Results of Comparison Study: Lexmark X73 vs Canon PIXMA

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Fred - 28 Aug 2005 15:32 GMT

Executive Summary:
There is no comparison. Lexmark is a piece of garbage. There
is a reason they start the model number with an "X." Canon
starts up first time, every time.

Conditions:
Windows 98SE, 128MB RAM

Detailed Results:
(a) Lexmark X73 -- Installed per mfr instructions. Fails to
print. Re-installed. Fails to print. Contacted Lexmark India
tech support. They re-read the instruction book to me, then
had me fiddle around with un-install programs, clear cache
programs, re-install. Fails to print about 1/2 the time and
only prints if I boot the computer first, then power up and
connect the USB cable. Otherwise fails to print.

(b) Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at
Fry's Electronics. Plugged in, installed per mfr
instructions. Went thru alignment procedure in a snap.
Printed first time, every time. Fast, fast, fast. No monkey
business.

Researcher's Conclusion:
Canon is good. Lexmark X73 is a piece of garbage. On the
box is clearly says "Windows 98", yet it doesn't work with
Window's driver OR with the drivers from the Lexmark CD or
website. If you can't read the manual for yourself, then
tech support is good because all they do is read the manual
via a 2 second delayed connection from India.

Reply to this Message

zakezuke - 29 Aug 2005 11:54 GMT

> Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at Fry's
> Canon is good. Lexmark X73 is a piece of garbage. On the
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> tech support is good because all they do is read the manual
> via a 2 second delayed connection from India.

I had no idea that they were so cheap at Fry's. The ink alone is worth
$40-$50ish. Tell me if that deal is common, if so i'll have to run up
to fry's and buy one. Even without ink i'd buy one for that price.

While I own a couple of canons now.. it's not like there have not been
reports of them not working out of the box... but those are pretty rare
from what i've seen.

The Lexmark X73 is a multifuction unit... not exactly a fair contest.
I would be more keen to compare the x73 to at least another
multifuction. For example the mp750/mp760 lacks fax support where even
the most lame lexmarks, the ones that come free with your dell
lexmarks, have great fax support and find their springboard software to
be more versatile. I don't know the x73 personaly, it sounds like an
older model though.

Drivers though are fair comment though it's been years since i've used
win98se. In this day and age one might consider upgrading to win2k at
the very least provided your system can deal with it. 98 was at one
point classed as an end of life product and support for it is
dwindling. XP isn't a bad option but it doesn't run very well on
128megs of ram... 2k works sluglishly on 128megs from what I remember.
But even with a current generation OS expect some drivers to crap out,
destroy the print spooler, not uninstall properly, leaving you with a
huge mess to clean up. Lexmark isn't alone in this regard.

Reply to this Message

Fred - 29 Aug 2005 17:54 GMT

Thanks for the info, ZZ. Yep, they were still there at
Frys - now at $29.99. They're refurbs, but I can't tell mine
from new - I bought 2 of them. I would be that when this
batch is gone, that would be the end of them. However, I
bought another Canon refurb directly from Canon years ago,
so just give Canon a call. The Canon stuff is all top rated
in my book and reasonably priced, compared with similar
units.

Only drawback for these Canon's that I've seen so far -- and
probably the reason they're so low cost... the ink
cartridges are extremely small and run out of ink fast. And
I mean FAST! But the garden variety ink-refill kits (Fry's
also has a good one for $10 that fills a half dozen times)
work just fine. I have already refilled mine once - only
had to enlarge the vent hole a little to get the syringe
down into it.

And one more thing... Lexmark is CRAP! Hopefully they'll
self-destruct one day before they annoy too many other
folks. (Again, I never ask for more than is advertised by
that worthless company and what they themselves printed on
their box. Yep, they're a bunch of moronic buffoons if you
ask me!)

Fred

> > Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at Fry's
> > Canon is good. Lexmark X73 is a piece of garbage. On the
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> destroy the print spooler, not uninstall properly, leaving you with a
> huge mess to clean up. Lexmark isn't alone in this regard.

Reply to this Message

measekite - 29 Aug 2005 19:55 GMT

>Thanks for the info, ZZ. Yep, they were still there at
>Frys - now at $29.99. They're refurbs, but I can't tell mine
[quoted text clipped - 184 lines]
>
>

Reply to this Message

Fred - 30 Aug 2005 21:36 GMT

LOL!!

> >Thanks for the info, ZZ. Yep, they were still there at
> >Frys - now at $29.99. They're refurbs, but I can't tell mine
[quoted text clipped - 184 lines]
> >
> >

Reply to this Message

drc023 - 29 Aug 2005 22:10 GMT

Which Canon model are you quoting? From the description of the ink
cartridge, it sounds more like an iP1500 than the iP3000 and higher
printers.

Signature

Ron

> Thanks for the info, ZZ. Yep, they were still there at
> Frys - now at $29.99. They're refurbs, but I can't tell mine
[quoted text clipped - 81 lines]
>> huge mess to clean up. Lexmark isn't alone in this
> regard.

Reply to this Message

zakezuke - 29 Aug 2005 22:32 GMT

> Which Canon model are you quoting? From the description of the ink
> cartridge, it sounds more like an iP1500 than the iP3000 and higher
>printers.

Agreed, the ip4000 should have a 25ml black tank and 4 smaller 14ml ish
tanks. The yield isn't super duper fab.. i'd describe it as average.

The x73 uses the #70 black inktank which does have a higher yield than
canon's black. The color is about the same.

Reply to this Message

Fred - 30 Aug 2005 21:38 GMT

> The x73 uses the #70 black inktank which does have a higher yield than
> canon's black. The color is about the same.

Actually......... the Canon is a tremendously higher yield,
if you figure it as "pages per irritation". I wouldn't buy
a printer based on the capacity of the ink. You can always
refill them for about 10-cents a piece with just about any
ink bought thru the mail or internet. Also.... not
recommending this, but..... I found one time by accident, if
you have an empty ink cartridge but no ink on hand..... just
refill it with tap water. I did this twice in row and got
good enough quality for what I do. Then the 3rd time,
filled with regular ink and the good dark print came right
back.

Oh, and, as is my usual custom, I'd like to take this
opportunity to say.... Lexmark X73 is a piece of crap.

Reply to this Message

zakezuke - 31 Aug 2005 00:31 GMT

> Actually......... the Canon is a tremendously higher yield,
> if you figure it as "pages per irritation". I wouldn't buy
> a printer based on the capacity of the ink.

You may not, but others who consider buying a ip1500, now I know you
are talking about the ip1500, might be concerned about the yields. I
dont remember the yield on the ip1500, but we're talking the sub 300p
range for black. I do remember it's 9.5ml for the black. Given that
average joe user is going to likely be buying OEM ink... it's important
for them to understand that while the printer may cost $50ish or in
your case $25ish that they'll be spending a huge premium on refills the
likes of which would exceed the cost of more costly model. But you
plan to refill those tanks, and more power to you.

I think canon may have abandoned these microyield tanks. the new
ip1600 claims 500p, on par with the ip3000/4000/5000. I don't know if
that is measured by 5% yield or 1500char/page.

But ouch! The ip1600 black costs $20.00 (pg-40 16ml) where the ip4200
black costs $16.25 (PGI-5bk 26ml)... same estimated yield and the same
ink (chromalife100) but more money for less volume.

Reply to this Message

Fred - 30 Aug 2005 21:36 GMT

Yes, it's the iP1500. Works like a champ.

> Which Canon model are you quoting? From the description of the ink
> cartridge, it sounds more like an iP1500 than the iP3000 and higher
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> >
> > "zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1125312872.919738.190570@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> >> > Canon PIXMA -- Purchased refurbished model for $26.99 at
> > Fry's
[quoted text clipped - 54 lines]
> >> huge mess to clean up. Lexmark isn't alone in this
> > regard.

Reply to this Message

Fred - 29 Aug 2005 17:59 GMT

Thanks again. I have Win2000Prof here on disk somewhere but
can't upgrade right now - memory and other hardware being
one reason, time being another. I'll just stick with Win
98SE as long as the programs don't require something better.

> Drivers though are fair comment though it's been years since i've used
> win98se. In this day and age one might consider upgrading to win2k at
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> destroy the print spooler, not uninstall properly, leaving you with a
> huge mess to clean up. Lexmark isn't alone in this regard.

Reply to this Message

Fred - 11 Sep 2005 06:51 GMT

Reply to this Message

Gary S. Terhune - 11 Sep 2005 18:44 GMT

A comparison test using only one example of each device is scientifically
worthless. But thanks for sharing, <s>.

Signature

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User

> Executive Summary:
> There is no comparison. Lexmark is a piece of garbage. There
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> tech support is good because all they do is read the manual
> via a 2 second delayed connection from India.

Reply to this Message