picture black)?
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Odie Ferrous wrote:

    >Bruce wrote:
    >
    >
    >>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone out
    >>on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>
    >>

    That is lousey service. Have you always used OEM ink?

    >><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>
    >>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction printer?
    >>I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and
    >>copying.
    >>
    >>Thanks,
    >>
    >>bruce
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I've only just gone through all this - the Brother I had didn't like
    >printing photos, even though it's supposed to do a good job of it.
    >
    >Fortunately, I am returning and getting a full credit for it.
    >
    >I did quite a bit of research on this one, and have decided on the new
    >Epson RX620.
    >
    >I can't comment on it until Tuesday, but it seems to be a good machine.
    >
    >
    >Odie
    >
    >
  8. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    measekite <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in
    news:XVFme.308$wy1.74@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:

    >
    >
    > Odie Ferrous wrote:
    >
    >>Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >>>out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    > That is lousey service. Have you always used OEM ink?
    >
    >>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>
    >>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>scanning, and copying.
    >>>
    >>>Thanks,
    >>>
    >>>bruce
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>I've only just gone through all this - the Brother I had didn't like
    >>printing photos, even though it's supposed to do a good job of it.
    >>
    >>Fortunately, I am returning and getting a full credit for it.
    >>
    >>I did quite a bit of research on this one, and have decided on the new
    >>Epson RX620.
    >>
    >>I can't comment on it until Tuesday, but it seems to be a good
    >>machine.
    >>
    >>
    >>Odie
    >>
    >>

    Yep. Always used OEM ink. As a matter of fact, I have a new black
    cartridge and a new cyan cartridge still in the box. Damn.

    I just removed the printhead and tried to clean the orifices with alcohol
    and very fine brass wire. I reassambled, but no joy.

    I think it's time for the junkyard.
  9. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Bruce <parcxman@netscape.net> wrote in
    news:Xns96665F0749F7Dparcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136:

    > measekite <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in
    > news:XVFme.308$wy1.74@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> Odie Ferrous wrote:
    >>
    >>>Bruce wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >> That is lousey service. Have you always used OEM ink?
    >>
    >>>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>
    >>>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>>scanning, and copying.
    >>>>
    >>>>Thanks,
    >>>>
    >>>>bruce
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>I've only just gone through all this - the Brother I had didn't like
    >>>printing photos, even though it's supposed to do a good job of it.
    >>>
    >>>Fortunately, I am returning and getting a full credit for it.
    >>>
    >>>I did quite a bit of research on this one, and have decided on the
    >>>new Epson RX620.
    >>>
    >>>I can't comment on it until Tuesday, but it seems to be a good
    >>>machine.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Odie
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    > Yep. Always used OEM ink. As a matter of fact, I have a new black
    > cartridge and a new cyan cartridge still in the box. Damn.
    >
    > I just removed the printhead and tried to clean the orifices with
    > alcohol and very fine brass wire. I reassambled, but no joy.
    >
    > I think it's time for the junkyard.

    Forgot to mention, my in-laws bought the same CX5200, at the same time I
    did, and got about 6 mos. of service. Because it was still under the 1
    year warrantly, Epson shipped them, free of charge, a replacement CX6400.
    I'd like to give them my CX5200 carts, but they aren't compatible with
    their CX6400. Hope their CX6400 lasts longer than my CX5200.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Bruce wrote:
    > "Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in
    > news:co-dnW4_nKVaDwffRVn-sA@comcast.com:
    >
    >
    >>I've been using the Canon MP780 for 3-4 months. It has proved to be a
    >>very well designed unit. The document feeders works extremely well.
    >>It also has four ink tanks. I use compatible cartridges which makes
    >>printing extremely economical and it also prints great photos. So
    >>far, I can't say one bad thing about it.
    >>
    >>Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >>>out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>
    >>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>
    >>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>scanning, and copying.
    >>>
    >>>Thanks,
    >>>
    >>>bruce
    >
    >
    > Do you know if the iP4000, which I like, is the same as the MP760, but
    > without the scanner and card readers? Do both use 5 tanks (black and
    > picture black)?

    I believe the printing capabilities of the MP760/780 are identical to
    the iP4000. I think they use the same print head and I know they use
    the same ink tanks.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Try a Canon IP4000. OEM and Canon Photo Paper PRo or Costco/Kirkland
    Glossy Photo Paper work great. Costco is 1/7 the price and 98% as good.

    Bruce wrote:

    >measekite <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in
    >news:XVFme.308$wy1.74@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Odie Ferrous wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Bruce wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >>>>out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>That is lousey service. Have you always used OEM ink?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>
    >>>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>>scanning, and copying.
    >>>>
    >>>>Thanks,
    >>>>
    >>>>bruce
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>I've only just gone through all this - the Brother I had didn't like
    >>>printing photos, even though it's supposed to do a good job of it.
    >>>
    >>>Fortunately, I am returning and getting a full credit for it.
    >>>
    >>>I did quite a bit of research on this one, and have decided on the new
    >>>Epson RX620.
    >>>
    >>>I can't comment on it until Tuesday, but it seems to be a good
    >>>machine.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Odie
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >Yep. Always used OEM ink. As a matter of fact, I have a new black
    >cartridge and a new cyan cartridge still in the box. Damn.
    >
    >I just removed the printhead and tried to clean the orifices with alcohol
    >and very fine brass wire. I reassambled, but no joy.
    >
    >I think it's time for the junkyard.
    >
    >
  12. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Michael Johnson, PE wrote:

    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the
    >> best of breed on both.
    >
    >
    > What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?


    While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00. Or
    he can compromise.

    >
    >> Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>
    >>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>
    >>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>> scanning, and copying.
    >>>
    >>> Thanks,
    >>>
    >>> bruce
    >>>
    >>>
  13. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    > Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >
    >> measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the
    >>> best of breed on both.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >
    >
    >
    > While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00. Or
    > he can compromise.

    A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be approximately
    $200. Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the
    scanner. Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    recommendation is $470 (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for
    faxing) verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion
    he could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.

    As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.

    >>
    >>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>
    >>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>
    >>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>> scanning, and copying.
    >>>>
    >>>> Thanks,
    >>>>
    >>>> bruce
    >>>>
    >>>>
  14. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    FWIW, the mp760 is on sale now at amazon for 186.99 shipped. (This
    price probably won't last though, as the next best is 241 shipped at
    Newegg.) http://snipurl.com/f8z7

    Pretty good review here:
    http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/canon_mp760.html

    Also a PC mag 'editor's choice.'

    There seem to be a lot of good reasons to recommend this model --
    quality, speed, lower operating costs, ect -- but at this price I had
    to pull the trigger because of the built-in negative scanning. No, it
    likely won't have the quality of standalone, but it should help in
    putting together the couple of web page photo albums I've been meaning
    to do for some time.

    I was getting ready to buy either an ip4000 or 5000, but now it'll be
    sort of like getting the universally lauded ip4000 along with a
    traditional scanner/copier, a 2.5" lcd preview, usb2 card slots, and a
    negative/slide scanner thrown in for just another 67 bucks.

    Yeah, it seems like to much too ask for to have the negative scanning
    results from an all-in-one impress me, but given my sights aren't set
    too high in this area to begin with, it'll be a real bonus if film
    scans turn out to be quite good.

    If anyone's interested, I'll post a mini-review here at the end of the
    week.

    Michael


    Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    > Bruce wrote:
    > > "Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in
    > > news:co-dnW4_nKVaDwffRVn-sA@comcast.com:
    > >
    > >
    > >>I've been using the Canon MP780 for 3-4 months. It has proved to be a
    > >>very well designed unit. The document feeders works extremely well.
    > >>It also has four ink tanks. I use compatible cartridges which makes
    > >>printing extremely economical and it also prints great photos. So
    > >>far, I can't say one bad thing about it.
    > >>
    > >>Bruce wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    > >>>out on me. Clogged printheads?
    > >>>
    > >>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    > >>>
    > >>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    > >>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    > >>>scanning, and copying.
    > >>>
    > >>>Thanks,
    > >>>
    > >>>bruce
    > >
    > >
    > > Do you know if the iP4000, which I like, is the same as the MP760, but
    > > without the scanner and card readers? Do both use 5 tanks (black and
    > > picture black)?
    >
    > I believe the printing capabilities of the MP760/780 are identical to
    > the iP4000. I think they use the same print head and I know they use
    > the same ink tanks.
  15. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Bruce wrote:

    >"Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in
    >news:co-dnW4_nKVaDwffRVn-sA@comcast.com:
    >
    >
    >
    >>I've been using the Canon MP780 for 3-4 months. It has proved to be a
    >>very well designed unit. The document feeders works extremely well.
    >>It also has four ink tanks. I use compatible cartridges which makes
    >>printing extremely economical and it also prints great photos. So
    >>far, I can't say one bad thing about it.
    >>
    >>Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >>>out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>
    >>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>
    >>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>scanning, and copying.
    >>>
    >>>Thanks,
    >>>
    >>>bruce
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >Do you know if the iP4000, which I like, is the same as the MP760, but
    >without the scanner and card readers? Do both use 5 tanks (black and
    >picture blACK
    >
    >

    The IP4000 does use those 5 carts. The best deal on a scanner is the
    Epson 4180
  16. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Measekite misses the point completely. While he (and I, although I find it
    difficult to imagine anything about which we would agree) prefer to buy each
    piece of equipment for its own attributes, he fails to listen to the
    question the original poster poses. He is so convinced of his own perfect
    judgement that he invariably suggests the equipment he owns as suitable for
    everyone elses needs. Chosing a MF unit can be based on lack of deskspace,
    expense, or a variety of other issues, one of which may be personal bias,
    something that Measekite is full of. Now you can bet that he will respond
    to this post by telling me what I am full of! His usual response to logic
    he can't refute.

    "Michael Johnson, PE" <cds@erols.com> wrote in message
    news:Od2dnfb9NvNA8AbfRVn-2g@comcast.com...
    > measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>
    >>> measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the
    >>>> best of breed on both.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00. Or
    >> he can compromise.
    >
    > A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be approximately
    > $200. Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    > Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your recommendation
    > is $470 (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing) verses $260
    > for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he could have the
    > MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >
    > As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    > multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >
    >>>
    >>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >>>>> out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>>> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>>> scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> bruce
    >>>>>
  17. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Michael Johnson, PE wrote:

    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>
    >>> measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the
    >>>> best of breed on both.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00.
    >> Or he can compromise.
    >
    >
    > A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be approximately
    > $200.

    I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody pays
    that.

    > Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.


    $275.00

    > Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    > recommendation is $470


    $375 (sales and rebates)

    > (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)


    Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally. You
    need to go into the files and install it manually.

    > verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    > could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >
    > As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    > multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >
    >>>
    >>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>>> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>>> scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> bruce
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
  18. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    > Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >
    >> measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have the
    >>>>> best of breed on both.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00.
    >>> Or he can compromise.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be approximately
    >> $200.
    >
    >
    > I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody pays
    > that.

    The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem). I can buy an MP780 and a
    4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have money in my pocket. I don't see
    your point. Quoting a low price for the 4180 works against you about as
    much as it supports your position.

    >> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >
    >
    >
    > $275.00

    This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't print
    anything.

    >> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >> recommendation is $470
    >
    >
    >
    > $375 (sales and rebates)

    Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    change to spare.

    >> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >
    >
    >
    > Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally. You
    > need to go into the files and install it manually.

    You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    irrelevant to this discussion.

    >> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    >> could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>
    >> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>
    >>>>
    >>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>>>> printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>>>> scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
  19. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:ctKme.436$wy1.263@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Burt wrote:
    >
    >>Measekite misses the point completely. While he (and I, although I find
    >>it difficult to imagine anything about which we would agree) prefer to buy
    >>each piece of equipment for its own attributes, he fails to listen to the
    >>question the original poster poses. He is so convinced of his own perfect
    >>judgement that he invariably suggests the equipment he owns as suitable
    >>for everyone elses needs. Chosing a MF unit can be based on lack of
    >>deskspace, expense, or a variety of other issues, one of which may be
    >>personal bias, something that Measekite is full of.
    >
    > The real justification is space.

    Again he proves my point - that he mistakes his personal bias for
    irrefutable fact. There are as many justifications as there are people who
    chose one of these unit. Measekite - your "real" justification is not the
    only one. And---as predicted he responded. He loves to follow several of
    us around this NG trying to create doubt about our advice.
    >
  20. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    The MP760/750 wasn't out when I picked up the 780. The 760 looks to
    have some really good features for the price if a document feeder isn't
    a requirement. Also, the 750 looks like a good bargain too.

    mstpc@yahoo.com wrote:
    > FWIW, the mp760 is on sale now at amazon for 186.99 shipped. (This
    > price probably won't last though, as the next best is 241 shipped at
    > Newegg.) http://snipurl.com/f8z7
    >
    > Pretty good review here:
    > http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/canon_mp760.html
    >
    > Also a PC mag 'editor's choice.'
    >
    > There seem to be a lot of good reasons to recommend this model --
    > quality, speed, lower operating costs, ect -- but at this price I had
    > to pull the trigger because of the built-in negative scanning. No, it
    > likely won't have the quality of standalone, but it should help in
    > putting together the couple of web page photo albums I've been meaning
    > to do for some time.
    >
    > I was getting ready to buy either an ip4000 or 5000, but now it'll be
    > sort of like getting the universally lauded ip4000 along with a
    > traditional scanner/copier, a 2.5" lcd preview, usb2 card slots, and a
    > negative/slide scanner thrown in for just another 67 bucks.
    >
    > Yeah, it seems like to much too ask for to have the negative scanning
    > results from an all-in-one impress me, but given my sights aren't set
    > too high in this area to begin with, it'll be a real bonus if film
    > scans turn out to be quite good.
    >
    > If anyone's interested, I'll post a mini-review here at the end of the
    > week.
    >
    > Michael
    >
    >
    > Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >
    >>Bruce wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in
    >>>news:co-dnW4_nKVaDwffRVn-sA@comcast.com:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I've been using the Canon MP780 for 3-4 months. It has proved to be a
    >>>>very well designed unit. The document feeders works extremely well.
    >>>>It also has four ink tanks. I use compatible cartridges which makes
    >>>>printing extremely economical and it also prints great photos. So
    >>>>far, I can't say one bad thing about it.
    >>>>
    >>>>Bruce wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have gone
    >>>>>out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>
    >>>>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced multifunction
    >>>>>printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4 tanks is fine),
    >>>>>scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Thanks,
    >>>>>
    >>>>>bruce
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Do you know if the iP4000, which I like, is the same as the MP760, but
    >>>without the scanner and card readers? Do both use 5 tanks (black and
    >>>picture black)?
    >>
    >>I believe the printing capabilities of the MP760/780 are identical to
    >>the iP4000. I think they use the same print head and I know they use
    >>the same ink tanks.
    >
    >
  21. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Michael Johnson, PE wrote:

    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>
    >>> measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>> the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is
    >>>> $150.00. Or he can compromise.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>> approximately $200.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >> pays that.
    >
    >
    > The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    > Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    > assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    > suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).


    Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need broadband.

    > I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have money
    > in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price for the
    > 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your position.
    >
    >>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> $275.00
    >
    >
    > This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    > print anything.
    >
    >>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>> recommendation is $470
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >
    >
    > Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    > change to spare.
    >
    >>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally.
    >> You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >
    >
    > You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    > irrelevant to this discussion.
    >
    >>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    >>> could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>
    >>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>>>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4
    >>>>>>> tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
  22. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    > Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >
    >> measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>>> the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is
    >>>>> $150.00. Or he can compromise.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>> approximately $200.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >>> pays that.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >> Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >> assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    >> suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >
    >
    >
    > Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need broadband.

    They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't need
    broadband because I already have it. ;)

    Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still more
    expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.

    >> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have money
    >> in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price for the
    >> 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your position.
    >>
    >>>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> $275.00
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >> print anything.
    >>
    >>>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>> recommendation is $470
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    >> change to spare.
    >>
    >>>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally.
    >>> You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    >> irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>
    >>>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    >>>> could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>
    >>>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>>>>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4
    >>>>>>>> tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
  23. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>
    >>> measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>>>> the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is
    >>>>>> $150.00. Or he can compromise.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>>> approximately $200.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >>>> pays that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >>> Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >>> assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    >>> suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need
    >> broadband.
    >
    >
    > They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    > have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    > modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't need
    > broadband because I already have it. ;)
    >
    > Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still more
    > expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.
    >
    >>> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have
    >>> money in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price for
    >>> the 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your position.
    >>>
    >>>>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> $275.00
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >>> print anything.
    >>>
    >>>>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>>> recommendation is $470
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    >>> change to spare.
    >>>
    >>>>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally.
    >>>> You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    >>> irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>>
    >>>>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    >>>>> could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may
    >>>>>>>>> have gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks
    >>>>>>>>> (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>>>

    >>>>>>>>>

    This guys and idiot. His mother bought him a canon ip4000 and he thinks
    he's a printer expert. Oh...and he is also a wannabe script-kiddie and
    thinks he knows c++.
    Kill file his stupid ass as he's a know nothing moron.
    Frank
  24. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Burt wrote:

    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:ctKme.436$wy1.263@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>Burt wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Measekite misses the point completely. While he (and I, although I find
    >>>it difficult to imagine anything about which we would agree) prefer to buy
    >>>each piece of equipment for its own attributes, he fails to listen to the
    >>>question the original poster poses. He is so convinced of his own perfect
    >>>judgement that he invariably suggests the equipment he owns as suitable
    >>>for everyone elses needs. Chosing a MF unit can be based on lack of
    >>>deskspace, expense, or a variety of other issues, one of which may be
    >>>personal bias, something that Measekite is full of.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>The real justification is space.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Again he proves my point - that he mistakes his personal bias for
    >irrefutable fact. There are as many justifications as there are people who
    >chose one of these unit. Measekite - your "real" justification is not the
    >only one. And---as predicted he responded. He loves to follow several of
    >us around this NG trying to create doubt about our
    >

    bullshit


    >
    >
    >
    >
  25. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Michael Johnson, PE wrote:

    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>
    >>> measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>>>> the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is
    >>>>>> $150.00. Or he can compromise.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>>> approximately $200.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >>>> pays that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >>> Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >>> assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    >>> suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need
    >> broadband.
    >
    >
    > They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    > have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    > modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't
    > need broadband because I already have it. ;)


    Then you do not need broadband.

    >
    > Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still
    > more expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.
    >
    >>> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have
    >>> money in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price
    >>> for the 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your
    >>> position.
    >>>
    >>>>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> $275.00
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >>> print anything.
    >>>
    >>>>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>>> recommendation is $470
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    >>> change to spare.
    >>>
    >>>>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Software is built into windows but does not get installed
    >>>> normally. You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    >>> irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>>
    >>>>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion
    >>>>> he could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may
    >>>>>>>>> have gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks
    >>>>>>>>> (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
  26. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    > Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >
    >> measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>>>>> the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is
    >>>>>>> $150.00. Or he can compromise.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>>>> approximately $200.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >>>>> pays that.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >>>> Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >>>> assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    >>>> suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need
    >>> broadband.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    >> have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    >> modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't
    >> need broadband because I already have it. ;)
    >
    >
    >
    > Then you do not need broadband.

    Actually I do need broadband. If I didn't need it then I wouldn't have
    it.

    >>
    >> Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still
    >> more expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.
    >>
    >>>> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have
    >>>> money in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price
    >>>> for the 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your
    >>>> position.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> $275.00
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >>>> print anything.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>>>> recommendation is $470
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    >>>> change to spare.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Software is built into windows but does not get installed
    >>>>> normally. You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    >>>> irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion
    >>>>>> he could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>>>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may
    >>>>>>>>>> have gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks
    >>>>>>>>>> (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
  27. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Frank wrote:

    > Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >
    >> measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You
    >>>>>>>>> have the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is
    >>>>>>> $150.00. Or he can compromise.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>>>> approximately $200.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and
    >>>>> nobody pays that.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >>>> Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >>>> assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of
    >>>> your suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need
    >>> broadband.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    >> have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    >> modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't
    >> need broadband because I already have it. ;)
    >>
    >> Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still
    >> more expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.
    >>
    >>>> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have
    >>>> money in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price
    >>>> for the 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your
    >>>> position.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> $275.00
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >>>> print anything.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>>>> recommendation is $470
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180
    >>>> with change to spare.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Software is built into windows but does not get installed
    >>>>> normally. You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost
    >>>> is irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion
    >>>>>> he could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>>>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may
    >>>>>>>>>> have gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks
    >>>>>>>>>> (4 tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >
    > This guys and idiot. His mother bought him a canon ip4000 and he
    > thinks he's a printer expert. Oh...and he is also a wannabe
    > script-kiddie and thinks he knows c++.
    > Kill file his stupid ass as he's a know nothing moron.
    > Frank


    An Asslecker. Did your nose ever leave your MaMas crotch.
  28. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:EkPme.459$IE7.444@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Burt wrote:
    >
    >>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>news:ctKme.436$wy1.263@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>>Burt wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Measekite misses the point completely. While he (and I, although I find
    >>>>it difficult to imagine anything about which we would agree) prefer to
    >>>>buy each piece of equipment for its own attributes, he fails to listen
    >>>>to the question the original poster poses. He is so convinced of his
    >>>>own perfect judgement that he invariably suggests the equipment he owns
    >>>>as suitable for everyone elses needs. Chosing a MF unit can be based on
    >>>>lack of deskspace, expense, or a variety of other issues, one of which
    >>>>may be personal bias, something that Measekite is full of.
    >>>>
    >>>The real justification is space.
    >>>
    >>
    >>Again he proves my point - that he mistakes his personal bias for
    >>irrefutable fact. There are as many justifications as there are people
    >>who chose one of these unit. Measekite - your "real" justification is not
    >>the only one. And---as predicted he responded. He loves to follow
    >>several of us around this NG trying to create doubt about our
    >
    > bullshit

    Again measekite doesn't disssapoint us. When we point out his bias and
    proclivity for following our posts with mean spirited and infantile, obscene
    responses, he repeats the idiocy over and over, etc. As predictable as
    clockwork.
    >
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>
  29. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Michael - If you haven't been on this NG long you just had the dubious
    pleasure of dealing with our resident "expert", the foremost authority on
    everything --- measekite. Not only didn't he know that you needed a modem
    for faxing with the unit in question, he thought that most computers still
    came with them. When you corrected him he obfuscated - a manly response
    would have been the thank you for the information. Instead he answers with
    the non-sequeter that (since you already have broadband) you don't need
    broadband. A non-responses would have done as well. You only have to read
    his response to Frank just above this post to see the sterling quality of
    his "quick-witted" replies. When all else fails he defames our mothers,
    wives, and sisters. What a jerk.

    "Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in message
    news:2PudnV3j1eUbUAbfRVn-sA@comcast.com...
    > measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>
    >>> measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>>>>>> the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00.
    >>>>>>>> Or he can compromise.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>>>>> approximately $200.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >>>>>> pays that.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >>>>> Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >>>>> assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    >>>>> suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need
    >>>> broadband.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    >>> have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    >>> modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't need
    >>> broadband because I already have it. ;)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Then you do not need broadband.
    >
    > Actually I do need broadband. If I didn't need it then I wouldn't have
    > it.
    >
    >>>
    >>> Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still more
    >>> expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.
    >>>
    >>>>> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have money
    >>>>> in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price for the
    >>>>> 4180 works against you about as much as it supports your position.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> $275.00
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >>>>> print anything.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>>>>> recommendation is $470
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> $375 (sales and rebates)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    >>>>> change to spare.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> (plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally.
    >>>>>> You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    >>>>> irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    >>>>>>> could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>>>>> multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>>>>>>>> gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> <Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>>>>> multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4
    >>>>>>>>>>> tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> bruce
    >>>>>>>>>>>
  30. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Burt wrote:

    >Michael - If you haven't been on this NG long you just had the dubious
    >pleasure of dealing with our resident "expert", the foremost authority on
    >everything --- measekite. Not only didn't he know that you needed a modem
    >for faxing with the unit in question, he thought that most computers still
    >came with them. When you corrected him he obfuscated - a manly response
    >would have been the thank you for the information. Instead he answers with
    >the non-sequeter that (since you already have broadband) you don't need
    >broadband. A non-responses would have done as well. You only have to read
    >his response to Frank
    >

    Frankie Crankie

    >just above this post to see the sterling quality of
    >his "quick-witted" replies. When all else fails he defames our mothers,
    >wives, and sisters. What a jerk.
    >
    >

    Your sister is not bad

    >"Michael Johnson, PE" <nospam@ourhouse.com> wrote in message
    >news:2PudnV3j1eUbUAbfRVn-sA@comcast.com...
    >
    >
    >>measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>measekite wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>measekite wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>Buy a Canon IP4000 and an Epson 4180 or 2480 Scanner. You have
    >>>>>>>>>>>the best of breed on both.
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>What if he wants the convenience of a document feeder?
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>While expensive, the document feeder for the Epson 4180 is $150.00.
    >>>>>>>>>Or he can compromise.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>A quick search shows an average price for the 4180 to be
    >>>>>>>>approximately $200.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I paid $125 after sale and rebate. You are quoting list and nobody
    >>>>>>>pays that.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>The price I listed was based on a quick scan of priced on the PC
    >>>>>>Magazine web site. Obviously, many people do pay that price. Even
    >>>>>>assuming your price on the 4180 is legitimate the total cost of your
    >>>>>>suggestion is $430 (don't forget the modem).
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Modems are obsolete. Most computers have them anyway. You need
    >>>>>broadband.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>They're not obsolete if you need to send a fax. Many computers don't
    >>>>have them because of the availability of broadband. I don't have a
    >>>>modem in any of the four computers in my home office. BTW, I don't need
    >>>>broadband because I already have it. ;)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Then you do not need broadband.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>Actually I do need broadband. If I didn't need it then I wouldn't have
    >>it.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>>Even if I take out the cost of the modem you're suggestion is still more
    >>>>expensive than purchasing an MP780 and 4180.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> I can buy an MP780 and a 4180 (@ $125) for $385 and still have money
    >>>>>>in my pocket. I don't see your point. Quoting a low price for the
    >>>>>>4180 works against you about as much as it supports your position.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Add the feeder and the price balloons to $350 for just the scanner.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>$275.00
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>This is more than the total cost of the MP780 and you still can't
    >>>>>>print anything.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Add another $120 for the iP4000 and the total cost of your
    >>>>>>>>recommendation is $470
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>$375 (sales and rebates)
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Add the cost of a modem and I can still buy an MP780 and a 4180 with
    >>>>>>change to spare.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>(plus another $20-$30 for a cheap modem for faxing)
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Software is built into windows but does not get installed normally.
    >>>>>>>You need to go into the files and install it manually.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>You still need to buy a modem to fax anything. The software cost is
    >>>>>>irrelevant to this discussion.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>verses $260 for an MP780. For the $500 spent on your suggestion he
    >>>>>>>>could have the MP780 and the Epson 4180 with change to spare.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>As we discussed in another thread, the convenience of today's
    >>>>>>>>multi-function printers is the real reason for their existence.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>Bruce wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>After 1.5 years of pretty good service, my Epson CX5200 may have
    >>>>>>>>>>>>gone out on me. Clogged printheads?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>><Xns9665C70ECB04parcxmannetscapenet@216.196.97.136>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>If it is a gonner, can anyone recommend a mid-priced
    >>>>>>>>>>>>multifunction printer? I need photo printing, separate tanks (4
    >>>>>>>>>>>>tanks is fine), scanning, and copying.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks,
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>bruce
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  31. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:y5Rme.647$wy1.587@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Burt wrote:
    >
    >>Michael - If you haven't been on this NG long you just had the dubious
    >>pleasure of dealing with our resident "expert", the foremost authority on
    >>everything --- measekite. Not only didn't he know that you needed a
    >>modem for faxing with the unit in question, he thought that most
    >>computers still came with them. When you corrected him he obfuscated - a
    >>manly response would have been the thank you for the information. Instead
    >>he answers with the non-sequeter that (since you already have broadband)
    >>you don't need broadband. A non-responses would have done as well. You
    >>only have to read his response to Frank
    >
    > Frankie Crankie
    >
    >>just above this post to see the sterling quality of his "quick-witted"
    >>replies. When all else fails he defames our mothers, wives, and sisters.
    >>What a jerk.
    >>
    >
    > Your sister is not bad
    >
    (snip)

    Right on cue, Measekite enters stage right and utters another of his stupid,
    infantile, crude one-liners. When will he ever grow up?
  32. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Burt wrote:

    > "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:y5Rme.647$wy1.587@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >>
    >>Burt wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Michael - If you haven't been on this NG long you just had the dubious
    >>>pleasure of dealing with our resident "expert", the foremost authority on
    >>>everything --- measekite. Not only didn't he know that you needed a
    >>>modem for faxing with the unit in question, he thought that most
    >>>computers still came with them. When you corrected him he obfuscated - a
    >>>manly response would have been the thank you for the information. Instead
    >>>he answers with the non-sequeter that (since you already have broadband)
    >>>you don't need broadband. A non-responses would have done as well. You
    >>>only have to read his response to Frank
    >>
    >>Frankie Crankie
    >>
    >>
    >>>just above this post to see the sterling quality of his "quick-witted"
    >>>replies. When all else fails he defames our mothers, wives, and sisters.
    >>>What a jerk.
    >>>
    >>
    >>Your sister is not bad
    >>
    >
    > (snip)
    >
    > Right on cue, Measekite enters stage right and utters another of his stupid,
    > infantile, crude one-liners. When will he ever grow up?
    >
    >

    Well I made a mistake in guessing his age at 12-15.
    It appeares I was too generous.
    8-11 is much more realistic.
    Frank
  33. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    In message <ZQPme.5743$fp.198@fed1read05>, Frank <fb@nospam.com> writes
    >This guys and idiot. His mother bought him a canon ip4000 and he thinks
    >he's a printer expert. Oh...and he is also a wannabe script-kiddie and
    >thinks he knows c++.

    C++ ? Real men do it in fortran.
    Cue computer version of four yorkshiremen sketch leading to punch card
    programming.

    --
    Timothy
  34. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    > Forgot to mention, my in-laws bought the same CX5200,
    > at the same time I did, and got about 6 mos. of service.
    > Because it was still under the 1 year warrantly, Epson shipped
    > them, free of charge, a replacement CX6400. I'd like to give them
    > my CX5200 carts, but they aren't compatible with their CX6400.
    > Hope their CX6400 lasts longer than my CX5200.

    They're lucky. I talked with Epson and the require taking the printer
    to the shop. After my R200 experence I have to admit i'm no longer a
    big fan of Epson. I just looked at the Epson RX620 today and I have to
    admit I love the output. Like the r200/r300 is does a wonderful job
    with white text on a black background, and the extra color inks are a
    big bonus. Shades of black stand out very well giving an almost erie
    quality. But at the end of the day I had to consider if I felt it
    would continue to operate for at least the warranty period. Given the
    fact that the more recent epsons are difficult if not impossible to
    replace the ink waste pad on their own, and the fact that they waste so
    much ink in the purging cycles, I couldn't help but to feel if I spend
    $300 on the RX620 I'd have another streaming pile of ink dripping from
    my printer. This bias was re-enforced by the demo models of Epson
    printers at office depot that already had started to drip ink, but in
    all fairness none of their multi-fuction models showed signs of
    dripping.

    My HP PSC 950 is starting to flake out. Scanner isn't always scanning,
    can't always feed photo paper, simple tasks seem to take forever, time
    to buy a new printer.

    I finally decided on the Canon mp760 and ordered it a few hours ago.
    The 35mm scanning i'd find more useful than the auto doc feader offered
    on the mp780. It's speed and quality of text were the major deicding
    factors, even though I loved the display and ease of use of the Epson
    RX620 I had to say no due to my recently bad Epson experence. And
    there might be a chance in hell one can enable CD printing on either
    the mp760 or mp780. Sure I love the color range of the Epsons... and
    the defination of the outputs is higher, I fear their choice to make
    end user service almost impossible a huge negative point.
  35. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Just a point to watch for with the C & CX series is the plastic
    waste pipe comes adrift from the 'head docking' unit, so that when it
    goes through a cleaning cycle the ink not only builds up dries and
    clogs the heads, and may be drip through the very tiny waste hole on
    to the bottom around the ink docking unit.

    I noted this on a C80 and Art said it was also common on the CX
    series, I just wonder how many units have been 'clodded' because of
    this.

    Looking at the manuals it seems they are about the same methods. You
    can easily tell with a printer, if you can see the plastic tube with
    the lid up just switch the printer on or do a cleaning cycle - if all
    is well you will see the ink flow through the clear tube, if not it
    simply ain't connected.

    I posted this to avoid a unit getting 'clodded' for so little a
    reason.

    Davy
  36. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Nice timing. That price is gone now and it's back up to 240 from
    newegg.

    Michael Sean
  37. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1117611382.996562.203890
    @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

    >> Forgot to mention, my in-laws bought the same CX5200,
    >> at the same time I did, and got about 6 mos. of service.
    >> Because it was still under the 1 year warrantly, Epson shipped
    >> them, free of charge, a replacement CX6400. I'd like to give them
    >> my CX5200 carts, but they aren't compatible with their CX6400.
    >> Hope their CX6400 lasts longer than my CX5200.
    >
    > They're lucky. I talked with Epson and the require taking the printer
    > to the shop. After my R200 experence I have to admit i'm no longer a
    > big fan of Epson. I just looked at the Epson RX620 today and I have to
    > admit I love the output. Like the r200/r300 is does a wonderful job
    > with white text on a black background, and the extra color inks are a
    > big bonus. Shades of black stand out very well giving an almost erie
    > quality. But at the end of the day I had to consider if I felt it
    > would continue to operate for at least the warranty period. Given the
    > fact that the more recent epsons are difficult if not impossible to
    > replace the ink waste pad on their own, and the fact that they waste so
    > much ink in the purging cycles, I couldn't help but to feel if I spend
    > $300 on the RX620 I'd have another streaming pile of ink dripping from
    > my printer. This bias was re-enforced by the demo models of Epson
    > printers at office depot that already had started to drip ink, but in
    > all fairness none of their multi-fuction models showed signs of
    > dripping.
    >
    > My HP PSC 950 is starting to flake out. Scanner isn't always scanning,
    > can't always feed photo paper, simple tasks seem to take forever, time
    > to buy a new printer.
    >
    > I finally decided on the Canon mp760 and ordered it a few hours ago.
    > The 35mm scanning i'd find more useful than the auto doc feader offered
    > on the mp780. It's speed and quality of text were the major deicding
    > factors, even though I loved the display and ease of use of the Epson
    > RX620 I had to say no due to my recently bad Epson experence. And
    > there might be a chance in hell one can enable CD printing on either
    > the mp760 or mp780. Sure I love the color range of the Epsons... and
    > the defination of the outputs is higher, I fear their choice to make
    > end user service almost impossible a huge negative point.
    >

    Yesterday, I purchased the Canon MP760 from Amazon for $186 plus tax.
    Shipping was free.
  38. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Bruce
    Contact Arthur in the original post that you did. he may be able to
    solve the problem

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

    ]Bruce
    Contact Arthur he may be able to solve the problem


    Contact Arthur at


    e-printerhelp@mvps.org

    Davy
  40. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "mstpc" <mstpc@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1117634481.318684.220630
    @g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

    > Nice timing. That price is gone now and it's back up to 240 from
    > newegg.
    >
    > Michael Sean
    >
    >

    It was always 240 at Newegg; I always check them first. As a matter of
    fact, I ordered it from Newegg Monday night (actually Tues. 12:50 am) for
    240, and then cruised over to Amazon and saw it for 186. I cancelled my
    Newegg order 10 minutes after I placed it, and ordered from Amazon.

    Amazon is now up to 290 from 186. I don't understand that.
  41. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    I'd like to suggest that people who have had poor experience with recent
    models of Epson printers, either with early failure, great amount of ink
    wastage, clogged heads, poor customer service and especially, with
    filled and unrepairable waste ink pads, either call or email Epson in
    their country and let them know that you are no longer considering
    replacing your printer with an Epson product, and you will be going to
    another manufacturer.

    If enough people express displeasure with the direction Epson is taking
    and word of mouth spreads, Epson's sales are doing to suffer, which is
    one thing they seem to understand.

    Epson needs to understand that they cannot rest on the virtue of the
    output quality alone and that there are alternatives in the marketplace
    for many of their printer models.

    Although none of the printer manufacturers, IMHO, make the perfect
    printer, it appears that Epson is degrading the quality of the
    reliability of their printer to remain competitive, and that is an
    unacceptable direction for a product to be heading in a period where
    societies are encouraging more durable and reliable and longer lasting
    products to limit and reduce e-waste.

    Art


    zakezuke wrote:

    >>Forgot to mention, my in-laws bought the same CX5200,
    >>at the same time I did, and got about 6 mos. of service.
    >>Because it was still under the 1 year warrantly, Epson shipped
    >>them, free of charge, a replacement CX6400. I'd like to give them
    >>my CX5200 carts, but they aren't compatible with their CX6400.
    >>Hope their CX6400 lasts longer than my CX5200.
    >
    >
    > They're lucky. I talked with Epson and the require taking the printer
    > to the shop. After my R200 experence I have to admit i'm no longer a
    > big fan of Epson. I just looked at the Epson RX620 today and I have to
    > admit I love the output. Like the r200/r300 is does a wonderful job
    > with white text on a black background, and the extra color inks are a
    > big bonus. Shades of black stand out very well giving an almost erie
    > quality. But at the end of the day I had to consider if I felt it
    > would continue to operate for at least the warranty period. Given the
    > fact that the more recent epsons are difficult if not impossible to
    > replace the ink waste pad on their own, and the fact that they waste so
    > much ink in the purging cycles, I couldn't help but to feel if I spend
    > $300 on the RX620 I'd have another streaming pile of ink dripping from
    > my printer. This bias was re-enforced by the demo models of Epson
    > printers at office depot that already had started to drip ink, but in
    > all fairness none of their multi-fuction models showed signs of
    > dripping.
    >
    > My HP PSC 950 is starting to flake out. Scanner isn't always scanning,
    > can't always feed photo paper, simple tasks seem to take forever, time
    > to buy a new printer.
    >
    > I finally decided on the Canon mp760 and ordered it a few hours ago.
    > The 35mm scanning i'd find more useful than the auto doc feader offered
    > on the mp780. It's speed and quality of text were the major deicding
    > factors, even though I loved the display and ease of use of the Epson
    > RX620 I had to say no due to my recently bad Epson experence. And
    > there might be a chance in hell one can enable CD printing on either
    > the mp760 or mp780. Sure I love the color range of the Epsons... and
    > the defination of the outputs is higher, I fear their choice to make
    > end user service almost impossible a huge negative point.
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Printers Photo Epson Peripherals