On Thursday 29 November 2001 06:09, you wrote: > Regarding Canon BJC 2100 and BJC 2000 > I actually work for Canon and I use at home a BJC2100 why do you say > never buy that? > It works for that little printing that I do at home fine for over a > year now . > > Christian Posratschnig
My main 'problems' with the canon bjc2100 are: very heavily pixelized images (frankly the worst I've seen) and: Extremely slow -i.e. taking about 8 minutes to print an A4 page in color. and: the printer cartridges are fairly expensive and badly insulated. By that I mean that they drie out when not in use after a month or so. In comparison: I have a HP 340 portable printer for my laptop that's only used at an average of once a year. It's still printing on the cartridge I bought 4 or 5 years ago. The B/W quality of the bjc2100 is OK though. On using the GIMP's BJC 2000 printerdriver I get a good speed gain but loose a lot of color quality. Still has the same horrible raster. Shame! The bjc2100 is very cheap (cheaper than a new printerhead for the bjc 2000), it's an extreme case of: 'value for money!' You get what you pay for. IMO the bjc 2000 was the better model. (alas the 2100 power supply doesn't fit on the 2000. Wonder why they did that?) good hunting, Harm Bathoorn.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
