Warning about Canon PIXMA iP3000/iP4000 series printers

"Vincent" wrote in message
news:E8Mpe.25914$DC2.3405@okepread01...

snipped
Are they transparent, so you can see the ink level, and separated from
the print heads, with no electronics in the cartridge to make it
expensive, with the cartridges and refills available at a reasonable
price? If you can name other models that have been around for a while
that do, then I stand corrected. Until now, the PIXMA's are the first
ones I have seen.

Absolutely - and that includes the vast array of aftermarket cartridges
available as well! You definitely will stand corrected on this one. The
Pixma's may have been the first ones you've seen, but that doesn't mean they
haven't been around. Ever see a child cover their eyes and say "you can't
see me because I have my eyes closed"? Canon has used these tanks since the
mid 1990's (maybe longer). As to recent models I've owned - BJC-3000 mfg'd
1999, s820 from 2002, i950 from 2003 and iP4000 from 2004, all used BCI-3 or
BCI-6 tanks. As to the issues with PCL and why Canon consumer tech support
couldn't speak to that has been more than adequately addressed by PC Medic.

Ron

snipped

If you can name other models that have been around for a while
that do, then I stand corrected. Until now, the PIXMA's are the first
ones I have seen.

Ummm, Epson. They are not transparent but are simply tanks like canon.
They are chipped to keep track of ink count and stop working when the
drop count hits a certain point. Easy to find 3rd party ink,
refillable carts, or external ink tanks. I wasn't happen with my Epson
but it's an option. Some Brothers featured this as well but i'm not up
to date on their current models.

Yes, and why is that? Because we are too passive about just accepting
that it is ok for technical support to not have any technical information to give you

Has consumer technical support ever been useful? The job of consumer
level technical support is limited to what button to press, what
software to install, and all things that apply to general supported
use. They offer NO technical support for Linux, only some drivers on
the Japanese site. This is pretty spiffy. Think 10 years ago when
your only options were pretty much Postscript, HP, or dotmatrix.


That is the attitude I am trying to get people to change. The
question should be, "why wouldn't they?". All it means to them is
more sales. As long as people do not expect to get such information,
these companies are never going to change.

More sales 'eh. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but to them they
likely feel that the release of propriority information would run the
risk of devaluing their products. Why but a Canon when you can use the
software they spend good money developing on some other printer.

Also you are trying to get world class support on consumer grade
equipment with MSRP of under $200. And let's face it, it's not worth
it. Now if you were to talk about the image runner series you get to
use this http://canon.codehost.com/.

I'm all for open standards, documented protocals, and freedom of
information. But at the end of the day it's their choice to do this or
not,, and it's your choice to buy it or not.

I tried to get corporate R&D contact information from the rep as well,
but he claimed not to have that either.

Outside of calling Japan, you gotta learn how to play phone tag. Gotta
learn how to say "well I've been to that department and they refered me
to you". This applies whether you are trying to get proprioirty
information or a trivial part.

However, I am not willing to do that because, after spending the time and money,

Tough. They are under no moral or ethical obligation to provide you
with anything for free. They're pretty cool providing what they do for
free.

I am not asking Canon to release the source to their microcode or the equations
to their gate arrays. Without the technical information to communicate
with their printer, it is useless.

I find my Canon ip3000 very useful. without any technical information
what so ever.. I plugged it in and it prints. Does it's job perfectly
well. Plenty of people using it under linux using the stock BJ drivers
or the one canon provides. If that's inadquate there is always
Turboprint. Sure it costs $40, but that is a very legit option. You
could get ultra fancy and run on a platform that is supported and use
post script emulation. Or if you don't like any off these soultions
pick a printer that has the features and docucumentation available to
you. In the end that's the only language any company understands.

It is like buying a Hayes modem and not having any information on the
Hayes command set.

Or better yet, a modem that isn't hayes compatable. Met a few of
those. Not so bad with the supplied terminal software and manual.
Pretty useless without it. So don't buy one.

Burt wrote:
Why Taliesyn, I didn't realize that, in addition to being one of the most
pragmatic people on this NG with regard to printers, inks, and papers being
only a means to an end, your writing ebbs and flows as a great river that
brings life and beauty to all creation. Your alliterative phrases recall
Hemmingway's descriptions of his surroundings as he participated in a hunt
or a fishing trip. So glad that Measekite, through his flowery description
of Canon paper and OEM inks, inspired this gifted response. I have
actually found the Kirkland Glossy photo paper to be 2.549 (rounded to three
decimal places) percent better than Canon Photo Paper Pro, and the MIS inks
to be within the same color spectrum at a 97.554991 accuracy level on my
$29,000 digital spectrometer. These results, mind you, are obtained at
1/7th the cost for the paper (per Measekite's extremely accurate
calculation) and 1/12th the cost for inks as compared to retail, or 1/9th
the cost if compared to Costco (per measekite's previous posts).


Burt I can't agree with you. I have the same setup and at best you
are correct only to second decimal place. Anything beyond 2 decimal
places has to be speculation.

Mickey

"Mickey" wrote in message
...
Burt wrote:
Why Taliesyn, I didn't realize that, in addition to being one of the most
pragmatic people on this NG with regard to printers, inks, and papers
being only a means to an end, your writing ebbs and flows as a great
river that brings life and beauty to all creation. Your alliterative
phrases recall Hemmingway's descriptions of his surroundings as he
participated in a hunt or a fishing trip. So glad that Measekite,
through his flowery description of Canon paper and OEM inks, inspired
this gifted response. I have actually found the Kirkland Glossy photo
paper to be 2.549 (rounded to three decimal places) percent better than
Canon Photo Paper Pro, and the MIS inks to be within the same color
spectrum at a 97.554991 accuracy level on my $29,000 digital
spectrometer. These results, mind you, are obtained at 1/7th the cost
for the paper (per Measekite's extremely accurate calculation) and 1/12th
the cost for inks as compared to retail, or 1/9th the cost if compared to
Costco (per measekite's previous posts).


Burt I can't agree with you. I have the same setup and at best you are
correct only to second decimal place. Anything beyond 2 decimal places
has to be speculation.

Mickey

Mickey - Since I am not vying for the exalted position of Troll of the Week,
and one Village Idiot is enough for one NG, I will refrain from doing battle
with you on this very critical and important issue. Although it is
difficult for me to withhold the standard childish schoolyard taunts, the
innane one-liners, the obscene written equivalents of flipping the bird, and
the sexual defamation of all your female relatives, I will observe the rules
of civility that are supposed to apply to newsgroup postings. But only 2
decimal places? For a subject that cries out for extremely accurate (as
well as poetic) reporting, 2 decimal places puts these statments in the
questionable realm of simple observation! Would you want someone to
recommend photo papers and aftermarket inks simply on the basis that they
look damned good and don't harm your printer? Where's your precise
investigative drive? What deprivation have you suffered in your youthful
history that that would bring you to the point where you eschew iambic
pentameter and alliterative, flowery passages in favor of the prosaic
statement, "Anything beyond 2 decimal places has to be speculation." Ah, if
only Cyrano had crafted the words and spoken for you!

Burt (aka Burtie Furtie, Reverend, the Pope, Fotofreek, and president of the
Aftermarket Club)

Burt wrote:

"Mickey" wrote in message
...


Burt wrote:


Why Taliesyn, I didn't realize that, in addition to being one of the most
pragmatic people on this NG with regard to printers, inks, and papers
being only a means to an end, your writing ebbs and flows as a great
river that brings life and beauty to all creation. Your alliterative
phrases recall Hemmingway's descriptions of his surroundings as he
participated in a hunt or a fishing trip. So glad that Measekite,
through his flowery description of Canon paper and OEM inks, inspired
this gifted response. I have actually found the Kirkland Glossy photo
paper to be 2.549 (rounded to three decimal places) percent better than
Canon Photo Paper Pro, and the MIS inks to be within the same color
spectrum at a 97.554991 accuracy level on my $29,000 digital
spectrometer. These results, mind you, are obtained at 1/7th the cost
for the paper (per Measekite's extremely accurate calculation) and 1/12th
the cost for inks as compared to retail, or 1/9th the cost if compared to
Costco (per measekite's previous posts).



Burt I can't agree with you. I have the same setup and at best you are
correct only to second decimal place. Anything beyond 2 decimal places
has to be speculation.

Mickey



Mickey - Since I am not vying for the exalted position of Troll of the Week, I just want to be The Asshole Of The Week


and one Village Idiot like me is enough for one NG, I will refrain from doing battle
with you on this very critical and important issue. Although it is
easy for me to withhold the standard childish schoolyard taunts, the
innane one-liners, the obscene written equivalents of flipping the bird, and
the sexual defamation of all your female relatives, I will never observe the rules
of civility that are supposed to apply to newsgroup postings.



Burt (aka Burtie Furtie, Reverend, the Pope, Fotofreek, and president of the
Aftermarket Club)




Well you must be happy because

*YOU
ARE
NOW
ASSHOLE
OF
THE
WEEK

AND

ASSHOLE
OF
THE
MONTH*

Mickey wrote:

Burt wrote:

Why Taliesyn, I didn't realize that, in addition to being one of the
most pragmatic people on this NG with regard to printers, inks, and
papers being only a means to an end, your writing ebbs and flows as a
great river that brings life and beauty to all creation. Your
alliterative phrases recall Hemmingway's descriptions of his
surroundings as he participated in a hunt or a fishing trip. So glad
that Measekite, through his flowery description of Canon paper and
OEM inks, inspired this gifted response. I have actually found the
Kirkland Glossy photo paper to be 2.549 (rounded to three decimal
places) percent better than Canon Photo Paper Pro, and the MIS inks
to be within the same color spectrum at a 97.554991 accuracy level on
my $29,000 digital spectrometer. These results, mind you, are
obtained at 1/7th the cost for the paper (per Measekite's extremely
accurate calculation) and 1/12th the cost for inks as compared to
retail, or 1/9th the cost if compared to Costco (per measekite's
previous posts).


Burt I can't agree with you. I have the same setup and at best you
are correct only to second decimal place. Anything beyond 2 decimal
places has to be speculation.

Mickey Mouse

measekite wrote:



Burt wrote:

"Mickey" wrote in message
...


Burt wrote:


Why Taliesyn, I didn't realize that, in addition to being one of the most
pragmatic people on this NG with regard to printers, inks, and papers
being only a means to an end, your writing ebbs and flows as a great
river that brings life and beauty to all creation. Your alliterative
phrases recall Hemmingway's descriptions of his surroundings as he
participated in a hunt or a fishing trip. So glad that Measekite,
through his flowery description of Canon paper and OEM inks, inspired
this gifted response. I have actually found the Kirkland Glossy photo
paper to be 2.549 (rounded to three decimal places) percent better than
Canon Photo Paper Pro, and the MIS inks to be within the same color
spectrum at a 97.554991 accuracy level on my $29,000 digital
spectrometer. These results, mind you, are obtained at 1/7th the cost
for the paper (per Measekite's extremely accurate calculation) and 1/12th
the cost for inks as compared to retail, or 1/9th the cost if compared to
Costco (per measekite's previous posts).



Burt I can't agree with you. I have the same setup.

Mickey



Mickey - Since I am not vying for the exalted position of Troll of the Week, I just want to be The Asshole Of The Week


and one Village Idiot like me is enough for one NG, I will refrain from doing battle
with you on this very critical and important issue. Although it is
easy for me to withhold the standard childish schoolyard taunts, the
innane one-liners, the obscene written equivalents of flipping the bird, and
the sexual defamation of all your female relatives, I will never observe the rules
of civility that are supposed to apply to newsgroup postings.



Burt (aka Burtie Furtie, Reverend, the Pope, Fotofreek, and president of the
Aftermarket Club)




Well you must be happy because

*YOU
ARE
NOW
ASSHOLE
OF
THE
WEEK

AND

ASSHOLE
OF
THE
MONTH*

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 19:33:53 -0500, Vincent
wrote:

The PIXMA printers are the first ones we have seen that have separate
transparent cartridges for each color that you can see the ink level
in and are easy to refill or replace without buying a new print head.


Wow! Where have you been ???
Canon printers have offered these individual tanks for many years
including almost all S and I series and many BJC's.

Are they transparent, so you can see the ink level, and separated from
the print heads, with no electronics in the cartridge to make it
expensive, with the cartridges and refills available at a reasonable
price? If you can name other models that have been around for a while
that do, then I stand corrected. Until now, the PIXMA's are the first
ones I have seen.

We had one, oh, 5-7 years ago. There were no refills used on it and we
ditched it as not worth having after about 18 months. So, yes, these
clear tanks have been around for a long time.

--

Hecate - The Real One

Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...

My hope is that one day legislation requires all computer peripheral
manufacturers to guarantee their products will be supported with drivers
for a certain number of years (perhaps 7 might be reasonable), so that
should OSs change the drivers will support the current OS.

At one time, I suggested to one OS producer that they require this of a
manufacturers in order for them to get the logo certification to
advertise their product as "compatible" with the OS. That didn't go
over very well, so the next step might be for this to be required by law.

Currently, it is way too easy for a manufacturer to orphan a product by
never updating drivers for newer OSs or other features that come along.

Makes for way too much e-trash.

Art

PC Medic wrote:



No, it is called quality control and protection of intellectual property
rights.
Give Bill over at Microsoft a call and say "Hey Bill, Joe Blow here...how
bout getting that source code for your OS so I can write a couple pieces of
software". Manufactures (including Canon) have Developer programs. If you
want what is needed contact corporate, and request information on what it
takes to get on board.

Arthur Entlich wrote:

My hope is that one day legislation requires all computer peripheral
manufacturers to guarantee their products will be supported with
drivers for a certain number of years (perhaps 7 might be reasonable),
so that should OSs change the drivers will support the current OS.


And I think the ink industry also ought to be regulated.


At one time, I suggested to one OS producer that they require this of
a manufacturers in order for them to get the logo certification to
advertise their product as "compatible" with the OS. That didn't go
over very well, so the next step might be for this to be required by law.


The same should be for AfterMarket inks.


Currently, it is way too easy for a manufacturer to orphan a product
by never updating drivers for newer OSs or other features that come
along.

Makes for way too much e-trash.

Art

PC Medic wrote:



No, it is called quality control and protection of intellectual
property rights.
Give Bill over at Microsoft a call and say "Hey Bill, Joe Blow
here...how bout getting that source code for your OS so I can write a
couple pieces of software". Manufactures (including Canon) have
Developer programs. If you want what is needed contact corporate, and
request information on what it takes to get on board.