InkJet Printers Lying, Or Just Wrong?

akkarin writes in about a study reported at Ars Technica on how accurate ink-jet printers are when they report that cartridges are empty. Not very, it turns out. Epson came out on top of the study (and Ars rightly questions how objective it was, given that Epson paid for it), but even they waste 20% of the ink if users take the printers' word for when to get a new cartridge. On average, the printers in the study wasted more than half the ink that users bought.

Considering how expensive ink is

[DaveCBio (659840)]

Hearing this pisses me off. I realize it's a competitive market, but every company out there charges insane amounts for ink. Hell, even the 3rd party refills are expensive. I'd rather pay the real price for a printer and have reasonable ink prices, but I guess that would kill the 1000% markup they have on ink. Laser isn't much better, but at least it doesn't feel like virtual buggering.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[BobTheLawyer (692026)]

The problem is that the printer manufacturers are now caught in this model. Nobody dares go back to charging the "real" price for the printer and the ink, as their printers would immediately seem more expensive to the average customer.

In an ideal world the model would be unsustainable, as third party ink manufacturers would undercut the official ink packs. But the printer manufacturers have consistently abused their market position and IP law to prevent third party ink manufacturers competing on equal terms. Your average consumer doesn't even know he can get cheap alternatives, and life is increasingly difficult for even sophisticated consumers as the printer manufacturers build in IP-protected electronics into ink cartridges.

All in all, it's clearly bad for consumers and the kind of thing the competition/anti-trust authorities should be investigating.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[Ucklak (755284)]

In case there are any young ones around, a color HP printer in 1996 was $200 something. Ink was $15 for black and $15 for color so $30 and it lasted for my use over a year. Color was a novelty then too so that was impressive for the amount of waste I went through.

Today you can get a printer for under $100 and EACH color is $15 and it lasts 3 months.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[jonwil (467024)]

Thankfully lawsuits like Lexmark vs. Static Control have shown that using "IP laws" to prevent someone from making 3rd party spare parts wont fly.
I believe that current case law basically says that it is perfectly legal to cleanroom the special circuitry from a printer cartridge in order to produce 3rd party ink cartridges and that the printer manufacturers cannot stop it. (ob IANAL disclaimer)

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[Bacon Bits (926911)]

Heck, if you're going to go that far, an ideal world would not need printers at all. Save the trees, man.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[walt-sjc (145127)]

Laser is significantly better at the moment. Cost per page is about 10% that of inkjet, and it's a lot faster. Photo's aren't so hot, but are about the same as an inkjet in photo draft mode - big reason is that the DPI is lower (1200 on my color laser) and it only has 4 colors instead of 6 or 8. This is why I use my little Kodak 4x6" photo printer for photos (which is thermal transfer) and an internet print shop for larger quantities / enlargements of photos.

I'll never ever buy an inkjet ever again. With my laser, I never have banding, never have "cleaning cycles," etc. It just works.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

One of the biggest problem I have with lasers, aside from photo quality, is that paper handling isn't so good as compared to an inkjet. Inkjets can print on a variety of different media - envelopes, glossy photo paper, card stock, etc. Most inexpensive lasers have very poor paper handling in that they have an inability to print on anything thicker than thick bond or thin card stock. More expensive printers have no problem, but then they are not cost competitive with an inkjet.

Also, cheap lasers tend to wear out quicker than inkjets, in my experience.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[drinkypoo (153816)]

Seriously, how many people do you think spend over 1k on a printer and ink over a reasonable period of time? Say 5 years? That is a LOT of ink refills on an inkjet.

And over five years you will MAKE a lot of ink refills on an inkjet. If you print a lot you will use the carts up (or as much of them as they allow you to use up, anyway.) If you don't print a lot, then you either blow out your ink cleaning the heads, or your heads crust up and you have to replace the print head, which may be integrated into the cartridge, or which may only come with ink carts (true or at least formerly true of some HP inkjets.)

IMO it just doesn't make sense to do inkjet prints in any situation. If you're not doing enough to justify buying a color laser, send them out for printing. If you have broadband you can upload them to a website, make a CC payment, and they will mail you prints. If you don't, you can take them to a multitude of places including Kmart, Walmart, Kinkos, etc. (as you say) and not have to worry about maintaining a printer.

Re:Considering how expensive ink is

[kalirion (728907)]

Don't you see, you don't buy the ink, you license it. Once the license runs out, you have to renew, and by ignoring the "out of ink" warning you are no better than the pirates costing the industry $10000000000000000000000000.

Software

[Mockylock (1087585)]

There's actually a free software that's available that can be used to reset the chips in several brands of ink cartridges. I'm not sure if you need any type of hardware, but I've heard good things about it.

It allows you to reset the numbers and use the remainder of the ink, before it makes you replace it.

If you ask me, the feature that stops you from using a cartridge after the ink is too low, is pretty ignorant. I think it's obvious when the ink is completely out, so why not let the user decide?

Re:Software

[christus_ae (985401)]

Yeah, there are a few solutions out there to reset the cartridge chip so that you can refill it.

Inksupply [inksupply.com] seems to have a few solutions.

British company proprint [proprint.co.uk] has some pay solutions.

Also found this [tonik.co.uk].

I couldn't find any "free software" solutions to the chip problem, albeit I only looked for a little while.

In a word

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

Yes.

I've found 'extra' ink in both my Epson and HP inkjet printers. I'd use refill kits, but the cartridges tend to leak over time, and refilling takes a lot of time and effort. In the meantime, for Epson printers, just go with the el cheapo compatible cartridges from places like Inkco [inkco.us]. Epson C88 cartridges are $5 a pieces, as opposed to to ~$25 for branded cartridges.

Wow, I just came here to submit this

[farker haiku (883529)]

Although I heard about it from ecogeek [ecogeek.org]. It has links to the Ars Technica article also, but I really just wanted to point out the nice Office Space picture.

Surprised?

[db32 (862117)]

Given all of the insanity surrounding refilling ink cartridges, DMCA lawsuits, "authenticity checks" on cartridges, and the give them the printer sell them the cartridges style business is anyone, anyone at all, even remotely surprised, maybe even just raised an eyebrow, that the vendors would stoop so low as to have the printer lie to you to get you to go buy another "DMCA protected authentic cartridge we are gunna sue you if you try to refill it" item that costs nearly as much as the stupid printer did in the first place as often as possible?

I am just gunna call "well duh" on this whole thing. I have worked with HP laserjets that told me I had 200 pages left that I could print. After printing 192 pages it told me I could still print 320 pages. All said and done that day, I had printed some 500 pages and its final number was that I could still print another 250ish pages. Whether they lie, or their math is freaking horrible for figuring it out is up for debate I suppose, but given the problems we have had with that same model and HP accusing us of theft because a brand new HP cartridge out of the box was determined to be not authentic by the stupid machine...well I assume they are just out for blood. 4 hours of fighting with their technician to have them exchange the stupid cartridge.

People Have Too Much Disposable Income...

[pandrijeczko (588093)]

...as this can only explain the popularity of mobile phones & inkjet printers; both are a total 100% rip-off.

Inkjet ink works out to be more expensive, by volume, than the most expensive Bollinger champagne which is why the money-grabbing manufacturers can virtually give the printers away but rip you off for cartridges. In some cases, it is actually cheaper to throw the printer away and buy a new one than it is to buy replacement cartridges - how *GREAT* is that for our environment.

Grow up, people! Take your nicely-edited photos down to a printing booth or shop and get your photos printed in *MUCH BETTER QUALITY* and at a cheaper cost than what you can do on a home inkjet. Then invest in a cheap laser printer to just print letters and documents when you need to.

And the sooner VoIP phones and wireless access kicks out the price-fixing cellular phone providers, the better...

Ummm....

[Otter (3800)]

1) Reporting "Empty" when a single color in a multi-ink cartridge runs out is hardly "lying".

2) It's pretty easy for Epson to have rigged the test so that multi-ink cartridges did particularly badly (although in my experience they really are that wasteful).

3) Assuming accurate wording of the message, I'd much prefer to get a warning when the ink is low but there's time to get a replacement than to get it only at the last possible moment -- I can figure out for myself when the ink is really gone. The article claims users rush to change cartridges as soon as a message pops up, but those workers are a lot more proactive than those in any office I've ever worked in.

Re:Ummm....

[PHPee (559830)]

I used to work at an outsourced call centre, supporting Epson printers and scanners. By far the biggest customer complaints we received always had to do with printers wasting ink.

During our training, and from talking to various Epson reps, we learned that the printer doesn't actually monitor the amount of ink in each cartridge. Rather, it estimates the amount left, based on the various print settings chosen.

The worst part is that on many printers, once it "thinks" it's out of ink, it will no longer print until you change the cartridge. In some older printers, you could simply remove the cartride and then put it back into place, tricking it into thinking you replaced it with a new cartridge. However, this would make the ink monitor even less accurate. Newer printers won't even allow this, because the circuitry on the cartridge itself will lock you out once it has reached the estimated empty level.

There are some tools available that let you reset the "intelligent cartridges" so that they can be refilled and reused, but of course they aren't supported by Epson and may void your warranty.

Fucking HP Photosmart D7360!!!

[brxndxn (461473)]

I bought an HP Photosmart D7360 a few months ago.. Since then, I've printed at least a thousand 4x6 photos. I've changed the ink a bunch of times.. but I always wait until I finally see a photo print with low ink.

However, if I use the lame HP software that starts up with my computer (and slows it down quite a bit), it flat out refuses to let me print unless I change 'empty' cartriges first. It also annoys the living hell out of me with 'low ink' popups while I'm playing video games or doing other things - like the printer is the whole fucking reason I exist.

In Ubuntu, I just use whatever driver it found for my printer... and I can print beautiful prints with 'empty' cartriges. It pisses me off..

But, I will admit, I really do get about 200 4x6 photos with a single set of cartriges like HP advertises.. this is the first printer I've had (besides laser of course) that actually lives up to how many prints it advertises.

Re:Fucking HP Photosmart D7360!!!

[140Mandak262Jamuna (970587)]

That is why they are moving the monitoring from computer into the cartridge itself. Once the "intelligent" cartridge determines that it is time to make you pay another tribute/ransom to the mother ship, it will simply lock you out. No more tricks like using Ubuntu to evade what, the printer makers believe, is their rightful claim to your wallet.

I've had good results with Canon

[multiOSfreak (551711)]

I've got a Canon S750, and it is great on reporting ink levels. It also has three separate color cartridges, which is nice. There have a been a few times when it was over zealous in reporting low ink, but all I had to do was take the cartridge out and put it back in and it ran fine until it was actually out of ink.

Ever seen a toothpaste commercial?

[smitty_one_each (243267)]

They grab that tube, start at one end of the brush, and just hammer that brush, covering it to the last bristle with toothpaste.
Is the cleanliness of the teeth proportional to the amount of paste used? No.
Are sales driven by encouraging people to use more product? Yes.
Why does the 'corporate we' seem so surprised when we occasionally wake up and realize that vendors are trying to cajole more sales?

We tape the cartridge...

[John3 (85454)]

We use Epson inkjet receipt printers at my hardware store and we put a small piece of masking tape over the cartridge ink window. We find that we get an extra week or two of use out of a cartridge by covering the ink window. When the ink runs out (i.e. the receipt is blank) we swap the cartridge.

John

Re:Not buying a printer...

[gameguy56 (796026)]

Get a Color Laser then.

Inkjets are so 1993

Re:Not buying a printer...

[curmudgeous (710771)]

I've been a long time fan of Canon photo printers, in fact I just bought a Pixma Pro9000. Their ink tanks are clear so if you doubt what the printer is saying you can eyeball it for yourself. So far it's been very accurate about remaining ink level.

Laserjets do this too..

[MousePotato (124958)]

Wow, this has been one of those things that really piss me off for quite some time. While it is true that the laser jet printers do better than inkjets they ALSO LIE and ARE DESIGNED TO FAIL.

For example; I bought a laser two years ago (from a company that rhymes with hell). I bought it because I needed to print letters to clients and do things like print checks. Nothing heavily graphics intensive nor really heavy duty text work either.

So here is what I discovered with my 'efficient' laser printer; My '5000 page' toner cartridge prints about 1000 pages. Pissed, I decided to open one up as they are about $100 for a new one.

Lo and behold it was still full of toner. Somehow, as the printer printed the quality of the prints degraded as the toner 'ran out' a little more with each print. At the time I figured this was because there was no toner but the proof was now in my hands (and all over my desk for that matter) so I decided to investigate further. It seems that these toner cartridges use chips to tell your pc that its running out each time you print.

Now, I'm not electronics guru, so I don't have a machine I can actually read the chip with, but I am under the impression that this chip also purposefully degrades the quality of your prints as it counts down your toner level. To test that theory I ordered some refill kits off of the web.

First thing I noticed after doing the chip replacement was that the quality of the prints immediately improved. I printed for several weeks, noticed the quality go down again, replaced the chip (no toner added in there yet...) and viola worked beautiful. When that chip said it was empty I opened the whole thing up again and took a look. This time it was indeed very low, but not empty. I poured in the new bottle of toner and put in a new chip and went back to work.

I usually order 3 chips for each bottle of toner I purchase . Currently I get about 4000 pages per bottle of toner. My refill purchases cost me $29 for two bottles of toner and six chips (on chip comes with each bottle and I add the other four to the order) Let's see$200 vs $29 for two 'cartridges' worth of prints... hmmm.... yeah I'll refill. Add to that the fact that the purchased carts don't get the same mileage as the refilled ones with extra chips to replace the old ones.

I guarantee I will never buy another 'rhymes with hell' printer again.

Caveat emptor indeed.