Epsons designed to stop??
in [Printers]
|
Prev: Auto on/off_Pixma iP4000
Next: Epson Tech Suppt Says
From: Arthur Entlich on 24 May 2005 08:54 If you visit the Sensient web site, you will understand why they can't and won't sell ink under their own name retail. They formulate inks for printer manufacturers. They would lose that business if they began to sell ink under their own name, as well. The manufacturers relay upon rumor mongers and providers of incomplete or inaccurate information, like yourself, to scare off the average consumer from 3rd party inks. Can you imagine what would happen to ink sales, which all manufacturers reply upon for income, if suddenly it was revealed that Canlexson inks were made in the same factory and by the same company as Sensient inks... no one would buy Canlexson inks anymore. We are dealing with the real world here. Get this... Sensient does NOT want to sell their inks revealed under their name. For them it is better to make OEM inks and sell 3rd party inks anonymously. Get it? Smart people figure out what's what over time and buy from reputable labels even if no one can admit where the inks come from. The 3rd party dealers would probably LOVE to tell you if they were selling known brand inks. In most cases, they cannot do so because the ink supplier will not allow them to. Even if you don't have the business savvy to know this, can you at least try to think it through and comprehend the consequences? Art measekite wrote: > > > Burt wrote: > >> >> The model that current internet vendors use for third party ink/cart >> sales is considerably less expensive than even the "big box" brick and >> mortar businesses such as Costco and Office Depot. Although you don't >> like theses e-vendors' business methods and disparage them constantly, >> they offer the consumer the best pricing on these products. Add more >> sophisticated packaging, more personel and management salaries, and >> another layer or more of profit taking in the chain of distribution, >> and the prices go up considerably for these products. In addition, I >> would bet that the OEM products would not drop in price with broader >> distribution of third party products. Market forces notwithstanding, >> the public is generally fearful of straying from the manufacturers' >> recommendations. >> >> > > And with good reason. However, I said that the distribution by > manufacturers should be between all of the channels. Let say that > Sensinet packaged 2oz and 4 oz bottles as well as prefilled carts and > sold them on their own webstore just like Canon and Epson as well as > through brick and mortar stores under their own name. You could then > choose to buy that BRAND anywhere and compare prices as well. Once > Sensinet established BRAND recognition with the public Epson and Canon > would have a viable competitor. Once sales are taken away from them > they would have to rethink their pricing. > > Also, if it was proved that their ink was inferior and you were getting > is from Costco, you would not turn to Office Depot and unknowingly buy > the same thing. > >> >> >>>> measekite wrote: >>>> >>>> >> >> (snip) >> >> >>
From: measekite on 24 May 2005 09:01 Arthur Entlich wrote: > I neither forgot nor did I include Microsoft. > > In order to get a strong and honest aftermarket for ink suppliers, > there are several matters to overcome which make much of it impossible. > > The manufacturers need to spell out what their specs and requirements > are, and a 3rd party foundation which is sponsored by 3rd party ink > suppliers, but independent of them, needs to test and scrutinize the > inks made. Isn't that like the fox guarding the hen house? > > Won't happen because manufacturers have no interest in revealing the > specs and requirements of the printers they make when their profit > engine IS their inks. > > Won't happen because 3rd party ink manufacturers distribute their inks > to many, many distribution channels and might even make the ink for > the OEM, and contracts and NDAs do not allow them to reveal this. Ink > formulation is only part of the issue. Cartridges and or heads have > to be designed to spec also. And finally, longevity of the ink is a > very costly process to allow for good advanced aging estimate. > > Of the majors, Lexmark, Dell, HP and Epson have all developed methods > to confound refilling. > > Art > > measekite wrote: > >> >> >> Arthur Entlich wrote: >> >>> I don't disagree. I find this to be a pervasive problem in the >>> computer hardware business. I have rarely found a company that >>> doesn't shirk some of it's responsibilities. Canon, as an example >>> seem less than forthright about the stability of their ink, and the >>> reliability of their printer heads. They have developed a new head >>> for their professional wide carriage printers and are supplying >>> pigment colorant inks for them, with a gloss and matte ink, >>> amazingly very similar sounding to Epson's ink system. >>> >>> I could enumerate personal stories with bad technology and poor >>> company response from dozens of high tech companies, including Epson. >> >> >> >> >> You forgot about Microsoft. ;-) >> >>> I've never said otherwise. I just know a lot more about the issues >>> with Epson products because I deal with people who encounter them. >>> I don't think they have anything approaching a monopoly for >>> problems, even in the printer industry, however, and they certainly >>> do make some innovative designs along the way. >>> >>> Art >> >> >> >> >> While I use OEM ink (best for my purposes) Epson, more than the other >> companies, have thus far put out designs that appears to foil or make >> difficult using other ink. >> Notwithstanding my feeling about the 3rd party ink hawkers and the >> way they do business along with many poor quality inks that can >> damage printers, I would like to see a strong, honest, professional, >> and full disclosing aftermarket ink industry that will sell BRANDED >> ink in both bottles and prefilled carts through all of the marketing >> channels (Brick & Mortor like Costco and Office Depot as well online) >> . This will help to drive down the overpriced OEM ink alternatives. >> >>> >>> measekite wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Arthur Entlich wrote: >>>> >>>>> The little suction pump reminds me of a miniature milking machine. >>>>> >>>>> I wish the problem with the tube coming off was just the C80. I >>>>> have helped people with this problem with C82, C84, CX 5200, CX >>>>> 4600 all in one. AND, worse yet, the dang tube tends to fall off >>>>> during cartridge replacement, so all the sudden the printer stops >>>>> working after a cartridge has been replaced. >>>>> >>>>> Worse still, Epson is very tight-lipped about it, and if it occurs >>>>> out of warranty, they have nothing to say at all. >>>>> >>>>> I find that approach unreasonable. This is a manufacturing or >>>>> design defect, and Epson ought to take responsibility for it. >>>>> >>>>> Art >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> It seems there are a lot of things that Epson does not take >>>> responsibility for. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Davy wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The pump system on many an Epson printer consist of a plastic >>>>>> tube the >>>>>> far end connects to the waste pad. the pump end is situated, for >>>>>> obvious reasons in the 'head park tray' just prior to where this is >>>>>> connected it goes through a 'U' turn moulding, imagine a wheel >>>>>> with a >>>>>> llittle bump or hammer on it rotating from a coupling from the paper >>>>>> feed gears, as the wheel rotates the bump or hammer pushes against >>>>>> the tube in a rotational manner, since the tube is being 'squashed' >>>>>> in a 'U' formation causes the ink to be drawn through the tube by >>>>>> suction. >>>>>> >>>>>> With the Picture Mate, the waste could well be collected by the ink >>>>>> cartridge as waste in a seperate chamber and then 'thrown out' with >>>>>> the empty tank, why not with all printers? >>>>>> >>>>>> Incidentally in a C80 this plastic tube is a common cause for bad >>>>>> printing and clogged heads it has a habit of coming away from the >>>>>> end of the head tray, causing ink to build and dry in the 'head >>>>>> park'. >>>>>> >>>>>> Davy >>>>>>
From: measekite on 24 May 2005 09:21 Arthur Entlich wrote: > If you visit the Sensient web site, you will understand why they can't > and won't sell ink under their own name retail. They formulate inks > for printer manufacturers. Where's the Beef? > They would lose that business if they began to sell ink under their > own name, as well. The manufacturers relay upon rumor mongers and > providers of incomplete or inaccurate information, like yourself, to > scare off the average consumer from 3rd party inks. Yeh Canon gives me free ink and free cameras. :-D > > > Can you imagine what would happen to ink sales, which all > manufacturers reply upon for income, if suddenly it was revealed that > Canlexson inks were made in the same factory and by the same company > as Sensient inks... no one would buy Canlexson inks anymore. Made in the same factory only insures similar quality control. It does not mean formula. Canon, Epson, and HP spend a great deal of money to formulate their inks. Mercedes makes the 230 and the 500 in the same factory but they are different quality of cars. > > We are dealing with the real world here. Get this... Sensient does > NOT want to sell their inks revealed under their name. For them it is > better to make OEM inks and sell 3rd party inks anonymously. Get it? > > Smart people figure out what's what over time and buy from reputable > labels even if no one can admit where the inks come from. The 3rd > party dealers would probably LOVE to tell you if they were selling > known brand inks. In most cases, they cannot do so because the ink > supplier will not allow them to. > > Even if you don't have the business savvy to know this, can you at > least try to think it through and comprehend the consequences? > > Art > > > measekite wrote: > >> >> >> Burt wrote: >> > >>> >>> The model that current internet vendors use for third party ink/cart >>> sales is considerably less expensive than even the "big box" brick >>> and mortar businesses such as Costco and Office Depot. Although you >>> don't like theses e-vendors' business methods and disparage them >>> constantly, they offer the consumer the best pricing on these >>> products. Add more sophisticated packaging, more personel and >>> management salaries, and another layer or more of profit taking in >>> the chain of distribution, and the prices go up considerably for >>> these products. In addition, I would bet that the OEM products >>> would not drop in price with broader distribution of third party >>> products. Market forces notwithstanding, the public is generally >>> fearful of straying from the manufacturers' recommendations. >>> >>> >> >> And with good reason. However, I said that the distribution by >> manufacturers should be between all of the channels. Let say that >> Sensinet packaged 2oz and 4 oz bottles as well as prefilled carts and >> sold them on their own webstore just like Canon and Epson as well as >> through brick and mortar stores under their own name. You could then >> choose to buy that BRAND anywhere and compare prices as well. Once >> Sensinet established BRAND recognition with the public Epson and >> Canon would have a viable competitor. Once sales are taken away from >> them they would have to rethink their pricing. >> >> Also, if it was proved that their ink was inferior and you were >> getting is from Costco, you would not turn to Office Depot and >> unknowingly buy the same thing. >> >>> >>> >>>>> measekite wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> (snip) >>> >>> >>>
From: Arthur Entlich on 24 May 2005 09:37 Dear Mr. J. Lindsay Clanahan, As much as I don't like the business model inkjet printer companies have come to use (it wasn't always like this), with all due respect, they all do this now and Epson is not the most costly, in fact, they are probably third down the list of major inkjet printer companies, of which there are only four. I don't know when you purchased this C70, as it is a discontinued model for some time now, but if the manufacturers sold the ink cheaply, do you think you could buy the complex inkjet technology built into a C70, as an example, for the few bucks you paid for it? Might I suggest that if you are buying an inkjet printer in the future, that before doing so, you walk the 3 metres from the inkjet printer section to the inkjet cartridge section of the store and compare cartridge prices so you aren't in any shock, or even better, surf the web prior to your purchase. Speaking of surfing the web, you can acquire the drivers for all Epson printers at their websites without charge (you see, those cost them money to put up and maintain, also). Go to www.epson.com, then select your country (I assume the UK). Then go to support and look up your printer, and all the drivers for your printer will be listed and you simply need to download the one for your operating system. I do not mean to be unkind, but you came out fists a flaring with much inaccurate information. My first color inkjet printer (also an Epson) cost me $1000 Canadian. Back then, it had larger and much cheaper cartridges (per unit of ink), because i paid over 10X as much for the printer as you likely did. That printer, although ruggedly built, is much slower and of worse image quality than yours. Lastly, if you do not wish to pay the prices you are for OEM Epson inks, you can either buy a chip resetter and buy refill ink and refill the cartridges yourself (there are many free websites that explain the process) or you can buy 3rd party ink cartridges and pay considerably less. This newsgroup has a number of UK residents on it who use Epson printers who can probably direct you to a good source for less costly ink cartridges that are of reasonable quality. Art lindsay(a)clanahan.fslife.co.uk wrote: > I have an Epson C70+ colour inkjet printer.I have just spent ý65 on 2 > cartridges , 1 black and 1 colour.While knowing that this is a chipped > cartridge, I resent the fact that I have to spend this kind of money > just to get refills for a printer.In future, when it comes times to > replace, my printer, I will not be buying an Epson. They have just > about the most expensive refill cartridges of any manufacturer that I > have come across.When companies ( not just Epson, but others do come to > mind as well ) make their hardware, they really should give a thought > for the upkeep of their equipment for the low end private user. > If someone could also provide me with drivers for above printer, > running on an XP home Packard Bell Easynote C3300, I would also be most > grateful. > > Mr. J. Lindsay Clanahan > > lindsay(a)clanahan.fslife.co.uk >
From: Arthur Entlich on 24 May 2005 09:53
Hi Davy, Yeap, the cable tie is one solution to the problem. The problem with these printers and the all in ones which are designed around them, as well, is that some of them are not easy to get at the underside of the cleaning station area, especially for people who aren't familiar with the guts of these printers. I suggest hemostat type scissors as one possible solution for some models to get at the tube when it pops off. Art Davy wrote: >>Arthur Entlichwrote: > > > >> the dang tube tends to fall off during cartridge >>replacement, so all the sudden the printer stops working after a >>cartridge has been replaced. >> >>Davy say's, >>Bearing in mind the new cartridge will be full so when it goes > > through the head cleaning routine the pressure is gonna be at it's > most max due to the weight of the ink and gravity just like systole > pressure of the heart, sounds quite feesible. > >>A cure is to use a plastic cable tie. >> >>Davy > > |