Yes, there is truth out there, and I think I might be able to shed some
light upon it.
Epson heads are indeed more costly to manufacture than some others.
They are designed as a permanent part of the printer. Epson uses a very
different design from most other consumer inkjet printers. They use a
piezo electric actuation system, which vibrates. It is based upon the
original Seiko quartz crystal used in their watches. Epson heads are
not just the piezo system however, they also contain some of the logic
electronics on a circuitboard which is attached to the head. When the
head is replaced, so is that circuitboard, since it is attached via a
flexible foil that has hundreds of individual connections on each side
of it.
Other inkjet printers use a thermal head which has a resistor for each
nozzle which is heated to boil the ink in a tube. They are much cheaper
to produce and they eventually fail, both because the tube gets etched
from the continual heat and cooling and because the resistors eventually
burn out. The newer Canon head, which is not part of the cartridge,
uses a more robust system, but they too eventually burn out, also.
Epson heads have another issue. Due to variations in the manufacturing,
they require geometric adjustments when installed, AND they require
voltage adjustments be applied in firmware to each piezo actuator to
even them out. This requires special software not available to the
general public. In many cases, the printer will "work" with a new head,
but the results will not be up to the original standard without these
adjustments.
Now, why are the heads almost the cost of the printer? Well, why are
ink cartridges almost the cost of the printer, when the printer comes
with ink cartridges included on purchase? Epson and other manufacturers
have decided to use a specific business model, which involves basically
giving away the printer and getting the profit on the ink and
consumables. Lexmark is the king of this approach. Here in Canada, and
I assume at least in the US as well, hardly anyone actually pays for a
Lexmark printer. Buy a digital camera, get a free printer after rebate.
Buy a new computer, get a free printer or all in one after rebate, buy
anything that generates printable pictures, or text, and get a free
printer. Now, obviously, Lexmark printers, regardless of what you might
personally think of their quality, do not get manufactured and shipped
out here for free, so how can they afford to give them away? The
retailer gets to keep their profit, in most cases, and the rebate comes
from a fulfillment company that gets paid extra. Well, the secret is
the ink cartridges. Lexmark, probably more than any of the other inkjet
manufacturer spends a fortune in lawyers protecting their patents so 3rd
party ink cartridges don't stay on the market. They lost the last
battle, but I'm expecting they'll be back. So, you now have a free
printer, and when you need ink, you basically are stuck buying Lexmark
cartridges. The profit margin on them is huge.
Getting back to Epson printer heads, the printers used to be sold with
profit built into them. My original Epson Color Stylus cost $1000 CAN
back in 1995 or so. It came with a huge set of cartridges which lasted
about a year of pretty substantial use, and cost about $35 CAN to
replace the color. Over the years, the cartridges have become smaller
and smaller and smaller, and the cost has gone up and up and up. Each
inkjet company has worked on methods to make them more difficult to
refill, and some have chips in them that program to "empty" so you
require a special reprogrammer to get them to even be acknowledged in
the printer if you refill them.
The same game is now being played with laser printers, photocopiers, and
especially color laser printers, which now sell for about the price of
one replacement cycle of consumables.
It's a nasty business which is bad for the environment, because it means
people will replace the printer rather than having a new head or waste
inkpad put in. In some cases, people toss a printer once it needs new
ink or toner. You can't blame them if all they are considering is cost.
Quite honestly, I believe the only thing that will change this "road to
he*l" is for legislation to force printer manufacturers to change their
business model. The EU has already done so, and other countries are
moving toward that as well. It will probably mean more expensive
printers to come, but cheaper ink and more options in terms of
consumables. If the printer cost $1000, a $100 replacement head would
seem like a bargain.
Art