Lexmark

[Guest]

I must have lucked out...Have had the default Z12 since '00 ...No
problems...took back a couple of no good carts...but nothing wrong with
the printer itself....I was thinking it was one of the best compatible
printers....tried out an epson c62 You're cleaning the jets
constantly...I guess there are some lousy ones in every brand name.

 

[Brendan R. Wehrung]

I must have lucked out...Have had the default Z12 since '00 ...No
problems...took back a couple of no good carts...but nothing wrong with
the printer itself....I was thinking it was one of the best compatible
printers....tried out an epson c62 You're cleaning the jets
constantly...I guess there are some lousy ones in every brand name.

I tend to buy a new printer each time I buy a computer, avoiding the
problem of not having an update driver to make it work with the new OS
(eg. HP), and I've bought a string of Lexmark ink-jets. Only one has gone
"bad" and even that one I'm not sure about, since it could be a dried-up
cartridge that I didn't wnat to replace to find it a new one worked (the
Win '95 computer is otherwise an orphan, not a backup).

I originally settled on Lexmark because it didn't get talked about a lot
in this group, but it didn't get complained a lot about either, unlike
(ahem) Epson.

The current favorite is Canon, but I note that the complaint count is
rising against them now, only partly explained by vast number of models
and quantity of same they sell. In particular, the seperate print head
module and the expense (and trouble of obtaining the right one) for
replacement seems to be a point of irritation not mitigated by being able
to buy ink tanks, which ought to make Canon the most economical printer on
the market. Since my next computer will be purchased after MS Vista is
released (now delayed to early 2007) I'll be asking that same question
then: is Canon really a good buy?

Who knows with Lexmark? The ones I have in operation still work fine, but
they no longer are close to cutting edge, don't get mentioned any more in
top 10 lists, and seem content to make their profits on selling expensive
replacement cartridges (which I have learned to live with through a few
tricks of my own). What 2007 will bring is anybody's guess, for all of
the brands mentioned above.

Brendan

 

[measekite]

No Spam ([email protected]) writes:




I tend to buy a new printer each time I buy a computer, avoiding the
problem of not having an update driver to make it work with the new OS
(eg. HP), and I've bought a string of Lexmark ink-jets.

THE REASON YOU BUY A NEW COMPUTER EACH TIME IS WHY YOU BOUGHT A STRING
OF LEXMARKS. SHEER STUPIDITY

Only one has gone
"bad" and even that one I'm not sure about, since it could be a dried-up
cartridge that I didn't wnat to replace to find it a new one worked (the
Win '95 computer is otherwise an orphan, not a backup).

I originally settled on Lexmark because it didn't get talked about a lot
in this group,

BECAUSE NOBODY WITH A BRAIN BUYS THAT SHIT. HOWEVER, SOME PEOPLE JUST
LUCKED OUT SINCE THERE ARE MANY WITHOUT BRAINS IN THIS NG.

 

[Taliesyn]

I must have lucked out...Have had the default Z12 since '00 ...No
problems...took back a couple of no good carts...but nothing wrong with
the printer itself....I was thinking it was one of the best compatible
printers....tried out an epson c62 You're cleaning the jets
constantly...I guess there are some lousy ones in every brand name.

I used an uppity Lexmark, I believe a Z55. It generally worked
flawlessly for almost two years before I upgraded to my first Canon, an
I850. I refilled the same two cartridges (color & black) so I never had
to buy another cartridge in its "lifetime". The only reason I moved on
was because print properties had too few print options for the quality
work I was doing and photos came out lighter than I liked. Other than
that I can't complain, it far outlasted its warranty and was retired in
full working condition.

-Taliesyn

 

[Frank Arthur]

"measekite" is a slimy, useless troll who contributes zero to this
newsgroup.