Xerox failure responsbilety ?

Xfactor your answers are very suspicious to me. You always take the side of Xerox when they
are clearly in the wrong.

I have seen your posts pertaining to several different types of equipment all Xerox of course. And
you always take the side of Xerox. First of all Xerox only produces 1 decent machine. (The Igen)
So to stick up for anything else is ridiculous. You obviously have not had to produce anything off this
equipment with high expectaions.

I'm sorry to bash but it frustrates me when I read your answers. I have never heard you once say anything
negative about the way Xerox is handling the problem above. If a tech is there 3-5 times a week it's a problem
hands down and is totally unacceptable no matter how you try to defend it.

I guess it's frustrsating to read these answers I understand how Michael feels I've been there with
Xerox and it is not fun. They promise the moon but when the machine fallas short of there promises
it's excuse after excuse.

If I was to guess Xfactor I would say you worked for Xerox. If you don't see if ther hiring.

 

Michael I undersatnd where you are coming from. I am from offset background and the vendors I dealt with
where knowledgeable and got things fixed where you could trust the answers of your technicinan and had confidence
if they were there it would be fixed. I am sorry to say this is not the case with Xerox. I cringe whenever I need to call them
and am fearful of which tech will arrive and what kind of BS I will hear come from there mouth. They do fix issues but my goodness
it's like pulling teeth. And not every tech is a bad tech but there are only one or two good ones I have dealt with. A lot of times the tech's
seem just as lost as I am. So Michael I feel where you are coming from especially with a lower end printer. I feel for you brother good luck

 

I think we come from different backgrounds. Did you come up on digital equipment, or did you start working on million dollar + presses?

I've used a bunch of digital machines and each have had great aspects (for the time) and their own set of limitations and problems to watch out for.

I would definitely disagree with your statement that xerox's only "decent machine" is the Igen (depending on the meaning of produce, whether it's provide or design for scratch.) Their machines which cost a fraction of their top of the line IGen are not as good as an Igen, sure, but they still produce millions of prints that make customers happy. If you buy a $40k machine you should expect a lot, but your expectations have to be lower than if you bought a $1 million machine. The $1 million dollar machine is going to have more reliability/capability/quality/etc.
Compare the $40k current machine to what we used a few years ago in the same price range and it's impressive how efficient it is to use and the quality of the output overall. The price per print is also more competitive now than ever before.

 

IgenSkeptic, I think your right xerox signs xfactors pay checks.

 

If you don't want other people's opinions, don't post on a public forum. I send my money to xerox every month for a lease, I don't get paid by them. However I am happy with my current machines and the work I'm able to produce from my xerox month after month makes me happy to send in my lease payment. No machine I've ever had has been perfect, but my current machines are better than what I've run to date.

 

I don't have a 550 -- but I did get 550 samples printed on what appears to my eye to be 12 pt c1s and c2s kromekote. They are ok but not as glossy as previous machines. When you say it "failed for them to" what exactly failed and how? I didn't see any toner adhesion problems on the samples they sent.

 

Preach it Michael. I hear what you are saying. Xfactor don't really listen too much to what he has to say.
His replies are very bias and always sticking up for Xerox regardless of the situation. I personally believe he is a Xerox employee
that replies to posts bashing Xerox. Look at his reply history and you will see what I mean.

 

As I've replied to your biased posts in the past, if you had more experience and knew what was out there you would have a different perspective. It sounds like you've always depended on others to fix all your equipment problems and expected digital printing is hitting a green button and that's it. I already told you last time you said that I was a Xerox employee that I'm not - I lease equipment from xerox and I run it every day.
I notice there was no answer from either of you to my question "what failed." When I typed the reply you replied to on 5/31 I was holding samples in my hand printed on the machine on the stock in question and gave my impression.

 

I had some awful issues with my 550 when it arrived, fortunately xerox replaced the machine after 5 months and now (fingers crossed) the new machine hasn't had any problems that the old one did.

One thing i did come across when trying to resolve the old machine's issues was a special fuser for heavyweight stock >177gsm which applied less pressure to the paper and caused less curl which allowed the paper to feed much more easily via the bypass tray when printing on the second side (manual duplex).

I don't know if you have one of these fusers but it has made my life a lot easier when printing onto heavy stock. Maybe see if Xerox will supply you with one of these fusers. They look exactly the sameas teh normal fuser but have a label that says >177g/m2.

hope this helps

 

get a Xerox 770

 

Talking about RML - recommended media list, im sometimes told the paper isnt on the RML so i cant expect our Xerox CP800 to print on the media without jams because of the paper curling etc, is this an acceptable excuse from xerox?

 

Always Xerox use this excuse !

 

And there is a reason for it. The papers on the RML have been tested on the machines. If the paper doesn't work or damages the engine it does not go on the RML. If a non Xerox paper is found that is good and has been extensively tested by a customer it can be placed on the RML.

RML stands for Recommended Media List. Note the recommended - it's not compulsory but if you have a stock that you use and causes problems we will not spend the time and money to rectify and repair the engine because of this

--
Mark

 

The frustrating part is when we have run 300g Multiart silk for 3 years etc, then we have bad duplex and suddently when cant rely on the paper anymore because it isnt on the RML.

According to RML on CP800 i can only find Xerox medias "Here is the solution, use 100.000$ more a year on paper, our paper"

 

Mills change their processes and paper merchants change mills usually without telling you. It has happened to Xerox branded paper. Just because it isn't on the RML does not mean it is a bad/incompatible stock and just because it is currently on the RML does not mean it cannot be removed if things change

Why should we test a competitors paper? If you have a stock that runs OK and has been "proven" on your machine then you can get this submitted to get placed on the RML at your expense. The iGen RML has non Xerox stock on it that has been submitted by our customers (one of my customers actually)

--
Mark

 

Well a papermill is a quite expensive setup, i doubt they change much.

The problem is that its a excuse too commonly used by xerox techs.

I had a quite heavy uncoated stock(Conqueror) couldnt print duplex at all, my tech didnt want to touch it and blamed the paper although we had printet it for 2 years. As he is onsite payed by us i told him to look up the fault code and fix it, turned out to be bad sensors after registration area. They tend to "fall down" by raising them again it ran without problems..