Canon CLI-8/PGI-5 resetter question
in [Printers]
|
Prev: Printing on toilet paper
Next: Lexmark Z640 vs Z2320
From: IntergalacticExpandingPanda on 24 Dec 2008 22:17 On Dec 22, 12:48 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:24:25 -0800, Arthur Entlich wrote: > > Indeed, I feel similarly with any chipped cartridge... Of course, that > > would defeat the whole reason they put the chip there to begin with (in > > spite of what they may claim). > > > With Epsons, which I have a lot more experience with, I have seen many > > chip and chip firmware related problems, as well as hardware related > > problems related to the chips. I find it ironic that purchasers end up > > paying extra for the printer, and the ink cartridges, and have > > additional issues with their printers so that they can be forced to buy > > the manufacturer's ink. "What a 'country'!" ;-) > > > Art > > The above top posted statement is incorrect. The mfgs are not forcing > anybody to use the correct ink. There are many jerks that do not follow > the advice of the mfg and get lousy results but either they lie about what > they get or they are unknowingly willing to accept poorer results and > enjoy complaining and having issues with their printers. > > The majority of printer users do in fact use OEM productgs. Manufacturers are doing their best to force users to use their ink. With Epson they employ a patented cartridge design and use chips. Same with Canon, they went after third party manufacturers that used prisms in the UK, and they started using chips in their cartridges. HP has been using chips for some time, though many printers are the head on the cart type which to be fair is more of an issue to have refilled, and can't exactly be manufactured with ease by a 3rd party, well, until the patent expired. Manufacturers are in fact trying to force users to buy their ink. I'm perfectly willing to accept there are some cartridges and inks that have issues. Making an informed choice is important. That's why people like my self share information about products we've actually tried. MIS inks I've used enough to say my printer did not explode. I replaced the head after 15 cartridge changes. I saved over a grand which I used for a modest vacation, Porta del Carmen, Cancun, Merida, Chitzen Itza. For aftermarket ink for the Canon, there isn't really an archival solution, but my main application is printing on discs where the discs are in cases not near sunlight. Not an issue. OEM Canon ink is not very archival in the first place, so I see little point paying 10x as much for a substandard product. For archival, I'm going to use the Epson 1280 with pigmented ink. That without a doubt will out perform OEM dye which to be fair was pretty lame on that model.
From: Arthur Entlich on 25 Dec 2008 05:26 Nice to not be at the mercy of the OEM ink market, have the ability to use 3rd party and formulations of inks that may be different than the manufacturer is willing to offer, and to be able to reuse both the cartridges and the resetter long term, rather than either going into the landfill. Art If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste, I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog: http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/ John Chapman wrote: > IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: >> >> >> Righto, here's how it works. >> >> Canon has a reservoir (80%) Sponge (20%) and a prism. When reservoir >> = empty prism exposed, signals printer 20% ink remaining (low ink >> warning). >> >> Let's say you are able to keep the cartridges full all the time. >> Prism not exposed so the printer should be happy? Well, they also >> have a countdown as well. I don't know how many ml of ink you can use >> before you trigger this failsafe. >> >> Here's the part that applies to you. The reverse is not true. Let's >> say you have a mostly full chip (above 20%) and an empty reservoir. >> The printer will presume presume 20% full and start the sponge >> countdown? >> >> What does this mean? You can test the unit on a full cartridge if you >> like. I'll just read 3 bars but the prism will still be happy to do >> it's job. >> >> Noise. Mine makes some noise if you shake it. It's a PC board >> attached with pegs. The contacts you see are attached directly to the >> board. The switch you see is actually a plastic rod that hits a push >> button on the unit it self. It is a screwless wonder. >> > I have the Redsetter chip resetter from Sudhaus. > It works perfectly in resetting chips for my 4500 > and my wife's 3500 both of which printers use the > same cartridges. > > The paragraph above entitled "Noise" explains exactly > about the inside of the resetter. > *** Do not read on if you are measekite *** > I have carefully prised open the Redsetter with a sharp knife > along the whole of the bottom edge and have thus been able > to disassemble the unit and reassemble it with small screws > which means I can now change the battery if needed. > Inside there is a small pc board which is located on four > lugs or pegs which can be carefully drilled out to accept > screws. The base of the resetter has some small dimples in the > plastic. If you drill holes in the dimples at each corner then > these should line up with the lugs inside and screws can go > through the four holes in the base directly into the lugs > thereby making the resetter have a longer life. > *** DO NOT READ IF YOU ARE MEASEKITE *** > So now I have the ability to reset all my ink cartridges > and extend the life of the resetter by changing the battery > > *** measekite to resume reading here *** > I love the results I get with my Canon 4500 printer. > >
From: Arthur Entlich on 25 Dec 2008 05:47 I'm only responding to mindless Measekite because he's been quoted, so I have seen his reply, and because he is, as per usual, speaking out of his lower orifice. Canon printers may work without resetting the chip while losing the ink monitor systems which may lead to a head burnout, but Epson printers simply will not work if the cartridges chip is not reset or replaced with a new one. Epson and other inkjet manufacturers have used legal means based, in part, on the political climate in North America, to "protect" their ink sales by claiming patent infringement. In some cases, the patents themselves were adopted to force 3rd party companies to violate them in order for the cartridges to work with the printer design. My hope is that with the change of administration in the White House and more awareness of the environmental impact of these horrible business models, as in the EU, North America will be legislated into providing refillable cartridges. Art If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste, I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog: http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/ Taliesyn wrote: > measekite <inkystinky(a)oem.com> wrote in > news:a2T3l.9588$D32.3598(a)flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com: > >> On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:24:25 -0800, Arthur Entlich wrote: >> >>> Indeed, I feel similarly with any chipped cartridge... Of course, >>> that would defeat the whole reason they put the chip there to begin >>> with (in spite of what they may claim). >>> >>> With Epsons, which I have a lot more experience with, I have seen >>> many chip and chip firmware related problems, as well as hardware >>> related problems related to the chips. I find it ironic that >>> purchasers end up paying extra for the printer, and the ink >>> cartridges, and have additional issues with their printers so that >>> they can be forced to buy the manufacturer's ink. "What a 'country'!" >>> ;-) >>> >>> Art >>> >>> >> The above top posted statement is incorrect. The mfgs are not forcing >> anybody to use the correct ink. > > That's why they placed the chips on the cartridges, stupid. People HAVE > to buy BRAND NEW MANUFACTURER'S CARTRIDGES or lose ink metering. That is > "force" by any definition of the word! > > >> There are many jerks that do not follow the advice of the mfg. > > The manufacturer's advice is to pay an incredible $100+ CAD for a set of > new (Canon) cartridges. I don't subscribe to this sort of robbery since > it's also the price of a brand new printer - with cartridges included! > >> and get lousy results > > Been using refilled cartridges/prefilled cartridges for 13 years. If I > didn't like the quality, durability, concern for the printer, I would > have stopped 12 years ago. Obviously I have seen nothing that would sway > my opinion. I'm very happy and have saved thousands of dollars over the > years. Basically every printer I buy now is technically "free" because > of the years of money saved not using OEM cartridges. > >> but either they lie about what they get or they are >> unknowingly willing to accept poorer results and enjoy complaining and >> having issues with their printers. > > What issues? Printers are cheaper than the ink. Even the brand new > iP4600 can be bought for less than the price of a set of expensive new > Canon cartridges. I don't register with the mfg, I buy a 1-3 year > automatic replacement warranty from the store. Never had to use it > though. However, I will not deal with the mfg. Last (and only time I > will ever call them) they told me to bring my printer to a service > center. Right! What am I supposed to print with for 3-4 weeks? That > 1950's kind of customer service just won't cut it in this modern world. > > -Taliesyn
From: Arthur Entlich on 25 Dec 2008 06:02 The only extra I wish to add to this is that not all 3rd party inks are inferior to OEM, in fact, quite the contrary. Some of the most interesting and ingenious new ink formulations are coming from small 3rd party companies. I am not speaking of the low cost Chinese inks that compete with OEM, but of new innovations. If it were not for 3rd party inks, I doubt we would have seen long life pigment inks nearly as quickly. And to this day none of the OEM companies are producing dye sub inks for inkjets, or many other specialty inks. Art If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste, I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog: http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/ IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: > On Dec 22, 12:48 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: > >> The above top posted statement is incorrect. The mfgs are not forcing >> anybody to use the correct ink. There are many jerks that do not follow >> the advice of the mfg and get lousy results but either they lie about what >> they get or they are unknowingly willing to accept poorer results and >> enjoy complaining and having issues with their printers. >> >> The majority of printer users do in fact use OEM productgs. >> > > If the majority of printer users use OEM, then why the switch to the > chips? Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the majority use OEM, not because > it's an informed choice but because they don't know there are > options. > > By your logic, we should be using OEM oil for our cars. Ford oil for > a Ford car, Toyota oil for a Toyota. But as a matter of law they > can't make use of their product a condition of the warranty. > > But if you're going to use the logic of the majority of printer users, > the majority of printer users don't need archival ink all the time. > Likely the main application for a printer is text with a dab of > color. You don't need OEM to do this. > > The chips serve one purpose, to lock the end user into buying their > ink, to maintain the monopoly. With the Canon design, chips are NOT > required since they use a prism to indicate whether the cartridges are > full or close to empty (20%). In fact the prism is still the major > indicator. > > The thing you refuse to get is it's our printer. The manufacturer has > NO business forcing us to use their consumables.
From: measekite on 26 Dec 2008 03:05
On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 03:02:17 -0800, Arthur Entlich wrote: What section of the post are you replying to. It is difficult to put your post into any perspective since you are choosing to top post. > The only extra I wish to add to this is that not all 3rd party inks are > inferior to OEM, in fact, quite the contrary. Some of the most > interesting and ingenious new ink formulations are coming from small 3rd > party companies. > > I am not speaking of the low cost Chinese inks that compete with OEM, > but of new innovations. If it were not for 3rd party inks, I doubt we > would have seen long life pigment inks nearly as quickly. And to this > day none of the OEM companies are producing dye sub inks for inkjets, or > many other specialty inks. > > Art > > > > If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste, > I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog: > > http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/ > > IntergalacticExpandingPanda wrote: >> On Dec 22, 12:48 pm, measekite <inkysti...(a)oem.com> wrote: >> >>> The above top posted statement is incorrect. The mfgs are not forcing >>> anybody to use the correct ink. There are many jerks that do not follow >>> the advice of the mfg and get lousy results but either they lie about what >>> they get or they are unknowingly willing to accept poorer results and >>> enjoy complaining and having issues with their printers. >>> >>> The majority of printer users do in fact use OEM productgs. >>> >> >> If the majority of printer users use OEM, then why the switch to the >> chips? Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the majority use OEM, not because >> it's an informed choice but because they don't know there are >> options. >> >> By your logic, we should be using OEM oil for our cars. Ford oil for >> a Ford car, Toyota oil for a Toyota. But as a matter of law they >> can't make use of their product a condition of the warranty. >> >> But if you're going to use the logic of the majority of printer users, >> the majority of printer users don't need archival ink all the time. >> Likely the main application for a printer is text with a dab of >> color. You don't need OEM to do this. >> >> The chips serve one purpose, to lock the end user into buying their >> ink, to maintain the monopoly. With the Canon design, chips are NOT >> required since they use a prism to indicate whether the cartridges are >> full or close to empty (20%). In fact the prism is still the major >> indicator. >> >> The thing you refuse to get is it's our printer. The manufacturer has >> NO business forcing us to use their consumables. |