Skip to main content

An inkling

Much has been writ about the cost of bubble-jet ink, & today I’m not going to make an exception. Oh, yes, & I seem to be in whingey mode anyway...

One person I carefully instructed to get good-quality 3rd-party (Calidad) cartridges for their printer had a dependent (instructee is visiting relatives) complain to me yesterday that the printer would not print.

On surfacing at the premises, I discover that the instructee had paid $17 a cartridge for branded ink instead of $8 a cartridge for Calidad ink (which, for that printer, comes in double-doses) & that the printer had exhausted not the black ink which they were printing with, but the Yellow & Magenta cartridges (within a few percent of axeing the Cyan as well).

Replaced the cartridges with $8 ones & all works well.

While I was grabbing the ink, I noticed that the wholesaler had an MFC (MultiFunction Centre; ie, printer plus scanner, usually fax, often copying facility) on special for $59. Now it happens to use the same cartridges as instructee’s printer, so a full set of replacement branded cartridges is 4x$17 or $68 — 15% more than the MFC!

I’m betting the printer manufacturer wonders why customers buy $32 worth of ink (a mere ½ of an MFC-worth) from their 3rd-party competitors & wind up with twice as much actual ink.

Not being one to look a gift horse in the laser (well, not too hard :-), I invested in one.

Hopefully, this will spell an end to a long stream of small, hand-written notepad pages. I’ll share it on the LAN so mine current hosts (who have a mono laser, not plugged in) can benefit from it also. Another form of “board.”

WRT the ethernet card which went bung yesterday, an enormously expensive ($10 retail inc) TP-Link Ethernet card fixed it up nicely.

The switch concerned seems to be a bit dodgy (whether dodgyfied by the last mucking around or not, I don’t know), so I might have to lash out another $8 for a replacement for it.

This will be partially financially remedied by the discovery of an unused $39 (66%/MFC) wireless LAN card.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...