i860 Canon & OEM, Inkgrabber, & Alotofthings.com inks

[Bill Pease]

I've just completed a simple experiment to compare photo prints
from
my Canon i860 printer using (first) OEM original Canon inks, then
Inkgrabber.com inks and then Alotofthings.com inks in the same
printer. I wanted to find out how these two 3rdparty inks compared
with the OEM Canon inks. I thought readers of this forum might be
interested in the results of this experiment.

As the test print I chose a standard test image whose origin I failed
to note when I saved it from some printer forum on the web several
months ago. Sorry about that. It's the one with the gorgeous
girl's
eyes in the center, the church and sunset pictures at the top, the
baby's face on the right and the color samples at the bottom.
Perhaps
you recognize it from that description. It's a great test print.

First I printed this test image on my i860 Canon printer with the
original Canon inks in it. The result on letter-size Canon Photo
Paper Plus Glossy was gorgeous—perhaps just a trifle
over-saturated
for best taste, but nevertheless, gorgeous enough to melt your
insides.

Then I pulled the OEM Canon ink cartridges from the printer and
substituted Inkgrabber.com ink cartridges. I printed a full color
purge print to get all the residual Canon ink out of the printhead
and then printed the same test image as before using the
Inkgrabber.com inks. The result was lovely on the same paper, but it
differed from the OEM Canon print in the following ways:
1. the grey clock face on the OEM print had taken on a slight
greenish hue
2. the rust-colored bricks of the church on the OEM print had
turned to a dull brown
3. the blue cast of the ocean in the sundown OEM print had
turned to a greenish hue
4. the greyish-blue eyes of the gorgeous girl in the OEM print
had turned to greenish-blue, her skin had turned very pale, and her
eyebrows had turned from brown to greenish-grey
5. the grey-to-black picture of the man in the OEM print had
turned to green-to-black.

In conclusion, the print produced using the Inkgrabber.com ink
cartridges differed considerably from the print produced using the
OEM Canon ink cartridges. Nevertheless, the Inkgrabber.com cartridges
produced a lovely print that might please some even though it did not
duplicate exactly the colors of the OEM Canon print. The
Inkgrabber.com ink cartridges for the Canon i860 printer cost about
$2.00 each.

Then I pulled the Inkgrabber.com cartridges from my printer and
substituted Alotofthings.com cartridges. Again I printed a full color
purge print to get all the residual Inkgrabber ink out of the
printhead and then printed the same test image as before using the
Alotofthings.com inks. The result was gorgeous on the same paper,
ALMOST identical to the OEM Canon print. It differed, ever so
slightly, in the following ways:
1. the grey clock face in the OEM print was just slightly tan
2. the grey parallel lines in the OEM print were just slightly
tan
3. the gorgeous girl's skin tone in the OEM print was just
slightly lighter
4. the grey-to-black picture of the man in the OEM print was
just slightly a little tan.

I would emphasize the word "slightly" here; you had to look
REAL hard
at the print done using Alotofthings.com cartridges to discern any
difference from the print done using OEM Canon cartridges. And the
OEM Canon cartridges cost about $11-$12 each. The Alotofthings.com
cartridges cost me $2.40 each (including postage) when I bought an
i860 combo package that included 18 cartridges of the 5 different
ones for the i860.

I'm not a photo purist (or a pro) who would quibble about the
VERY
slight differences between the OEM Canon print and the
Alotofthings.com print, but I am a retired realist who can appreciate
the fact that the Alotofthings.com cartridges cost one-fifth of what
the OEM Canon cartridges cost while producing gorgeous prints that
are ALMOST identical to the OEM Canon prints. Alotofthings.com is
going to get my cartridge business from now on. I'm going to
print
all my photos and a couple of family history books with them.

By the way, Alotofthings.com also sells bulk ink and paraphernalia
for refillers too. With superb cartridges for just $2.40 each,
though, I can't see much sense to go through the trouble of
refilling
cartridges with all its hassle.
Others may want to.

And I am in no way connected with anybody or anything at
Alotofthings.com except as a happy and very satisfied customer.

Here are the relevant web addresses:

http://www.inkgrabber.com/index.htm

http://www.alotofthings.com/index.html



Happy printing,

Bill Pease

 

[beezer]

Im glad you seem to be very satisfied with Alotofthings.com. I always
recommend them to people looking for ink. If you ever had the desire
to refill your cartridges yourself, you could perhaps get some blanks
made for refilling from inkjetgoodies.com. Just pop the plug , fill
it up and you are done in 1 min. They also have clip on exit hole
plugs so there is no mess at all.

By the way, alotofthings.com and atlanticinkjet.com both use formulabs
ink.

 

[TR]

Inkgrabber.com inks

Could not get their site to work properly when clicking on certain
links. They replied to my questioning of this and told me that their
site doesn't work when certain firewalls are set to "High" security
(not cookie specific) and that I should take my firewall down in order
to use their site.

Don't think I will be buying anything from Inkgrabber because I refuse
to take my firewall down or change its settings from "High Security"
to "Low Security" for any site and they should be ashamed for
suggesting that I do so. If people can't build security conscious,
firewall friendly sites in these security conscious days we now have
to operate in, then how can they attempt something more technical like
providing a quality product?

Sorry for venting but the audacity to suggest I take my firewall down
in order to navigate their site!

Regards,
TR

 

[Taliesyn]

Could not get their site to work properly when clicking on certain
links. They replied to my questioning of this and told me that their
site doesn't work when certain firewalls are set to "High" security
(not cookie specific) and that I should take my firewall down in order
to use their site.

Don't think I will be buying anything from Inkgrabber because I refuse
to take my firewall down or change its settings from "High Security"
to "Low Security" for any site and they should be ashamed for
suggesting that I do so. If people can't build security conscious,
firewall friendly sites in these security conscious days we now have
to operate in, then how can they attempt something more technical like
providing a quality product?

Sorry for venting but the audacity to suggest I take my firewall down
in order to navigate their site!

"They should be ashamed?..."

Perhaps your "Great-Wall-of-China-Mother-Of-All-Firewalls" is overkill.

I have a firewall too (Armor2Net) and I've never had any problem
visiting any site. In the last 6 or so years that I've surfed -
thousands upon thousands of hours - I've only managed to pick up one
semi-virus. That's right, semi-virus. And some sites didn't classify
it as a true virus. I figure I picked it up from an email.

Don't know what browser you use. Netscape, correct me if I'm wrong,
has fewer security problems than Explorer.

I think you should let in some air before you suffocate as castle master
of your little domain. You can't expect all websites to be guaranteed to
work with the dozens of differently programmed firewalls available. It's
not up to the website to work with your firewall. Your firewall has to
be set up so as to provide you with both, security and yet.... (wait for
it...) let you into the website!!!

-Taliesyn

 

[TR]

Your firewall has to
be set up so as to provide you with both, security and yet.... (wait for
it...) let you into the website!!!

Since this is the only web site I have had this specific problem with
in the three years that I have used this specific firewall and, of
course, the only web site that suggested that one take their firewall
down in order that their web site might operate properly, I think my
firewall and its configuration is probably doing exactly what it is
intended to do.

I've only managed to pick up one
semi-virus. That's right, semi-virus. And some sites didn't classify
it as a true virus.

Is that like a half virus? Maybe 3/4 of one.... I wouldn't know
since I have never gotten a virus.... Probably because I don't take my
firewall down at the suggestion of some sites so their site will work
properly......

I think you should let in some air before you suffocate as castle master
of your little domain.

Then I might get a "Semi-Virus" or worse yet... A Whole Virus.

You can't expect all websites to be guaranteed to
work with the dozens of differently programmed firewalls available.

I don't recall suggesting that they do guarantee such... WOW...
looking over my message I see that I never did suggest such...
Hummm... Selective Reading?

It's not up to the website to work with your firewall. Your firewall has to
be set up so as to provide you with both, security and yet.... (wait for
it...) let you into the website!!!

Or, you could always do as the web site suggest and take your firewall
down while using their web site.

Na! Think Not! If I had this specific problem with all sites or even
a few sites, then maybe but with this one site.... Na! Think Not!

Semi-Virus?

Regards,
TR
















Like your miastrazentionist attitude though.... Been a while since I
came across one of those.

Regards,
TR

 

[Sandy Delany]

Could not get their site to work properly when clicking on certain
links. They replied to my questioning of this and told me that their
site doesn't work when certain firewalls are set to "High" security
(not cookie specific) and that I should take my firewall down in order
to use their site.

Inkgrabber's links work just fine with my firewall. This website has put
into place some impressive safeguards to protect their customers and
themselves. At least those that WANT to get in ;-).

SandyD

 

[beezer]

The page seems pretty relaxed. The source code is very basic and it
doesnt even try to set a cookie. There is a little javascripting which
perhaps may be the reason your firewall isnt likeing it but that is
only the Netscape Navigator 4 resize bug, but no one runs NN4 anymore.

I can not see anything that would flag a firewall to reject this site
myself. There couldn't be a more basic site.

 

[TR]

I can not see anything that would flag a firewall to reject this site
myself. There couldn't be a more basic site.

I got another email from them, this time an individual that had better
suggestions than the prior one that suggested taking the firewall
down. It would appear that they require what is called "Persistent"
cookies along with the normal session cookies to be accepted. I have
my firewall set to only accept session cookies and block persistent
and 3rd party cookies.

She did say that they were in the process of changing that "because of
complaints" and that it should never have been suggested that I take
my firewall down. Too bad the person that emailed me before could not
have been as informative about the problem and had a better solution
than telling me to "take my firewall down". She was most informative
and courteous unlike the one that emailed me before curtly suggesting
the problem was mine and my firewall.

Oh well, now the reason finally comes out.

Thanks for the courteous and informative reply Beezer.... As with the
lady that sent the second email to me, courtesy makes things happen in
a positive way...

Regards,
TR

 

[beezer]

I got another email from them, this time an individual that had better
suggestions than the prior one that suggested taking the firewall
down. It would appear that they require what is called "Persistent"
cookies along with the normal session cookies to be accepted. I have
my firewall set to only accept session cookies and block persistent
and 3rd party cookies.

She did say that they were in the process of changing that "because of
complaints" and that it should never have been suggested that I take
my firewall down. Too bad the person that emailed me before could not
have been as informative about the problem and had a better solution
than telling me to "take my firewall down". She was most informative
and courteous unlike the one that emailed me before curtly suggesting
the problem was mine and my firewall.

Oh well, now the reason finally comes out.

Thanks for the courteous and informative reply Beezer.... As with the
lady that sent the second email to me, courtesy makes things happen in
a positive way...

Regards,
TR

No problem. Glad things worked out for you.

I did not notice persistant cookies but If I could direct you to a
web browser called "GreenBrowser" or even avantbrowser.com they have
many many features and settings.

One is to clean cookies upon session closing among many other
features. That way, any persistant cookies would just be wiped out at
the end of the session anyway.

They are great browsers with tabls that load pages in the same window,
etc just too many features to mention. I been using them for years.
Green browser is my favorite and most powerful.

take it easy.