Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Printer Makers Are Crippling Cheap Ink Cartridges Via Bogus
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 10:49 am    Post subject: Printer Makers Are Crippling Cheap Ink Cartridges Via Bogus Reply with quote

Printer Makers Are Crippling Cheap Ink Cartridges Via Bogus 'Security Updates'

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/pa98ab/printer-makers-are-crippling-cheap-ink-cartridges-via-bogus-security-updates

EFF To Texas AG: Epson Tricked Its Customers With a Dangerous Fake Update

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/10/eff-texas-ag-epson-tricked-its-customers-dangerous-fake-update

Letter to Texas AG about Epson printers

https://www.eff.org/document/letter-texas-ag-about-epson-printers


PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To a certain extent understandable.
We already discussed before that usage of 3rd party ink is prone to ruin the print heads.
Why should Epson take the burden to deal with guarantee issues which are outside of their control?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
Why should Epson take the burden to deal with guarantee issues which are outside of their control?


I'm fairly certain that most(if not all) printer manufacturers specifically state
in their warranty terms that the use of third-party IS possible, but NOT recommended.

I believe it's fundamentally a legal issue of a free-market system,
wherein third-party manufacturers are free to produce compatible
replacement parts at costs below OEM prices, which is a basic
concept of a free-market system. Allowing a single manufacturer
to control a given market sector is a monopoly, which is strictly
illegal in the vast majority of free-market economies.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excerpt from Epsons Guarantee conditions:

"We will not repair or replace products if, in our opinion, the problem is due to:
.............
(iii) accessories, parts or consumables which are not Epson branded ............"

I think this makes it clear: The usage of 3rd party ink is at own risk and will end the warranty.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So at Epson repair they first do a DNA test of the ink. Lol.

Seriously they haven't an easy way to discern 3rd party ink was used, imho.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SkedAddled wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Why should Epson take the burden to deal with guarantee issues which are outside of their control?


I'm fairly certain that most(if not all) printer manufacturers specifically state
in their warranty terms that the use of third-party IS possible, but NOT recommended.

I believe it's fundamentally a legal issue of a free-market system,
wherein third-party manufacturers are free to produce compatible
replacement parts at costs below OEM prices, which is a basic
concept of a free-market system. Allowing a single manufacturer
to control a given market sector is a monopoly, which is strictly
illegal in the vast majority of free-market economies.


Yes. Printer manufacturers need to adapt to market. They could license/certify 3rd party ink manufacturers, perhaps for a % of sales.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've owned several Epson printers -- both inkjet and laser. The laser printers were good products, but the ink jet printers were simply awful. I used ONLY Epson inks in these printers and ALL of them suffered from clogged print heads within a year of purchase. It is almost impossible to clean an Epson's print heads once they've become clogged -- and I've tried, even buying products that were specifically designed to clean and unclog Epson print heads.

I threw away my last two Epson printers in disgust. I will never EVER buy another Epson printer product. I've been using a Canon Pixma happily for a couple of years now, with both Canon and aftermarket inks and with absolutely no sign of degradation at all. What a relief.

I hope the Texas AG reads Epson the riot act regarding their business practices.

Several years ago I read a comment -- I don't recall where anymore -- which stated that HP had gone from one of the world's best producers of electronic equipment to the world's largest seller of ink. This may no longer be the case, but at the time I felt that there was just something wrong with that.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:
So at Epson repair they first do a DNA test of the ink. Lol.

Seriously they haven't an easy way to discern 3rd party ink was used, imho.


They know the pigments used in their inks, spectroscopic analysis of any residues will easily tell if others are present.
I'm confident that instruments we have here could do it, whether the material is organic in nature (FTIR used) or inorganic (atomic spectroscopy for metals analysis)
In each case if the equipment is already up & running adding another sample will only take about 10 minutes to test.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2018 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DConvert wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
So at Epson repair they first do a DNA test of the ink. Lol.

Seriously they haven't an easy way to discern 3rd party ink was used, imho.


They know the pigments used in their inks, spectroscopic analysis of any residues will easily tell if others are present.
I'm confident that instruments we have here could do it, whether the material is organic in nature (FTIR used) or inorganic (atomic spectroscopy for metals analysis)
In each case if the equipment is already up & running adding another sample will only take about 10 minutes to test.


Yes, certainly, but that's exactly how 3rd party inks are formulated, using manufacturer product in the test -- reverse engineering. I don’t actually know that's how but that's the simplest way imho.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obviously in this case the opinions and experiences are quite different.

Despite that I had quite unhappy adventures with Epson printers and destroyed print heads from the usage of 3rd party ink as well I did give them another chance as finally the printing quality is still the decisive factor for me. It should also be noted that printing quality highly depends on used ink and paper. If original ink and paper is used some higher end Epson printers are simply excellent. From this point of view it doesn't make any sense at all to use any after market consumables.

I also understand that other printers are not as sensible when it comes to the usage of 3rd party ink. Nevertheless the usage of Canon printers with 3rd party ink within my family was not as successful as well; i.e. destroyed print heads after 1 to 2 years usage. Anyway, for high quality photo printing there are IMHO hardly any alternatives to Canon or Epson.

As already mentioned in another thread my consequence was the purchase of an Epson ET-7750 which comes already with 140 ml of original ink per color. That equals the Epson XP-900 (which is basically the same printer with different ink system) with apprx. 20 sets of ink cartridges. The price difference was incl. ink apprx. EUR 1.400.- in favor of the ET-7750. The 3-years warranty gives me some confidence that it will last at least that long. The open question is whether I really need 140 ml of ink within this period of time. Wink


PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2018 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
Obviously in this case the opinions and experiences are quite different.

Despite that I had quite unhappy adventures with Epson printers and destroyed print heads from the usage of 3rd party ink as well I did give them another chance as finally the printing quality is still the decisive factor for me. It should also be noted that printing quality highly depends on used ink and paper. If original ink and paper is used some higher end Epson printers are simply excellent. From this point of view it doesn't make any sense at all to use any after market consumables.

I also understand that other printers are not as sensible when it comes to the usage of 3rd party ink. Nevertheless the usage of Canon printers with 3rd party ink within my family was not as successful as well; i.e. destroyed print heads after 1 to 2 years usage. Anyway, for high quality photo printing there are IMHO hardly any alternatives to Canon or Epson.

As already mentioned in another thread my consequence was the purchase of an Epson ET-7750 which comes already with 140 ml of original ink per color. That equals the Epson XP-900 (which is basically the same printer with different ink system) with apprx. 20 sets of ink cartridges. The price difference was incl. ink apprx. EUR 1.400.- in favor of the ET-7750. The 3-years warranty gives me some confidence that it will last at least that long. The open question is whether I really need 140 ml of ink within this period of time. Wink


Also whether the printer lasts that long, and, if not, do you get a new printer or partial credit due to usage?

HP makes printers. Iirc, Canon made the first Laser jet sngines.