Conference noted::ibmpc-95

    I have been looking around for an HP inkjet printer and as has been
    stated before in this notes file it gets very hairy really fast.
    Lots of models out there.
    
    400
    680/682C
    690C/693C
    820CSE
    870CSE
    and I am sure there are more I forgot to write down.
    
    looking at rough ball park prices (prices will vary) but just as a
    point of reference:
    
    400         $200
    680/682C    $<300
    690C/693C   $300
    820CSE      $400
    870CSE      $500
     
    I have been reading spec sheets and i do not see a big difference.
    OK the higher up models print faster and have larger capacity paper
    trays, but the resolution seems the same, so is the quality the same?
    If I am not concerned about speed do I need to pay $400-$500?
    
    one difference is the 690C has the "HP Photo Color Kit", which as best
    i can tell only works on the 690C/693C.   It is a special cartridge
    that replaces the black(?) cartridge and supposedly gives you more
    wizbang colors.   Has anyone seen this/tried this?   Is it worth it?
    Does this "Color Kit" give you better color than a more expensive
    model (820CSE or 820CSE)?
    
    another difference:   the 680/682C states it does 2-sided printing.
    I have not seen this in any other model.   Anyone have this?  Sounds
    like a great idea but does it work?   Does it make for more moving
    parts?  More to break?  Easier to go out of alignment?  
    
    I do not know the answers, I am just asking
    
    signed
        Confused in printerland

    I too was just as confused as you are when it came time to finally
    purchase a color inkjet printer.  I shopped around, did a lot of
    comparisons (I brought my own paper so the playing field was equal) and
    finally decided on the 693C.  This is the model that supports the
    "photo cartridge".
    
    I have been very pleased with the printer and the quality of the
    output.  As far as the photo cartridge was concerned it was "free"
    since there was a $50 rebate.  (Check the HP web site to see if it is
    still available).
    
    I very rarely use the photo cartridge, however, as I never print "just
    photos".  When you use the photo cartridge, it replaces the black ink
    so any "blacks" you print are no longer pure black.  No problem with
    photos, but is a problem with text/graphics.  As far as the output
    quality with the photo cartridge is concerned, I only use it when I am
    printing photos on the "HP Glossy Printer".  Flesh tones come out more
    realistic.  Other than that I prefer the quality of the normal color
    and black cartridges.
    
    

    690C = near photo quality with special ink cartridge and special paper.  
           You decide if this is worth the extra initial expense and the 
           cost of supplies.
    
    680C = Same text/graphics quality as above (as far as I can tell).  
           2-sided printing is just a software thing; you turn the paper 
           over yourself, same as my 660C.
                 
    400 =  Single ink cartridge. If you want true black, you take out 
           (and have to store) the color cartridge.
    
    Tony

    I purchased a 693 at Christmas time. I am very happy with it thus far.
    The 'Photo Cartridge' is only needed in cases where you are printing
    something which is 'near photo quality'. I tried printing an 8x10 
    photo on HP photo paper with the photo cartridge and with the black
    cartridge.
    
    The print with the black cartridge was slighly darker than the one with
    the photo cartridge. Some people actually liked the quality of the
    darker print better than the lighter one produced by the photo
    cartridge. All agreed that th photo cartridge did the best job of
    reproducing the original.
    
    Jim

    Hullo,
    
    it really is a 'horses for courses' thing. What do you want to do with
    your colour printer?
    
    Last year, I purchased an HP DJ400 - with colour cartidge ("upgrade
    kit"), and for printing things that kids (6 & 3) create, it's perfect.
    The price was 'good' too :')
    
    The _only_ problem I've had, is that in very humid weather, the paper
    in the printer absorbs the moisture, and that causes problems with a
    paper jam. The paper path is 180� - which is less 'friendly' (I think)
    than my Canon BJ10e's 60� (or so) path. The HP is a real <expletive
    deleted> to clear, especially if you tear the paper :'(
    
    On the DJ400, the change of the cartridges is a 'snap' - 30 seconds
    max.
    
    hth,
    
    H

    re: 690C/693C
    
    Sorry if this has already been entered...
    
    From the reading I did during my "printer research period" a few
    weeks ago, I believe that the only difference between the 690C
    and the 693C is that the 693C includes the "101 Dalmatians Print
    Studio Kit" software (sounds like a Dalmatian-themed print-shop
    kind of thing).  Both models can accept the optional (still free?)
    photo-quality cartridge kit that replaces the black cartridge with
    three other colors, to essentially do six-color printing.
    
    So, if you don't need the "Dalmatians" software, you can probably
    save $20 or so and get the 690C.  Of course, most of the stores
    carry the 693C... :-)
    
    Chris

    Re: 2-sided printing.  The 820cse has it. You print first one side
    then replace the paper to print the other, of course, but it's
    pretty automated and foolproof.  A window comes up on the screen
    after the first sides are printed telling you how to take the
    paper out and put it back. It works well.
    

    Speaking of comparing models, has anyone any first hand
    experience with the 870 model, and how it stacks against
    the 690 model? Other than a bit more speed for both b/w
    and color, did they make any other improvements, such as
    ink cartridge capacity, or quality of the b/w or color
    printing, or ease of swapping out cartridges?
    
    Bob

        I was thing of get a new/used HP color printer but need some advice
    first.  I know some of the printer will do envelopes and post cards,
    but I would like to print on the back of photo Xmas cards. You know,
    the 4 x 8 or 3 x 7 cards. I get a stack of about 80 every year and 
    would like to just put a stack in the tray and have the printer do
    its thing. No more hand writing.  Has anyone tried this ? I don't
    mind feeding one at a time, but would like to put a stack in the
    tray and let the printer do the work.  

    Thanks  Bob

    Re: .254
    
    We have the 870cse here in the office.  Before getting it we spoke to
    the HP folks.  They told us there is no technical/quality differences
    between the 693 and the 870.  The 870 is a little faster and is build
    for a heavier duty cycle, meaning if you are doing a lot of printing
    the 870 is a better fit.

    I believe that one "technical" difference is that the 693 can use the
    Photo cartridge and the 870 can't.  At least that is what HP told me

    RE: .256 Thanks Richard.
    
    With reference to the heavier duty cycle mentioned by the HP
    folks, did they mention if there was any difference in the
    capacity of the ink cartridges? IE: Do the ink cartridges
    hold more ink, thus needing replacement less often?
    
    Bob

    The 870 has an appletalk serial connector in addition to the parallel
    one, so if printing from a Mac is important to you, that's a nice
    feature.  Don't know if the 693 has that.  I'm not positive, but I
    don't believe there's a significant difference in the ink capacities
    between the 600s and 800s.
    
    	Steve

    The 800's have significantly larger ink tanks than the 600 series
    printers. The 800's use the black tank/head from the HP 1600C, and a
    new larger 3 color tank/head, unique to the 800's.
    
    The 800's give speed and higher duty cycle than the 600's, for a bit
    higher cost. The 870 has an on-board rasterizer CPU, to allow network
    connects. The 820 seems to be a standard Windows printer.
    
    NT support for anything but the 870 is unclear.... All are supported in
    W95.
    
    Chris
    

re: .261

>   NT support for anything but the 870 is unclear.... All are supported in
>   W95.

    Not true.  The following are excerpts from the NT4DSK1.EXE and NT4DSK2.EXE
    README.TXT files that are available from the Microsoft Driver Library.

    (NT4DSK1.EXE):

        This release adds support for the following
        Hewlett Packard series Printers:


        o HP DeskJet 400 (Monochrome)
        o HP DeskJet 400
        o HP DeskJet 680C
        o HP DeskJet 682C
        o HP DeskJet 690C
        o HP DeskJet 692C
        o HP DeskJet 693C
        o HP DeskJet 694C
        o HP OfficeJet
        o HP OfficeJet LX


    (NT4DSK2.EXE):

        This release adds support for the following
        Hewlett Packard series Printers:


        o HP DeskJet 850C
        o HP DeskJet 855C
        o HP DeskJet 855Cse
        o HP DeskJet 855Cxi
        o HP DeskJet 870C
        o HP DeskJet 870Cse
        o HP DeskJet 870Cxi
        o HP PaintJet XL 300

    Whether these drivers are actually useful is a reader excercise ...

    Bob

    
    This sort of brings me back to a point in my initial reply.
    
    How does the print quality compare between the 69xC when using the special
    Photo Color Kit versus the 820CSE with C-Ret ???  Is C-Ret as good as or
    better than using the Photo Color Kit in a 69xC?
                           
    

    It -seems- that the 69x with photo kit is slightly better than the
    820/870 for photo quality - but I can't tell a lot of difference.
    
    I do mostly black, with occasional pictures, so I'll probably buy an
    870 if I get a new printer. I don't like the "windows only" feature of
    the 820.
    
    Chris
    

    Thanks Chris for your reply. Those answers may have sold me on
    paying the additional amount to get the 870, and would appear 
    to me, to outweigh the added marginal photo quality gained by
    the 69X with the photo kit. I'd rather have a printer with some
    additional robustness built in. I also like to have the ability
    to print from DOS, so wouldn't opt for the 820.
    
    Bob

    re: .262
    
    I've installed the latest drivers from the MSDL under Windows/NT 4.0.
    
    For my 855C, the drivers work fine as long as I'm not printing in
    color.  If I try to print in colors, it does print colors from the same
    general places on the color wheel as what's on the screen, but the
    results are vastly inferior to what I get printing the same material
    using HP's drivers under Windows-95.
    
    Sadly, there seem to be no decent color printing options for HP
    DeskJets under NT.

I got off the phone to HP and CompUSA. Although implied by earlier replies 
(which I am sorry I had not read before my purchase), here is what I found out

about the 820Cse/xi:

This is a Windows95 and Windows 3.11 printer only. No DOS, No NT. They do
not plan to supply an NT driver for the 820 ever. They will not even promise 
that Windows 98 (or whatever) will support the 820. 

So when they claim that the printer is "optimized for Windows" they do not
mean windows NT. In fact, following HP's reasoning, if your car were
advertised 
as being "optimized" for highway driving, they would see no need to have it
be able to drive at all on normal back roads and downtown streets!

My experience:

Programs running in a DOS box may not be able to use this printer.
A 486/66 will not drive this printer to print simple pages as fast as claimed
even with the new drivers on the web site. (It hesitated quite a while with 
5 or 6 line printouts.) Your mileage may vary.

The manager at CompUSA is worried because there is a rapid move going on in
small
businesses to NT. They held off Win95 due to reported configuration problems. 
So they're going directly to NT. Won't they be surprised to find their 820Cs
are now boat anchors (unless they keep some windows 3.11 systems as print
servers...)

By the way, this is the only printer HP has made that is constrained to work 
only with the operating systems listed (Windows 95 and Windows 3.11). But
their
marketing department saw no reason to list any limitations on the box 
(e.g., not for DOS or Windows NT). So much for HP's compatibility
reputation...

Alex

P.S. Since I can return the 820, has anyone done a good comparison between the
HP870 and Epson 800?
[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

    I've owned an 820 for over a year, have been generally very satisfied with 
    it. Sometimes it can be a bit slow on some graphics (depending on the
    application), but for text it is plenty fast enough for me. The quality 
    is good by the standards that existed at the time. However this is over
    one year old technology, almost ancient by color ink jet standards
    these days, so I would not expect to buy one today if I was in the
    market. Interestingly, until very recently, HP had held the price
    steady.
    
    Antony.

    I am having a problem installing the printer software for my
    new HP 870CSE.  I'm wondering if anyone has seen a problem like
    this or has any ideas.
    
    A little background - I recently bought a new Gateway system 200MHZ
    Pentium Pro, (I think the model is G6-200) and I first installed
    my HP Laserjet printer that I have had for 4 or 5 years.  I then
    wanted to added the Deskjet to get color.  After a great deal of
    difficulty installing a second parallel port (all of the IRQs were
    taken), I finally got on to installing the printer software. from
    the disks that came with the printer.  The first problem I ran
    into was deemed to be a corrupted disk by HP so they sent me the
    800 series printer software.  When I try to load that through th
    Print Wizard, I get a message that says "Specificed location does
    not contain software appropriate for your hardware" (those may
    not be the exact words).  But no indication of what it thinks it's
    looking for.
    
    HP said that was a Microsoft problem - call the vendor. HP did suggest
    installing the HP550 software from the WIndows 95 disk to get going.
    My Gateway information says call Gateway abouta Microsoft problems. 
     
    
    Gateway's only suggestion was to RELOAD everything on to my PC - yuck!
    This was in response to my question regarding how do I figure out
    what hardware the Print Wizard thinks I have and what software it
    thinks it's looking at.
    
    I have tried installing the software with the printer on  LPT1 and then
    on LPT2, with the other port empty; with no printers attached to the
    system at all; I removed all printers from the print window.  I took my
    Laserjet
    printer offline.  And I probably tried some other things.
    
    Other people can install the printer software on their WIN95 systems
    no problem, so it is clearly something with my system but I am at
    a loss as to how to diagnose the problem - WIN95 seems to have hidden
    everything.
    
    Thank you for any help.  
      

>  P.S. Since I can return the 820, has anyone done a good comparison between
>  the HP870 and Epson 800?

I believe the 800 is supposed to be a little faster, and to have better quality
output (in the highest quality mode, which uses paper that costs $2 a sheet).

The Epson 800 can take an Ethernet card that costs $500(!).  I don't know if an
Ethernet card is available for the HP.

According to MacUser (June 1997), you cannot reinstall the Epson ink cartridges
once they have been removed.  (They preferred the Apple, Canon, and HP design.)

I can't compare the two.  I picked up an 800 last week.  This being my first
printer I'm amazed at the simple text output it does, never mind the 
quality of some of the gifs I've dumped out to it (on normal paper).

bjm

    The Epson 800 has better picture quality on good, coated paper.
    It is rated slightly faster than the HP. Small ink tanks, though.
    It is slightly cheaper than the HP.
    
    THe HP 870 has better text quality on plain paper, larger ink tanks 
    (which include the head assembly), and pretty good color picture 
    quality, but the Epson is -much- better for photos.
    
    They are both slow on hi-res color. 
    
    I've worked with both. The HP suited my needs better, so that's what I
    have.
    
    Chris
    

Epson Stylus 800 Review(and comparison)!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From           [email protected] (Mac Guitar)
Organization   AOL http://www.aol.com
Date           13 Mar 1997 13:39:52 GMT
Newsgroups     comp.sys.mac.printing
Message-ID     <[email protected]>

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, after much hype(and excitment) I got a Stylus Color 800, and after
having an HP 870cse for a good 4 months, I am happy to give you this short
review of the 800 and a quick comparison to the HP.....

Maybe I was too hyped, but I was pretty much disappointed.  First off, I
didn't like the way the printer looks, it's bulky, if you ask me.  Also,
I'm very upset that they got rid of the front paper tray.  The back feed
can jam easily, and it's harder to add paper....You have to remove the
stack and than refan, and stack it....(I know these are little things, but
I'm giving a review, and I want you to have the BIG picture)

Alright, let's forget all of the minor things, and move on to the good
stuff-The printing itself.  First of all, when you first pop in the ink
carts, the printer has to prime itself.  This took exactly 7 minutes and
14 seconds!  Thank God you only have to do this once!  Sheesh...It was
really, really loud, by the way.....

Once it was done, I installed the drivers....I had NO(yes, I said NO)
problems with the installation.  The printer appeared in the Chooser(the
way it should) and everything was ready to rock and roll.  Points to Epson
for this one...A driver which installs and works the way it should!

I printed my resume first, because I was super-impressed by my HP...The
black text on plain paper was always laser quality...No bleeding or
dots....

I was extremely let-down with the plain paper quality...There is a TON of
bleeding with black text...I tried 360 and 720, and on plain paper 720
looks horrible, IMO.  Using the coated paper, however, gave text which
looked good...BUT, I achevied AMAZING text quality on plain paper with the
HP 870.....So, the Epson loses on plain paper..

Moving on to color, and using special paper.....The resolution of 1440 is
unbelievable...It is, without question, AMAZING.  The colors are vivid,
and the dots are basically undetectable....Epson wins HANDS down for color
and quality....

Finally, the speed is as good as the HP 870, and the driver is
stable....I'm really impressed that Epson got the speed and stability
down...The ink cartridge level function is really cool...It shows pictures
of both ink carts, and it keeps track of your useage, and shows you the
level(like a fuel gauge) of the carts...Cool!

As for things I disliked....The printer cleans itself a decent
amount...Specifically if you turn the printer off for the night...The HP
NEVER EVER has to do any "thing" after turn on....I've heard that with
Piezo technology, ink tends to crust because with Thermal, the heat
evaporates the ink, I guesss....

Anyway, I have to say the HP 870Cse WINS compared to the 800....WOW, I
can't believe I said that! :(  The color and graphics are better on the
800, but the HP is much quieter, there is no priming and black text on
plain paper wins HANDS DOWN.  Also, the Epson has an ink cartridge without
a print head, yet the HP cart WITH a print head is the same price....Epson
ink carts seem overpriced.....

The vedicts---Epson:HIGHS-Amazing color and resolution, impressive speed,
good driver functions.
LOWS-Poor text on plain paper, NO PRINT PREVIEW(ARRGGHH!), ink carts
expensive(considering factors), and NOISY!

HP--HIGHS-No priming or cleaning, quiet, SUPER-FAST, amazing black text,
very good color quality, also Print Preview function in driver is a super
useful thing.
LOWS-There really aren't any...I sound like I work for HP, but I
don't...I just really think that the 870 is solid and hassle-free.....

If you MUST have color and resolution GRAPHICS quality, then the Epson is
the choice.  No question.  But for normal people, who want the fastest Mac
printer, with no hassle...the HP is the choice.....For me, the Epson was
just too much hassle, and I really don't HAVE to have the killer color
and graphics....

Hope you enjoyed this review! :)
Michael

Re: .273

Note that the Print Preview function in the HP 870 Mac driver wouldn't
necessarily be available on a Windows system, or even on a Mac running
QuickDraw GX (for which I understand one might need to use a HP 855 GX
driver).

I assume that the comments on the hardware are as applicable to the PC
as to the Mac.

    Regarding text quality on "plain paper" for Epson Stylus Color 600/800,
    I've been reading a wide variety of experiences both here and on Usenet
    (in comp.periphs.printers).  Based on what I've read so far, the big
    difference appears to be the exact brand and "model" of "plain paper"
    that is used.  It can (and apparently does) make a substantial
    difference.  The plain (i.e., non-coated) paper that I've frequently
    seen recommended for the new Epson series is Hammermill Jet Print.
    
    I'd recently bought the Epson SC 600 model, and with the Hammermill
    Jet Print paper and "plain text" settings, the quality of text is
    excellent.  No bleeding at all.  I have to use a magnifying glass
    to detect the difference between the Epson text and laser printer
    text.
    
    HP text does appear to be "blacker" than Epson; actually, HP text
    appears blacker than any other inkjet, and even blacker than most
    laser printer output.  Apparently this has to do with the formulation
    of the ink itself, as well as the method used to dispense the ink.
    
    In general, though, I'm very impressed with the Epson SC 600 text
    quality on the particular non-coated paper that I've been using.
    I'll try using some generic plain paper someday for comparison, but
    this Hammermill Jet Print is so inexpensive (about $10 for 500 sheets)
    that I don't see a problem continuing to use it.
    
    Chris

    I'm looking for a printer (Probably either the Epson 600 or an HP
    equivalent) for use at home.  With three kids, 11, 9 and 7 using it I
    want to make sure that it is easy to use (paper feed, etc), the ink
    cartridges are easy to replace, and it does decent color pictures
    (cards, etc) on inexpensive paper.  Does one printer lend itself to
    this application more than another, given the environment that I have?

    Dan

    
    
    	I would think the new 694C at $300~ is a good bet. It's the one I'm
    considering, should my raise come through in June. :)
    
    jim

    From what I've seen, kids find both makes of printers fairly easy
    to use.  I've only installed cartridges on the Epson printer, and
    it was easy.  It's probably pretty easy on the HP printer as well.
    Both manufacturers seem to have designed the printers for the
    average home user pretty well.
    
    Both printers do well with photos.  To get photo-quality output on
    the HP models to be as good as the Epson, you'll need to swap the
    black ink cartridge with the special HP photo-ink cartridge (I forget
    its "official" name).  This HP photo cartridge is included with the
    HP 694 model (it used to be a separate purchase with the 693 model).
    
    The general consensus "out there" (see comp.periphs.printers for some
    occasionally interesting writeups), is that HP does somewhat better
    with text (see my previous note), while Epson does somewhat better with
    photo-quality images.  Both handle simple graphics pretty well.
    
    For general home and kid use, I'd say it was a tossup.  The main
    reason I ended up going with the Epson was that I wouldn't have to
    switch ink cartridges to get photo-quality output.  Not that I do
    photo-quality very often... :-)  Pricewise, the Epson SC 600 and
    HP 694 are pretty much identical.
    
    Chris

    Just brought an Epson 600 for $249 at "Service Merchandise" Leominster.
    I am pleased with its performance with "plain paper" ($4.99 for 500
    sheets). Selecting Quality, via the speed/Quality slider yielded
    colors brighter that I expected. 
    HP and Epson are both excellent printers and as noted many times the
    Epson has the edge for high res. photographic images hence my choice
    and at $249 was hard to pass up.	
    I beleive the HP delivers Brighter colors at higher speeds but for
    photo work the colors are not very natural looking. Also I did not like
    having to buy another/different cartridge just for photos. Once a
    cartridge is opened (exposed to the air) its days are numbered (6
    months per Epson) for best output.
    
    
    Dick	
    			

    re:279
    >>>
        I beleive the HP delivers Brighter colors at higher speeds but for
        photo work the colors are not very natural looking.
    >>>
    
    On my HP693 (with photo cartridge and photo paper) I have printed many
    photographs which the casual observer can not detect as anything other
    than a photograph. I have framed some of them and on more than one
    occasion have had trouble convincing people that I 'Printed it on the
    computer'. This includes 8X10 portraits of my children... Don't know
    what your definition of 'natural looking' is... 
    
    Jim

>>    Just brought an Epson 600 for $249 at "Service Merchandise" Leominster.
    
    $249.00 is the cheapest I've seen for that printer. Is Service Merchandise 
    running a sale this month on that model?
    
    Pete

    Service Merchandise announced last week that it is getting out of
    the retail PC business... might be some good deals.  k
    

    Yes, Service Merchandise is getting out of the Computer Business hence the
    extra low prices to clear out stock.
    I was in the the Leominster store last night and noted they have sold
    all of the Epson 600's they had but still had 400's for $199.
    
    On the HP side I noted that a color cartridge for the 693 model and
    others was $19+.
    
    FYI
    Dick

Re: earlier note: I have purchased, installed and tested the HP 870Cse

IMHO, PC Magazine's November review of printers was totally misleading
regarding the 820. 

   * Their performance figures were based on a P90. Those of us who want to
     use something like a 486/66 will find host-based printing on the
     820 to be unacceptably slow if you are doing anything else. (E.g., you
     have a network and the kids use the 486/66 for school work and the box
     also serves as a print server--the box will stop working until the
printout
     is done--at least it will seem to do that).  The performance figures I
     got were not even close to the ones they showed. 

     By comparison, the 870 seems to exact almost no load.

   * The article implies that printing from a DOS box is possible. That is
true, 
     but I was unable to get a DOS program operating in a DOS box to print
     directly using the 820C.  It simply would not work no matter what I
tried.
     Others I have talked to who have an 820 agreed that you have to print to
     a file and then print from the DOS box. That's a major pain for what I
have
     to do. My application requires alignment on a form: I never got a print 
     from file to align print output the way it did from the program.

     The 870 prints from the DOS box directly from the program without any
     problems. Alignment worked perfectly.

     Bottom line: to save $5 on a DOS chip, HP made the 820 into a boat anchor
     if your application is not windows based (where windows does not include
NT)
     As far as I can tell, all other host-based printers (e.g., Lexmark,
Canon,
     etc.) have a default DOS print capability. 

   * While the sales people imply that the 820 is an 870 without the Macintosh
     capability, in reality, the color printing has been found to be better
     in the 870 by a number of magazine tests. 

   * I printed a B&W page which was simply amazing: it looked like a high end
     laser printer!


     My recommendation: if you can't spring for an 870, get a 694C. Avoid
     the 820.

Alex
[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

I have Corel Ventura Publisher 5 and an HP 520 deskjet printer and have
the following problem:  Whenever I have a gray scale image in a document
(e.g. from a scanned in file, .tif), it appears correctly on the screen
and even in the preview area for printing, but prints as solid black on
the HP 520 printer.  Corel customer support says that I need to adjust
an entry in the HP*.INI or DESKJET.INI file in my windows directory
to change the entry:  jumbo technology=0100 to  = 0000 but I don't
see any such FILE never mind such an entry.

Anyone have any idea what is going on here and/or how I can fix it?

BTW if anyone has Corel Ventura 5 F2 release they said that version
did correct this problem!  WOuld be glad to pay shipping or whatever
to get that CD.

Thanks,
Rich
DTN 381-2126

    Rich: Call Corel's Customer Support with your CorelDraw5 serial number
    at the ready, and ask them for the latest/greatest CD5. As a registered
    owner you are entitled to all bug-fix/patchrevs for CD5, for no charge.
    
    fwiw, the last update for CD5 I received is rev G1 - which I got some
    months ago before going on to CD7 - so even the F2 isn't the latest...
    
    /dave

Re .-1

Dave,
	I have already ordered the VP 5 CD - but it won't come for
4 weeks and I need the update to ease the development of a dance
recital program which is due in 2-3 weeks.

That's why the plea for someone who already has the CD that I could
borrow until I get my official one from Corel.

So might you (or anyone else reading this note) have the F2 release CD?  

Also the G1 release is the
full release also containing Corel Draw and I only bought the
Corel Ventura "standalone"

Thanks,
Rich
DTN 381-2126