Epson 1280 question

Hi, I have a new, unopened Epson 1280 printer that I obviously purchased some time ago, but never had the need to use. I purchased it with the Epson Postscript Rip, which was about $100.00 additional. At this point, the large box is just taking up space.

This was a very highly rated printer when it was introduced, and was not dropped from the Epson line for many years, so I'm sure there are a lot of people still happily using this model.

I wouldn't mind having a small ink jet for miscellaneous things, so my questions are:

(A) Has the current Epson technology changed significantly that it would not be viable for me to try and sell this printer and RIP? If you think I could sell it, would you be kind enough to venture a guess at pricing?

(B) If the technology has changed significantly, would it be more cost effective for me to get a smaller, newer ink jet and sell this one, or just set this one up and use it?

Thank you for your advice.

I am still using a 1290 (European name for the 1280). The main technological advance that came with the next generation was the transition to pigment colorants rather than the inks supplied for the 1280, which have a many times longer permanence. Other changes were greater consistency between units which allowed them to supply better profiles, the use of two black cartridges and higher dot resolution, although I have reservations about the advantages of the last since although my printer is capable of 2880 dpi, I can't see any improvement over 1440 dpi and so run it at the lower resolution.

As to whether it is more worthwhile to use it or sell it - the 1280 was introduced in 2001 and seven year old technology has depreciated considerably. Ultimately , however, it has to be your decision regarding print quality vs. budgetary constraints.

Thank you for your informed response, Elie. I guess my primary concern is if the technology had changed sufficiently that I could do what this printer does more efficiently and cheaper. Looking for opinions to help me decide. Thanks again.