I have to run the clean program everyday on Cannon 4000. in order for
it to print without streaks. I soaked the head in hot water and then
in cleaning solution overnight without any results. Any suggestions?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Are you and have you always used Canon OEM ink. I have a Canon IP4000
and never have had the problems you state.

Andy Petro wrote:

measekite wrote:

And I have always used aftermarket refill and prefilled cartridges in my
ip4000, and even the iP5000 which has still smaller ink nozzles. And I
too have never had the problems you surprise me with. In fact my after-
market inks have all behaved exactly as specified by Canon and they
operate just like ink that costs up to 20 times more. What in the world
are you putting in your printer? If it's "Universal" type ink, ink that
supposedly "works in ALL printers (Epson, HP, Lexmark and Canon)", then
I'm not too surprised.

-Taliesyn

Taliesyn wrote:

Yes he has. He already lost a printhead

That is not true. They have a greater propensity to fade, clog and the
results are not the same.

measekite wrote:

Bullshit; stop lying It was a bum OEM printhead failing after less than
2 months of use. In fact, the feed paper failed too. It was a lemon
printer, it happens, and was replaced. The exact replacement is still
working perfectly a year and a half later, and still used only with
aftermarket ink.

More bullshit; the ink behaves AS specified by Canon - no clogging, no
cleaning, no deep cleaning, streak free. I wouldn't be surprised if
it's less cloggy than OEM ink since I have no use for Canon's clean and
deep clean cycles as suggested in their manual, other than when I change
cartridges in order to prime the ink.

I don't have fade, clog problems as mentioned many, many times before.
The results are excellent at about 1/20th the cost. If they weren't, I'd
be using Canon inks now... or is that too difficult a concept for you to
grasp.

-Taliesyn

Taliesyn wrote:


than stop posting stuff that is contrary to what many other posters
experience.

false

false

false

false

just look at the posting and especially about the ink you make claims about.


buy an epson then


the coreect statement is that you do not recognizise any fading


some people like ugly girls too -- so what and they usually are cheaper
to date also


now now :-)

measekite wrote:

Sorry to disappoint you, but I will not stop posting stuff contrary to
your "horse blinders" opinion based on never having used any aftermarket
ink. As to what "others" report, their results do not make for a
blanket coverage of aftermarket inks in general. As you can see today,
there are people reporting printing problems while using OEM inks too.
This is the sad nature of inkjet printing, it's not a perfect technology
(is it the head.. is it the ink???), everybody knows this. Some will
come out better than others. I once had a totally bum Canon printer. It
was replaced - printhead and all - the replacement was absolutely
perfect, and still works as new.


Your reply is precious as it shows anyone reading this post that you are
totally shallow and desperately pulling unrelated wild replies out of a
hat. "Ugly girls" do not equate to one using aftermarket ink. How old
are you again...?

-Taliesyn

Taliesyn wrote:
What an ignorant stupid piece of shit this asshole of jerk is!
Get a fuckin life meashershithead, you fuckwit moron!
Frank

"Taliesyn" <taliesyn4@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:12f1jfii58sce59@corp.supernews.com...
I see that our troll is reverting to a previous infantile state. And here I
thought he was "all growed up" acting for a change. It is apparent from
this last post that he prefers cheaper, ugly girls to date - probably
because, having purchased OEM carts for his old ip4000 printer, he doesn't
have enough money left for a real date. Frankly, I would be surprised if
ANY girl, attractive or not, skinny or fat, tall or short, would want to
spend any time with him at all!

Burt wrote:

Good one Burt!
:-)
Frank

Burt,
You may have missed the point about the "ugly girls to date" quote by Ms.
Measekite. She was speaking about herself. Then again, maybe she also likes
to date ugly girls. At least that way they can share the same outfits -
complete with OEM ink stains.
--
Ron

"Burt" <sfbjgNOSPAM@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:ED7Ig.3383$yO7.1187@newssvr14.news.prodigy.co m...

"drc023" <d+r+c+0+2+3@sbcXXXglobalYYY.ZZZnet> wrote in message
news:ExsIg.3471$tU.1515@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com ...
by our resident troll) MEANS ugly person. It is the rare person who
identifies herself as ugly and also a cheap date. Probably the only truth
she has posted on this NG.

Mapanari wrote:

Now this sure sounds like a relabeler.

Mapanari wrote:

I don;t think so.

measekite wrote:
measekite, are you and have you ever used non-Canon OEM-compatible ink?
No? Lol, then I suggest you shut your cakehole, because you know not
of what you speak.

phineaspaine@yahoo.com wrote:

Not a true statement

With all of your problems it sounds like you know not what you dol