If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530
Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
"measkite" what you write is neither proved or disproved.
Your advice precludes that users have huge sums of money to spend on inks. Most don't. "measekite" wrote in message news http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530 Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. When Kodak announced its new EasyShare line of all-in-ones (AIOs), it garnered a lot of attention. Not only was Kodak venturing into new territory with AIOs aimed for the home and home office, it claimed its ink prices were low enough to cut printing costs by up to half compared with the competition. I tested the first EasyShare AIO-the Kodak EasyShare 5300 All-In-One printer ($200 street)-and the news is largely good. The 5300 may not be a home run, but it's at least arguably a triple, and that's not bad for a first time at bat. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
Frank Arthur wrote:
"measkite" what you write is neither proved or disproved. Your advice precludes that users have huge sums of money to spend on inks. Most don't. "measekite" wrote in message news http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530 Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. When Kodak announced its new EasyShare line of all-in-ones (AIOs), it garnered a lot of attention. Not only was Kodak venturing into new territory with AIOs aimed for the home and home office, it claimed its ink prices were low enough to cut printing costs by up to half compared with the competition. I tested the first EasyShare AIO-the Kodak EasyShare 5300 All-In-One printer ($200 street)-and the news is largely good. The 5300 may not be a home run, but it's at least arguably a triple, and that's not bad for a first time at bat. Oh that idiot measher****head never, ever let the truth facts stand in his way. Lies, distortion and FUD are a way of life for him. Frank |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
"measekite" wrote in message
news http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530 Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. Did you actually read the review? If so, exactly where did it say that Canon offers "higher quality photo results" because I seemed to have missed that part. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
JoJo wrote:
"measekite" wrote in message news http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530 Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. Did you actually read the review? If so, exactly where did it say that Canon offers "higher quality photo results" because I seemed to have missed that part. Measher****head is a "shill" (a plant) of canons to market their products in this ng. They give him candy every time he mentions their name in a favorable manner. They (canon) haven't sent him any candy for years now as all he ever does is ruin their good name. IOW, he's a real jerk! Frank |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
Read the part about Editors choice and then read the other reviews their
about Canon. JoJo wrote: "measekite" wrote in message news http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530 Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. Did you actually read the review? If so, exactly where did it say that Canon offers "higher quality photo results" because I seemed to have missed that part. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:44:04 -0700, measekite
wrote: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000530 Based on my understanding of the review the Canon is faster and offers higher quality photo results. And the claimed savings in ink costs was neither proved or disproved. The Kodak printers will cost less than half to operate with their cheaper ink cartridges. And as to quality, the resolution of modern printers has long surpassed the ability of humans to discern the difference. So, not to worry, the Kodak costs half what a Canon or HP costs. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
"Deke" wrote in message
... The Kodak printers will cost less than half to operate with their cheaper ink cartridges. [snip] So, not to worry, the Kodak costs half what a Canon or HP costs. Read the article. The ink costs may or may not be better than alternatives, but seem nowhere near the claimed half cost. I would like to see published test data (like that at http://www.hp.com/pageyield/us/en/ for the HP units) for the Kodak units. - Bob Headrick, MS MVP Printing/Imaging |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak Only Gets 3 of 5 Stars - Review
Bob Headrick wrote: "Deke" wrote in message ... The Kodak printers will cost less than half to operate with their cheaper ink cartridges. [snip] So, not to worry, the Kodak costs half what a Canon or HP costs. Read the article. The ink costs may or may not be better than alternatives, but seem nowhere near the claimed half cost. I would like to see published test data (like that at http://www.hp.com/pageyield/us/en/ for the HP units) for the Kodak units. - Bob Headrick, MS MVP Printing/Imaging I would also like to see published data that HP is no longer putting games on their PCs that are sponsored by a known adware company GATOR with the new name of WILD TANGENT. I had to remove all of that type of software from a friends computer. I do not think that HP should support that kind of a company. Here are links for more info: http://www.thiefware.com/info/data.gator.shtml http://www.pchell.com/support/wildtangent.shtml http://forums.spywareinfo.com/lofive...hp/t82917.html Now I have nothing against HP products, just their policies and their support. I still have and use an HP990 and I like it except for the driver that does cause some intermittent problems. I did upgrade the driver and it caused more problems so I went back to the factory CD. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why were Old IBM 5400 Desk-stars so fast ? | fellow | Storage (alternative) | 1 | August 1st 04 04:40 PM |
Kodak PPM200 | Scott Reynolds | Printers | 0 | December 30th 03 06:33 PM |
Kodak Gold CD-Rs | zero | Cdr | 8 | October 28th 03 08:00 PM |
kodak | JULIAN HALES | UK Computer Vendors | 2 | October 20th 03 08:16 PM |
KODAK 325 With Windows XP ? | Marvin Rosen | Webcams | 1 | July 26th 03 10:56 AM |