Panasonic Dot Matrix Rubber Part

My Panasonic dot matrix printer is the first one that I ever owned that
saddles the naive buyer with "gotcha" consumables, setting the stage for
the inkjet printer cartel's ripoff that brought most people to this
newsgroup.

It's a good printer, and of course, was known as a fine value when new.
However, the cost of a machine is one thing; the cost of keeping it
going is quite another, as we're so well aware here. The Panasonic
ribbons are unreasonably short, causing excessive re-running past the
print head. They contain a re-inking roller that can deposit a bit more
ink on the ribbon, once. That'll about do it, because if you try to
re-ink it yourself after that, you'll find that the pins have ripped
through the ribbon fabric: the thing's shot.

Aftermarket ribbons don't have the re-inker, but they're still a better
deal. Even so, you get to run through ribbons at a rate that would shock
an Epson dot printer owner.

I have two Panasonic dot printers; they both work fine. The older one
will be recycled. The newer one will remain available -- only because I
have a collection of new ribbons for it. When the ribbons are done, so
will be the printer.

I've mostly avoided Panasonic products since then. But the lesson was
reinforced by my Panasonic personal stereos ("We don't have any
schematic diagrams for it because they are unrepairable") and my
expensive electric shaver, for which no replacement batteries are
offered (really!). And don't get me started about Sony.

Richard

Richard Steinfeld wrote:
My Panasonic dot matrix printer is the first one that I ever owned that
saddles the naive buyer with "gotcha" consumables, setting the stage for
the inkjet printer cartel's ripoff that brought most people to this
newsgroup.

It's a good printer, and of course, was known as a fine value when new.
However, the cost of a machine is one thing; the cost of keeping it
going is quite another, as we're so well aware here. The Panasonic
ribbons are unreasonably short, causing excessive re-running past the
print head. They contain a re-inking roller that can deposit a bit more
ink on the ribbon, once. That'll about do it, because if you try to
re-ink it yourself after that, you'll find that the pins have ripped
through the ribbon fabric: the thing's shot.

Aftermarket ribbons don't have the re-inker, but they're still a better
deal. Even so, you get to run through ribbons at a rate that would shock
an Epson dot printer owner.

I have two Panasonic dot printers; they both work fine. The older one
will be recycled. The newer one will remain available -- only because I
have a collection of new ribbons for it. When the ribbons are done, so
will be the printer.

I've mostly avoided Panasonic products since then. But the lesson was
reinforced by my Panasonic personal stereos ("We don't have any
schematic diagrams for it because they are unrepairable") and my
expensive electric shaver, for which no replacement batteries are
offered (really!). And don't get me started about Sony.

Richard

My first exposure to Panasonic came in 1967, when I received a
reel-to-reel tape recorder as a graduation present. I was college-bound,
and the giver thought it would be a good tool for recording lectures.
Cassette recorders were a few years off yet. It was a fine machine, and
worked well. I still have it, and the last time I tried it, it still
worked well.

Several years later, maybe 10, someone gave me a Panasonic TV set that
needed repairs - a bad power switch. It was a small B+W set that was
powered by either AC or two gel batteries, and the switch was a complex
unit rater than a simple switch. That one wasn't quite as good as the
recorder. I had it repaired, but some of the circuitry had to be altered
or the switch would just burn out again. I did have that done, though it
cost nearly as much as the set was worth. The set worked for many years
after that, even giving us an information lifeline when the power went
out all over the region in the locally-infamous Labor Day Storm of 1998.
It finally gave up on me about 5 years ago.

Newer things from Panasonic haven't fared so well. A radio died after a
year. A battery charger never did work right, though another one of a
different model works very well indeed. Some of their Ni-Cd batteries
seemed to have practically no life at all. Maybe their Nimh batteries
would be better, but I haven't wanted to try any yet.

All the evidence points to a sad conclusion: Like many manufacturers,
Panasonic isn't the same company it was 40 years ago.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ wrote:
Richard Steinfeld wrote:
My Panasonic dot matrix printer is the first one that I ever owned
that saddles the naive buyer with "gotcha" consumables, setting the
stage for the inkjet printer cartel's ripoff that brought most people
to this newsgroup.

It's a good printer, and of course, was known as a fine value when
new. However, the cost of a machine is one thing; the cost of keeping
it going is quite another, as we're so well aware here. The Panasonic
ribbons are unreasonably short, causing excessive re-running past the
print head. They contain a re-inking roller that can deposit a bit
more ink on the ribbon, once. That'll about do it, because if you try
to re-ink it yourself after that, you'll find that the pins have
ripped through the ribbon fabric: the thing's shot.

Aftermarket ribbons don't have the re-inker, but they're still a
better deal. Even so, you get to run through ribbons at a rate that
would shock an Epson dot printer owner.

I have two Panasonic dot printers; they both work fine. The older one
will be recycled. The newer one will remain available -- only because
I have a collection of new ribbons for it. When the ribbons are done,
so will be the printer.

I've mostly avoided Panasonic products since then. But the lesson was
reinforced by my Panasonic personal stereos ("We don't have any
schematic diagrams for it because they are unrepairable") and my
expensive electric shaver, for which no replacement batteries are
offered (really!). And don't get me started about Sony.

Richard

My first exposure to Panasonic came in 1967, when I received a
reel-to-reel tape recorder as a graduation present. I was
college-bound, and the giver thought it would be a good tool for
recording lectures. Cassette recorders were a few years off yet. It
was a fine machine, and worked well. I still have it, and the last
time I tried it, it still worked well.

Several years later, maybe 10, someone gave me a Panasonic TV set that
needed repairs - a bad power switch. It was a small B+W set that was
powered by either AC or two gel batteries, and the switch was a
complex unit rater than a simple switch. That one wasn't quite as good
as the recorder. I had it repaired, but some of the circuitry had to
be altered or the switch would just burn out again. I did have that
done, though it cost nearly as much as the set was worth. The set
worked for many years after that, even giving us an information
lifeline when the power went out all over the region in the
locally-infamous Labor Day Storm of 1998. It finally gave up on me
about 5 years ago.

Newer things from Panasonic haven't fared so well. A radio died after
a year. A battery charger never did work right, though another one of
a different model works very well indeed. Some of their Ni-Cd
batteries seemed to have practically no life at all. Maybe their Nimh
batteries would be better, but I haven't wanted to try any yet.

All the evidence points to a sad conclusion: Like many manufacturers,
Panasonic isn't the same company it was 40 years ago.
The Panasonic printer in question is good. The Panasonic VCRs are one
of the best out there. The Panasonic digital cameras are very good.
While I prefer Canon due to noise issues Panasonic makes a close second
and is very good. So it is quite apparent that your judgement is off.
What else is new?

TJ

Richard Steinfeld wrote:
My Panasonic dot matrix printer is the first one that I ever owned
that saddles the naive buyer with "gotcha" consumables, setting the
stage for the inkjet printer cartel's ripoff that brought most people
to this newsgroup.
Great googamooga. Whats he smokin.

It's a good printer, and of course, was known as a fine value when
new. However, the cost of a machine is one thing; the cost of keeping
it going is quite another, as we're so well aware here.
Now that is a ha ha ha or is it a he he he no no that is for idiots so
it is a ha ha ha
The Panasonic ribbons are unreasonably short, causing excessive
re-running past the print head. They contain a re-inking roller that
can deposit a bit more ink on the ribbon, once. That'll about do it,
because if you try to re-ink it yourself after that, you'll find that
the pins have ripped through the ribbon fabric: the thing's shot.

Aftermarket ribbons don't have the re-inker, but they're still a
better deal. Even so, you get to run through ribbons at a rate that
would shock an Epson dot printer owner.

I have two Panasonic dot printers; they both work fine. The older one
will be recycled. The newer one will remain available -- only because
I have a collection of new ribbons for it. When the ribbons are done,
so will be the printer.
So he uses a lower quality noisy printer (probably not for multi carbon
forms - BETTER TO DUPLICATE LASER OR INKJET) just to use up a bunch of
cheap ribbons. Is that a ha ha or what.

I've mostly avoided Panasonic products since then. But the lesson was
reinforced by my Panasonic personal stereos ("We don't have any
schematic diagrams for it because they are unrepairable") and my
expensive electric shaver, for which no replacement batteries are
offered (really!). And don't get me started about Sony.
Sony makes good TVs and other product however I do not care for their
cameras.

Richard

TJ wrote:

Some of their Ni-Cd batteries
seemed to have practically no life at all.

Exactly my experience, especially their super-duper ones.
But as I said the last time, "Don't get me started on Sony."

Richard

measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:

Newer things from Panasonic haven't fared so well. A radio died after
a year. A battery charger never did work right, though another one of
a different model works very well indeed. Some of their Ni-Cd
batteries seemed to have practically no life at all. Maybe their Nimh
batteries would be better, but I haven't wanted to try any yet.

All the evidence points to a sad conclusion: Like many manufacturers,
Panasonic isn't the same company it was 40 years ago.
The Panasonic printer in question is good. The Panasonic VCRs are one
of the best out there. The Panasonic digital cameras are very good.
While I prefer Canon due to noise issues Panasonic makes a close second
and is very good. So it is quite apparent that your judgement is off.
What else is new?

I disagree with you, so MY judgment is off? Chuckle. Well, at least
you're consistent.

I had forgotten about the VCR. Thanks for reminding me. The Panasonic
VCR I bought just a few years back lasted a little over two years before
the audio system went kaput. Never did find out why. As it is cheaper to
buy another VCR than to fix one, I replaced it with a Toshiba - used,
from Ebay. That Toshiba is still going, having lasted far longer than
the Panasonic. To its credit, though, the Panasonic did a good job
during its short lifespan.

I wouldn't know about their cameras. Never had one. I've only owned one
digital camera, an Olympus. It's limited by today's standards, but does
a great job for what it is.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:

Newer things from Panasonic haven't fared so well. A radio died
after a year. A battery charger never did work right, though another
one of a different model works very well indeed. Some of their Ni-Cd
batteries seemed to have practically no life at all. Maybe their
Nimh batteries would be better, but I haven't wanted to try any yet.

All the evidence points to a sad conclusion: Like many
manufacturers, Panasonic isn't the same company it was 40 years ago.
The Panasonic printer in question is good. The Panasonic VCRs are
one of the best out there. The Panasonic digital cameras are very
good. While I prefer Canon due to noise issues Panasonic makes a
close second and is very good. So it is quite apparent that your
judgement is off. What else is new?

I disagree with you, so MY judgment is off? Chuckle. Well, at least
you're consistent.

I had forgotten about the VCR. Thanks for reminding me. The Panasonic
VCR I bought just a few years back lasted a little over two years
before the audio system went kaput. Never did find out why. As it is
cheaper to buy another VCR than to fix one, I replaced it with a
Toshiba - used, from Ebay. That Toshiba is still going, having lasted
far longer than the Panasonic. To its credit, though, the Panasonic
did a good job during its short lifespan.

I wouldn't know about their cameras. Never had one. I've only owned
one digital camera, an Olympus. It's limited by today's standards, but
does a great job for what it is.

TJ

it seems that everything you buy is limited because you buy on price. I
first find what I want and then I cost it out.

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 10:17:26 -0800, measekite wrote
in et
nothing of significance, as is usual. To wit:

it seems that everything you buy is limited because you buy on price. I
first find what I want and then I cost it out.

You want a round of applause, a medal, or a chest to pin it on?

In case anyone looks for the same problem: a piece of vinyl molding trim cut
down to size [3/8 X 15] seems to function perfectly.

--
Remove -NOSPAM- to contact me.

measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:
measekite wrote:


TJ wrote:

Newer things from Panasonic haven't fared so well. A radio died
after a year. A battery charger never did work right, though another
one of a different model works very well indeed. Some of their Ni-Cd
batteries seemed to have practically no life at all. Maybe their
Nimh batteries would be better, but I haven't wanted to try any yet.

All the evidence points to a sad conclusion: Like many
manufacturers, Panasonic isn't the same company it was 40 years ago.
The Panasonic printer in question is good. The Panasonic VCRs are
one of the best out there. The Panasonic digital cameras are very
good. While I prefer Canon due to noise issues Panasonic makes a
close second and is very good. So it is quite apparent that your
judgement is off. What else is new?

I disagree with you, so MY judgment is off? Chuckle. Well, at least
you're consistent.

I had forgotten about the VCR. Thanks for reminding me. The Panasonic
VCR I bought just a few years back lasted a little over two years
before the audio system went kaput. Never did find out why. As it is
cheaper to buy another VCR than to fix one, I replaced it with a
Toshiba - used, from Ebay. That Toshiba is still going, having lasted
far longer than the Panasonic. To its credit, though, the Panasonic
did a good job during its short lifespan.

I wouldn't know about their cameras. Never had one. I've only owned
one digital camera, an Olympus. It's limited by today's standards, but
does a great job for what it is.

TJ

it seems that everything you buy is limited because you buy on price. I
first find what I want and then I cost it out.

It must be nice to be independently wealthy. I pay the bills that keep
me in my home first - things like heat, lights, food, clothing, property
taxes, health, auto, and fire insurances. (My employer provides 100% of
my health insurance. Trouble is, my employer is Me.) Anything I have
left over when those bills are paid is what I have to work with for
personal expenses, stuff I can get along without if I have to. Some
years are better than others, so yeah, price is an important
consideration when I make a personal purchase. It's not the only
consideration, though. I can't always have every "feature" that's
available, so I have to decide what I can do without - but I also try to
get the best value for what I can spend. And sometimes deals fall into
my lap where I spend little or nothing, yet get something that will do
the job I want to do.

The Olympus camera was a gift. My nephew knew I was looking for an
entry-level camera and he was about to upgrade, so he gave me his old
one. It's adequate for my purposes, and I haven't seen any reason to
replace it. When I do, I will probably look for one I think will last
longest for the money I have to spend, rather than the one with the most
"features." To me, a camera that will take good photos for more than
five years is a better value than one that will take excellent ones for
only six months before crapping out.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com