And like a typical inkjet printer, the ink cartridges will cost a fortune, claim it is empty even if there is still ink inside, and dry out if you don't use it for a few weeks.

I think I'd have to see it in actual printed form to judge the readability accurately.

BUT, in terms of readability on a display, like the 40" 1920x1080 LCD I'm watching on ... it is quite poor in my opinion. I have a feeling that it would work much better in ink on paper.

33% ink savings sounds pretty good, assuming that the readability on paper is better than a display. That being said, encouraging printer manufacturers to have a more sane approach to refillable ink/toner reservoirs would have a better/bigger impact.

Here in Thailand, where respect for patents / IP is low, (SE Asia is notorious for fake manufactured goods, pirated "soft" media, and hardware hacks / bypasses) I'd guess that around 90% of inkjet printers sold have a tank system glued onto the side with ink lines running into the cartridges from big CYMK reservoirs. I never buy new cartridges unless the print head gets damaged/worn out -- instead, I just buy cheap LARGE bottles of the different ink colors and refill the reservoirs. (Image link of such a setup HERE)

That kind of mod would be a gray or black-market item in the West, but here the laissez-faire attitude about such things has some positive effects. At least, for a consumer (like me), or someone concerned about the environmental impact of all the waste packaging for ink carts (like the dude in this video).

4 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

>> ^Payback:

>> ^raverman:
Many printers now have the obsolescence blatantly built in to the ink cartridges.
To stop recycling and reuse, the cartridge is programmed to short circuit and fuse it's control chip if it passes a level approaching empty.
Other manufacturers do it at the driver level, when the cartridge is empty it sets a value to lock the printer unless a new branded cartridge is used.
DRM for digital media has a logical argument at least. But why is there not a class action law suit against this deliberate sabotage of a product after purchase?

With even colour laser printers (decent ones too) in the range of sub-$200 why would ANYONE buy an ink printer anyway? Laser toner doesn't dry out. As a matter of fact, the drier it is, the better.


Because they want to print photos. And because doing so with a laser printer requires specialist laser photo paper rather than the easily available inkjet photo paper.

I'm not trying to defend the ridiculous $30 for a printer, $90 for the ink crap that the inkjet printers have going, just saying why people would. I hate blanket statements like yours.

I despise Canon Pixma with a fervent, seething passion. I won't fall for their corporate art. They didn't invent paint + sound sculptures. Just using them to promote their crappy printers and brand.

The pixma inkjet printer typically has 5 cartridges, two of which are blacks. If just one runs out, including the extra black you're not using, it stops working altogether. When I say it stops working I don't mean it just stops printing, the fax machine and scanner become defunct as well.

And by "run out" I mean half the ink cartridge still has ink in it. And because of the microchip they place in them, you can't reinstall the same cartridge in the hopes of fooling it. And they run about $50 a pop. I don't want to go off on a rant here, but...

Neat trick. It seems the printer uses some kind of optical sensor to check the toner level.
Too bad most printers use an electronic chip in the cartridge that counts how much you've printed and just stop working after x number of pages or x mg of toner/ink, obviously the printer refuses to print anything if you just tape over the connectors on those.

The best advice for anyone looking for a new printer: find an old printer with replaceable print heads (for ink) or drum (laser). Printer technology hasn't advanced much in the last 10-15 years. Just make sure there are drivers available for it.

@Morganth: It's not that the printers have inadequate cooling and need the ink for cooling. Most inkjet printers work by heating tiny ink-filled tubes (there's usually over 100 in the print head), instantly vaporizing the ink, forming a bubble that shoots a tiny drop of ink out of the tube and then pulls more ink into the tube from the other side. If there's no ink to vaporize the tube could overheat or more probably whatever ink is left dries up and clogs up the print head. If you put a heatsink on the heating elements the printer just wouldn't work.

I tend to agree that inkjet printers are pretty frustrating. I have an old HP inkjet and the cartridges are pretty hard to find unless I go to a big office store like OfficeMax. And even then they are hidden in a dizzying array of about FORTY different HP inkjet cartridges. HP invents some new printer once every 2 or 3 years, and creates an entirely different cartridge for each one. That's pretty lousy company policy.

I haven't had the test page print issue the AVGN ran into here, but I sure do hate HP's DRIVERS. HP drivers are the most ungodly, bulky, massive, unwieldy, invasive drivers I think I've ever seen for ANYTHING - let alone for printers. Even the notoriously bulky 3d video card drivers aren't as nasty. And the download times from HP's website are the pits.

So you have to download 200+ MB drivers (when 2KB would be plenty) on a 1KBPS server. And 99.9999999% of the download is just a crappy, clunky, badly designed user interface. HP printers are nice engineering, but their software is about the worst on the planet.

Cheap inkjets are horrible, but try printing photos with a laser printer...
And a lot of color laser printers print tracking dots on every page you print. Yay!

Cheap b/w laser printers are ok, but if you need color don't buy the cheapest inkjet printer/scanner/fax/toaster/radio all-in-one POS you find, spend a little extra cash on a proper inkjet printer (without a ton of built-in crap).

correction; inkjet printers are bullshit
only thing wrong with laser printers is the buying prize, but it also lasts longer
ink doesn't dry out on it's own like on inkjets
doesn't get stuck as often due to no moving parts on paper surface
drivers and general mechanical functionality don't suck as bad due to less complex mechanics
doesn't take fucking 30 minutes to install a new cartridge
used to install stuff like printers for a living for a while and hated anyone who got an inkjet cos it took so goddamn long to set up and then there still often was trouble with the inks - or drivers - or the mechanical parts being buggy or plain faulty
it took all of three minutes to unpack a laser, install drivers and plug it in

^ and, as a brazilian prostitute, i can attest to juan's prowess.

he has files! and an inkjet printer! even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way.
yet, i remain skeptical.

>> ^ant:
But laser is so expensive.


If you can live with monochrome it's not really that expensive compared to inkjet. My Samsung ML-1710 cost me about $120 and came with a starter cartridge good for about 1000 pages. The replacement cartridges are about $75 and good for about 3000 pages. When I had an inkjet I was paying around $60 for ink every 6-8 months and that was even if I hadn't used it that much because the cartridges would clog up or dry out. I bought my last toner cartridge a couple of years ago and it's still going strong.

>> ^HaricotVert:
It's simple corporate greed at work here. Printers in and of themselves are not costly to produce, and (for the most part) are rather stable peripherals that one can easily get their full value's worth over a couple years. You can observe this yourself by walking into the nearest electronics store and picking up a decent Inkjet printer for under $100.
The problem is, giving consumers a $100 product that may very well outlast the computer they hook it up to is not a wise business decision... not wise at all.
The only way companies that manufacture printers can expect to see sizable profit margins off of the printers themselves is through selling ink cartridges just as this video describes - an eyedropper full of colored water for $40.
Is it efficient? Absolutely not. Is it fair to the consumers? Absolutely not. Is it incredibly wasteful? Hell yes. Does it make huge profit margins? ABSOLUTELY.
That's really the only rhyme or reason for it. Any one of these major printer companies could make a high-capacity, high-efficiency Inkjet printer with accompanying affordable cartridges - except it wouldn't make any money.


You know what? I sense a cartel/conspiracy.

You need one "eco-minded" rebel to make a high efficiency machine. They would instantly steal SO MUCH of the market share that they would destroy all the other companies in one fell swoop.

Of course, they probably have their goons ready to destroy anybody who tries to lift a finger in this direction.

Still, a huge profit-making scheme for someone with environmental zeal and a ballsy attitude towards life, I figure.

This video didn't even mention that the ink cartridges are designed to dry out if you don't use them for a while. I don't print much, maybe 3 things a month, but when I had an inkjet printer I still had to buy an ink cartridge every 3 months no matter how many pages I printed. My inkjet would do color, but I only printed black and white. A B&W cartridge for my printer cost $35.

I finally tossed it and bought a laser printer. The toner cartridge for it costs about $60, but so far I've gone 2 years on one.

It's simple corporate greed at work here. Printers in and of themselves are not costly to produce, and (for the most part) are rather stable peripherals that one can easily get their full value's worth over a couple years. You can observe this yourself by walking into the nearest electronics store and picking up a decent Inkjet printer for under $100.

The problem is, giving consumers a $100 product that may very well outlast the computer they hook it up to is not a wise business decision... not wise at all.

The only way companies that manufacture printers can expect to see sizable profit margins off of the printers themselves is through selling ink cartridges just as this video describes - an eyedropper full of colored water for $40.

Is it efficient? Absolutely not. Is it fair to the consumers? Absolutely not. Is it incredibly wasteful? Hell yes. Does it make huge profit margins? ABSOLUTELY.

That's really the only rhyme or reason for it. Any one of these major printer companies could make a high-capacity, high-efficiency Inkjet printer with accompanying affordable cartridges - except it wouldn't make any money.