How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

[Canuck]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

Hey, Excuse me, why not include HP?

HP don't make anything. All their LaserJets are Canon print engines

[Canuck]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

Worked at Xerox for 12 years. Their older machines were ok. Played with the other junk. Been working on Canons for 15 years. Canon makes the best,no doubt. Xerox is a distant 2nd. Everybody else is toys or junk. Could not stand up to the beating that my Canons take. Only the Canons and Xeroxs can

[Canuck]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

I like the Xerox machines. They were the first in the industry, long before the offshore copiers were developed in the 70,s and 80,s. If you are familiar with working on one Xerox, and you have a PWS laptop, and you can read, you can repair any Xerox. I am somewhat prejudiced, as I have 45 years experience on Xerox ,Osay, Xeikon. I provide the Portable Work Station laptop that is critical to working on Xerox equipment.If you need one, e-mail me at xtraininc@cableone.net

Xerox had exclusive rights to the patent on electrostatic copying until about 1980. Nobody else could use the process until then. HP tried in the 60s and got sued by Xerox. It cost HP a shit load of money

[Exok]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

On the service end, I like Xerox the most because of the auto updating of service docs ( edocs ), the vast global database of information through eureka tips and overall durability of the high end machines. Some of the low end machines are less dependable.

I never disliked working on Canon machines (other than restringing corona wire). I always thought the CQ on canon machines was great and consistent.

Ricoh machines and me never got along, even though I've worked on them the longest (since 1990). CQ never held up well and the machines always needed a lot of maintenance to keep them running.

Sharp machines (1994-1998 era) were pretty crappy. I did like the air feed system on the 3062. That worked pretty good.

Very little experience working on Konica / Minolta or Toshiba.

[Klydon]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

I have worked on Canon and Ricoh equipment the most. Canon base machine is usually pretty good for the most part, but their accessories are weak. A 45 CPM machine with a friction pad in the feeder? Really Canon? Ricoh is typically the other way around in that their accessories are pretty good, but the machine itself is a bit weak.

Canon appeared to be going backwards to me for awhile. The IR5000-6000 machines seemed more reliable than the IR5070 series that followed. I know one thing; I never had to cut wire ties on a Ricoh to get it to work while cutting wire ties fixed a fair amount of issues for me with Canons.

Best of both worlds would probably be a Ricon. (Canon machine with Ricoh accessories).

I also worked for a contractor that did training for Xerox, so from a training standpoint of view, I had exposure to their machines. I wasn't impressed. In my area, a lot of customers are not happy with Xerox in terms of service, etc. We have lost accounts to Xerox only to get them back again when they are up and the poor service from Xerox and the good service they got from us was quoted as one of the big reasons why.

I think most of the equipment is close enough to each other that the service and other little things that are done for the customer make the difference. A customer can have the greatest running machine from a tech standpoint of view, but if the customer isn't happy with it and/or feels they are getting poor service, then it doesn't matter. On the other hand, a machine could be meh, but if a customer is extremely happy with it and believes they are getting good value, then who is the winner?

[copyprint]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

Hi! How do you position those brands in a professional aspect? According to the quality? Printing speed? Price? After-sale service? Or the solutions that they provide?
P.S. It's about the multifunctional printer

as an ordinary technician handled numerous Brands of from copier up to MFP, CANON is the BEST quality print, economical, environment friendly, easy to install, use and servicing even though I dream some difficult trouble sometimes ha ha still CANON.

[leevabug@gmail.com]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

I do love the mono component aspect

[skibum]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

Canon support I feel is the best. Easiest to work on from service and user stand point. Canon color wins hands down, all the others are playing catch up with color technology.

Kyocera does have some good print engines but they lack fast delivery on parts and support.

[danilee2]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

As Reprographic Technician, I've had the unique opportunity to use all 4 brands in the original question. I've managed fleets of up to 50 mfps including production equipment.
In terms of network integration: I've had the least issues with Canon equipment followed by Ricoh with Konica Minolta equipment coming in dead last. There are just certain things that KM equipment does not do well at all particularly when dealing with a large WAN with layers of security. They also have not been able to resolve scanning to network folders.
In terms of copier construction: Xerox devices tend to be the best made with the most end user maintainable components, Canon comes next and Ricoh and KM have similar issues with overall machine construction.
In terms of user interface: Ricoh has the most user friendly user interface with Canon a close second. They're both very intuitive and easy to navigate. KM lacks consistency from platform to platform and everything is oriented from the point of view of the paper path of the device rather than the view of the user which can be confusing for the average user and time consuming for experienced operators when making adjustments to output.
In terms of service: Canon is the clear cut winner here. No other company provides the same level of support for their equipment. If you have a choice in choosing your equipment avoid Konica Minolta for this reason alone. Their techs are untrained, they do not have enough staff to support their products and it takes too long to resolve what should be routine issues if they're resolved at all.
In terms of sales and product solutions: I think Canon is a clear favorite here, although Xerox has some very nice solutions and tools, they're often just priced too high when there are comparable solutions available at a better cost. Again Canon's support provides a better overall experience after purchase. At least this has been my experience
I found the following link interesting you might too. J.D. Power and Associates: Copiers

[Canuck]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

CANON RULES

[Canuck]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

It is true that Xerox had fallen behind on the service side. That is why they they gave it up and purchased Global Imaging Systems (GIX) to take over as Xerox's service dept. I was a Global tech at the time of the purchase. For the first few years all our techs were Xerox trained and Xerox was the only product we sold from that point on. We slowly started to replace all our customer's older machines with new Xerox machines. We are now in the next stage of the transition. Machines that were formerly service directly by Xerox are now being services by GIX. You will see a very significant improvement to Xerox's service from this point on. GIX has a much higher standard than Xerox's former service dept.

I worked at Xerox for 12 years back in the 90s. They had great service back then. Now......GARBAGE....contract technicians,poor training,etc. I left them on my own in 2000 because they used to be the flagship company and turned into a bean counter driven corporation. Nowdays,service is junk,products are soso(the ones that THEY actually manufacture),coloring book over saturated color. I still see my Xerox tech buddies all the time and they know the company has went downhill.They will be the first to admit it...they worked for them when they were the benchmark.Xerox is more focused on document solutions now...not focusing on the "box" anymore. Still a good company but 15 percent of what they used to be

[kingpd@businessprints.net]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

Good question, not so easily answered...I think there's three major considerations: 1)dealer/technician point of view (including service and profitability, reliability, training and support; 2)User point of view (including service, ease of use, setup, and interface, reliability, and met customer expectation(s); and 3)Quality and reliability without regard to user experience and costs...

1)

• I think Kyocera and Canon probably have the best dealer support for dealerships and technicians as far as training programs and support from a manufacturer master tech if/when needed;
• I think the above brands helped keep out competition among dealerships in the same area many years ago but now everybody has eroded profits through too many dealers and direct sales;
• It's been a while but from what I can recall, Canon and Sharp had the worst quotas for newcomers, I think half a million dollars to start a new dealership...most others were no quota to $100k-$250k investment to get started and some manufacturers like Canon wouldn't let you play in the high volume arena without a few million in initial investment and minimum techs required (which is probably a good thing overall);
• I'd say Canon and Kyocera had better dealer profitability since not everything was module based (from what I recall, may have changed) and both had higher than standard yields;
• Xerox was overprotective in their patent fights to maintain sales and service internally, so little to no independent dealership oppertunity
• As Xtrain stated, Xerox in it's hay day was a leader in all kinds of technology, Apple did buy mouse technology from them, Xerox had the first desktop computers and email, net communications
• As a dealer, I only ever called Ricoh corporate once and never bothered again, too layered with BS;
• Never bothered with Sharp other than an initial call and realized it was too costly to enter into with them;
• I think Kyocera had the friendliest manufacturer reps, Canon and Konica were pretty decent too but I felt that Konica was too spoiled by $20 million+ dealers and couldn't be bothered with me. The people at Lanier were nice too, surprisingly, much better than Ricoh;

2)

• Initially I was a worker at a print shop and got used to production equipment before ever getting into servicing anything...my experiences as a user from that and from many years as an employee in large firms and government employment are where I draw my conclusions about brands as an end-user, as well as personal in home/home office experience...;
• In more modern times I'd have to say that Xerox hands down wins the most user friendly network setup and best looking and easiest end-user interfaces. Their printers are really good at doing auto setup on networks and their copy devices have a very consistent look and feel to them. From their 20-30 ppm machines to their 100+ ppm machines, the firmware is very similar and easy for non-tech people to use. Actually even on old analogs, Xerox seemed to keep functions simple and laid out a little neater on the buttons and controls;
• If I was going strictly on an end user experience I would probably pick Xerox, just because of the module based system (although I wouldn't pick this as a dealer, too costly), the display layouts and consistency, and if I was a large organization, I would lean towards Xerox because of one vendor, one negotiation necessary;
• If I was concerned about quality, I wouldn't lean towards Xerox, I'll explain in section 3...;
• If I wanted a machine because of being able to push it to the limits, I would go with Canon. I haven't used their most current line but traditionally, their 50+ppm machines have been very solid and could handle many straight hours of printing...I wouldn't try it on a Ricoh or Konica unless I was at the 105+ppm category...probably same for Xerox with their current line-up, have seen them run for hours but they feel more like they're going to have a melt-down...maybe it's just me or maybe they don't have as many fans...not sure, but they have and do run too;
• As far as user training, I know Xerox has a department for this but that doesn't mean other brands don't or wouldn't train you if you asked them to;
• As far as being treated like a human-fukking being when I was in the rare situation of being the purchaser of a new machine...Xerox hands down was the rudest, the absolute rudest, and I can't stress this enough. Disclosure: when I was purchasing copiers I was doing so for non-profits, budget concerned organizations, etc., if that makes any difference. I just got the impression that they felt we had a little budget or the sales people would have to sell at a lower price and therefore acted like it wasn't worth their time. Sharp was ok, Kyocera was pretty normal (they were just mita at the time), Ricoh and Canon were actually the friendliest and most helpful at the time. They were independents. Imagistics was eh.
• As far as being treated like a human when dealing with service, all experiences were pretty good actually. Minolta was the most expensive (before merger) and made sure they billed for every minute but tech was honest, Canon techs were the most helpful and coolest, we shot the sh*t for a while afterwards, Xerox was the funniest...I used to run a 1090 (loved the thing) and to the techs dismay, on occasion I was told to output about 200k copies in about 2-3 days (i think that was a months volume), and the thing would overheat naturally and the tech would come in every year for this project and give looks but fixed the thing all the same...well the one year he said he was taking out all air filters and leaving off a bunch of panels so the thing could get more air since it was so hot, but he put up with us.
• Overall, this is a very personal "depends where you are and who you get" section...

3)

• As an independent, I think you can make any brand work or not work with costs and profits...depends on the individual machines you use. Theoretically this should translate through to an end user experience;
• I think Konica Minolta has the best color and best cost for color in all ranges, but Canon does well in the production arena;
• I think Xerox used to have the best b/w for text, now I think a properly run in and calibrated Canon wins, more times than not. No surprise HP would win for b/w text and graphics printing. I'd have to add though that I think Canon and HP have about the highest b/w costs at least for toners;
• I am not fond of the current to last generation of Canon low volume 40ppm and below b/w machines, the b/w toner was not so permanent and had some rub off issues;
• I go a little nuts when my blacks, especially text isn't pure solid pitch black. I've had great results on some faster imagerunners, but I think an adjusted Sharp may actually win on that issue, but I don't necessarily like the extra shine factor from the wax in a sharp toner. Love the solid black with no show thru but don't want a glossy effect. Old Xerox analogs had excellent black solid pitch without the gloss but the fusing was not the greatest or most permanent;
• I think quality of prints is going to come down to service, adjustments, and frequency of replacing parts and consumables. I'd give Canon a win on quality as a dealer but give credence to Xerox and Konica as a user with the replaceable modules...however, I noticed that on Xerox, quality will suffer before a user is actually instructed to replace something, e.g., light shading will occur on b/w text prints before the replace web supply unit message occurs. I find the quality unacceptable until the new web has been installed...

Bottom line, it still mostly all comes down to individual area. In summary, I would probably go with Canon/HP as a b/w printer, Kyocera for low volume copier/printer, Canon for 50-60ppm+ departmental or production printer for b/w, or Xerox for 100+ppm b/w, and Konica Minolta for color.

[335577]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

In terms of technology and product, Xerox is the best one, especially their production machines, latest machines mostly designed/manufactured by Japan. in terms of service quality, Xerox probably is the worst one.

Here is my opinion;
Xerox = BMW
Canon = Toyota
Ricoh = Honda
Konica = Mazda

[hannamd]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

... what a surprise. =^..^=

RICOH RICOH RICOH

[skibum]

Re: How do you rank Canon, Xerox, Ricoh and Konica?

In terms of technology and product, Xerox is the best one, especially their production machines, latest machines mostly designed/manufactured by Japan. in terms of service quality, Xerox probably is the worst one.

Here is my opinion;
Xerox = BMW
Canon = Toyota
Ricoh = Honda
Konica = Mazda

Canon = Honda
all others below

Canon is most popular and Honda manufacturers the most engines in the world. Just wish they still made a wagon with a stick