Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The woe of Epson (C62):

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
April 30, 2005 4:33:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

My Epson C62 printer started to give me trouble about six months after
purchasing it so I contacted Epson, after a few tests with their
technical team and after wasting a vast amount of ink from their
genuine ink tanks I was advised to take it to a local Epson dealer.
"Print heads" said the dealer as though I had been printing on
sandpaper....! He duly give me a replacement and literally threw the
C62 straight into the nearest bin, I repeat " threw it", the
replacement was of course minus the ink tanks and when I got home
minus the guarantee and receipt of purchase documents.

The problem was black lines on picture with a yellow cast about 1"
from the left hand side and along the bottom of the picture, as
though in a frame. The normal black & white text consisted of
either blue or red straight lines through the text - sometimes these
were broken, the lines could not have been more straighter if a ruler
had been used with a coloured pen. The higher the settings in the
printer on-screen driver settings made matters more worse.

The replacement printer has started to produce exactly the same
effects. I had to contact Epson several times before getting a
response. I expect to get at least 12 months of trouble free service
from a brand new purchase (excluding print head cleaning), certainly
not the case here.

The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
round printer. The cartridges are not exactly cheap either, the
'Intellichip' as I believe Epson calls it, to you and me the 'chipped
cartridges' is a sales gimmick to boost the Epson cartridge sales - BE
WARNED it does not monitor the amount of ink in the tanks BUT only
ESTIMATES the amount of ink remaining by presumably counting the
number of times the heads are ‘in operation’ - there is no direct
feedback or monitoring between the chip and the ink level (as in a
petrol/oil/water level gauge as in a car).

To be honest, purchasing a set of cartridges for an Epson, one could
purchase a Lexmark printer complete with cartridges every time you
wanted a 'refill'. My advice when buying a printer is keep away from
'Chipped Cartridges' and Epson’s peizo print heads, I am now
beginning to think that 'long life peizo heads' is also another sales
gimmick - basically like a crystal in an oscillator stage of a
receiver or transmitter, the heads are vibrating to squirt the ink
and crystals do crack when driven hard, if this is the actual fault I
can not say, another thing I suspect is the sealing around the head
where it’s clamped to the base unit (like that of a picture in a
mounting frame.

The help I got from Epson was only on the first occasion, they did not
want to know the second time around, why is it that two identical
products developed the same faults….

The local dealer has now stopped repairing Epson printers

Goodbye Epson.... I will never buy ANY Epson products again…!


Also-:
A letter from Epson states that Air bubbles cause head damage and
Epson Technical advised never ever clean the heads more than six
times continuously as this will also damage the heads. Why are these
NOT mentioned in your manual's Messers Epson?

More about : woe epson c62

April 30, 2005 8:42:50 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Davy, what a sorry story.
Several years ago Epson had terrible trouble with printhead reliability, It was
my view that this had improved.Maybe not eh?
Brother are currently having major printhead troubles (Error 41 - all over the
Web), they have (at least in my country) extended their warranty by 6 months
but have not advertised this, their dealers are well aware of it however.
Anyway back to Epson. Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> has excellent
information on Epson printers but if yours is in warranty then you need to be
careful. By the way many of the chipped cartridges can be reset.
I bought my own Epson (Stylus Colour 860) several years ago for use at home and
it gave me good service for about 5 years (I used compatible cartridges for
most of its life), heavily used almost every day, when it died I bought another
one (Photo 830U), the printhead died before I had got through the original
cartridges, it took 6 weeks for the warranty agents to repair it and the new
head died a week later. I couldn't manage for another 6 weeks without a printer
so I cut my losses and bought a Canon PIXMA ip4000 which has served me well now
for 4 months (great having auto duplexing and CD printing <although not
available in the USA I understand>). I have heard horror stories about every
printer manufacturer, the one reality is that none of them (at least at the
home user level) last as long as they used to, you are entitled to good service
throughout the warranty period but after that it is wait and see. I see older
HP's, some as old as 8-10 years old coming in for routine service that just
keep on going but they were well built and to be fair quite expensive in their
day. The newest HP's are built no better than most other manufacturers in my
opinion. It seems to me that you either accept the fact that printers at the
entry and medium level are now a disposable item (warranty implications
excluded) or you buy at the higher end of the market. The HP professional range
are still very well built but they are expensive. My gut feel is that unless
you need one for high throughput business use you are best to assume you will
be replacing it after 18-24 months. In any event make sure you get it to print
2-3 times per week to avoid head clogging and use good quality inks/cartridges
whether OEM or compatible.
Many printer manufacturers fail to tell you the whole story (reference the air
bubbles letter and the need to print regularly) this is true of many industries
today.
In this part of the world Lexmark bundle their printers with new PC's (Epson
used to do that), trouble is a set of replacement cartridges costs about 90% of
the price of a new printer, you need to check that where you live if you are
considering Lexmark.
Hope this helps even if it is largely negative
Tony


davecoe@blueyonder.co-dot-uk.no-spam.invalid (Davy) wrote:
>My Epson C62 printer started to give me trouble about six months after
>purchasing it so I contacted Epson, after a few tests with their
>technical team and after wasting a vast amount of ink from their
>genuine ink tanks I was advised to take it to a local Epson dealer.
>"Print heads" said the dealer as though I had been printing on
>sandpaper....! He duly give me a replacement and literally threw the
>C62 straight into the nearest bin, I repeat " threw it", the
>replacement was of course minus the ink tanks and when I got home
>minus the guarantee and receipt of purchase documents.
>
>The problem was black lines on picture with a yellow cast about 1"
>from the left hand side and along the bottom of the picture, as
>though in a frame. The normal black & white text consisted of
>either blue or red straight lines through the text - sometimes these
>were broken, the lines could not have been more straighter if a ruler
>had been used with a coloured pen. The higher the settings in the
>printer on-screen driver settings made matters more worse.
>
>The replacement printer has started to produce exactly the same
>effects. I had to contact Epson several times before getting a
>response. I expect to get at least 12 months of trouble free service
>from a brand new purchase (excluding print head cleaning), certainly
>not the case here.
>
>The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
>an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
>through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
>correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
>round printer. The cartridges are not exactly cheap either, the
>'Intellichip' as I believe Epson calls it, to you and me the 'chipped
>cartridges' is a sales gimmick to boost the Epson cartridge sales - BE
>WARNED it does not monitor the amount of ink in the tanks BUT only
>ESTIMATES the amount of ink remaining by presumably counting the
>number of times the heads are ‘in operation’ - there is no direct
>feedback or monitoring between the chip and the ink level (as in a
>petrol/oil/water level gauge as in a car).
>
>To be honest, purchasing a set of cartridges for an Epson, one could
>purchase a Lexmark printer complete with cartridges every time you
>wanted a 'refill'. My advice when buying a printer is keep away from
>'Chipped Cartridges' and Epson’s peizo print heads, I am now
>beginning to think that 'long life peizo heads' is also another sales
>gimmick - basically like a crystal in an oscillator stage of a
>receiver or transmitter, the heads are vibrating to squirt the ink
>and crystals do crack when driven hard, if this is the actual fault I
>can not say, another thing I suspect is the sealing around the head
>where it’s clamped to the base unit (like that of a picture in a
>mounting frame.
>
>The help I got from Epson was only on the first occasion, they did not
>want to know the second time around, why is it that two identical
>products developed the same faults….
>
>The local dealer has now stopped repairing Epson printers
>
>Goodbye Epson.... I will never buy ANY Epson products again…!
>
>
>Also-:
>A letter from Epson states that Air bubbles cause head damage and
>Epson Technical advised never ever clean the heads more than six
>times continuously as this will also damage the heads. Why are these
>NOT mentioned in your manual's Messers Epson?
>
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 8:57:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Davy" <davecoe@blueyonder.co-dot-uk.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:3bf91$4272d25e$455da0d2$11637@allthenewsgroups.com...

>
> Goodbye Epson.... I will never buy ANY Epson products again…!
>

The only comment I'd make Davy, is that I just did a browse for reviews of
the C62, and it gets very mediocre reports. But I wouldn't necessarily judge
all products from the one manufacturer as the same. There are lots of good
Epson machines. It sounds like this may be a fairly poorly designed and
inefficient printer though, with fairly poor print quality. For that level
machine, the Canon IP range may be better suited - and in general it's
always good to check for online reviews before you buy anything!

Oh - and don't go buying a Lexmark - they're even worse!
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 4:55:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Although your experience with this printer is not typical, and it sounds
like your "Epson" dealer or service depot leaves a lot to be desired,
this is one of the lowest end printer Epson produces. Of course, you
should have received a working printer to begin with, and a replacement
that should have at least given you a good 12 months of worry-free service.

I don't know how UK warranties operate, but in North America, Epson
replaces the printer by mail and you get the duration of your warranty,
and usually brand new ink cartridges.

Your description is very dramatic and all, but no printhead lasts longer
than a piezo design, and it is used in nearly every professional printer
on the market. We are speaking of printers selling for up to $10,000
US, which are in use up to 24 hours a day.

I don't know exactly what the problem was with your printer(s) but I
would have never accepted the type of warranty treatment you received
from the depot, and I would report the full circumstances to Epson.

Lastly, I don't believe Epson monitors this newsgroup, so if you really
wish them to read what you have to say, you'd probably be best off
writing or emailing their head office.

As to your comment regarding Lexmark printers, at least here, it is the
most costly printer to operate in terms of ink costs. The printers
themselves are often given away free with other pruchases.

Art

Davy wrote:

> My Epson C62 printer started to give me trouble about six months after
> purchasing it so I contacted Epson, after a few tests with their
> technical team and after wasting a vast amount of ink from their
> genuine ink tanks I was advised to take it to a local Epson dealer.
> "Print heads" said the dealer as though I had been printing on
> sandpaper....! He duly give me a replacement and literally threw the
> C62 straight into the nearest bin, I repeat " threw it", the
> replacement was of course minus the ink tanks and when I got home
> minus the guarantee and receipt of purchase documents.
>
> The problem was black lines on picture with a yellow cast about 1"
> from the left hand side and along the bottom of the picture, as
> though in a frame. The normal black & white text consisted of
> either blue or red straight lines through the text - sometimes these
> were broken, the lines could not have been more straighter if a ruler
> had been used with a coloured pen. The higher the settings in the
> printer on-screen driver settings made matters more worse.
>
> The replacement printer has started to produce exactly the same
> effects. I had to contact Epson several times before getting a
> response. I expect to get at least 12 months of trouble free service
> from a brand new purchase (excluding print head cleaning), certainly
> not the case here.
>
> The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
> an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
> through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
> correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
> round printer. The cartridges are not exactly cheap either, the
> 'Intellichip' as I believe Epson calls it, to you and me the 'chipped
> cartridges' is a sales gimmick to boost the Epson cartridge sales - BE
> WARNED it does not monitor the amount of ink in the tanks BUT only
> ESTIMATES the amount of ink remaining by presumably counting the
> number of times the heads are �in operation� - there is no direct
> feedback or monitoring between the chip and the ink level (as in a
> petrol/oil/water level gauge as in a car).
>
> To be honest, purchasing a set of cartridges for an Epson, one could
> purchase a Lexmark printer complete with cartridges every time you
> wanted a 'refill'. My advice when buying a printer is keep away from
> 'Chipped Cartridges' and Epson�s peizo print heads, I am now
> beginning to think that 'long life peizo heads' is also another sales
> gimmick - basically like a crystal in an oscillator stage of a
> receiver or transmitter, the heads are vibrating to squirt the ink
> and crystals do crack when driven hard, if this is the actual fault I
> can not say, another thing I suspect is the sealing around the head
> where it�s clamped to the base unit (like that of a picture in a
> mounting frame.
>
> The help I got from Epson was only on the first occasion, they did not
> want to know the second time around, why is it that two identical
> products developed the same faults�.
>
> The local dealer has now stopped repairing Epson printers
>
> Goodbye Epson.... I will never buy ANY Epson products again�!
>
>
> Also-:
> A letter from Epson states that Air bubbles cause head damage and
> Epson Technical advised never ever clean the heads more than six
> times continuously as this will also damage the heads. Why are these
> NOT mentioned in your manual's Messers Epson?
>
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 5:03:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Just to clarify, whenever anyone tells me their printer is under
warranty, I suggest strongly that they first go to the manufacturer and
try to resolve the issue before using any suggestions I have.

Art

Tony wrote:

> Davy, what a sorry story.
> Several years ago Epson had terrible trouble with printhead reliability, It was
> my view that this had improved.Maybe not eh?
> Brother are currently having major printhead troubles (Error 41 - all over the
> Web), they have (at least in my country) extended their warranty by 6 months
> but have not advertised this, their dealers are well aware of it however.
> Anyway back to Epson. Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> has excellent
> information on Epson printers but if yours is in warranty then you need to be
> careful.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 10:43:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 2-May-2005, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:

> > The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
> > an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
> > through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
> > correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
> > round printer.

Same as my experience, Epson are making landfill at our expense.
They sell both the printers and the (rip-off priced) ink, sooner we
stop buying Epson the sooner they will improve the design. Nothing
like losing market share to upset the stockholders, and get
something done. Epson ought to be thinking about reasonably
priced replacement heads (like Canon's un-reasonably
priced heads) then they might start to take market share from
Canon, HP and Lexmark. Instead Epson's research efforts
seem to be devoted to chipping cartridges so they safeguard
their ink market.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:15:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:

>On 2-May-2005, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
>>>an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
>>>through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
>>>correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
>>>round printer.
>>>
>>>
>
>Same as my experience, Epson are making landfill at our expense.
>They sell both the printers and the (rip-off priced) ink, sooner we
>stop buying Epson the sooner they will improve the design. Nothing
>like losing market share to upset the stockholders, and get
>something done. Epson ought to be thinking about reasonably
>priced replacement heads (like Canon's un-reasonably
>priced heads) then they might start to take market share from
>Canon, HP and Lexmark. Instead Epson's research efforts
>seem to be devoted to chipping cartridges so they safeguard
>their ink market.
>
>


But look at all of the idiots in this NG defending all of the Epson
bullshit.

I still think the printers are reasonable quality but they do have a
misguided management.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:55:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I absolutely did not write the quote you attributed to me below. Be
careful with your attributions. I have corrected the attribution below,
and I do not necessarily agree with much of the writer's comments.

Art

ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:

The correct attribution of the excised quote is:

>>>davecoe@blueyonder.co-dot-uk.no-spam.invalid

>
>>>The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
>>>an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
>>>through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
>>>correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
>>>round printer.
>
>
> Same as my experience, Epson are making landfill at our expense.
> They sell both the printers and the (rip-off priced) ink, sooner we
> stop buying Epson the sooner they will improve the design. Nothing
> like losing market share to upset the stockholders, and get
> something done. Epson ought to be thinking about reasonably
> priced replacement heads (like Canon's un-reasonably
> priced heads) then they might start to take market share from
> Canon, HP and Lexmark. Instead Epson's research efforts
> seem to be devoted to chipping cartridges so they safeguard
> their ink market.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:34:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The only confused person I see defending a product, is you. That is not
to say the product you defend is a bad product, but you defend it
through ignorance and that makes you an at least confused.

I would simply state that anyone who buys a Canon printer because of
MEASEKITE's input to this newsgroup is buying one based upon nothing
more than some very limited knowledge.

Let me put it this way. Your advice is perfect for people who wish to
own a printer based upon the knowledge of someone who uses his printer
to make personal copies of snapshot sized pictures and some business
documents over the last few months. And I think, with that caveat, your
advice may be helpful to people in a similar situation. As long as they
understand the inks probably will not hold up over time, the paper
variety is limited, and the print head, which can cost almost as much as
the printer, will probably not last more than about 18 months at
moderate to low usage.

For people who demand great print quality, and yet don't care if their
prints fade away, or that the head can fail rapidly, I AGREE with
MEASEKITE, buy a medium level Canon printer, unless you also need CD
printing, in which case consider a medium price Epson dye colorant
printer, which will provide for longer lasting inks, longer lasting
heads, more paper and ink choices, but may be somewhat slower, nosier
and cost more to run if you stick to Epson OEM inks. You will save
money on ink with the Canon printer because you can refill the
cartridges very easily with 3rd party inks. However, keep in mind the
cost of the head usage per print may bring the cost up significantly.
Heads are also very costly for Epson printers, and require service techs
to install them,, but their failure rate is much much less common than
averages with thermal printers like Canon.

However, for people who use their printers professionally, who wish to
have options of inks and paper, want real permanence in the inks, and
permanence in the head, and are willing to put a bit extra maintenance
into the printer to get equal or better print quality, at the same basic
cost, I still have to suggest Epson printers, in spite of the chipped
cartridges, (if you stick with Epson inks) and other issues.

Most Epson users fully recognize, and this has been stated numerous
times by several people, that Epson printers require extra maintenance.

The reason Epson printers are still bought and used by more
sophisticated and professional printer owners is because they provide a
product with longer lasting reliability (particularly in their medium
and high end product lines) because they provide inks that are unique in
the industry for permanence, because for years their print quality and
resolution was THE BEST in the industry bar none, because the printers
could use numerous third party inks including dye sub and pigment which
other printers could not successfully, because continuous inking systems
were designed for them, because specialty papers by Epson and other
manufacturers has been designed for them, and because their drivers, and
those of 3rd party manufacturers are superior for professionals who
print more than a few 4 x6" prints each week, as MEASEKITE does.

Many Epson printer owners print thousands of prints a month with their
printers. They know what they are speaking of, and where the reliability
is to be found. No, these people are hardly "idiots". These are people
who through trial and error and good research found the correct printers
for their needs and most have indeed profited from that.

If people decide to follow your advice, then they have only themselves
(and you) to blame.

One caveat: The low end Epson Printers, costing $100 and less US, which
use Durabrite inks, are an amazing deal for a printer offering very long
lasting image fade resistance. However, these printers are produced for
a very inexpensive mass market, and although the print quality is great,
the inks are costly to replace, and a higher than average number of
printers will require extra maintenance to keep them running smoothly.

If you are unwilling to provide that extra maintenance, I would suggest
against those printers. Either go for a dye colorant ink type printer,
or spend more on the printer and buy a higher (middle cost) printer that
uses the Ultrachrome inks instead.

Art




measekite wrote:

>
>
> ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> On 2-May-2005, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>> The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
>>>> an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
>>>> through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
>>>> correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
>>>> round printer.
>>>>
>>
>>
>> Same as my experience, Epson are making landfill at our expense.
>> They sell both the printers and the (rip-off priced) ink, sooner we
>> stop buying Epson the sooner they will improve the design. Nothing
>> like losing market share to upset the stockholders, and get
>> something done. Epson ought to be thinking about reasonably
>> priced replacement heads (like Canon's un-reasonably
>> priced heads) then they might start to take market share from
>> Canon, HP and Lexmark. Instead Epson's research efforts
>> seem to be devoted to chipping cartridges so they safeguard
>> their ink market.
>>
>>
>
>
> But look at all of the idiots in this NG defending all of the Epson
> bullshit.
>
> I still think the printers are reasonable quality but they do have a
> misguided management.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 4:54:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
Their management is misguided at times.

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> I absolutely did not write the quote you attributed to me below. Be
> careful with your attributions. I have corrected the attribution
> below, and I do not necessarily agree with much of the writer's comments.
>
> Art
>
> ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> The correct attribution of the excised quote is:
>
> >>>davecoe@blueyonder.co-dot-uk.no-spam.invalid
>
>>
>>>> The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
>>>> an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
>>>> through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
>>>> correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
>>>> round printer.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Same as my experience, Epson are making landfill at our expense.
>> They sell both the printers and the (rip-off priced) ink, sooner we
>> stop buying Epson the sooner they will improve the design. Nothing
>> like losing market share to upset the stockholders, and get
>> something done. Epson ought to be thinking about reasonably
>> priced replacement heads (like Canon's un-reasonably
>> priced heads) then they might start to take market share from
>> Canon, HP and Lexmark. Instead Epson's research efforts
>> seem to be devoted to chipping cartridges so they safeguard
>> their ink market.
>
May 3, 2005 7:54:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

measekite wrote:

> Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
> Their management is misguided at times.

Management? Explain to us exactly who you know in Epson management and
why you think they're "misguided".
Please "enlighten" us ok?
And no bullshit, got it!
Frank
May 4, 2005 12:12:35 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Tony wrote:
I know of no-one who is more knowledgeable on this subject and I heartily agree
with everything Art has to say.
Worth noting that the Canon PIXMA series do have CD printing functionality in
many parts of the world escept North America (not just Europe), worth checking
it out if CD printing is important . My experience of this range of printers is
very limited due to it's relatively recent introduction, but so far I'm
impressed, ink permanence will however not be one of it's strong points. Thanks
Art.
Tony

Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>The only confused person I see defending a product, is you. That is not
>to say the product you defend is a bad product, but you defend it
>through ignorance and that makes you an at least confused.
>
>I would simply state that anyone who buys a Canon printer because of
>MEASEKITE's input to this newsgroup is buying one based upon nothing
>more than some very limited knowledge.
>
>Let me put it this way. Your advice is perfect for people who wish to
>own a printer based upon the knowledge of someone who uses his printer
>to make personal copies of snapshot sized pictures and some business
>documents over the last few months. And I think, with that caveat, your
>advice may be helpful to people in a similar situation. As long as they
>understand the inks probably will not hold up over time, the paper
>variety is limited, and the print head, which can cost almost as much as
>the printer, will probably not last more than about 18 months at
>moderate to low usage.
>
>For people who demand great print quality, and yet don't care if their
>prints fade away, or that the head can fail rapidly, I AGREE with
>MEASEKITE, buy a medium level Canon printer, unless you also need CD
>printing, in which case consider a medium price Epson dye colorant
>printer, which will provide for longer lasting inks, longer lasting
>heads, more paper and ink choices, but may be somewhat slower, nosier
>and cost more to run if you stick to Epson OEM inks. You will save
>money on ink with the Canon printer because you can refill the
>cartridges very easily with 3rd party inks. However, keep in mind the
>cost of the head usage per print may bring the cost up significantly.
>Heads are also very costly for Epson printers, and require service techs
>to install them,, but their failure rate is much much less common than
>averages with thermal printers like Canon.
>
>However, for people who use their printers professionally, who wish to
>have options of inks and paper, want real permanence in the inks, and
>permanence in the head, and are willing to put a bit extra maintenance
>into the printer to get equal or better print quality, at the same basic
>cost, I still have to suggest Epson printers, in spite of the chipped
>cartridges, (if you stick with Epson inks) and other issues.
>
>Most Epson users fully recognize, and this has been stated numerous
>times by several people, that Epson printers require extra maintenance.
>
>The reason Epson printers are still bought and used by more
>sophisticated and professional printer owners is because they provide a
>product with longer lasting reliability (particularly in their medium
>and high end product lines) because they provide inks that are unique in
>the industry for permanence, because for years their print quality and
>resolution was THE BEST in the industry bar none, because the printers
>could use numerous third party inks including dye sub and pigment which
>other printers could not successfully, because continuous inking systems
>were designed for them, because specialty papers by Epson and other
>manufacturers has been designed for them, and because their drivers, and
>those of 3rd party manufacturers are superior for professionals who
>print more than a few 4 x6" prints each week, as MEASEKITE does.
>
>Many Epson printer owners print thousands of prints a month with their
>printers. They know what they are speaking of, and where the reliability
>is to be found. No, these people are hardly "idiots". These are people
>who through trial and error and good research found the correct printers
>for their needs and most have indeed profited from that.
>
>If people decide to follow your advice, then they have only themselves
>(and you) to blame.
>
>One caveat: The low end Epson Printers, costing $100 and less US, which
>use Durabrite inks, are an amazing deal for a printer offering very long
>lasting image fade resistance. However, these printers are produced for
>a very inexpensive mass market, and although the print quality is great,
>the inks are costly to replace, and a higher than average number of
>printers will require extra maintenance to keep them running smoothly.
>
>If you are unwilling to provide that extra maintenance, I would suggest
>against those printers. Either go for a dye colorant ink type printer,
>or spend more on the printer and buy a higher (middle cost) printer that
>uses the Ultrachrome inks instead.
>
>Art
>
>
>
>
>measekite wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On 2-May-2005, Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> The printer is nothing but a "noisy ink guzzler", it consumes ink at
>>>>> an alarming rate - even if it is not being used, and regularly goes
>>>>> through a cleaning routine when powered up, when it is working
>>>>> correctly the print quality is acceptable as a general purpose all
>>>>> round printer.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Same as my experience, Epson are making landfill at our expense.
>>> They sell both the printers and the (rip-off priced) ink, sooner we
>>> stop buying Epson the sooner they will improve the design. Nothing
>>> like losing market share to upset the stockholders, and get
>>> something done. Epson ought to be thinking about reasonably
>>> priced replacement heads (like Canon's un-reasonably
>>> priced heads) then they might start to take market share from
>>> Canon, HP and Lexmark. Instead Epson's research efforts
>>> seem to be devoted to chipping cartridges so they safeguard
>>> their ink market.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> But look at all of the idiots in this NG defending all of the Epson
>> bullshit.
>>
>> I still think the printers are reasonable quality but they do have a
>> misguided management.
May 4, 2005 3:14:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Frank - Measekite has now exposed himself as THE expert in management -
undoubtedly an MBA from Harvard or Yale. Epson would do well to dump their
CEO and all upper management, hire Measekite, and match his current
multimillion dollar annual income. There are several companies that would
benefit from his expertise. Hell, maybe we could elect him president of the
US in the next election. We could sure use his help there, for sure!

"Frank" <fb@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MiTde.9748$fI.275@fed1read05...
> measekite wrote:
>
>> Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
>> Their management is misguided at times.
>
> Management? Explain to us exactly who you know in Epson management and why
> you think they're "misguided".
> Please "enlighten" us ok?
> And no bullshit, got it!
> Frank
May 4, 2005 3:14:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Burt wrote:
> Frank - Measekite has now exposed himself as THE expert in management -
> undoubtedly an MBA from Harvard or Yale. Epson would do well to dump their
> CEO and all upper management, hire Measekite, and match his current
> multimillion dollar annual income. There are several companies that would
> benefit from his expertise. Hell, maybe we could elect him president of the
> US in the next election. We could sure use his help there, for sure!
>
> "Frank" <fb@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MiTde.9748$fI.275@fed1read05...
>
>>measekite wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
>>>Their management is misguided at times.
>>
>>Management? Explain to us exactly who you know in Epson management and why
>>you think they're "misguided".
>>Please "enlighten" us ok?
>>And no bullshit, got it!
>>Frank
>
>
>
hahahaha....he gets my vote!
President Mouseshit.
Frank
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 5:01:08 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Burt wrote:

>Frank - Measekite has now exposed himself as THE expert in management -
>undoubtedly an MBA from Harvard or Yale.
>

Wrong again know it all. Try Stanford - MBA NYU BA

>Epson would do well to dump their
>CEO and all upper management, hire Measekite, and match his current
>multimillion dollar annual income. There are several companies that would
>benefit from his expertise. Hell, maybe we could elect him president of the
>US in the next election.
>

Better than the Non-President the US has now.

>We could sure use his help there, for sure!
>
>"Frank" <fb@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:MiTde.9748$fI.275@fed1read05...
>
>
>>measekite wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
>>>Their management is misguided at times.
>>>
>>>
>>Management? Explain to us exactly who you know in Epson management and why
>>you think they're "misguided".
>>Please "enlighten" us ok?
>>And no bullshit, got it!
>>Frank
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
May 4, 2005 7:34:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

You are certainly the biggest embarassment that Stanford ever produced!
Worse than Condi Rice.

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:o 9Vde.1793$5o2.1349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>Frank - Measekite has now exposed himself as THE expert in management -
>>undoubtedly an MBA from Harvard or Yale.
>
> Wrong again know it all. Try Stanford - MBA NYU BA
>
>>Epson would do well to dump their CEO and all upper management, hire
>>Measekite, and match his current multimillion dollar annual income. There
>>are several companies that would benefit from his expertise. Hell, maybe
>>we could elect him president of the US in the next election.
>
> Better than the Non-President the US has now.
>
>>We could sure use his help there, for sure!
>>
>>"Frank" <fb@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>news:MiTde.9748$fI.275@fed1read05...
>>
>>>measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
>>>>Their management is misguided at times.
>>>>
>>>Management? Explain to us exactly who you know in Epson management and
>>>why you think they're "misguided".
>>>Please "enlighten" us ok?
>>>And no bullshit, got it!
>>>Frank
>>
>>
>>
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 7:52:47 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Your wife did not think so. She was not disappointed.

Burt wrote:

>You are certainly the biggest embarassment that Stanford ever produced!
>Worse than Condi Rice.
>
>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:o 9Vde.1793$5o2.1349@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Burt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Frank - Measekite has now exposed himself as THE expert in management -
>>>undoubtedly an MBA from Harvard or Yale.
>>>
>>>
>>Wrong again know it all. Try Stanford - MBA NYU BA
>>
>>
>>
>>>Epson would do well to dump their CEO and all upper management, hire
>>>Measekite, and match his current multimillion dollar annual income. There
>>>are several companies that would benefit from his expertise. Hell, maybe
>>>we could elect him president of the US in the next election.
>>>
>>>
>>Better than the Non-President the US has now.
>>
>>
>>
>>>We could sure use his help there, for sure!
>>>
>>>"Frank" <fb@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>news:MiTde.9748$fI.275@fed1read05...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>measekite wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Does the truth hurt. But even I think that Epson is a fine company.
>>>>>Their management is misguided at times.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Management? Explain to us exactly who you know in Epson management and
>>>>why you think they're "misguided".
>>>>Please "enlighten" us ok?
>>>>And no bullshit, got it!
>>>>Frank
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
May 5, 2005 5:29:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Wow, have I disturbed an hornets nest....? Yeah I know the C62 is an
'El Cheapo', but two should not have gone the same way, in near about
the same time with the same faults and that was with Epson ink's, I
started to use Jet-Tec after the 2nd printer started to give the same
symptoms - a gradual clean, more clean, even more clean as time went
by until I started to get printing defects which got worse over time
and by increasing print quality in the driver windows.

Those who blame me for not wanting nor trusting Epson products the
third time - must come from planet Pluto.

Oh, and yes I had contacted the manufacturers, by email, by phone and
by post....!

Thanks to all contributers
Davy
May 5, 2005 5:29:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Davy wrote:

> Wow, have I disturbed an hornets nest....? Yeah I know the C62 is an
> 'El Cheapo', but two should not have gone the same way, in near about
> the same time with the same faults and that was with Epson ink's, I
> started to use Jet-Tec after the 2nd printer started to give the same
> symptoms - a gradual clean, more clean, even more clean as time went
> by until I started to get printing defects which got worse over time
> and by increasing print quality in the driver windows.
>
> Those who blame me for not wanting nor trusting Epson products the
> third time - must come from planet Pluto.
>
> Oh, and yes I had contacted the manufacturers, by email, by phone and
> by post....!
>
> Thanks to all contributers
> Davy
>

Not to worry Davy. You're surrounded by many very knowledgeable
professionals and one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe.
So its quite easy to figure out who's advice you should take.
Good luck.
Frank
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 3:36:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Whatever it is you're smokin... I want some!

Gee, 3 picolitres, that's like micrograms and the only think I can think
of that really changes people's heads that is measured that small is...

OK, now I see why they called it microdot!

Art

CarBone wrote:

> The Magical Potion of Onkink
>
> There was once a person who wished with all his heart that he might be
> able to transform himself into an inkjet printer expert, to understand
> what they understand, to learn all that can be understood, and to see
> things in ways that only these kinds of experts could see.
>
> He spent a good deal of his time wondering how to achieve this aim by
> posting meaningless messages to other experts on the newsgroup hoping
> they might show him how it might be done.
>


<cut>
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 4:50:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would also be annoyed to have two
bad printers in a row. However, it isn't typical and it does sound like
the service depot involved was a bit flaky, and you might have been
taken advantage of as well.

Art

Davy wrote:

> Wow, have I disturbed an hornets nest....? Yeah I know the C62 is an
> 'El Cheapo', but two should not have gone the same way, in near about
> the same time with the same faults and that was with Epson ink's, I
> started to use Jet-Tec after the 2nd printer started to give the same
> symptoms - a gradual clean, more clean, even more clean as time went
> by until I started to get printing defects which got worse over time
> and by increasing print quality in the driver windows.
>
> Those who blame me for not wanting nor trusting Epson products the
> third time - must come from planet Pluto.
>
> Oh, and yes I had contacted the manufacturers, by email, by phone and
> by post....!
>
> Thanks to all contributers
> Davy
>
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 6:03:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Frank wrote:

> Davy wrote:
>
>> Wow, have I disturbed an hornets nest....? Yeah I know the C62 is an
>> 'El Cheapo', but two should not have gone the same way, in near about
>> the same time with the same faults and that was with Epson ink's, I
>> started to use Jet-Tec after the 2nd printer started to give the same
>> symptoms - a gradual clean, more clean, even more clean as time went
>> by until I started to get printing defects which got worse over time
>> and by increasing print quality in the driver windows.
>>
>> Those who blame me for not wanting nor trusting Epson products the
>> third time - must come from planet Pluto.
>>
>> Oh, and yes I had contacted the manufacturers, by email, by phone and
>> by post....!
>>
>> Thanks to all contributers
>> Davy
>>
>
> Not to worry Davy. You're surrounded by many very knowledgeable
> professionals


Not You

> and one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe.


whose name is Frankie Crankie

> So its quite easy to figure out who's advice you should take.
> Good luck.

Without

> Frank
May 5, 2005 6:03:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

measekite wrote:

>
>> and one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe.
>
>
heheh...glad you identified your miserable self. Now get lost.
Frank
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 7:11:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Frank wrote:

> measekite wrote:
>
>>
>>> and one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe.
>>
>>
>>
> heheh...glad you identified your miserable self. Now get lost.



> Frank

one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe. one glaring no nothing idiot
wannabe. one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe. one glaring no nothing
idiot wannabe. one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe. one glaring no
nothing idiot wannabe. one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe. one
glaring no nothing idiot wannabe. one glaring no nothing idiot
wannabe. one glaring no nothing idiot wannabe. AND A SHMUCK WITH EARS.
May 5, 2005 8:31:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The two printers concerned came from TWO DIFFERENT SOURCES THE
PROBLEM....!

One was purchased from a Computer shop, the replacement was a sealed
'bog standard' plain brown box with Epson sealed tape from their
service agent..(minus ink tanks and that was after Epson had be doing
this and doing that, then trying this and trying that wasting ink
along the way....!)

That's why I won't touch Epson again.
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 11:20:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Art

Anyone who can accurately measure out 3 picoliters of magical elixir,
or who publishes & freely disseminates real knowledge about their
craft, qualifies as a guru among inkjet printer experts.

I have no recent knowledge of microgramage ever since I attended a
meeting of the Native American Church.

Thanks for your real expertise.

TC



On Thu, 05 May 2005 11:36:28 GMT, Arthur Entlich
<e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:

>Whatever it is you're smokin... I want some!
>
>Gee, 3 picolitres, that's like micrograms and the only think I can think
>of that really changes people's heads that is measured that small is...
>
>OK, now I see why they called it microdot!
>
>Art
>
>CarBone wrote:
>
>> The Magical Potion of Onkink
>>
>> There was once a person who wished with all his heart that he might be
>> able to transform himself into an inkjet printer expert, to understand
>> what they understand, to learn all that can be understood, and to see
>> things in ways that only these kinds of experts could see.
>>
>> He spent a good deal of his time wondering how to achieve this aim by
>> posting meaningless messages to other experts on the newsgroup hoping
>> they might show him how it might be done.
>>
>
>
><cut>
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:54:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I wouldn't either if that's the service you get. The OEM boxed unit was
probably a refurbished return. Seems to me it should have come with ink
cartridges.

Art

PS: your original explanation was missing a lot of important details
which didn't make it easy to evaluate what took place, and I'm, still
not sure I understand fully why what happened did so, but I do
understand your displeasure with the company.

Davy wrote:

> The two printers concerned came from TWO DIFFERENT SOURCES THE
> PROBLEM....!
>
> One was purchased from a Computer shop, the replacement was a sealed
> 'bog standard' plain brown box with Epson sealed tape from their
> service agent..(minus ink tanks and that was after Epson had be doing
> this and doing that, then trying this and trying that wasting ink
> along the way....!)
>
> That's why I won't touch Epson again.
>
May 9, 2005 7:58:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

> Arthur Entlichwrote:
I'm not sure who you are directing this toward.
>
> Epson inks are costly, as are many inkjet company's. The chip is
just
> to make you more likely to not refill, and probably costs them a few

> cents to add.
>
> Davy say's,
> Ok, the chip cost's a few cents to add - will they not pass that few
cents on to the customer....!
>
> What I should have done and if I had realised it was a referb unit
then I should have taken it to 'Trading Standards' or taken legal
advice. But I had expected the problem to have been sorted - and how
would I know that I would end up with a 2nd printer with the same
fault ?... and may I repeat according to Epson I repeat EPSON, the
warrenty was from the date of purchase and a new warrenty WOULD NOT
BE NOT GIVEN from the date of the exchanged unit...!
>
> I disagree with your comment that all inks are expensive what I can
agree with is the chip to stop you refilling but also on the other
hand to prevent the head from running dry.
>
> Arthur please just explain one problem, we all know to use an
inkjet frequently OK, you with me eh? Suppose I was to go on
vacation for two weeks.
> WHAT AM I EXPECTED TO DO? GO OUT AND BUY A NEW PRINTER when I
return...! There IS NO MENTION AT ALL in the user manual as to using
the printer frequently or any warning about not using it for a couple
of day's - let alone about going on vacation.....SO WHO's FAULT IS
THAT.....?
>
> To me it is plainly obvious the printers are CHEAP because the tanks
are used up like the clappers.
>
> And from MY EXPERIENCE the heads are gonna'
clog whether you use Epson INKS or NOT.... I have PROVED
THAT.
Anonymous
May 11, 2005 9:46:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I don't think we are going to get anywhere Davy. I'm just trying to be
fair. I have a lot of issues with Epson products and I voice them on
these newsgroups, but your experience is not typical. I happens
occasionally, but not normally. Epson sells millions of printers, and
some get clogged and many do not. The ones that do clog, usually can be
repaired fairly easily.

I believe you received below standard service from the depot and perhaps
from Epson. I don't think Epson has any right to hold you to printing
with the printer every day or even every month. I have Epson printers
which have gone unused for many months and print after one small
cleaning cycle. Sometimes printers are out of specification.

I have also stated, however, many times, that the Durabrite ink printers
tend to be more prone to clogs due to the makeup of the inks - they use
pigment colorants.

So, while I believe your experience to be less common than you may wish
to believe, it sounds like you received poor customer service.

Art


Davy wrote:

>>Arthur Entlichwrote:
>
> I'm not sure who you are directing this toward.
>
>>Epson inks are costly, as are many inkjet company's. The chip is
>
> just
>
>>to make you more likely to not refill, and probably costs them a few
>
>
>>cents to add.
>>
>>Davy say's,
>>Ok, the chip cost's a few cents to add - will they not pass that few
>
> cents on to the customer....!
>
>>What I should have done and if I had realised it was a referb unit
>
> then I should have taken it to 'Trading Standards' or taken legal
> advice. But I had expected the problem to have been sorted - and how
> would I know that I would end up with a 2nd printer with the same
> fault ?... and may I repeat according to Epson I repeat EPSON, the
> warrenty was from the date of purchase and a new warrenty WOULD NOT
> BE NOT GIVEN from the date of the exchanged unit...!
>
>>I disagree with your comment that all inks are expensive what I can
>
> agree with is the chip to stop you refilling but also on the other
> hand to prevent the head from running dry.
>
>>Arthur please just explain one problem, we all know to use an
>
> inkjet frequently OK, you with me eh? Suppose I was to go on
> vacation for two weeks.
>
>>WHAT AM I EXPECTED TO DO? GO OUT AND BUY A NEW PRINTER when I
>
> return...! There IS NO MENTION AT ALL in the user manual as to using
> the printer frequently or any warning about not using it for a couple
> of day's - let alone about going on vacation.....SO WHO's FAULT IS
> THAT.....?
>
>>To me it is plainly obvious the printers are CHEAP because the tanks
>
> are used up like the clappers.
>
>>And from MY EXPERIENCE the heads are gonna'
>
> clog whether you use Epson INKS or NOT.... I have PROVED
> THAT.
>
!