Do the print heads current Canon printers clog up?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Synapse Syndrome
  • Start date Start date
I am not going to waste my time with cheap refilling inks.  Whatever people
say about them, the fact is the quality is going to be variable, and with
the OEM inks, you know what you are getting.  I bought ready-filled cheap
cartridges once, and made a test print, of an identical picture I printed
out on original Epson ink, and places them both in a Window.  They both
faded over a whole summer, but the cheap one faded much more, and all that
was left was the blue.
Click to expand...

Yes cheap generic ink is not good...it will not compare to the quality
of Epson. You can only use generic ink in a Canon...according to
Canon's reps. Quality aftermarket ink made for your printer is the way
to go.
 
Yes, I knew what the MP500 was because I "live here" (jeez, that sounds
sad, doesn't it ;-))

Actually, I would suspect that many people would have figured it out,
but it doesn't hurt in these newsgroups to be a little extra descriptive
than not enough.

Quite honestly, had you been more civil in your response, I would have
probably agreed and left it alone, but there was no reason to be rude
and name calling when the person was just asking for greater clarity.

Richard used self-effacing humor to express his frustration regarding
the missing information which for him would have proved helpful.

See below:
Pardon my being clairvoyantly challenged, but please explain what an
Click to expand...
"MP500" is, and who made it. Lack of mind-reading ability is an epidemic
that's growing out-of-control; it's the need of those afflicted to know
what posters are talking about.
Pray for us.

Richard
Click to expand...


You used attack and name calling, see below:
Every done a Google search? It isn't hard and you could have done
Click to expand...
it in less time than it took you to type the ignorant, insulting post
your just made. All it would take is typing "MP500" and "printer" and
hitting the Enter key. I'll pray for you alright. I'll pray you don't
get any lazier, or dumber, whichever the case may be. I am far from
clairvoyant and understood exactly what CANON printer Russell was
referencing, even without a Google search.

You claim Richard's post was "ignorant and insulting" while it was
neither. It was self effacing humor to get his point across, whether
you agree with it or not. On the other hand, your posting was
definitely personally attacking AND insulting.

Whether I agree with you or Richard in terms of the issue, his message
was reasonable, civil, humorous and even polite (please explain...) and
yours was out of line (I'll pray you don't get lazier, or dumber...)

Thank was my point,

Art
 
I see you've reacted to my personal attack upon you similarly to how I
empathized to your manner with Richard.

Lesson taught.

Although I would never imply I even approach the wisdom of a Zen master,
there is a reason they often carry a stick with them.

Peace.

Art
 
Arthur said:
I see you've reacted to my personal attack upon you similarly to how I
empathized to your manner with Richard.

Lesson taught.
Click to expand...

So you did it for my own good? Right. When are you going to give
Richard his lesson?
Although I would never imply I even approach the wisdom of a Zen master,
there is a reason they often carry a stick with them.
Click to expand...

You're best left to giving advice regarding printers, which you do
rather well. Playing the protector/advocate for others in this
newsgroup isn't your strong point.
 
Arthur said:
Yes, I knew what the MP500 was because I "live here" (jeez, that sounds
sad, doesn't it ;-))

Actually, I would suspect that many people would have figured it out,
but it doesn't hurt in these newsgroups to be a little extra descriptive
than not enough.

Quite honestly, had you been more civil in your response, I would have
probably agreed and left it alone, but there was no reason to be rude
and name calling when the person was just asking for greater clarity.
Click to expand...

Me being civil? Did you read the post I responded to? Maybe you and
Richard are buds and have some personal understanding of each other I'm
not aware of. If that is so then his post is somewhat hypocritical.
Richard used self-effacing humor to express his frustration regarding
the missing information which for him would have proved helpful.
Click to expand...

I read his post thoroughly before I responded. I don't see the self
effacing humor anywhere. There were no smilies, winky symbols or any
other marks that usually accompany posts with this intent. There was
just an attack and insult toward Russell. I did get the sarcasm though.
See below:

"MP500" is, and who made it. Lack of mind-reading ability is an epidemic
that's growing out-of-control; it's the need of those afflicted to know
what posters are talking about.


You used attack and name calling, see below:
Click to expand...

It was in response to his ORIGINAL attacking post. He called Russell
and idiot, albeit in a less direct way. I guess I am just more direct
in making my point.
it in less time than it took you to type the ignorant, insulting post
your just made. All it would take is typing "MP500" and "printer" and
hitting the Enter key. I'll pray for you alright. I'll pray you don't
get any lazier, or dumber, whichever the case may be. I am far from
clairvoyant and understood exactly what CANON printer Russell was
referencing, even without a Google search.

You claim Richard's post was "ignorant and insulting" while it was
neither. It was self effacing humor to get his point across, whether
you agree with it or not. On the other hand, your posting was
definitely personally attacking AND insulting.
Click to expand...

Where you find self effacing humor in his post is beyond me. If it was
there then it was EXTREMELY subtle.
Whether I agree with you or Richard in terms of the issue, his message
was reasonable, civil, humorous and even polite (please explain...) and
yours was out of line (I'll pray you don't get lazier, or dumber...)
Click to expand...

Maybe Richard and I need to have a beer together so I can better
understand his humor.
Thank was my point,
Click to expand...

Point noted.
 
Michael, if I wanted to be sarcastic, I would have been sarcastic. I was
humorous instead.

It is the job of a poster to be clear to readers. It's called
"communication." Expecting other people to just "know" what you're
talking about when you speak in shorthand is thoughtless (I could have
said "arrogant.") Some people do this in some newsgroups (such as the
audiophile ones).

The American Automobile Association, in one of their publications, once
said that New York City road signs were "gentle reminders to those who
already know the way." I don't already know the way when it comes to the
printer you mentioned.

To tell people to go look it up on Google _is_ arrogant. People who talk
in shorthand in newsgroups tend to say exactly this when they're asked
to be clear. "It's your job to do the work of knowing what I'm telling
you. I won't condescend to trouble myself. You're the screwup, not me."

Yeah, right.

Richard
 
Michael, yep: you sure did misread what I wrote. I am a communicator by
trade these days, and am known to be a clear writer. Witty, too (but
that's redundant).

I submit that whatever offense you found in reading my post was the
offense that you read between the lines. I'm not in the habit of using
smilies because I can't remember them, nor, a lot of the time figure
them out. Also, I don't write technical manuals with smilies. People
have been writing in English for centuries without symbols like this: in
fact, let me suggest that Shakespeare did a decent job without smilies.

On the other hand, perhaps G.W. Bush should carry around a few smilies;
they might be useful when he speaks in public. Smilies might help out
because when I tried to look up "misunderestimate" on Google, it didn't
do me much good.

But I'll take you up on that beer.

:>)

Richard
 
You can only use generic ink in a Canon...according to
Canon's reps.
Click to expand...

Have you got any cites for this extremely dubious statement?

I could go as far to say that this must be utter bullshit.

ss.
 
Michael said:
Well, I'm happy to see that Russell's post was useful for you. I guess
it wasn't so cryptic after all.
Click to expand...
Why yes, I think anybody who has read the exchange between you, Richard,
and Art in this thread now knows just what an "MP500" is, probably to
the point of becoming bilious about the whole issue. Guys, like the book
title says, "Don't Sweat The Small Stuff - And It's ALL Small Stuff."

TJ
 
Richard said:
Michael, if I wanted to be sarcastic, I would have been sarcastic. I was
humorous instead.
Click to expand...

The humor wasn't clear to me.
It is the job of a poster to be clear to readers. It's called
"communication." Expecting other people to just "know" what you're
talking about when you speak in shorthand is thoughtless (I could have
said "arrogant.") Some people do this in some newsgroups (such as the
audiophile ones).
Click to expand...

In college I was always taught to write and speak to the anticipated
audience. Here that audience is people who have an interest in
printers. When I type a post I expect the reader to have a certain
level of comprehension on the group's intended subject matter (i.e.
printers). We all type posts this way here. Otherwise it would get
very redundant, very quickly. If a new person comes here they have a
responsibility to educate themselves to a certain level. It isn't our
responsibility to dumb down all our posts so a first grader can
comprehend them.
The American Automobile Association, in one of their publications, once
said that New York City road signs were "gentle reminders to those who
already know the way." I don't already know the way when it comes to the
printer you mentioned.
Click to expand...

So you knew what an MP500 was and still made the post in this manner?
Are you the shepard for the less informed here? Why didn't you just
post a clarification for the less informed instead of the back-handed
humor? Maybe employing a few smilies, winkies or other emoticons might
better indicate your intent. What you did is about the same thing as
what you accused Russell of perpetrating.... that is being vague
regarding the subject matter, or intent, of your post.
To tell people to go look it up on Google _is_ arrogant. People who talk
in shorthand in newsgroups tend to say exactly this when they're asked
to be clear. "It's your job to do the work of knowing what I'm telling
you. I won't condescend to trouble myself. You're the screwup, not me."
Click to expand...

I don't see where Russell was unclear in his post. The Canon name is in
the subject title of the thread. The OP mentions Canon in his post and
so does Russell. It isn't much of a stretch to assume that an MP500 is
a printer and that printer is a Canon brand. IMO, it was plenty clear
and did not warrant the back-handed humor you directed at him.
Yeah, right.
Click to expand...

Is this more humor? I can't tell.
 
Richard said:
Michael, yep: you sure did misread what I wrote. I am a communicator by
trade these days, and am known to be a clear writer. Witty, too (but
that's redundant).

I submit that whatever offense you found in reading my post was the
offense that you read between the lines. I'm not in the habit of using
smilies because I can't remember them, nor, a lot of the time figure
them out. Also, I don't write technical manuals with smilies. People
have been writing in English for centuries without symbols like this: in
fact, let me suggest that Shakespeare did a decent job without smilies.
Click to expand...

If I had known you were posting in a humorous manner I probably wouldn't
have made any comment. I just took Russell as contributing his
experience and even though it may have been a little short on details he
did make an effort to help the OP. I've seen much worse posts here
regarding clarity. I just felt he was being singled out for no good reason.
On the other hand, perhaps G.W. Bush should carry around a few smilies;
they might be useful when he speaks in public. Smilies might help out
because when I tried to look up "misunderestimate" on Google, it didn't
do me much good.
Click to expand...

Nothing is going to help George at this point. The only thing that will
help him is time and, in specific, what impact Iraq will have on the
future direction of the Middle East. It will take decades though before
that juror is in.
But I'll take you up on that beer.
Click to expand...

Does Killian's work?
 
Richard said:
Michael, if I wanted to be sarcastic, I would have been sarcastic. I
was humorous instead. I did not think it was funny.

It is the job of a poster to be clear to readers. It's called
"communication." Expecting other people to just "know" what you're
talking about when you speak in shorthand is thoughtless (I could have
said "arrogant.") Some people do this in some newsgroups (such as the
audiophile ones). Here too

The American Automobile Association, in one of their publications,
once said that New York City road signs were "gentle reminders to
those who already know the way." I don't already know the way when it
comes to the printer you mentioned. I hear ya

To tell people to go look it up on Google _is_ arrogant.
Click to expand...
Some times it is and other times it is not.
 
Richard said:
Michael, yep: you sure did misread what I wrote. I am a communicator
by trade these days, and am known to be a clear writer. Witty, too
(but that's redundant).
Click to expand...
I find it confusing and not witty.
I submit that whatever offense you found in reading my post was the
offense that you read between the lines. I'm not in the habit of using
smilies because I can't remember them, nor, a lot of the time figure
them out. Also, I don't write technical manuals with smilies. People
have been writing in English for centuries without symbols like this:
in fact, let me suggest that Shakespeare did a decent job without
smilies.
Click to expand...
What kind of printer did he have?
On the other hand, perhaps G.W. Bush should carry around a few
smilies; they might be useful when he speaks in public.
Click to expand...
Now that is dumb. He laughs (and smiles) all of the way to the bank
with $100 a barrel oil.
Smilies might help out because when I tried to look up
"misunderestimate" on Google, it didn't do me much good.

But I'll take you up on that beer.
Click to expand...
Why not a milk shake. Drinking is not good for people.
 
You see, I brought the two of you together... I knew I had a reason for
being here! ;-)

Art
 
Michael said:
Richard Steinfeld wrote:
Click to expand...

In college I was always taught to write and speak to the anticipated
audience. Here that audience is people who have an interest in
printers. When I type a post I expect the reader to have a certain
level of comprehension on the group's intended subject matter (i.e.
printers). We all type posts this way here. Otherwise it would get
very redundant, very quickly. If a new person comes here they have a
responsibility to educate themselves to a certain level. It isn't our
responsibility to dumb down all our posts so a first grader can
comprehend them.
Click to expand...

Well, actually, in my communications courses it was suggested the
speaker never assume the qualifications of their audience, and it was
better to speak more generally, without jargon until one could gauge the
audiences background.

Einstein stated something to the effect that if you can't explain a
concept to a 3th grader, you probably don't understand the concept
yourself. ;-)
So you knew what an MP500 was and still made the post in this manner?
Click to expand...

I think Richard is stating he wasn't familiar with the MP500: "I don't
know the way when it comes to the printer <you> mentioned."

<clip>

Art
 
Arthur said:
Well, actually, in my communications courses it was suggested the
speaker never assume the qualifications of their audience, and it was
better to speak more generally, without jargon until one could gauge the
audiences background.
Click to expand...

I think that this is subjective. If a speaker is giving a talk to a
group of brain surgeons then I doubt it will be simple enough for a
three year old to understand. We had to write term papers and give
speeches for every class I took in college and they would tell us who
our audience would be and we would have to write accordingly. I hated
doing this at the time but can now appreciate the purpose of the exercise.
Einstein stated something to the effect that if you can't explain a
concept to a 3th grader, you probably don't understand the concept
yourself. ;-)
Click to expand...

Having taken a course on modern physics in college I can tell you
Einstein didn't practice what he preached.
 
Watch out, or I'll post a video of myself singing "It's a Small World
After All".. ;-)

Art
 
TJ said:
Why yes, I think anybody who has read the exchange between you, Richard,
and Art in this thread now knows just what an "MP500" is, probably to
the point of becoming bilious about the whole issue. Guys, like the book
title says, "Don't Sweat The Small Stuff - And It's ALL Small Stuff."
Click to expand...

It's all ancient history.
 
Back
Top