Slashdot Mirror
Epson Is Trying To Kill the Printer Ink Cartridge
An anonymous reader writes: Inkjet printer cartridges have been the bane of many small businesses and home offices for decades. It's interesting, then, that Epson is trying something new: next month, they're launching a new line of printers that come with small tanks of ink, instead of cartridges. The tanks will be refilled using bottles of ink. They're reversing the economics, here: the printer itself will be more expensive, but the refills will be much cheaper. Early reports claim you'll be spending a tenth as much on ink as you were before, but we'll see how that shakes out. The Bloomberg article makes a good point: it's never been easier to not print things. The printer industry needs to innovate if it wants us to keep churning out printed documents, and this may be the first big step.
I ditched inkjet printers because the ink dries out before the next time I want to print something. Toner cartridges don't seem to have that problem.
Can Epson overcome that problem?
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
Classic: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/p...
Seriously though, who prints stuff outside of work anyway?
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Yup. And the entire device stops working if one of the cartridges is empty. You want to scan a page? Replace the yellow cartridge first.
Does anyone remember the company that started the whole 'printing is a razorblade business' model? Lexmark.
At the time businesses were laser copy shops or IBM wheelwriter typewriter houses. Epson, HP, and Canon were the dominant forces in ink jet printing in the 90's but IBM's fledgling Lexmark brand has just gone independent in their own buyout, and figured they could turn inkjet printing into a razorblade business where the hardware was commodity but the cartridges were the real money to be had. CPD, the consumer printing division, was tasked with making something IBM historically had never done: consumer inkjets. Cartriges were never cheap, but lexmark took this to a whole other level. by early to mid 2000 you could get a Lexmark laser printer for around 50 dollars that came without cartriges. Those were around 50 a piece as well, and the reigning opinion at the New Circle campus was customers would go for it in hordes...except they didnt, for two reasons.
1. Quality: BPD, the Business Printing Division at lexmark, ran like a well oiled machine because it had to. business customers that relied on IBM printing now had to rely on Lexmark, and processes and methods for manufacturing an entire line of laser and ribbon technologies was sacrosanct. CPD on the other hand was horribly mismanaged, and driven in direct competition with BPD. corners were cut in order to meet an inexorable demand for new releases each year and lower costs. Hardware in the Z series finally became so awful, and so failure prone, the lines name was changed out entirely and CPD was eventually folded into BPD during a large round of firings and layoffs.
2. Internet.: The internet was fast obsoleting printers and while Lexmark had all-in-one laserjets, these were still marketed almost solely to businesses. CPD had plans for a high-speed scanner based on an array of digital cameras, but it came too late. Lexmark building 10, 58, 98, and much of their remaining manufacturing areas were being demolished or leased out.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I'd just be happy with larger ink cartridges. It is sad how few milli-liters most cartridges have.
Also: Individual colors, and a head declogging routine that works on a single cartridge at a time instead of draining the perfectly good colors as well.
The final straw for me was when one color was blocked, so I did a couple of cleans to sort it out and that drained another color so I had to put in a new cartridge (luckily I had separate colors), run the cleaning again, by which time another color was flashing as empty and I had to change that as well. During this time my brand new black ink cartridge went down by about 25%. All in all that page cost me about $20 to print.
I went out next day and bought a color laser. I've had it about 10 years and only bought one new set of cartridges. It's always worked first time - switch on and print. I'd rather stab my own eyeballs with forks than own another inkjet.
No sig today...
Yes, that annoys the shit out of me.
Except with just refill bottles instead of cartridges it means that it is vastly easier to sell off brand ink, no pesky DMCA and such on the cartridges, so you are not really locked in.
You haven’t seen the bottles, have you? They come with pentalobe shaped tips that only fit the pentalobe shaped hole on the printer’s ink reservoir.
Why does it still happen? The only time I ever need to use a printer is at work. I had a client ask me why we still print copies of our orders. I replied with "I don't really know" because I really just don't get it. Everything else we do is electronic. We are spending money on paper and toner in order to have copies of repair orders that are stored on at least 6 different hard drives across a wide tract of the earth. Having all these copies on paper is only going to make it easier to burn the place down when they take my stapler and move me to the boiler room.
I've yet to see a color laser that can print photos as well as even the cheapest color ink jets.
I think laser printing tech doesn't lend well to making photographic prints. Probably due to the glossy paper and the need to mix ink colors together to create a wide color spectrum. With lasers everything you print is essentially half-toned, like photos in a magazine.