Results of Comparison Study: Lexmark X73 vs Canon PIXMA

[fred]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,comp.periphs.usb,microsoft.public.win98.printing,comp.printers.garbage.lexmark.x73 (More info?)

Executive Summary:
There is no comparison. Lexmark is a piece of garbage. There
is a reason they start the model number with an "X." Canon
starts up first time, every time.

Conditions:
Windows 98SE, 128MB RAM

Detailed Results:
(a) Lexmark X73 -- Installed per mfr instructions. Fails to
print. Re-installed. Fails to print. Contacted Lexmark India
tech support. They re-read the instruction book to me, then
had me fiddle around with un-install programs, clear cache
programs, re-install. Fails to print about 1/2 the time and
only prints if I boot the computer first, then power up and
connect the USB cable. Otherwise fails to print.

(b) Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at
Fry's Electronics. Plugged in, installed per mfr
instructions. Went thru alignment procedure in a snap.
Printed first time, every time. Fast, fast, fast. No monkey
business.

Researcher's Conclusion:
Canon is good. Lexmark X73 is a piece of garbage. On the
box is clearly says "Windows 98", yet it doesn't work with
Window's driver OR with the drivers from the Lexmark CD or
website. If you can't read the manual for yourself, then
tech support is good because all they do is read the manual
via a 2 second delayed connection from India.

 

[Guest]

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

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:32:57 GMT, "Fred"
<testing@testing1212mouse.com> wrote:

>Executive Summary:
>There is no comparison. Lexmark is a piece of garbage. There
>is a reason they start the model number with an "X." Canon
>starts up first time, every time.
>
>Conditions:
>Windows 98SE, 128MB RAM
>
>Detailed Results:
>(a) Lexmark X73 -- Installed per mfr instructions. Fails to
>print. Re-installed. Fails to print. Contacted Lexmark India
>tech support. They re-read the instruction book to me, then
>had me fiddle around with un-install programs, clear cache
>programs, re-install. Fails to print about 1/2 the time and
>only prints if I boot the computer first, then power up and
>connect the USB cable. Otherwise fails to print.
>

may be totally irrelevant but on mine I often have to simply unplug
the power (pull the power lead out of the printer) and put it back in
again before switching on the printer.

I also have specific instructions that Lexmark emailed me a couple of
years ago for issues on XP which worked.

I have had the printer working satisfactorily on Win98 SE. Having
said all that I would never buy another one.


--
AnthonyL

 

[zakezuke]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,microsoft.public.win98.printing (More info?)

> Which Canon model are you quoting? From the description of the ink
> cartridge, it sounds more like an iP1500 than the iP3000 and higher
>printers.

Agreed, the ip4000 should have a 25ml black tank and 4 smaller 14ml ish
tanks. The yield isn't super duper fab.. i'd describe it as average.

The x73 uses the #70 black inktank which does have a higher yield than
canon's black. The color is about the same.

 

[zakezuke]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,microsoft.public.win98.printing (More info?)

> Actually......... the Canon is a tremendously higher yield,
> if you figure it as "pages per irritation". I wouldn't buy
> a printer based on the capacity of the ink.

You may not, but others who consider buying a ip1500, now I know you
are talking about the ip1500, might be concerned about the yields. I
dont remember the yield on the ip1500, but we're talking the sub 300p
range for black. I do remember it's 9.5ml for the black. Given that
average joe user is going to likely be buying OEM ink... it's important
for them to understand that while the printer may cost $50ish or in
your case $25ish that they'll be spending a huge premium on refills the
likes of which would exceed the cost of more costly model. But you
plan to refill those tanks, and more power to you.

I think canon may have abandoned these microyield tanks. the new
ip1600 claims 500p, on par with the ip3000/4000/5000. I don't know if
that is measured by 5% yield or 1500char/page.

But ouch! The ip1600 black costs $20.00 (pg-40 16ml) where the ip4200
black costs $16.25 (PGI-5bk 26ml)... same estimated yield and the same
ink (chromalife100) but more money for less volume.

 

[fred]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,comp.periphs.usb,microsoft.public.win98.printing,comp.printers.garbage.lexmark.x73 (More info?)

Executive Summary:
There is no comparison. Lexmark is a piece of garbage. There
is a reason they start the model number with an "X." Canon
starts up first time, every time.

Conditions:
Windows 98SE, 128MB RAM

Detailed Results:
(a) Lexmark X73 -- Installed per mfr instructions. Fails to
print. Re-installed. Fails to print. Contacted Lexmark India
tech support. They re-read the instruction book to me, then
had me fiddle around with un-install programs, clear cache
programs, re-install. Fails to print about 1/2 the time and
only prints if I boot the computer first, then power up and
connect the USB cable. Otherwise fails to print.

(b) Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at
Fry's Electronics. Plugged in, installed per mfr
instructions. Went thru alignment procedure in a snap.
Printed first time, every time. Fast, fast, fast. No monkey
business.

Researcher's Conclusion:
Canon is good. Lexmark X73 is a piece of garbage. On the
box is clearly says "Windows 98", yet it doesn't work with
Window's driver OR with the drivers from the Lexmark CD or
website. If you can't read the manual for yourself, then
tech support is good because all they do is read the manual
via a 2 second delayed connection from India.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers,comp.periphs.usb,microsoft.public.win98.printing,comp.printers.garbage.lexmark.x73 (More info?)

A comparison test using only one example of each device is scientifically
worthless. But thanks for sharing, <s>.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

"Fred" <testing@testing1212mouse.com> wrote in message
news:hBPUe.496$YI6.107@trnddc05...
> Executive Summary:
> There is no comparison. Lexmark is a piece of garbage. There
> is a reason they start the model number with an "X." Canon
> starts up first time, every time.
>
> Conditions:
> Windows 98SE, 128MB RAM
>
> Detailed Results:
> (a) Lexmark X73 -- Installed per mfr instructions. Fails to
> print. Re-installed. Fails to print. Contacted Lexmark India
> tech support. They re-read the instruction book to me, then
> had me fiddle around with un-install programs, clear cache
> programs, re-install. Fails to print about 1/2 the time and
> only prints if I boot the computer first, then power up and
> connect the USB cable. Otherwise fails to print.
>
> (b) Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at
> Fry's Electronics. Plugged in, installed per mfr
> instructions. Went thru alignment procedure in a snap.
> Printed first time, every time. Fast, fast, fast. No monkey
> business.
>
> Researcher's Conclusion:
> Canon is good. Lexmark X73 is a piece of garbage. On the
> box is clearly says "Windows 98", yet it doesn't work with
> Window's driver OR with the drivers from the Lexmark CD or
> website. If you can't read the manual for yourself, then
> tech support is good because all they do is read the manual
> via a 2 second delayed connection from India.
>
>
>