Re: Cannon s800 printers instead of epsons

["Jim Wingo" <jimw203@mindspring.com>]

The comparison for cost of ownership was with the S800, not the S600. The
basis for the observation was the following:
1) the cost of 5 BCI-6 tanks (CcMmY) @ $11.99 (source: Canon's website) =
$59.95
2) the cost of 1 T009201 5-color cart for the 1270/80 $29.99 (source
Epson's website)
Admittedly my 3:1 ratio was off a bit it is closer to 2:1 (I was basing the
statement on a recent check I did at several web-based retailers including
Epson and Canon that showed an average price on the T009201 of $23.50 and
$11.20 each for the five Canon BCI-6 (CcMmy) tanks.

Regarding the printheads, few persons will argue that thermal printheads
will last as long as Epson's Piezo heads. The HP and Lexmark heads are
notoriously bad - anyone who attempts to refill their carts soon learns to
expect only one or two refills before a new cart is required

About users' livelihood coming from on ink on paper - I was talking about
images as images, where the value is in the image itself and not as a
representation of some other function. Thus, spreadsheets don't count,
working drawings don't count, and floorplans don't count, either. In those
cases it is the concept or knowledge that is valueable, not the image.
Please tell me anyone you know of where it is true that the value in their
printer output is determined by the image on paper rather than any other
factor. Keep in mind, that the logical comparison will be between Epson's
1160 and 1270/80 and the HP 1220 (we are not talking about large format
printers, here). Personally, I have never heard of anyone using the 1220 to
produce images that get sold as images alone. I remain convinced that when
users look for printers that will transfer their visions to paper with the
fidelity that is needed for consumers to agree with their value as images,
they look to Epson.

Jim Wingo

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 8/28/2001 at 8:05 PM Raphael Bustin wrote:

>At 10:39 AM 8/28/01 -0400, Jim Wingo wrote:
>
> >7) Cost of ownership (regardless of advertising hype related to the
> >perceived cost benefits of individual tanks, in the actual costs
incurred
> >in putting ink on paper, Epson is among the least expensive - in the
case
> >of the 1270/80 one can buy nearly three complete color carts for the
cost
> >of one color set for the Canon S800 -
>
>What is the basis for this observation?  A set of carts for
>the S600 costs almost exactly the same as a set for the
>1160, and as far as I can tell, the ink volumes are about
>the same.  If anything, the Canon seems more efficient
>in its use of ink (more pages per set of carts.)
>
> >also, the perceived value of having a
> >user replaceable printhead is lost on me; after all, does this not imply
> >that the NEED for replacement is likely? I have rarely heard of 1160s or
> >1270/80s that need replacing even after many, many thousands of prints;
> >believe me, if head replacement was a common occurance, we would have
>heard
> >about it here)
>
>
>Not just replacement, but for routine cleaning.  Eg., no need to
>try to shimmy a paper towel under the heads to clean a surface
>you can't get to.  Clogged heads are endemic on Epsons -- not
>so on Lexmark and HP printers, where each cart contains a new
>printhead chip.
>
> >8) Proven in practice (I know of no printers at the <$500 price point
>that
> >enjoy the wide acceptance among users who earn their living from putting
> >ink on paper as the 1160 and 1270/80s do)
>
>
>Are you certain that HPs are not used in that capacity?
>
>I'm not denying the strengths of Epson printers that we all know
>and love.  I'm saying that Canon has some very smart ideas
>and very nice print quality built into these new printers.
>
>
>rafe b.


-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.