States going after the ink industry?

20droger wrote in post #9366962
to be more ifficient

Roger, what has become of you?

Returning a printer because you ran out of ink is absurd....

$79
3 months of printing
Get real

mikekelley wrote in post #9367743
Roger, what has become of you?

Actually, I'm surprised there are as few typos as there are. I review each post and try to catch them all, but I miss a few.

I just had surgery in my left arm a couple of weeks ago to try to correct a neurological problem (for the second time), and the hand's just not working correctly. It wasn't working correctly before, but I had become used to it and compensated accordingly. Now, it's completely different, and my old compensations are making things worse.

That's the trouble with being nearly completely literate. When I screw up, it stands out like a sore thumb. If I typed like many here do, you'd never know that I was having problems.

There was a medium-sized post in another thread that I read three times and still couldn't figure out what the poster was trying (but failing) to say.

Sorry to hear about the surgery- hope everything works out for you

But yes, there are some posters that I just can't even start to attempt to figure out what they want to say.

mikekelley wrote in post #9368992
Sorry to hear about the surgery- hope everything works out for you

But yes, there are some posters that I just can't even start to attempt to figure out what they want to say.

Tru dat.

20droger wrote in post #9368950
Actually, I'm surprised there are as few typos as there are. I review each post and try to catch them all, but I miss a few.

I just had surgery in my left arm a couple of weeks ago to try to correct a neurological problem (for the second time), and the hand's just not working correctly. It wasn't working correctly before, but I had become used to it and compensated accordingly. Now, it's completely different, and my old compensations are making things worse.

That's the trouble with being nearly completely literate. When I screw up, it stands out like a sore thumb. If I typed like many here do, you'd never know that I was having problems.

There was a medium-sized post in another thread that I read three times and still couldn't figure out what the poster was trying (but failing) to say.

If I can't figure out what the poster is trying to convey, I just skip over the post. There's always one in the landscape talk forum that just about writes a complete paragraph, consisting of a single sentence replete with spelling/grammar errors and zero punctuation...talk about run-on sentences. I get dizzy trying to read those...had to pass them up just to keep from pulling my hair out.

HP labels ink quantities for some if not all its cartridges. And labeling how many mL are in a tank isn't going to change the amount of ink in that tank. It also won't make someone buy a different printer brand because all consumer inkjet printers have similar sized ink tanks.

If printer manufacturers lowered the price of the ink tanks they would make up that money in increased paper sales and have happier customers.

Ah, printers... such a crock of an industry.

I don't know about returning the printer, but I do consider them disposable. I usually buy a cheap printer, use it til the ink runs out, throw it away and go buy a new one. HEHEHE...

(It truly is just about at that point now)

Anyways, I can't remember where I saw it, but I recently saw a graphic that had the value of printer ink in relation to other precious commodities, and it was right up at the top - positioned higher than human blood. Ha.

Damn, where did I see that?!?!

(it was funny, but true.. Ink is something like $8000 a gallon)

Ah, here is it:

http://www.stat.columb​ia.edu …7/08/relative_p​rices.html

Todd Lambert wrote in post #9376035
Ah, printers... such a crock of an industry.

That is why I use Costco for all (well, most anyway) my photo printing needs and an ancient (circa 1994) HP 4MV Tabloid Laser printer for non-photo needs.

I have an Epson R300 that gets used for emergency photos (school project with overnight notice) and printing on CDs only.

I'm to the point where I will send two 4x6 prints to Costco rather than fart around with the Epson, its just not cost effective.

I havent studied the whole thread, or really looked into the kodak printers, but didn't I read somewhere or hear somewhere that kodak was advertising the cheapest ink by volume but it was false economy because you were forced to replace the entire four colors in one cartridge when one of the inks ran out. It never really interested me enough to look into it myself, if it doesn't say 'canon', I don't pay alot of attention to it. I hope I am not spreading falsehoods, but if true, wouldn't requiring cost per ounce pricing be a step toward eliminating this kind of ambiguity?

Todd Lambert wrote in post #9376035
Ah, printers... such a crock of an industry.

I don't know about returning the printer, but I do consider them disposable. I usually buy a cheap printer, use it til the ink runs out, throw it away and go buy a new one. HEHEHE...

(It truly is just about at that point now)

Oh, it's past that point... The free Epson printer that was being given away last Christmas season ( 2008 ) at my store was an $80 printer. The cost for the ink to refill the thing was $90. I bought an Epson NX400 with an employee discount, and the ink - still on employee discount - was STILL more than my cost for the printer!!

Here's an idea of how to solve this. Make an industry standard test page; it doesn't matter what's on it (although it would be good to make it use a typical amount of ink). Then, tell the industry that, if they want to advertise how many pages a consumer can expect from the specific ink, they have to use this industry standard page. Easy, and lets the manufacturer decide if they will comply.

This question of product pricing versus consumables pricing has been going on for many years. Replacement ink cartridges cost more than the original printer and ink bundle. Replacement razor-blade cartridges for my Gillette Mach 3 cost more than the original razor and razor-blade cartridge bundle. You can get the kids in to a Saturday matinee for $5 but the pop and popcorn combo necessary to keep them quiet during the show costs $12 after taxes. The wedding cost me three grand but the marriage and subsequent divorce... oops, better not go there...

I forget what the exact business or marketing term is for this but it basically boils down to "purchase our product and then we'll have you by the short and curlies."

bjyoder wrote in post #9379537
Here's an idea of how to solve this. Make an industry standard test page; it doesn't matter what's on it (although it would be good to make it use a typical amount of ink). Then, tell the industry that, if they want to advertise how many pages a consumer can expect from the specific ink, they have to use this industry standard page. Easy, and lets the manufacturer decide if they will comply.

My guess is there are such standards.

I know just about every laser printer rates toner consumption based on 5% page coverage.

I would imagine similar stats exist for inkjet... The problem would be doing it for photographic output since everyone would have to use exactly the same image and method for sending the image to the printer to insure they are all printing the same data.

The big problem (IMHO) is the insane clean/purge cycles. Every time I turn on my Epson, whether its been a year or a minute since the last time it was turned off, it runs a purge.

I could probably empty the ink tanks just by turning the printer on and off twenty times.