Test's on 3rd Party Inks
Davy
interesting for you to read-:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp
and here's a snippet
> We printed several types of files (including those with solid color
blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose
paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts
through the following tests.
~and~[quote:5793904ff4]
Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over
time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time a
very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no
risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and
Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
part clogging a printhead, for example the warranty for that part
would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4]
Lot more to read so well worth a peep.
Davy
Taliesyn
How about if through the use of Canon's OEM ink, as an alternative, they
bankrupt my wallet. Would Canon be willing to replace the contents then? :-)
-Taliesyn
Jon O'Brien
n...@spam.invalid (Davy) wrote:
> But representatives from Canon and Hewlett-Packard warn that if a
> third-party ink cartridge damages a part—clogging a printhead, for
> example—the warranty for that part would be void. Let the buyer
> beware.
This is a scare tactic which, to the best of my knowledge, has never been
used. It's unlikely to stand up in court and the manufacturers know this.
Consequently, they're unlikely ever to let it reach court. Once they've
had a ruling against them, they won't be able to scare people with the
threat.
Jon.
Frank
diminished since it was penned over three years ago. 3rd party inks are
now accepted as being equivalent in all aspects (except cost) to oem. No
manufacturer will void any warranty because of their use.
BTW, this is meashershithead's favorite article. He keeps a copy of it
under his pillow for quick reference.
Frank
Davy
quote="Frank"
> Excuse me Davy...but the relevance of this article has been greatly
> diminished since it was penned over three years ago.
Well I'll be damned it was dated 11.05.02, I never checked, thanks for
pointing it out Frank.
At least I've got the wooden spoon out...!
Davy
measekite
Frank wrote:
> Davy wrote:
>
>> Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be
>> interesting for you to read-:
>>
>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp
>>
>> and here's a snippet
>>
>>> We printed several types of files (including those with solid color
>>
>>
>> blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose
>> paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts
>> through the following tests.
>>
>> ~and~[quote:5793904ff4]
>> Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over
>> time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time�a
>> very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no
>> risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and
>> Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
>> part�clogging a printhead, for example�the warranty for that part
>> would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4]
>>
>> Lot more to read so well worth a peep.
>>
>> Davy
>>
> Excuse me Davy...but the relevance of this article has been greatly
> diminished since it was penned over three years ago. 3rd party inks
> are never accepted as being equivalent in any aspect (except cost) to
> oem. No manufacturer will void any warranty because of their use
> unless it was proved to have ruined the printer.
>
> Frank
Mike Berger
or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
won't cause damage or void warranties?
Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
by a few people who post in this newsgroup?
Frank
Well Mike...just how big do you think the after market ink business is?
Would you say as big as or bigger than the oem market? Bigger than "a
few people who post in this newsgroup"? I'd guess both. More than a few
who post here (self included) have used strictly after market inks for
almost ten years in our HP's, Canon's, Epson's and Lexmark's that I am
aware of. I've personally had 2 HP's, one Epson and one Canon replaced
under warranty over the years while using after market inks and I told
them up front what I was using.
No where in any warranty from these manufacturers have I seen, read or
heard about warranties being voided by using after market inks.
Have you?
Frank
Anna Daptor
"Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...
[...]
> representatives from Canon and
> Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
> part clogging a printhead, for example the warranty for that part
> would be void. Let the buyer beware
But they have to first prove that the 3rd party inks did indeed cause the
clog - and unless the are going to do an extreme scientific examination of
the heads that's not possible to do.
zakezuke
> or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
> the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
> won't cause damage or void warranties?
>
> Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
> by a few people who post in this newsgroup?
Magnuson Moss Warranty Act
US Code - Title 15, Chapter 50, Sections 2301-2312
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty.htm
Other countries have similar provisions. Basicly a MFG can not as a
condition of the warranty say you must use their consumables unless
they provide the product freely during the warranty period whether it
be car or printer. Now if your printer failed and if it was a direct
result of using some other guy's product, sure they can deny the
warranty. They just can't because you used the other guy's product,
not unless they want to take it up with the FTC or equilevent agency.
I disagree that the other guy's ink is equilivent in all aspects.
After all in all likelyhood the ink is protected by a patent and you
can't duplicate it exactly, unless the OEM decides to sell their stuff
in bulk aftermarket. In other cases ink totally different... like if
for example you wanted to shove pigment based inks down a dye printer
or use a solvent other than water, but this isn't your bargin hunter
equilivent ink. I feel it's more of a question of can you see the
difference, and if you can do you care.
Davy
them he was using Jet-Tec inks hoping they could suggest a method of
cleaning.
They asked him the 'usuals' and give him a referance number told him
to send a proof of purchase copy to Electroversal somewhere in the
Midlands along with the referance number, lo and behold a week later
a new head had arrived in spite of not using Canon ink.
My guess is the inlet nozzles from the cartridges were 'choked', he
never went beyond nozzle cleaning... otherwise he may have got it
working.
This guy was working abroad on a contract... he's now moved the
printer which was about a 10" away from a central heating radiator.
Good thinking for a person who works on Electrical distributor
systems.....!
I did say he would be better of with a laser, Canon didn't seem
concerned he was using non OEM inks.
Davy
measekite
Mike Berger wrote:
> Accepted by whom? I find no evidence of this on Canon's, Epson's,
> or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
> the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
> won't cause damage or void warranties?
THEY NEVER SAID THAT
measekite
Frank wrote:
> Mike Berger wrote:
>
>> Accepted by whom? I find no evidence of this on Canon's, Epson's,
>> or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
>> the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
>> won't cause damage or void warranties?
>>
>> Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
>> by a few people who post in this newsgroup?
>>
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Excuse me Davy...but the relevance of this article has been greatly
>>> diminished since it was penned over three years ago. 3rd party inks
>>> are now accepted as being equivalent in all aspects (except cost) to
>>> oem. No manufacturer will void any warranty because of their use.
>>>
>
> Well Mike...just how big do you think the after market ink business
> is? Would you say as big as or bigger than the oem market? Bigger than
> "a few people who post in this newsgroup"? I'd guess both.
THIS ASSHOLE KNOWS NOTHING. HE ONLY GUESSES
> More than a few who post here (self included) have used strictly after
> market inks for almost ten years in our HP's, Canon's, Epson's and
> Lexmark's that I am aware of. I've personally had 2 HP's, one Epson
> and one Canon replaced under warranty over the years while using after
> market inks and I told them up front what I was using.
BULLSHIT
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Accepted by whom? I find no evidence of this on Canon's, Epson's,
>>or Lexmark's sites. Could you provide a reference to show that
>>the manufacturers now agree that all third party inks are ok and
>>won't cause damage or void warranties?
>>
>>Or did you just mean "accepted as being equivalent in all aspects"
>>by a few people who post in this newsgroup?
>>
>>
>
>Magnuson Moss Warranty Act
>US Code - Title 15, Chapter 50, Sections 2301-2312
>http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty.htm
>
>Other countries have similar provisions. Basicly a MFG can not as a
>condition of the warranty say you must use their consumables unless
>they provide the product freely during the warranty period whether it
>be car or printer.
>
>Now if your printer failed and if it was a direct
>result of using some other guy's product, sure they can deny the
>warranty.
>
SEE HOW FRANKIE CRANKIE IS FULL OF SHIT. THERE IS NO CART BLANCHE
>They just can't because you used the other guy's product,
>not unless they want to take it up with the FTC or equilevent agency.
>
>I disagree that the other guy's ink is equilivent in all aspects.
>After all in all likelyhood the ink is protected by a patent and you
>can't duplicate it exactly, unless the OEM decides to sell their stuff
>in bulk aftermarket.
>
HA HA HA
Davy
Ders summat burnin in da kitchen - better go now...
Davy
ipodh...@gmail.com
http://www.inkrepublic.com/members/ozprintshop/review.asp
measekite
ASTRONOMICALLY HIGH AND I WAS ABOUT TO GET A NEW PRINTER ANYWAY SO I
WOULD NOT CARE ABOUT THE PRINTCLOG I WOULD GET.
zakezuke
printer on it's last legs in the first place.
measekite
USING OEM INK.
zakezuke
That was very smart... but you said you would only consider aftermarket
ink if you were to about to get a new printer, which is totally silly
to make an investment in ink if you don't plan to use all of it.
Perhaps you can pickup a goodwill printer and use aftermarket ink on
it... and actually see how long it takes to clog. Then you would
actually be able to say you have experence. Oh but because you were
treated unfairly by a few users you will continue to harrass others and
lie about products many of us use just because your ego can't stand it
when someone actually disagrees with you.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measekite said: <removed per request>
>>
>>
MY PRINTER DOES NOT HAVE LEGS. IT DOES NOT STAND BUT SITS ON MY DESK
USING OEM INK.
>
>That was very smart...
>
>
EVERYBODY SHOULD USE THE INK THE PRINTER MANUAL SAYS TO USE TO MINIMIZE
THE CHANCE OF GETTING A LOG.
HICKORY DICKORY DOCK
DA COCROACHES RAN UP DA CLOCK
DA CLOCK STRUCK ONE
DA UDDER GOT AWAY
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measekite said: <removed per request>
>>
>>
>
>*Man. carts only*
> Due to past experiences with
>other printers, I now use Epson printers exclusively. Their warning
>about using other brands of cartridges aren't just so they can make
>more money. When I had my C82, I used only Epson cartridges for the
>first 2 years. The printer worked great, just like new.
>
>One
>day I decided to try another brand of carts, which had a guarantee. I
>ended up spending more time running the cleaning cycle than I did
>printing. It wasn't worth my time to take them up on their guarantee,
>since they would have just sent me replacement carts which I wouldn't
>use anyway. Never again.
>
>I now use an R200, which is a great
>printer. I've started digitally restoring old photos, and I won't use
>anything but Epson carts and paper.
>
>
>
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
Measekite said: <removed per request>
HERE IS WHAT YOU MISSED
MY PRINTER DOES NOT HAVE LEGS. IT DOES NOT STAND BUT SITS ON MY DESK USING OEM INK.
MAYBE THEY HEARD ME. MAYBE THIS WILL BE THE FIRST BRAND OF AFTERMARKET INK. MAYBE IT WILL BE SOLD IN THE STORES BY REPUTABLE RESELLERS.. MAYBE ONE WILL BE ABLE TO TRACK THE BRAND TO SEE IF IT CLOGS PRINTHEADS LIKE THE OTHER NON BRANDED AFTURE MARKETTE WHATEVER.
Paper Mate to enter inkjet printer market
‘Paper Mate announced Wednesday it plans to throw its hat into the inkjet printer cartridge market, a lucrative and growing sector, as ink-thirsty digital photographs rise in popularity.
The pen division of Newell Rubbermaid expects to offer an inkjet cartridge line that will be compatible with a number of Hewlett-Packard, Epson and Canon printers. The cartridges, which will retail from $6.50 to $30 each, are expected to begin shipping nationwide next month. Cartridges from market leader HP range from $17 to $35 each….’zakezuke
Even if the printer manual said "use OEM ink so you don't get a clog"
[page number please] that doesn't mean anything, no more than if Rebox
shoes had a manual in them saying to use Rebox socks to extend the life
of the shoe. I'll agree Canon spends a good deal of money and research
developing systems of printheads, paper, and ink designed to work well
together, but it's up to the user whether to spend 2x, 5x, 10x as much
for them or not.
There already are brands of 3rd party ink. There are not as many as
there are in Europe as it's more popular to store brand these products
but there are at least two brands I can buy at a retail shop.
Davy
logically there would be an equal number of ink manufacturers.
Take Print Rite, or to be more correct Multi-Union Trading Co Ltd of
Hong Kong produces more than on label, are they really going to go
out of their way to change the ink formulations..? No one can say
unless they have inside info.
Davy
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measekite said: <removed per request>
>>
>>
>
>Even if the printer manual said "use OEM ink so you don't get a clog"
>SNIP
>
>
>
>
THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED INK CARTS FOR INKJET PRINTERS OTHER
THAN HP, CANON, AND EPSON, BUT I HEAR PAPERMATE MAY GET INTO DA BUSINESS
measekite
Davy wrote:
>Thinking about it logically there are many 3rd party ink brands, then
>logically there would be an equal number of ink manufacturers.
>
>
THERE ARE NO 3RD PATY IN BRANDS ONLY AFTERMARKET LABELS. THERE ARE MANY
MORE LABELS THAN MFG SO YOU ARE VERY LIKELY TO GET THE SAME JUNK FROM A
VARIETY OF LABELERS AND HAVE PROBLEMS AND CLOGS BECAUSE THE LABELERS
WILL NOT TELL YOU WHO MADE IT. IT IS A CONSPIRCY.
Jon O'Brien
inkys...@oem.com (in denial, measekite the memoryless) wrote:
[Claim that there are no brands of pre-filled cartridges except those
made by HP, Canon and Epson]
You've been told of several brands of pre-filled cartridges in the past.
Jon.
measekite
ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A BRAND AND ITS
PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW YOUR CHOICE.
NO ZOOCOWSKY
Frank
idiot. He doesn't give a shit about anyone or anything.
Kill file his stuck-on-stupid old fart ass.
Frank
zakezuke
If it's a retail brand the mfg isn't always going to list the price on
the website... unless they also sell them or are listing MSRP.
But you've been linked to Media street, Lyson, PriteRite... all of whom
are legit brands with their product sold in the retail market in the
retail box. All of these are brands. They meet with *ALL* of your
requirements for a brand name product, so much so that Canon them
selves don't meet with your strict requiremetns for being a brand name
of ink.
You did correct me in the past though, it's proper to refer to Image
Specalists and Formulalabs as wholesale brands rather than retail ones.
Jon O'Brien
wrote:
> He doesn't give a shit about anyone or anything.
He may not but I do. When I spot misinformation that might mislead
newcomers, I feel an obligation to correct it. I'm here to help as well as
to learn.
Jon.
Jon O'Brien
> *Date:* Fri, 15 Jul 2005 04:32:09 GMT
> Too bad there is not one mfg/formulator that sells Branded Prefilled
> Carts under their own name and has the quality to match the OEMs and
> some assurance that they would not damage the printer.
*From:* J...@NOonlySPAMbrowsingTHANX.com (Jon O'Brien)
*Date:* Fri, 15 Jul 2005 12:56 +0100 (BST)
Lyson fulfills your criteria: http://www.lyson.com/
*From:* "zakezuke" <zakez...@yahoo.com>
*Date:* 15 Jul 2005 14:10:13 -0700
As does Media Street.
http://www.mediastreet.com/
*From:* "Miss Perspicacia Tick" <te...@test.com>
*Date:* Fri, 15 Jul 2005 23:53:01 +0100
And JetTec www.jettec.com.
*From:* "Ron Cohen" <d+r+c...@sbcXXXglobalYYY.ZZZnet>
*Date:* Sat, 16 Jul 2005 03:31:31 GMT
And Print-Rite from Multi Union www.multiunion.com.
Frank
Yes and that is what this ng is supposed to be all about (I think). He
is here to distort, lie and misinform. Which he is quite good at doing.
Frank
measekite
Frank wrote:
> Jon O'Brien wrote:
>
>> In article <VJqaf.12049$dO2....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>,
>> inkys...@oem.com (in denial, measekite the memoryless) wrote:
>>
>> [Claim that there are no brands of pre-filled cartridges except
>> those made by HP, Canon and Epson]
>>
>> You've been told of several brands of pre-filled cartridges in the past.
>>
>> Jon.
>
> SHIP
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>>Measekite said: <removed per request>
>>>
>>>
MEASEKITE SAID THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED CARTS. NOBODY HAS CUT
AND PASTED FROM ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A
BRAND AND ITS PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW
YOUR CHOICE. NO ZOOCOWSKY
>
>If it's a retail brand the mfg isn't always going to list the price on
>the website... unless they also sell them or are listing MSRP.
>
>
THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED CARTS. NOBODY HAS CUT AND PASTED FROM
ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A BRAND AND ITS
PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW YOUR CHOICE.
NO ZOOCOWSKY
>But you've been linked to Media street, Lyson, PriteRite... all of whom
>are legit brands with their product sold in the retail market in the
>retail box. All of these are brands.
>
THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED CARTS. NOBODY HAS CUT AND PASTED FROM
ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A BRAND AND ITS
PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW YOUR CHOICE.
NO ZOOCOWSKY
>They meet with *ALL* of your
>requirements for a brand name product, so much so that Canon them
>selves don't meet with your strict requiremetns for being a brand name
>of ink.
>
>
THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED CARTS. NOBODY HAS CUT AND PASTED FROM
ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A BRAND AND ITS
PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW YOUR CHOICE.
NO ZOOCOWSKY
>You did correct me in the past though, it's proper to refer to Image
>Specalists and Formulalabs as wholesale brands rather than retail ones.
>
>
measekite
Jon O'Brien wrote:
ME TWO
measekite
Jon O'Brien wrote:
>>*From:* measekite <inkys...@oem.com>
>>*Date:* Fri, 15 Jul 2005 04:32:09 GMT
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Too bad there is not one mfg/formulator that sells Branded Prefilled
>>Carts under their own name and has the quality to match the OEMs and
>>some assurance that they would not damage the printer.
>>
>>
THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED CARTS. NOBODY HAS CUT AND PASTED FROM
ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A BRAND AND ITS
PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW YOUR CHOICE.
NO ZOOCOWSKY
A CLOG IS BORN
measekite
Frank wrote:
THE TRUTH
THERE ARE NO BRANDS OF PREFILLED CARTS. NOBODY HAS CUT AND PASTED FROM
ANY VENDORS WEBSITE CLEARLY MARKED INFORMATION OF A BRAND AND ITS
PRICE. NOBODY. IF YOU THINK THERE IS A BRAND IT IS NOW YOUR CHOICE.
NOBODY HAS MET THE CHALLENGE. JUST GO TO ANY WEBSITE YOU BELIEVE SELLS
BRANDED AFTERMARKET INKS OF PREFILLED CARTS AND CUT AND PASTE THE
INFORMATION INCLUDING THE PRICE SO WE CAN SEE.. IT WOUDL LOOK SOMETHING
LIKE THIS:
FORMULABS BRAND PREFILLED CARTS FOR CANON:: MODEL XXXX PRICE YYYY
AND THERE WOULD PROBABLY BE A PHOTO OF A SAMPLE CART. IT SHOUDL ALSO
HAVE A PROPER LABEL ON THE CART AND A BOX DISPLAYING THE NAME JUST LIKE
CANON, HP OR EPSON HAS.
YA ALL TALK BUT NOBODY HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CHOICES WHERE THEY CAN BE TRACKED. AFTER MANY
PEOPLE USE A BRAND AND THERE ARE FEW REPORTS OF CLOGS AND OTHER PROBLEMS
THEN IT IS REASONABLE TO CONSIDER USING IT. ONLY BRANDS CAN BE TRACKED.
THERE IS NONE.
drc023
http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html This company has been
around forever. And while were at it, let's also add Van Son Holland (one of
the oldest and most respected companies in the printing industry). How about
Ilford Archiva Ink. Let's not forget Staedtler which has only been around
since 1835 and has been producing inkjet ink under its own label since 1995,
http://www.staedtler-inkjet.com/SJ_FAQs_eng.Staedtler?ActiveID=58246. Gee, I
wonder if Measekite has ever heard of a little company known as DuPont?
http://www.inkjet.dupont.com/
--
Ron
"Jon O'Brien" <J...@NOonlySPAMbrowsingTHANX.com> wrote in message
news:memo.2005110...@blue.compulink.co.uk...
Davy
Print-Rite, Unicorn, Coraljet , as I understand what measekite is
saying these cartridges do not tell you who has made them, but 'we'
know they'er made by Multi-Union Trading Company of Honk Kong.
Now then do we know the manufacturer of 'other' brands, since they
don't give the info on the package we can rightly assume it can be
anyone.
There are vital words missing here and that is "This ink is made
by....", it can be wrong to assume just because it came with "Super
inks" on the package that it was made by them - am I right or
wrong..?
This of course can easily apply to Epson, Canon, HP etc.
If Multi-Union Trading Company of Honk Kong are willing to supply you
with ink under your very own label with "Clogging ink Company" on the
label it would be wrong to assume that Clogging ink Company is the
manufacturer.
It's just impossible to put it any clearer and this is I believe is
the root of the slanging matches.
Davy
zakezuke
This has already been done, many times. As a review all the brands
that meet your requirements for brands are as follows
Media Street. http://www.mediastreet.com/
-Retail box edition can be bought from mostly photoshops
Lyson... http://www.lyson.com/
Similar nitch, but can be bought in a retail box
Prite-Rite www.multiunion.com.
Less nitch... more generic.
JetTec www.jettec.com
IIRC they have that TV commercial in the UK with a girl with a lost pet
"Don't worry, I bought ink from jettec, we can print as much as we
want"
Pelikan http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html
Dont' know how I forgot about these guys, it was either priterite or
Pelikan ribbons for my old dot matrix.
---- recently added not investiaged too deeply
staedtler
http://www.staedtler-inkjet.com/SJ_FAQs_eng.Staedtler?ActiveID=58246.
These guys are old wideformat suppliers but decided to go into inkjet
ink. Out of germany.
http://www.inkjet.dupont.com/
Near as i'm aware these are wideformat products, but added them just
because you can't say dupont isn't a major brand.
-----
Because most of these guys are major mfgs, most don't offer direct
consumer sales. Being a Stanford MBA you should understand how this
works. But you have been linked to retail box editions of many of
these products before [except the recently added list by drc023].
sonsdad
There is little manufactured that does not involve the maker changing
packaging for a particular order i.e. The Epson shipment. The difference is
that Epson will specify and check the formulae. The probably introduce
Ammonia or some such substance to their inks to keep the nozzles clear. I
realise this is rocket science but it will be easy for anyone with the will
and wit to copy them! Digital Photo Art magazine recommends Jetec. This mag
is an excellent publication and does not come with a free CD full of trash.
On 4/11/05 10:59 am, in article
1131101993.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "zakezuke"
Jon O'Brien
inkys...@oem.com (measekite, in denial) stamped his foot and shouted
that, because no one had cut-and-pasted what he only has to click on a
link to read, he's going to ignore the inconvenient truth:
zakezuke
> saying these cartridges do not tell you who has made them, but 'we'
> know they'er made by Multi-Union Trading Company of Honk Kong.
We know this because the logo apears on the multi-union website.
http://www.multi-union.com/mu/main.asp
Ah but our resident troll wants a picture
http://www.multi-union.com/mu/product1.asp?txt=61
And a model number
PR Reorder No.: IFC119B [bci-3e compatable]
zakezuke
"Printrite".
http://www.datace.com/en/image/product/FI9wGHN3.jpg
Tide Fuyuan Technology (Shenzhen) Co Ltd
3/F, Block 204
Chegongmiao Industrial Zone
Futian District
Shenzhen, Guangdong
China (mainland)
Tel: (86 755) 83413838
Fax: (86 755) 83423838
Other Homepage Address: http://www.datace.com
measekite
drc023 wrote:
>And we can add Pelikan Inkjet Cartridges to the list.
>http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html
>
THIS IS A LIE. THERE WEBSITE DOES NOT SAY THEY SELL BRANDED PREFILLED
CARTS AND THEY DO NOT DISCLOSE WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS. ANYONE WITH
AN IQ OVER 80 CAN SEE THAT. IF I MISSED IT THEN CUT AND PASTE THE INFO
OR JUST STOP TELLING LIES
>This company has been
>around forever. And while were at it, let's also add Van Son Holland (one of
>the oldest and most respected companies in the printing industry). How about
>Ilford Archiva Ink. Let's not forget Staedtler which has only been around
>since 1835 and has been producing inkjet
>
>*ink under its own label*
measekite
Davy wrote:
>Lets go an buy 3 ink tanks and these are-:
>
>Print-Rite, Unicorn, Coraljet , as I understand what measekite is
>saying these cartridges do not tell you who has made them, but 'we'
>know they'er made by Multi-Union Trading Company of Honk Kong.
>
>
SUED BY EPSON FOR PATENT VIOLATIONS
>Now then do we know the manufacturer of 'other' brands, since they
>don't give the info on the package we can rightly assume it can be
>anyone.
>
>
AND THEY WILL NOT DISCLOSE WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF THE INK IS. YOU
COULD BUY FROM ONE VENDOR AND HAVED TROUBLE CHANGE VENDORS AND GET THE
SAME THING. OR YOU COULD BUY FROM THE SAME VENDOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS
APART AND GET WHAT THEY CLAIM IS A DIFFERENT PRODUCT ONLY TO GET THE
SAME THING UNDER A DIFFERENC LABEL.
>There are vital words missing here and that is "This ink is made
>by....", it can be wrong to assume just because it came with "Super
>inks" on the package that it was made by them - am I right or
>wrong..?
>
>
YOU ARE TOTALLY CORRECT.
>This of course can easily apply to Epson, Canon, HP etc.
>
>
OEM COMPANIES CONTROL THE ENTIRE PROCESS, DESIGN, AND MFG FROM PRINTER
TO INK TO PAPER. ALL ARE SPECIFIED AND DESIGNED TO WORK TOGETHER
>If Multi-Union Trading Company of Honk Kong are willing to supply you
>with ink under your very own label with "Clogging ink Company" on the
>label it would be wrong to assume that Clogging ink Company is the
>manufacturer.
>
>
YOU CAN JUST ASUME THAT THE INK WILL CLOG YOUR PRINTER
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
Measekite said: Removed per requestThis has already been done, many times. As a review all the brands that meet your requirements for brands are as follows
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
Media Street. http://www.mediastreet.com/ -Retail box edition can be bought from mostly photoshops
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
Lyson... http://www.lyson.com/ Similar nitch, but can be bought in a retail box
Prite-Rite www.multiunion.com. Less nitch... more generic.
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
JetTec www.jettec.com IIRC they have that TV commercial in the UK with a girl with a lost pet "Don't worry, I bought ink from jettec, we can print as much as we want"
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
Pelikan http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html Dont' know how I forgot about these guys, it was either priterite or Pelikan ribbons for my old dot matrix.
YOU MUST HAVE TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING ENGLISH AND JUST WANT TO TELL LIES. GOTO TO THIS SITES AND LOOK FOR INFORMATION ABOUT ANY DISCLOSURE OF THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF THE BRAND OF INK IN THE PREFILLED CARTS. THEN CUT AND PAST THE INFORMATION INTO A REPLY. DO NOT POST LINKS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS NOT THERE.
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
---- recently added not investiaged too deeply staedtler http://www.staedtler-inkjet.com/SJ_FAQs_eng.Staedtler?ActiveID=58246. These guys are old wideformat suppliers but decided to go into inkjet ink. Out of germany.
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
http://www.inkjet.dupont.com/ Near as i'm aware these are wideformat products, but added them just because you can't say dupont isn't a major brand.
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
----- Because most of these guys are major mfgs,
most don't offer direct consumer sales.
Being a Stanford MBA you should understand how this works. But you have been linked to retail box editions of many of these products before [except the recently added list by drc023].
BY NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION (YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE) YOU ARE TELLING EVERYONE IN THIS NG THAT THESE ARE JUST WEBSITE LABELS THAT DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR OF WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
measekite
| IFC113J | FOR CANON BJC-8500 PM | CANON BJC-8500/ BJF-8500 |
PHOTO MAGENTA | |
| IFC113Z | FOR CANON BJC-8500 PC | CANON BJC-8500/ BJF-8500 |
PHOTO CYAN | |
| IFC114C | FOR CANON BJC-8500 CY | CANON BJC-8500/ BJF-8500 |
CYAN | |
| IFC114M | FOR CANON BJC-8500 MG | CANON BJC-8500/ BJF-8500 |
MAGENTA | |
| IFC114Y | FOR CANON BJC-8500 YL | CANON BJC-8500/ BJF-8500 |
YELLOW | |
| IFC115X | FOR CANON BJC-8500 | CANON BJC-8500/ BJF-8500 |
TRANSPARENT | |
| IFC117B | FOR CANON BJC-8200 BK | CANON BJC-8200/ BJF-850 |
FOR CANON IS NOT A BRAND. IT IS A LABEL. THEY DO NOT TELL YOU WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS. THIS IS A COMPANY THAT WAS SUED BY EPSON FOR PATENT VIOLATIONS AND THEY WON.
measekite
I should add that in america your more likely to find Datace than "Printrite". http://www.datace.com/en/image/product/FI9wGHN3.jpg
THERE ARE ALSO NOT CARTS FROM OTHER WEBSTORES THAT SAY ON THE WEBSITE, THAT SAY ON THE BOX, THAT SAY ON THE CARTRIDGE LABEL THAT THIS PRODUCT IS FILLED WITH FORMULABS BRANDED INK.
IT JUST IS NOT THERE.
measekite
sonsdad wrote:
>Hi
>TRIM
>
>
>On 4/11/05 10:59 am, in article
>1131101993.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "zakezuke"
><zakez...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
TRIM
THERE IS NO PROOF.
measekite
NOT THERE
YOU PEOPLE JUST DISTORT AND LIE TELLING OTHERS TO GO TO THESE LINKS WHEN YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. WHY DON'T YOU END THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY AND SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT. IF YOU FIND THE INFO THEN CUT AND PASTE IT INTO A REPLY SO WE CAN ALL SEE IT IS NOT THERE. IF YOU CANNOT DO THIS THEN IT IS RATHER OBVIOUS IT IS NOT THERE.
I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE BRANDED AFTERMARKET CARTS AT ABOUT HALF THE PRICE AS CANON WHERE YOU COULD TRACK THE QUALITY (OR LACK OF IT).
THIS IS WHAT THE WEBVENDORS DO NOT WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO DO. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN SELL.
I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE A FEW OF THE REGULAR POSTERS IN THIS NG THAT ARE IN THE PRINTER AND INK BUSINESS AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MUCH OF THIS MISINFORMATION AND THEY DO NOT LIKE A PERSON LIKE ME TELLING OTHERS THE TRUTH.
zakezuke
1. Does it come in a retail box?
Yep
2. Are the cartridges labled clearly with the maker and logo?
Yep
3. Is it a brand?
Sure is!
3. Is measekite blind?
Sure is!
zakezuke
1. Does it come in a retail box?
Yep
2. Is it sold in retail store
Sure is... for 20 years at least!
3. Is it a brand?
There can be no doubt!
Frank
Jon don't bother with this fucking moron. Nobody really cares about him
or his stupid ass remarks. Remember this one simple fact: he has never
and probably will never use after market inks. He has NO EXPERIENCE to
speak of. Absolutely none!
So why bother with him other than to push his buttons (of course that's
fun isn't it)?
Other than that, he's just a fucking nobody idiot!
Frank
zakezuke
HP, Canon, Epson, none meet your requirement of disclosing who MFG the
ink. The only way to track epson is by the marked country of orgin and
even then there is no assurance that the ink was all made by the same
MFG. Your point is moot.
I posted a nice spiffy link to a PrintRite cartridge with the spiffy
little Printrite logo on it and you ignored it. This is what you do...
someone shows you solid proof of being a legit brand, one which is sold
in retail stores and you ignore it. The only person lying with all due
respect is you.
-brands of 3rd party cartridges-
Media Street. http://www.mediastreet.com/
Lyson... http://www.lyson.com/
Prite-Rite www.multiunion.com.
JetTec www.jettec.com
Pelikan http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html
All of these have products offered in retail stores in a retail box
with logos on the outside and the inside.
All of the above sell their product
-resellers of wholesale brand ink-
http://88inkjets.com/ formulabs stated clearly on the website
Even in measkite land all of these meet with your requirements. In
real people land, you are obsessed and crazy.
Alan Justice
cost 20% as much. But I had to throw away a lot more prints while figuring
out how to get good results. Because the ink was more fragile, I had to
disengage the exit rollers that scuffed the prints (with flags routinely
provided by MS because they know of the problem). But that led to other
problems such as printing the end of each page (which I need). So I went to
taping a card on the back of every sheet before feeding it. I could go on
about the problems this produced, but suffice it to say that it was so
time-consuming to get good results that I'm giving up. Not to mention that
the ink ruined the printer: All the additional head cleanings I had to do
caused the used ink reserevoir to fill up. This is not user-serviceable.
The printer simple stopped working at all.
--
- Alan Justice
"Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...
> Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be
> interesting for you to read-:
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp
>
> and here's a snippet
> > We printed several types of files (including those with solid color
> blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose
> paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts
> through the following tests.
>
> ~and~[quote:5793904ff4]
> Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over
> time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time預
> very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no
> risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and
> Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
> part幼logging a printhead, for example葉he warranty for that part
> would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4]
>
> Lot more to read so well worth a peep.
>
> Davy
>
Jon O'Brien
wrote:
> So why bother with him other than to push his buttons
I refer the honourable gentleman to my earlier reply to him.
Jon.
Jon O'Brien
inkys...@oem.com (measekite the hasty) didn't bother to read far enough:
I can assure anyone that's interested that, should they read the site I
linked to (http://www.lyson.com/) carefully enough, they will find plenty
of literature to support my contention that Lyson makes its own inks and
supplies them in pre-filled cartridges. I can't speak for the other links
as I merely quoted from earlier posts.
Those that want other people to do all the work for them by cutting and
pasting will be sadly disappointed.
Jon.
zakezuke
> linked to (http://www.lyson.com/) carefully enough, they will find plenty
> of literature to support my contention that Lyson makes its own inks and
> supplies them in pre-filled cartridges. I can't speak for the other links
> as I merely quoted from earlier posts.
I've linked to this in the past, measkite has seen them... but here we
go again.
-example of one place to buy lyson fotonic archival cartridges for the
canon-
http://www.einks.net/canon_fotonic.html
-this is their fancy logo-
http://www.lyson.com/graphics/FotonicText.jpg
-this is their retail box-
http://www.lyson.com/graphics/LYSONIC%20E1200.jpg
-this is also the retail box-
http://www.specialistinks.com/ep3000-fotonic.php
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measekite said: Irate rant removed per request
>>
>>
HEREIS WHAT MEASKITE SAID
YOU PEOPLE REFUSE TO CUT AND PASTE BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. I
CLICKED ON THE LINKS AND IT IS NOT THERE. I WISH IT WAS BUT IT IS
*NOT THERE
YOU PEOPLE JUST DISTORT AND LIE TELLING OTHERS TO GO TO THESE LINKS WHEN
YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. WHY DON'T YOU END THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY
AND SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT. IF YOU FIND THE INFO THEN CUT AND PASTE IT
INTO A REPLY SO WE CAN ALL SEE IT IS NOT THERE. IF YOU CANNOT DO THIS
THEN IT IS RATHER OBVIOUS IT IS NOT THERE.
I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE BRANDED AFTERMARKET CARTS AT ABOUT HALF THE
PRICE AS CANON WHERE YOU COULD TRACK THE QUALITY (OR LACK OF IT).
THIS IS WHAT THE WEBVENDORS DO NOT WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO DO. THAT IS
THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN SELL.
I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE A FEW OF THE REGULAR POSTERS IN THIS NG THAT
ARE IN THE PRINTER AND INK BUSINESS AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MUCH OF THIS
MISINFORMATION AND THEY DO NOT LIKE A PERSON LIKE ME TELLING OTHERS THE
TRUTH.*
>
>1. Does it come in a retail box?
>Yep
>2. Are the cartridges labled clearly with the maker and logo?
>Yep
>3. Is it a brand?
>Sure is!
>3. Is measekite blind?
>Sure is!
>
>
ANYONE WITH ANY IQ CAN GO TO A WEBSITE AND SEE IF THERE IS A STATEMENT LIKE
ALL OF OUR INK IS MFG BY XXXX
AND THE BOXES AND CARTS BEAR THE LABEL.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
Measekite said: Irate rant removed per request
YOU PEOPLE REFUSE TO CUT AND PASTE BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. I CLICKED ON THE LINKS AND IT IS NOT THERE. I WISH IT WAS BUT IT IS
YOU PEOPLE JUST DISTORT AND LIE TELLING OTHERS TO GO TO THESE LINKS WHEN YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. WHY DON'T YOU END THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY AND SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT. IF YOU FIND THE INFO THEN CUT AND PASTE IT INTO A REPLY SO WE CAN ALL SEE IT IS NOT THERE. IF YOU CANNOT DO THIS THEN IT IS RATHER OBVIOUS IT IS NOT THERE.
I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE BRANDED AFTERMARKET CARTS AT ABOUT HALF THE PRICE AS CANON WHERE YOU COULD TRACK THE QUALITY (OR LACK OF IT).
THIS IS WHAT THE WEBVENDORS DO NOT WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO DO. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN SELL.
I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE A FEW OF THE REGULAR POSTERS IN THIS NG THAT ARE IN THE PRINTER AND INK BUSINESS AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MUCH OF THIS MISINFORMATION AND THEY DO NOT LIKE A PERSON LIKE ME TELLING OTHERS THE TRUTH.
1. Does it come in a retail box? Yep 2. Is it sold in retail store Sure is... for 20 years at least! 3. Is it a brand? There can be no doubt!
measekite
Frank wrote:
HE ALWAYS ANSWERS. HE ALWAYS USED FOUL LANGUAGE. HE IS ALWAY ACCUSES
PEOPLE. I THINK HE IS IN THE PRINTER BUSINESS AND IS DOING POORLY
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
Measekite said: Rant removed per request
YOU PEOPLE REFUSE TO CUT AND PASTE BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. I CLICKED ON THE LINKS AND IT IS NOT THERE. I WISH IT WAS BUT IT IS
NOT THERE
YOU PEOPLE JUST DISTORT AND LIE TELLING OTHERS TO GO TO THESE LINKS WHEN YOU KNOW IT IS NOT THERE. WHY DON'T YOU END THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY AND SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT. IF YOU FIND THE INFO THEN CUT AND PASTE IT INTO A REPLY SO WE CAN ALL SEE IT IS NOT THERE. IF YOU CANNOT DO THIS THEN IT IS RATHER OBVIOUS IT IS NOT THERE.
I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE BRANDED AFTERMARKET CARTS AT ABOUT HALF THE PRICE AS CANON WHERE YOU COULD TRACK THE QUALITY (OR LACK OF IT).
THIS IS WHAT THE WEBVENDORS DO NOT WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO DO. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN SELL.
I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE A FEW OF THE REGULAR POSTERS IN THIS NG THAT ARE IN THE PRINTER AND INK BUSINESS AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MUCH OF THIS MISINFORMATION AND THEY DO NOT LIKE A PERSON LIKE ME TELLING OTHERS THE TRUTH.
THAT WAS NOT A BRIGHT STATEMENT. ASK GENERAL MOTORS WHO MFG A BUICK?HP, Canon, Epson, none meet your requirement of disclosing who MFG the ink.
HA HA HA
The only way to track epson is by the marked country of orgin and even then there is no assurance that the ink was all made by the same MFG. Your point is moot. I posted a nice spiffy link to a PrintRite cartridge with the spiffy little Printrite logo on it and you ignored it.
This is what you do... someone shows you solid proof of being a legit brand, one which is sold in retail stores and you ignore it. The only person lying with all due respect is you.
TRIMMED TO SHORTEN
zakezuke
Jet-Tec
" Jet Tec inkjet cartridges are made in the UK by DCI Ltd and are
compatible with the latest and most popular types of printers."
<snip>
"· Established in 1989
· British Manufacturer with 280 employees
· Extensive in-house R&D department
·<snip>
· In house ink formulation and production laboratory
· State of the art, custom built factory and tool making"
-- http://www.jettec.com/about_us.asp
I imagine I could continue but doing so would just make measekite look
more stupid than he already does. Unlike it's as he belives that there
are a group of people on here who are conspiring to spread lies about
non-oem solutions or if it's just measekite. And well... the evidence
sugests it's just measekite and his paranoid conspiricy theories.
The point is there are brands... even brands that meet all of
Measkete's inane requirements for an ink cartradge to be a name brand.
A brand is just a label people recognize. Whether or not they are
actually the ODM (Original Design Manufacturer) has nothing to do with
it. If what Measekite said was so, then Dell, HP / Compaq, Sony
wouldn't nessicarly be name brands. Even though being an ODM is just a
Measkite requirement... he can not say that 3rd party ODM cartridges do
not exist. They do.. this is a *FACT*. It's a very small point, so I
don't know why he's obsessed with it... and he's wrong anyways so the
point is moot.
But i'm sure he'll find some way to justify himself in saying these lot
are not a brand, even though they meet all his requirements,
requirements that not even Canon, HP, or Epson meet.
measekite
Alan Justice wrote:
I used MediaStreet ink in my Epson 2200 for about 8 months. Technically, it cost 20% as much.
But I had to throw away a lot more prints while figuring out how to get good results.
Because the ink was more fragile, I had to disengage the exit rollers that scuffed the prints (with flags routinely provided by MS because they know of the problem).
But that led to other problems such as printing the end of each page (which I need). So I went to taping a card on the back of every sheet before feeding it. I could go on about the problems this produced, but suffice it to say that it was so time-consuming to get good results that I'm giving up.
Not to mention that the ink ruined the printer:
I LOVE IT.
All the additional head cleanings I had to do caused the used ink reserevoir to fill up. This is not user-serviceable. The printer simple stopped working at all.
-- - Alan Justice "Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...
Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be interesting for you to read-: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp and here's a snippetWe printed several types of files (including those with solid color
blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts through the following tests. ~and~[quote:5793904ff4] Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time—a very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a part—clogging a printhead, for example—the warranty for that part would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4] Lot more to read so well worth a peep. Davy
I LOVED IT
measekite
Alan Justice wrote:
>I used MediaStreet ink in my Epson 2200 for about 8 months. Technically, it
>cost 20% as much.
>
>But I had to throw away a lot more prints while figuring
>out how to get good results.
>
THESE PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS. THEY WILL NOT ADMIT WHAT YOU SAY
HAPPENS TO MOST PEOPLE WHO USE GENERIC INK LIKE THIS
> Because the ink was more fragile, I had to
>disengage the exit rollers that scuffed the prints (with flags routinely
>provided by MS because they know of the problem).
>
WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU DO NOT USE OEM
>But that led to other
>problems such as printing the end of each page (which I need). So I went to
>taping a card on the back of every sheet before feeding it. I could go on
>about the problems this produced, but suffice it to say that it was so
>time-consuming to get good results that I'm giving up.
>
*READ THIS*
>Not to mention that
>the ink ruined the printer:
>
I HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE THAT WHEN A VENDOR WILL NOT DISCLOSE WHAT YOU
ARE GETTING (WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS) AND YOU CANNOT TRACK THE QUALITY
UNDER A BRAND NAME THEN DO NOT BUY THAT STUFF. MANY OF THESE POSTERS
EVEN GO THROUGH THE MESSY PAIN IN THE ASS OF REFILLING THEIR OLD CARTS
AND THEN WRITE POSTINGS ON HOW TO CLEAN THEIR CARPETS.
I LOVE IT.
>All the additional head cleanings I had to do
>caused the used ink reserevoir to fill up. This is not user-serviceable.
>The printer simple stopped working at all.
>
>
*END OF READ THIS*
>--
>- Alan Justice
>
>"Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...
>
>
>>Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be
>>interesting for you to read-:
>>
>>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp
>>
>>and here's a snippet
>>
>>
>>>We printed several types of files (including those with solid color
>>>
>>>
>>blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose
>>paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts
>>through the following tests.
>>
>>~and~[quote:5793904ff4]
>>Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over
>>time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time—a
>>very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no
>>risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and
>>Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
>>part—clogging a printhead, for example—the warranty for that part
>>would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4]
>>
>>Lot more to read so well worth a peep.
>>
>>Davy
>>
>>
*I LOVED IT*
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
measekite
Alan Justice wrote:
I used MediaStreet ink in my Epson 2200 for about 8 months. Technically, it cost 20% as much.
THESE PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS. THEY WILL NOT ADMIT WHAT YOU SAY HAPPENS TO MOST PEOPLE WHO USE GENERIC INK LIKE THISBut I had to throw away a lot more prints while figuring out how to get good results.
Because the ink was more fragile, I had to disengage the exit rollers that scuffed the prints (with flags routinely provided by MS because they know of the problem).
WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU DO NOT USE OEM
But that led to other problems such as printing the end of each page (which I need). So I went to taping a card on the back of every sheet before feeding it. I could go on about the problems this produced, but suffice it to say that it was so time-consuming to get good results that I'm giving up.
I HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE THAT WHEN A VENDOR WILL NOT DISCLOSE WHAT YOU ARE GETTING (WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS) AND YOU CANNOT TRACK THE QUALITY UNDER A BRAND NAME THEN DO NOT BUY THAT STUFF. MANY OF THESE POSTERS EVEN GO THROUGH THE MESSY PAIN IN THE ASS OF REFILLING THEIR OLD CARTS AND THEN WRITE POSTINGS ON HOW TO CLEAN THEIR CARPETS.Not to mention that the ink ruined the printer:
I LOVE IT.
All the additional head cleanings I had to do caused the used ink reserevoir to fill up. This is not user-serviceable. The printer simple stopped working at all.
-- - Alan Justice "Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be interesting for you to read-: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp and here's a snippetWe printed several types of files (including those with solid colorblocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts through the following tests. ~and~[quote:5793904ff4] Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time—a very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a part—clogging a printhead, for example—the warranty for that part would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4] Lot more to read so well worth a peep. Davy
measekite
In article <q7Naf.9761$q%.6972@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, inkys...@oem.com (measekite the hasty) didn't bother to read far enough: I can assure anyone that's interested that, should they read the site I linked to (http://www.lyson.com/) carefully enough,
measekite
measekite
Additional:Jet-Tec " Jet Tec inkjet cartridges are made in the UK by DCI Ltd and are compatible with the latest and most popular types of printers."
<snip> "· Established in 1989 · British Manufacturer with 280 employees · Extensive in-house R&D department
·<snip> · In house ink formulation and production laboratory · State of the art, custom built factory and tool making" -- http://www.jettec.com/about_us.asp I imagine I could continue but doing so would just make measekite look more stupid than he already does. Unlike it's as he belives that
there are a group of people on here who are conspiring to spread lies about non-oem solutions
or if it's just measekite. And well... the evidence sugests it's just measekite and his paranoid conspiricy theories. The point is there are brands... even brands that meet all of Measkete's inane requirements for an ink cartradge to be a name brand.
A brand is just a label people recognize.
Whether or not they are actually the ODM (Original Design Manufacturer) has nothing to do with it.
If what Measekite said was so, then Dell, HP / Compaq, Sony wouldn't nessicarly be name brands.
Even though being an ODM is just a Measkite requirement... he can not say that 3rd party ODM cartridges do not exist. They do..
this is a *FACT*. It's a very small point, so I don't know why he's obsessed with it... and he's wrong anyways so the point is moot. But i'm sure he'll find some way to justify himself in saying these lot are not a brand,
even though they meet all his requirements,
requirements that not even Canon, HP, or Epson meet.
zakezuke
If what you say is true, why is my printer not clogged? I'll agree
there are some bum solutions out there. That's why it's important for
people to share experence. You sir have NONE.
Anyhow your inane requirements are as follows.
*1. Manufacture and Formulate
2. Sold in a retail box
3. Sold in retail stores
#1 is totally inane as canon, hp, epson, bother, etc.. etc.. don't
technicaly manufacture the ink. In fact, you don't know for a fact
they even formulate, you take this on faith. But even with #1 in place
it has been proven without a doubt that there are products that meet
all your requirements.
On the small point no brand name 3rd party cartridges existing... you
are with all due respect 100% absolutly positivly wrong. The only
person who is lying is you. There is no grand ink conspircy, just one
person obsessed with the idea at getting back at a few people who hurt
his feelings. That's what this is all about. So accept the fact that
you are wrong... do something positive... and be happy.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measekite said: Inane rant removed per request
>>
>>
>
>If what you say is true, why is my printer not clogged?
>
THIS IS WHAT I SAID
Alan Justice wrote:
>I used MediaStreet ink in my Epson 2200 for about 8 months. Technically, it
>cost 20% as much.
>
>But I had to throw away a lot more prints while figuring
>out how to get good results.
>
THESE PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS. THEY WILL NOT ADMIT WHAT YOU SAY
HAPPENS TO MOST PEOPLE WHO USE GENERIC INK LIKE THIS
> Because the ink was more fragile, I had to
>disengage the exit rollers that scuffed the prints (with flags routinely
>provided by MS because they know of the problem).
>
WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU DO NOT USE OEM
>But that led to other
>problems such as printing the end of each page (which I need). So I went to
>taping a card on the back of every sheet before feeding it. I could go on
>about the problems this produced, but suffice it to say that it was so
>time-consuming to get good results that I'm giving up.
>
*READ THIS*
>Not to mention that
>the ink ruined the printer:
>
I HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE THAT WHEN A VENDOR WILL NOT DISCLOSE WHAT YOU
ARE GETTING (WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS) AND YOU CANNOT TRACK THE QUALITY
UNDER A BRAND NAME THEN DO NOT BUY THAT STUFF. MANY OF THESE POSTERS
EVEN GO THROUGH THE MESSY PAIN IN THE ASS OF REFILLING THEIR OLD CARTS
AND THEN WRITE POSTINGS ON HOW TO CLEAN THEIR CARPETS.
I LOVE IT.
>All the additional head cleanings I had to do
>caused the used ink reserevoir to fill up. This is not user-serviceable.
>The printer simple stopped working at all.
>
>
*END OF READ THIS*
>--
>- Alan Justice
>
>"Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...
>
>
>>Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be
>>interesting for you to read-:
>>
>>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp
>>
>>and here's a snippet
>>
>>
>>>We printed several types of files (including those with solid color
>>>
>>>
>>blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose
>>paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts
>>through the following tests.
>>
>>~and~[quote:5793904ff4]
>>Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over
>>time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time—a
>>very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no
>>risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and
>>Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
>>part—clogging a printhead, for example—the warranty for that part
>>would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4]
>>
>>Lot more to read so well worth a peep.
>>
>>Davy
>>
>>
*I LOVED IT*
>
>
zakezuke wrote:
> I'll agree
zakezuke
Measkite requirements
*1. Manufacture and Formulate
2. Sold in a retail box
3. Sold in retail stores
#1 is inane, and not actually required for something to be a brand
name, but the jet-tec website say perfectly clearly that " In house ink
formulation and production laboratory", in other words manufacture and
formulate. To put most simply, they meet with your high standards
100%. This isn't some brand hackers reconize but rather something
advertised on TV. Measekite is 100% positivly wrong on this small
point. QED - thus it is proven. You are wrong... accept this and
move on.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>>Measekite said: Rant removed per request
>>>
>>>
HERE IS WHAT WAS SAID. YOU ALL NEED TO KNOW THIS
Alan Justice wrote:
>I used MediaStreet ink in my Epson 2200 for about 8 months. Technically, it
>cost 20% as much.
>
>But I had to throw away a lot more prints while figuring
>out how to get good results.
>
THESE PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS. THEY WILL NOT ADMIT WHAT YOU SAY
HAPPENS TO MOST PEOPLE WHO USE GENERIC INK LIKE THIS
> Because the ink was more fragile, I had to
>disengage the exit rollers that scuffed the prints (with flags routinely
>provided by MS because they know of the problem).
>
WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU DO NOT USE OEM
>But that led to other
>problems such as printing the end of each page (which I need). So I went to
>taping a card on the back of every sheet before feeding it. I could go on
>about the problems this produced, but suffice it to say that it was so
>time-consuming to get good results that I'm giving up.
>
*READ THIS*
>Not to mention that
>the ink ruined the printer:
>
I HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE THAT WHEN A VENDOR WILL NOT DISCLOSE WHAT YOU
ARE GETTING (WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS) AND YOU CANNOT TRACK THE QUALITY
UNDER A BRAND NAME THEN DO NOT BUY THAT STUFF. MANY OF THESE POSTERS
EVEN GO THROUGH THE MESSY PAIN IN THE ASS OF REFILLING THEIR OLD CARTS
AND THEN WRITE POSTINGS ON HOW TO CLEAN THEIR CARPETS.
I LOVE IT.
>All the additional head cleanings I had to do
>caused the used ink reserevoir to fill up. This is not user-serviceable.
>The printer simple stopped working at all.
>
>
*END OF READ THIS*
>--
>- Alan Justice
>
>"Davy" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:B128f.308918$cw3....@fe01.news.easynews.com...
>
>
>>Here's an article I found about 3rd party (non OEM) inks, may be
>>interesting for you to read-:
>>
>>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,942656,00.asp
>>
>>and here's a snippet
>>
>>
>>>We printed several types of files (including those with solid color
>>>
>>>
>>blocks, text, graphics, and photos) on both inexpensive, multipurpose
>>paper and expensive, glossy photo paper. We then ran the printouts
>>through the following tests.
>>
>>~and~[quote:5793904ff4]
>>Issues not covered by our tests are how third-party inks hold up over
>>time and how they might affect your printer's performance over time—a
>>very controversial issue. The third-party ink sellers say there is no
>>risk to using their products. But representatives from Canon and
>>Hewlett-Packard warn that if a third-party ink cartridge damages a
>>part—clogging a printhead, for example—the warranty for that part
>>would be void. Let the buyer beware.[/quote:5793904ff4]
>>
>>Lot more to read so well worth a peep.
>>
>>Davy
>>
>>
*I LOVED IT*
>
>
>
>It's not a problem tracking the quality of products esp among the name
>brands listed.
>
THESE ARE NOT BRANDS. THEY ARE LABELS. THEY CAN CHANGE THEIR SUPPLIERS
AT ANY TIME.
>These name brands have been listed priviously. The
>only person trully obsessed and being deceptive on the subject is you.
>
>
THE ONLY REALLY OBSESSED AND BEING DECEPTIVE AND NOT STRAGHT FORWARD IS
YOU. CUT AND PASTE THE INFORMATION. OH NO YOU CANNOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT
THEIR.
THIS IS YOUR CHALLENGE - CHICKEN
>The few users that use third party products are sharing their experence
>with them, doing exactly what you claim you are pro in this rant...
>tracking the quality. Why don't you let them do this because it
>benifits us all?
>
>
READ ABOVE. SEE THE PROBLEMS. AND THIS IS FROM A VENDOR WHO YOU LIST AND
YOU CLAIM IS A BRAND. BUT IT IS NOT. IT IS A WELL KNOWN WEB SELLER
zakezuke
Measkite's chalange
*1. Manufacture and Formulate
2. Sold in a retail box
3. Sold in retail stores
Chalange won... Measkite lost.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
WHAT CHALLENGE. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. NO REFERENCE
zakezuke
You do understand the image you linked to shows cartridges with the
Print-rite logo on them? Do we feel dumb now? I thought so.
http://www.it88.com.cn/detail/3417.htm
More spiffy logos on boxes and cartridges. woot woot. Feeling mega
dumb now? I thought so!
Anyhow it's true Epson sued print-rite, but they didn't win, Print-Rite
settled. AFAIK the suit was about print-rite's chips not the ink it
self... and how the print-rite cartridges would report to the printer
they were Epson. Feeling super duper bloody stupid? I thought so.
What I don't understand is how can you be so wrong... spend 20 lines
offering proof that you are wrong, and still rant as if you were right.
Perhaps you need glasses.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>>Measekite said: Irate rant removed per request
>>>
>>>
> PR Reorder No.: IFC119B [bci-3e compatable]
>
>You do understand the image you linked to shows cartridges with the
>Print-rite logo on them? Do we feel dumb now? I thought so.
>
>
PRINTWRONG IS A GENERIC AND A POOR ONE AT THAT GENERIC LABEL
>http://www.it88.com.cn/detail/3417.htm
>More spiffy logos on boxes and cartridges. woot woot. Feeling mega
>dumb now? I thought so!
>
>
YOU CERTAINLY LOOK THAT WAY. LOOK AT WHAT I GOT YOU TO DO. LOOK AT ALL
THE CRAP YOU WRITE. :-D :-D :-D OUT LOUD
>Anyhow it's true Epson sued print-rite, but they didn't win, Print-Rite
>settled.
>
YOU ARE A REAL JOKE
HA HA HA HA
> AFAIK the suit was about print-rite's chips not the ink it
>self... and how the print-rite cartridges would report to the printer
>they were Epson. Feeling super duper bloody stupid?
>
YOU SURE SOUND THAT WAY
>I thought so.
>
>What I don't understand is how can you be so wrong... spend 20 lines
>offering proof that you are wrong, and still rant as if you were right.
> Perhaps you need glasses.
>
>
YOU MUST BE DRINKING FROM THEM
zakezuke
Print-rite has been around for 20 years. I first bought from them when
I needed ribbons for my dot matrix printer. They were cheaper and the
ink was darker than what I presumed was the OEM product. Now that I
think about it, I can't remember if it was Prite-rite or Pelican that
Office Depot carried but needless to say they have been offering retail
products for long enough for them to be called a brand.
Pelikan is also a name brand... they still make pens. Unless a $150
pen is a generic one in Measkite land. Hell for their ink cartridges
they even licended some stuff from Disney. "1 free cd-rom "Printstudio
of the Incredibles"
http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/Disney_Promotion.1225.0.html
They are a name brand, not a generic... not even in Measkite land.
They also are a big paper company... those other guys out of
Switzerland that are not ilford.
I'm not saying their product is good or bad, only that they exist, they
are a name brand and product pre-filled cartridges for printers. They
come in a retail box and have a spiffy logo on the cartridges... as you
no doubt know as you linked to them 7 times. They meet all your
requirements for a name brand product.
These are not odd ball products for hackers but rather consumer
oriented goods, and with all due respect you are the only one that has
huge issues with them. There are others who will share their experence
whether good or bad but you are totally obsessed, obsessed with a
product you have NO experence with what so ever.
All your requirements have been met, the game is over. You will rant
and rave like a lunitic trying someway to redeem some credibility but
alas you don't have any.. because you lied. That is the only
explanation... there is no one on this earth who can be as stupid as
you pretend to be. Your inane requirements have been met 100%, you can
pretend you can't see that all you want but anyone with a brain can
see, and I mean this with the greatest respect, you are totally full of
shinola.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measkite said: The same old shinola
>>
>>
IT CERTAINLY IS THE SAME OLD SHIT
>
>Print-rite has been around for 20 years.
>
I GUESS THEY FOOL MANY IDIOTS
>I first bought from them when
>I needed ribbons for my dot matrix printer. They were
>
>cheaper
>
OF COURSE
>and the
>ink was darker than what I presumed was the OEM product. Now that I
>think about it, I can't remember if it was Prite-rite or Pelican that
>Office Depot carried but needless to say they have been offering retail
>products for long enough for them to be called a brand.
>
>
THE QUALITY IS CRAP. I EVEN BOUGHTG AN ADDING MACHINE RIBBON FOR MY
ADDING MACHINE AND IT IS TOTAL TRASH
>Pelikan is also a name brand...
>
IT IS NOT A BRAND
>they still make pens. Unless a $150
>pen is a generic one in Measkite land. Hell for their ink cartridges
>they even licended some stuff from Disney. "1 free cd-rom "Printstudio
>of the Incredibles"
>http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/Disney_Promotion.1225.0.html
>They are a name brand, not a generic...
>
THEY ARE A GENERIC AND NOT A BRAND
> not even in Measkite land.
>They also are a big paper company... those other guys out of
>Switzerland that are not ilford.
>
>I'm not saying their product is good or bad,
>
WHO CARES CAUSE YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IT IS AND COULD BE CHANGING EVERY MONTH
>only that they exist, they
>are a
>
STORE LABEL
>name brand and product pre-filled cartridges for printers. They
>come in a retail box and have a spiffy logo on the cartridges... as you
>no doubt know as you linked to them 7 times. They meet all your
>requirements for a name brand product.
>
>
THEY DO NOT SAY WHO THE MFG/FORMULATOR IS ON THEIR WEBSITE. ANYBODY GO
LISTENS TO THIS CRAP AND THEN LOOK ON THE SITE FOR THEMSELVES NEVER
COMES BACK TO THIS NG FOR MORE MISINFORMATION
>These are not odd ball products for hackers
>
THAT IS JUST WHAT THE ARE
>but rather consumer
>oriented goods, and with all due respect you are the only one that has
>huge issues with them.
>
I DO NOT HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THEM OR ANY OF THE WEBSITE LABELERS WHO
FAIL TO DO BUSINESS THE RIGHT WAY. I JUST BUY WHAT I KNOW.
> There are others who will share their experence
>whether good or bad
>
BAD
>but you are totally obsessed, obsessed with a
>product you have NO experence with what so ever.
>
>All your requirements have been met, the game is over.
>
ARE YOU QUITTING
>You will rant
>and rave like a lunitic trying someway to redeem some credibility but
>alas you don't have any.. because you lied.
>
FOR SOME IN THIS NG I REALLY DO NOT CARE.
>That is the only
>explanation... there is no one on this earth who can be as stupid as
>you pretend to be.
>
HOW ABOUT YOU
>Your inane requirements have been met 100%, you can
>pretend you can't see that all you want but anyone with a brain can
>see,
>
YOU CANNOT SEE
>and I mean this with the greatest respect, you are totally full of
>shinola.
>
>
WHAT IS SHINOLA. I THINK IT IS S SHOE POLISH. ARE YOU SAYING I AM FULL
OF SHOE POLISH. WELL THEN NOW I CAN SHINE YOU OFF.
GOODIE GOODIE
zakezuke
Pelikan is a store brand? These guys who for decades have been selling
premium pens? $200 pens, $100 pens, $50 pens, $20 pens? You think
this Swiss company is just a store brand? No one can be *this*
stupid... I understand you don't know shit from shinola but there is no
way anyone can not understand that Pelikan is as big as Fisher and
Sheaffer for pens. And like many other companies... as their business
is ink it's only natural to move to inkjets. Pelikan has been around
for 76 years.... and you are calling them a store brand? You must
enjoy pretending to be stupid cause no one in their right mind could
believe that Pelikan isn't a brand.
The quality of the ink is not the purpose of this dialog. It has been
proven without a a doubt to anyone with two working neurons that brands
of 3rd party ink exist, even ones that meet all three of your
requirements.
I understand your feelings are hurt and you feel the need to lash out.
Perhaps you can take the time to reflect upon this experence and learn
how to be a better man. It's OK to be dead wrong because when you are
wrong you learn to be right in the future.
George E. Cawthon
of good information and sites to visit. But I
don't understand why you talk to M. It dilutes
your influence.
Anybody that doesn't know about Pelikan as a
brand of ink has got to be asleep at the wheel. I
remember Pelikan from when I was in highschool. I
probably even have a bottle around that was bought
back in the late 50's or early 60's. Everybody
bought Pelikan for drawing.
zakezuke
> back in the late 50's or early 60's. Everybody
> bought Pelikan for drawing.
Actually I bought Sheaffer... it not being an import IIRC it was a
good deal cheaper. Come to think about it I refilled those cartridges
with india ink and never had an issue with nib clogging.
drc023
80's. Besides using it to refill the plastic tube cartridges in my Sheaffer
ink pens - I also used it to refill the ink cartridge in my HP DeskJet 500.
Worked fine and never had to buy a second cartridge. FWIW, I was refilling
Shaeffer ink pen cartridges while I was in high school in the 60's. Just
think if Al Gore had invented the internet back then and we had a forum
about refilling ink pens, Measekite would have been going ballistic over the
thought of anyone not using new branded Sheaffer cartridges every time one
ran out. Think of the uproar he would have caused if someone used Parker ink
in a Shaeffer pen.
--
Ron
"zakezuke" <zakez...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131165370.3...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
zakezuke
> thought of anyone not using new branded Sheaffer cartridges every time one
> ran out. Think of the uproar he would have caused if someone used Parker ink
> in a Shaeffer pen.
Or worse yet, some compatable fountain cartridges with only a house
brand. Who knows what they put in there... for all you know office
depot is running kerosene lamps to make lampblack and mixing up the
stuff in their bath tub. Gotta use OEM lampblack if you don't want
your nibs to clog.
George E. Cawthon
Uh Oh, Sheaffer isn't a brand, is it? ;) Still
have a couple of Sheaffer pens, I think. I bought
Sheaffer ink for fountain pens in the late 40's.
The Pelikan ink I bought later was always India
ink for drawing.
Clogging was the least of anyone's worries, they
did dribble at times tho. I think the rubber
bladders deteriorated rather rapidly. Kind of
strange cause I still have good rubber bands from
the 40's whereas the modern ones seem to
deteriorate rapidly, seldom ever last longer than
1 year even without tension, in the dark, and in
the cool.
zakezuke
Additional information:
Bob Headrick posted this link a while ago, thought i'd revisited and
quote a segment.
-----
Anzen: a leading aftermarket ink brand in North America. Key provider
to internet resellers.
- Dataproducts: a leading aftermarket ink brand and private label
provider in North America, Europe and Asia. Also sold under Staples
private label at the time of the study.
- Geha: a leading aftermarket ink brand in Europe.
- KMP: a leading aftermarket ink brand in Europe.
- NCR: a leading aftermarket ink brand and private label provider in
the Americas and Europe. Also sold under the OfficeMax private label
brand.
- Nukote: a leading aftermarket ink brand and private label provider
in the Americas. Also sold under Office Depot and Walmart private
labels. Sold under Pelikan brand in the Americas.
- Turbon: a leading aftermarket ink brand and private label provider
in North America, Europe and Asia. Sold under the Jetfill brand. Also
sold under Quill private label.
----http://www.hp.com/sbso/product/supplies/supplies_reliability_ink.pdf
This is rather why I have a blindspot for Pelikan... seems according to
quality logic NuKote is another brand name for Pelikan.
http://www.nukote.com/about/?WWW_NUKOTE_COM=210bbd9a5e91d793dda40ba353383f6e
" * One of the world's largest independent manufacturers and
distributors of imaging supplies for printing devices.
* A leading supplier to major original equipment manufacturers:
No matter what brand name is on the machine, Nu-kote is the brand
of choice for the supply inside.
* Distribution channel includes office products commercial dealers,
super stores, electronics stores, mass-market retail chains, catalogs,
and electronic commerce "virtual" dealers."
Measkite check list
1. Do they mfg/formulate?
That's what they say.
2. Does it come in a retail box
Sure does
3. Is it sold in retail store
Sure... oh yea under it's own name and the Office Depot private label
according to Quality Logic. Sold at office max under it's own label.
http://www.officemax.com/max/solutions/product/prodBlock.jsp?prodBlockOID=537277515&campaign=363BT4HC2V2&cm_cat=Other&cm_pla=Other&cm_ite=Other&cm_ven=Shopping_com&BV_UseBVCookie=no&affCode=PRF&siteID=k2776&mid=
Is it a brand?
There can be no doubt.
Will Measekite rave like a loon finding some explanation why it's not a
brand? There is no doubt.
Does Measekite have cause to feel supremely stupid.
Am I grasping at straws? Nope... meets with Measkete's strict
requirements 100%. QED - thus it is proven.
Frank
ignorant bullshit and get on with helping real people with real
questions and real problems. He has none of these.
Frank
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measkite wrote: A bunch of inane crap
>>
>>
>
>Pelikan is a store brand?
>
IT IS A STORE LABEL THAT THEY STICK ON SOMETHING WITH OUT DISCLOSING
WHAT IT IS.
>These guys who for decades have been selling
>premium pens? $200 pens, $100 pens, $50 pens, $20 pens? You think
>this Swiss company is just a store brand? No one can be *this*
>stupid...
>
OH YES
>I understand you don't know shit from shinola but there is no
>way anyone can not understand that Pelikan is as big as Fisher and
>Sheaffer for pens. And like many other companies... as their business
>is ink it's only natural to move to inkjets. Pelikan has been around
>for 76 years.... and you are calling them a store brand?
>
GEE I SAW ON FLYING OVER THE COAST NEAR BOSTON THE OTHER DAY. NOW I KNOW
THEY GOOTA BE BIRDS
>You must
>enjoy pretending to be stupid cause no one in their right mind could
>believe that Pelikan isn't a brand.
>
>
IT IS A STORE LABEL THAT THEY STICK ON SOMETHING WITH OUT DISCLOSING
WHAT IT IS.
>The quality of the ink is not the purpose of this dialog. It has been
>proven without a a doubt to anyone with two working neurons that brands
>of 3rd party ink exist, even ones that meet all three of your
>requirements.
>
>
NOT REALLY
>I understand your feelings are hurt and you feel the need to lash out.
>Perhaps you can take the time to reflect upon this experence and learn
>how to be a better man.
>
WHAT MAKE YOU THINK I AM A MAN
measekite
George E. Cawthon wrote:
> zakezuke wrote:
>
>>> Measkite wrote: A bunch of inane crap
>>
>>
>>
>> Pelikan is a store brand? These guys who for decades have been selling
>> premium pens? $200 pens, $100 pens, $50 pens, $20 pens? You think
>> this Swiss company is just a store brand? No one can be *this*
>> stupid... I understand you don't know shit from shinola but there is no
>> way anyone can not understand that Pelikan is as big as Fisher and
>> Sheaffer for pens. And like many other companies... as their business
>> is ink it's only natural to move to inkjets. Pelikan has been around
>> for 76 years.... and you are calling them a store brand? You must
>> enjoy pretending to be stupid cause no one in their right mind could
>> believe that Pelikan isn't a brand.
>>
>> The quality of the ink is not the purpose of this dialog. It has been
>> proven without a a doubt to anyone with two working neurons that brands
>> of 3rd party ink exist, even ones that meet all three of your
>> requirements.
>>
>> I understand your feelings are hurt and you feel the need to lash out.
>> Perhaps you can take the time to reflect upon this experence and learn
>> how to be a better man. It's OK to be dead wrong because when you are
>> wrong you learn to be right in the future.
>>
> I gotta say what some other say. You give a lot of good information
> and sites to visit. But I don't understand why you talk to M. It
> dilutes your influence.
HE HAS NONE
>
>
> Anybody that doesn't know about Pelikan as a brand of ink has got to
> be asleep at the wheel.
GO TO THERE WEBSITE. SEE WHAT THEY SELL. THE PRIVATE LABEL SOME
MFG/FORMULATOR PREFILLED CARTS AND DO NOT DISCLOSE THE MFG/FORMULATOR.
THEY ARE A STORE LABEL.
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
YOU SHOULD TRY INK FROM PAKISTAN TOO
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>Measkite said: Rant deleted per request and he's being redundent
>Additional information:
>
> Bob Headrick posted this link a while ago, thought i'd revisited and
>quote a segment.
>
>
>
>
TRIM
>
>Am I grasping at straws?
>
ABSOLOOTLEE
zakezuke
Here is where we catch Measekite in a lie
1. You've seen the logo, so you know it's not just a store brand.
2. You said earlier that "THE QUALITY <of pelikan> IS CRAP. I EVEN
BOUGHTG AN ADDING MACHINE RIBBON FOR MY ADDING MACHINE AND IT IS TOTAL
So you know the logo is a bird, and you have bought a product with the
name clearly labled as Pelikan. Whether or not they are crap or not is
beside the point.. the dialog was whether these are name brands. The
fact that you bought a ribbon by "Pelikan" proves the fact that their
product isn't just a store brand as a store brand would have their
store label attached to the product.
So in short, you "proved" my case, the fact that you can call Pelikan
crap and not office max's private label of ink crap is proof that you
too reconize them as brand and not some store label.
Frank
really just one big sick ass liar. Nobody believes one word he ever post.
Ignore his stuck-on-stupid old fart fat ass.
Frank
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measekite said: Removed per request
>>
>>
>
>Here is where we catch Measekite in a lie
>
>1. You've seen the logo, so you know it's not just a store brand.
>
>
STORE LABELS HAVE LOGOS ALSO. THEY ARE JUST GRAPHICS AND ICONS
>2. You said earlier that "THE QUALITY <of pelikan> IS CRAP. I EVEN
>BOUGHTG AN ADDING MACHINE RIBBON FOR MY ADDING MACHINE AND IT IS TOTAL
>TRASH."
><mine>
>http://groups.google.com/group/comp.periphs.printers/browse_frm/thread/748ee92267285a21/0c8276b04a97ae81?lnk=st&q=measekite+pelikan+ribbon&rnum=1&hl=en#0c8276b04a97ae81
>
>So you know the logo is a bird,
>
THE BIRD ON THE LOGO I HAD HAS THE FLU
>and you have bought a product with the
>name clearly labled as Pelikan.
>
OH YEAH A LABEL
>Whether or not they are crap or not is
>beside the point..
>
HA HA HA
>the dialog was whether these are name brands.
>
THEY ARE NAMED LABELS. NOBODY KNOWS THE BRAND CAUSE THEY DO NOT
DISCLOSE THAT ON THEIR SITE
>The
>fact that you bought a ribbon by "Pelikan" proves the fact that their
>product isn't just a store brand as a store brand would have their
>store label attached to the product.
>
>
THEY ARE A DISTRIBUTOR
>So in short, you "proved" my case, the fact that you can call Pelikan
>crap and not office max's private label of ink crap is proof that you
>too reconize them as brand and not some store label.
>
>
DID YOU FINNISH HIGH SCHOOL
measekite
Frank wrote:
APPARENTLY YOU CAN'T
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE
zakezuke
Pelikan is a brand. It's not a "store" brand as the company has been
selling products under their own name for decades. Their business was
pens and ink, which is why it's not so shocking that they got involved
with ribbons and ink for inkjets. You bought this name brand your
self, which is proof that i'm not the only one that has seen them.
It's 100% clear on the site that they manufacturer and formulate.
"Decades of experience in the production of high quality inks are one
of Pelikan Hardcopy's strengths. The in-house research and
development team is constantly developing the best technology and
innovative solutions so that the various inks are perfectly attuned to
new models of current inkjet printers such as with Epson's new
chip-controlled ink cartridges"
-http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html
Do they mfg/formulate? That's what they say
Does it come in a retail branded box? Oh yea
Can you buy it in retail stores? You did
Is it a brand in Measekite world? Oh yea!
measekite
zakezuke wrote:
>>Measkite said: A bunch of stuff
>>
>>
>
>Pelikan is a brand.
>
>It's not a "store" brand
>
THAT IS CORRECT. IT IS A STORE LABEL
>as the company has been
>selling products under their own name for decades.
>
I DID NOT KNOW THEY WERE SELLING AFTERMARKET INK FOR DECADES. OF COURSE
THERE WERE NO INKJET PRINTERS DECADES AGO BUT IT IS OK TO SELL
AFTERMARKET INK IN CASE PRINTERS WERE INVENTED
> Their business was
>pens and ink, which is why it's not so shocking that they got involved
>with ribbons and ink for inkjets.
>
>You bought this name brand your
>self,
>
I DID NOT. I BOUGHT A VENDOR LABEL. DO NOT LIE AND TWIST WHAT I SAID.
I KNOW WHAT I BOUGHT SINCE I WAS THERE
>which is proof that i'm not the only one that has seen them.
>It's 100% clear on the site that they manufacturer and formulate.
>
>
THEIR WEBSITE DOES NOT DISCLOSE THAT FACT
>"Decades of experience in the production of high quality inks are one
>of Pelikan Hardcopy's strengths. The in-house research and
>development team is constantly developing the best technology and
>innovative solutions so that the various inks are perfectly attuned to
>new models of current inkjet printers such as with Epson's new
>chip-controlled ink cartridges"
>
>
HOW LONG HAVE YOU WORKED FOR THEM?
>-http://www.pelikanhardcopy.com/InkJet.437.0.html
>
>Do they mfg/formulate? That's what they say
>Does it come in a retail branded box? Oh yea
>Can you buy it in retail stores? You did
>
>Is it a brand in Measekite world? Oh yea!
>
>
JUST LIKE THE CHYRSLER COMMERCIALS. SOME DINGBAT ASKS A QUESTION AND
THEN HE ANSWERS IT HIMSELF. WHAT A JOKE.
YOU ARE BEGINNING TO BORE ME.