Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #104984

Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 21:22:41 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 4/22/17, 10:40 AM, in article op.yy3x1tpojs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 00:10:09 +0100, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <op.yyraw8wjjs98qf@red.lan>, James Wilkinson Sword
>>> <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Mine has NO ink cartridges.  You actually buy a new little plastic
>>>>>>> container all the time?  I have huge tanks sat on the desk beside it.
>>>>>>> When one looks a bit low, I pour some in from a bottle.  Equivalent to
>>>>>>> 3p (4c) a cartridge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've heard of those. Do that do anything about the problem of ink drying
>>>>>> and clogging the inside of the printer?
>>>>>
>>>>> unless you buy shitty ink, it shouldn't clog. clogging hasn't been an
>>>>> issue in *years* (other than crap ink which is the user's fault).
>>>>
>>>> I always use the cheapest ink and don't get clogging.
>>>
>>> luck.
>>
>> Nope.  Ink is ink.  The quality is all in the print heads.
>
> I use third party ink and the quality varies greatly (which backs your claim
> of it being the heads... they can be worn or damaged on some) but I suspect
> there is also a difference in the ink.

I use printers which have the heads in the printer.  The quality remains constant no matter what ink is used.

>>>> Clogging tends to
>>>> occur with HP crap where the heads are on the cartridge (so of lower quality
>>>> than the proper heads as part of the printer).
>>>
>>> nope.
>>>
>>> hp printers rarely clog, but in the unlikely event one does, it doesn't
>>> matter because both the print head and ink are replaced. any clog is
>>> tossed along with the old ink.
>>
>> In my experience, HP printers are absolutely terrible, constantly producing
>> stripy images and needing cleaned several times.
>
> Which ones would you suggest. I used to use Epson and they had higher
> quality but died far faster. Ended up buying a bunch for a school and half
> were dead by the end of the year (they did get high usage). Went the next
> year with HP and had one die and the rest lasted for several years.
>
> This was nearly a decade ago so things might have changed.

I use Epson and Brother.  Never found them to wear out any quicker than other makes.  They make cheap simple good quality printers, with the heads inside the machine.  I'm currently using an Epson which I retrofitted with ink tanks on the desk to the side of it.  It seems stupid to me to pay 90% of my money for the tiny plastic box with only a few (well 13) ml of ink in it.

>> And their drivers are buggy.  I've actually seen a computer hang completely
>> because an HP driver was looking for a printer which was not currently
>> connected to the network.
>
> I had a dying switch (just replaced yesterday) so my printer was often not
> found. Never had an issue with any system hanging from it.

Not every HP printer seems to do it.  The last time I remember it fucking up was an HP laser on an office network with about 500 Windows computers.

>>> that's actually a big *advantage* of hp printers.
>>
>> It isn't, because the quality of the head on a throwaway cartridge will be
>> much much lower than one that comes with the printer and is designed to last
>> the life of it.
>
> Seems reasonable. For my needs inexpensive and easy take precedence over
> high quality printing. HP has served me well with that EXCEPT when I have
> lousy refilled cartridges.

HP cartridges, even refilled, are expensive.  If you want cheap, you should get an Epson or Brother where you just buy ink cartridges without heads. Or even better a continuous ink system like mine.  The continuous ink system should have been £25, but I bought a "possibly faulty, old new stock" one for £7.  All I had to do was replace the battery and clean the contacts.  It came with £5 of ink in it, so I would only have lost £2 if I couldn't get it to work.

>> If you buy genuine HP ink in cartridges with heads on each time, maybe.  But
>> you can't get cheap toner.
>>
>> I used to work in a place where the management said that a colour inkjet cost
>> 14p a page, and a colour laser photocopier/printer cost 6p a page.  I did my
>> own calculations and came to the conclusion it was 1p a page for the inkjet,
>> not 14p.  I found out that Xerox (the company selling us the photocopiers)
>> were the ones that did the research, and deliberately found the most expensive
>> inkjets you could use.  Our management weren't the sharpest knives in the
>> drawer.  Needless to say I ignored their requirements for purchasing and
>> bought whatever the hell I liked.
>
> I did similar checking for the printers at schools

It was also a school I worked in at the time.

> and found the cost
> estimates the manufactures and reviews used were VERY different than what we
> had in reality. Maybe they mean for pages where the whole page is covered
> with ink?

More likely they were lying.  I based it on what was normally printed, a mixture of text with some diagrams and photos.  Even in the Art department where the whole page was used, it was still cheaper than a photocopier.  Toner is damn expensive.

-- 
What's the ultimate in rejection?
Having a wank and your hand goes to sleep!

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-22 18:40 +0100
  Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Mark Lloyd <not@mail.invalid> - 2017-04-22 14:10 -0500
    Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-22 20:23 +0100
  Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 13:22 -0700
    Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-22 21:34 +0100
      Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 15:23 -0700
    Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-22 18:33 -0400
      Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 15:46 -0700
  Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-22 18:33 -0400

csiph-web