f



Z1300 Update: InkStop Does Right, but Are They Right?

Well, I hauled the nonfunctioning Lexmark 34/35 "compatibles" back to
InkStop this afternoon.  Guess Kid Behind the Counter from Saturday
must be back in school.  His BIg Sister, who sold me the original
pair, was back.  Only today she was accompanied by Gramps, who I guess
runs the place.  Both of them repeated Kid's suggestion that I trade
in their cartridges for a pair of OEMs, but to their credit and their
company's, they didn't hesitate to refund my money when I told them
I'd already bought OEMs elsewhere.

Anyway, Gramps says they get around 4 per cent returns on their
compatibles.  He again repeats Kid's explanation that "some printers
just can't use them."  I wonder why.  Assuming these *were* the right
cartridges and were still in good working condition to start with,
what could have been done to them in the process of merely shooting
more ink into them that would convince the printer or operating system
they were "invalid?"  Even if they do have some kind of chip in them,
how can it tell the difference between "genuine Lexmark" ink and
something else?  My suspicion is still that these cartridges were
really a 32 and 33, respectively, and got mislabled.  Either that or
InkStop is contracting with a real butcher of a remanufacturer who's
not testing the cartridges electrically (thus not catching those that
have been run dry and have burned-out printheads) before going to the
trouble of refilling them, and certainly isn't bothering with pulling
enough of them from their finished production runs for adequate
quality testing.

I don't mean to sound here like I'm bashing InkStop.  After all, they
did right by me when I returned the non-working cartridges, and they
deserve kudos for that.  I'm just trying to understand why they didn't
work.

Anyone else out there with a Z1300 having a problem using compatibles
or DIY refills?
0
spammenot
8/26/2008 1:17:29 AM
comp.periphs.printers 18139 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

7 Replies
473 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 7


spammenot@mailinator.com wrote:
> Well, I hauled the nonfunctioning Lexmark 34/35 "compatibles" back to
> InkStop this afternoon.  Guess Kid Behind the Counter from Saturday
> must be back in school.  His BIg Sister, who sold me the original
> pair, was back.  Only today she was accompanied by Gramps, who I guess
> runs the place.  Both of them repeated Kid's suggestion that I trade
> in their cartridges for a pair of OEMs, but to their credit and their
> company's, they didn't hesitate to refund my money when I told them
> I'd already bought OEMs elsewhere.
>
> Anyway, Gramps says they get around 4 per cent returns on their
> compatibles.  
He must have forgot the 0 after the 4.
> He again repeats Kid's explanation that "some printers
> just can't use them."  I wonder why.  
Because they are junk
> Assuming these *were* the right
> cartridges and were still in good working condition to start with,
> what could have been done to them in the process of merely shooting
> more ink into them that would convince the printer or operating system
> they were "invalid?"  Even if they do have some kind of chip in them,
> how can it tell the difference between "genuine Lexmark" ink and
> something else?  My suspicion is still that these cartridges were
> really a 32 and 33, respectively, and got mislabled.  
Why are you surprised.  That is typically what you get from fly by niters.
> Either that or
> InkStop is contracting with a real butcher of a remanufacturer 
They like their competitors will not tell you where they get the crap.
> who's
> not testing the cartridges electrically 

Do you think they are going to do that in China.  And when they do and 
it is bad they will still ship and say it is good.
> (thus not catching those that
> have been run dry and have burned-out printheads) before going to the
> trouble of refilling them, and certainly isn't bothering with pulling
> enough of them from their finished production runs for adequate
> quality testing.
>
> I don't mean to sound here like I'm bashing InkStop.  
Thats OK.  Do it.
> After all, they
> did right by me when I returned the non-working cartridges, and they
> deserve kudos for that.  I'm just trying to understand why they didn't
> work.
>
> Anyone else out there with a Z1300
Lexmark is garbage to begin with so it really makes little difference 
what you use.
>  having a problem using compatibles
> or DIY refills?
>   
0
measekite
8/26/2008 4:07:45 AM
On Aug 25, 9:17 pm, spamme...@mailinator.com wrote:
> Well, I hauled the nonfunctioning Lexmark 34/35 "compatibles" back to
> InkStop this afternoon.  Guess Kid Behind the Counter from Saturday
> must be back in school.  His BIg Sister, who sold me the original
> pair, was back.  Only today she was accompanied by Gramps, who I guess
> runs the place.  Both of them repeated Kid's suggestion that I trade
> in their cartridges for a pair of OEMs, but to their credit and their
> company's, they didn't hesitate to refund my money when I told them
> I'd already bought OEMs elsewhere.
>
> Anyway, Gramps says they get around 4 per cent returns on their
> compatibles.  He again repeats Kid's explanation that "some printers
> just can't use them."  I wonder why.  Assuming these *were* the right
> cartridges and were still in good working condition to start with,
> what could have been done to them in the process of merely shooting
> more ink into them that would convince the printer or operating system
> they were "invalid?"  Even if they do have some kind of chip in them,
> how can it tell the difference between "genuine Lexmark" ink and
> something else?  My suspicion is still that these cartridges were
> really a 32 and 33, respectively, and got mislabled.  Either that or
> InkStop is contracting with a real butcher of a remanufacturer who's
> not testing the cartridges electrically (thus not catching those that
> have been run dry and have burned-out printheads) before going to the
> trouble of refilling them, and certainly isn't bothering with pulling
> enough of them from their finished production runs for adequate
> quality testing.
>
> I don't mean to sound here like I'm bashing InkStop.  After all, they
> did right by me when I returned the non-working cartridges, and they
> deserve kudos for that.  I'm just trying to understand why they didn't
> work.
>
> Anyone else out there with a Z1300 having a problem using compatibles
> or DIY refills?

If you refill carts, you soon learn that they sometimes don't work.
They wear out, burn out, clog and more. This can happen on the first
refill or the 10th. For more information on why they fail, Google the
ink refill sites.
0
Al
8/26/2008 11:47:04 AM
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Al Bundy wrote:
<blockquote
 cite="mid:78031b13-c402-43e4-ab13-511fe9369189@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com"
 type="cite">
  <pre wrap="">On Aug 25, 9:17 pm, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:spamme...@mailinator.com">spamme...@mailinator.com</a> wrote:
  </pre>
  <blockquote type="cite">
    <pre wrap="">Well, I hauled the nonfunctioning Lexmark 34/35 "compatibles" back to
InkStop this afternoon.  Guess Kid Behind the Counter from Saturday
must be back in school.  His BIg Sister, who sold me the original
pair, was back.  Only today she was accompanied by Gramps, who I guess
runs the place.  Both of them repeated Kid's suggestion that I trade
in their cartridges for a pair of OEMs, but to their credit and their
company's, they didn't hesitate to refund my money when I told them
I'd already bought OEMs elsewhere.

Anyway, Gramps says they get around 4 per cent returns on their
compatibles.  He again repeats Kid's explanation that "some printers
just can't use them."  I wonder why.  Assuming these *were* the right
cartridges and were still in good working condition to start with,
what could have been done to them in the process of merely shooting
more ink into them that would convince the printer or operating system
they were "invalid?"  Even if they do have some kind of chip in them,
how can it tell the difference between "genuine Lexmark" ink and
something else?  My suspicion is still that these cartridges were
really a 32 and 33, respectively, and got mislabled.  Either that or
InkStop is contracting with a real butcher of a remanufacturer who's
not testing the cartridges electrically (thus not catching those that
have been run dry and have burned-out printheads) before going to the
trouble of refilling them, and certainly isn't bothering with pulling
enough of them from their finished production runs for adequate
quality testing.

I don't mean to sound here like I'm bashing InkStop.  After all, they
did right by me when I returned the non-working cartridges, and they
deserve kudos for that.  I'm just trying to understand why they didn't
work.

Anyone else out there with a Z1300 having a problem using compatibles
or DIY refills?
    </pre>
  </blockquote>
  <pre wrap=""><!---->
If you refill carts, you soon learn that they sometimes don't work.
  </pre>
</blockquote>
That is true<br>
<blockquote
 cite="mid:78031b13-c402-43e4-ab13-511fe9369189@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com"
 type="cite">
  <pre wrap="">They wear out, burn out, clog and more.</pre>
</blockquote>
Oh Yeah<br>
<blockquote
 cite="mid:78031b13-c402-43e4-ab13-511fe9369189@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com"
 type="cite">
  <pre wrap=""> This can happen on the first
refill or the 10th. For more information on why they fail, Google the
ink refill sites.
  </pre>
</blockquote>
They do not want you to know the truth.&nbsp; For that read PC World<br>
</body>
</html>
0
measekite
8/26/2008 4:05:49 PM
First off, were they "compatible" cartridges or refilled lexmark
cartridges?? There is a huge difference. Compatible cartridges are new
cartridges made by a different manufacturer than the one that made your
printer and aren't made to the same specifications. I've worked in the
industry for over 12 years and i would never put a compatible in my
printer, they often fail. They are total garbage imo. If the cartridges
were refilled lexmark cartridges then yes, whomever refilled them should
have tested each and every cartridge that they refilled to make sure the
electronics were not damaged. They are delicate and can go out like a
light bulb, so you have to test everyone you refill.


0
Rusty
3/28/2009 4:37:02 AM

Rusty wrote:
> First off, were they "compatible" cartridges or refilled lexmark
> cartridges?? There is a huge difference. Compatible cartridges are new
> cartridges made by a different manufacturer than the one that made your
> printer and aren't made to the same specifications.

First of all, you DO realize that you're responding to a thread posted
seven months ago, don't you?

Second, I can't be sure but I'd guess the cartridges were refills on
the basis of their selling price and the likelihood that Lexmark would
sue anyone actually manufacturing copies of any of their current carts
out the wazoo on intellectual property protection grounds.

> I've worked in the
> industry for over 12 years and i would never put a compatible in my
> printer, they often fail. They are total garbage imo. If the cartridges
> were refilled lexmark cartridges then yes, whomever refilled them should
> have tested each and every cartridge that they refilled to make sure the
> electronics were not damaged. They are delicate and can go out like a
> light bulb, so you have to test everyone you refill.

Whatever.  Anyway I'm still convinced the cartridges didn't work
because they were mislabeled as a 34 and 35 when they were likely a 32
and 33 in reality.  The Z1300 won't work with the later carts.  The
confusion stems from the fact that the later cartridges are backward
compatible with the earlier ones, but the older carts AREN'T forward
compatible with newer printers.  That is, any printer that took 32/33
can use 34/35 but the converse isn't necessarily true.  New printers
designed for 34/35 can't use 32/33.  Apparently there's more of a
difference between the newer and older carts than just that the newer
ones hold more ink.
0
spammenot
3/28/2009 5:10:16 PM
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:37:02 -0500, Rusty wrote:

> First off, were they "compatible" cartridges or refilled lexmark
> 
> cartridges?? There is a huge difference. Compatible cartridges are new
> 
> cartridges made by a different manufacturer than the one that made your
> 
> printer and aren't made to the same specifications. I've worked in the
> 
> industry for over 12 years and i would never put a compatible in my
> 
> printer, they often fail. They are total garbage imo. If the cartridges
> 
> were refilled lexmark cartridges then yes, whomever refilled them should
> 
> have tested each and every cartridge that they refilled to make sure the
> 
> electronics were not damaged. They are delicate and can go out like a
> 
> light bulb, so you have to test everyone you refill.

It is all garbage.  Compatible is an over used meaningless term used by
fly by nite to sell their crap to others.
0
measekite
3/29/2009 6:48:28 AM
measekite wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:37:02 -0500, Rusty wrote:
> 
>> First off, were they "compatible" cartridges or refilled lexmark
>>
>> cartridges?? There is a huge difference. Compatible cartridges are new
>>
>> cartridges made by a different manufacturer than the one that made your
>>
>> printer and aren't made to the same specifications. I've worked in the
>>
>> industry for over 12 years and i would never put a compatible in my
>>
>> printer, they often fail. They are total garbage imo. If the cartridges
>>
>> were refilled lexmark cartridges then yes, whomever refilled them should
>>
>> have tested each and every cartridge that they refilled to make sure the
>>
>> electronics were not damaged. They are delicate and can go out like a
>>
>> light bulb, so you have to test everyone you refill.
> 
> It is all garbage.

You mean your brain or your stupid uninformed opinion...or both?

   Compatible is an over used meaningless term used by
> fly by nite to sell their crap to others.

Reading comprehension seems to be your biggest problem.
Of course, being brain dead doesn't help does it!...LOL!

0
Frank
3/29/2009 5:22:08 PM
Reply: