Epson R265 - aftermarket cartridges

[measekite]

sherwindu wrote:

Another reason for me to hang onto my older RX500 model. Probably, the newer versions will have this special firmware built in. Imagine car manufacturer's designing their cars so that only factory equipment could be installed. There would be a revolution. The printer manufacturer's think they can get away with anything. Someone should file a class action suit against these crooks. Sherwin D.


The real crooks are the relabelers who sell you stuff without telling you what it is and use dumb words like compatible that are totally meaningless.

That said, I know OEM ink is much too high.


SteveG wrote:



SteveG wrote:



Hi all, I'm new to this group but have been using Epson printers for several years. Just recently I purchased an R265 and so far have been very pleased with it but tonight I have a problem. The printer came with a set of S-Vision compatible cartridges. Tonight the printer reported that the Black one needed replacing so I got out an identical replacement (same manufacturer) and went through the process of replacement. When I got to the ink charging part of the replacement cycle the printer reported that the new cartridge is incompatible and refused to complete the cycle. Putting the original cartridge back in results in the same thing happening - odd, as it's been in the printer for about 6 weeks now. Oh, and before Measekite goes on about ruining the printer by using non-original inks - don't bother wearing out your fingers on the keyboard, It's my printer and I'll do what I want with it. Neither you, nor Epson, have a right to tell me what consumables to use in it. There, rant over Am I missing a trick here? Is there something I need to do to make the printer think the cartridge is a good one? Have I bought a duff cartridge?



Firstly, many thanks for everyone that responded to my post - even Measekite. I did some additional digging today by talking to an IT acquaintance of mine and it appears that Epson have been a bit sneaky - as is their want. If the printer was manufactured before 1st March 2007 then it should work fine with compatible cartridges. If it was manufactured during March then it may work/may not but if it was manufactured after 1st April 2007 (naughty date that) it has firmware embedded that will only recognise Epson branded carts. The after-market cartridge manufacturers are, apparently, working on a method of defeating this ... A quick phone call to Epson UK's tech support this afternoon (eventually) confirmed this scenario but he wasn't prepared to give out any details about how the detection is done. My guess is via the chip on the cartridge. According to the serial number on my printer it was made during the last week of April :-( Just to make sure the printer wasn't faulty I bought a set of Epson branded carts this evening and lo-and-behold they work fine. -- Regards Steve G

 

[measekite]

sherwindu wrote:

What makes you think that only Epson is capable of making good inks? We are not talking rocket science here. Sherwin D.


I never said that.  Canon and HP also makes good inks.  Do you know of anyone else that makes good inks and sells them in carts under their owns name and sells them in all venues?


measekite wrote:



SteveG wrote:



SteveG wrote:



Hi all, I'm new to this group but have been using Epson printers for several years. Just recently I purchased an R265 and so far have been very pleased with it but tonight I have a problem. The printer came with a set of S-Vision compatible cartridges. Tonight the printer reported that the Black one needed replacing so I got out an identical replacement (same manufacturer) and went through the process of replacement. When I got to the ink charging part of the replacement cycle the printer reported that the new cartridge is incompatible and refused to complete the cycle. Putting the original cartridge back in results in the same thing happening - odd, as it's been in the printer for about 6 weeks now. Oh, and before Measekite goes on about ruining the printer by using non-original inks - don't bother wearing out your fingers on the keyboard, It's my printer and I'll do what I want with it. Neither you, nor Epson, have a right to tell me what consumables to use in it. There, rant over Am I missing a trick here? Is there something I need to do to make the printer think the cartridge is a good one? Have I bought a duff cartridge?



Firstly, many thanks for everyone that responded to my post - even Measekite. I did some additional digging today by talking to an IT acquaintance of mine and it appears that Epson have been a bit sneaky - as is their want. If the printer was manufactured before 1st March 2007 then it should work fine with compatible cartridges. If it was manufactured during March then it may work/may not but if it was manufactured after 1st April 2007 (naughty date that) it has firmware embedded that will only recognise Epson branded carts.



I think that this is great. It helps protect some of their customers who make poor choices.



The after-market cartridge manufacturers are, apparently, working on a method of defeating this ...



It probably will be illegal.



A quick phone call to Epson UK's tech support this afternoon (eventually) confirmed this scenario but he wasn't prepared to give out any details about how the detection is done.



You really cannot blame them.



My guess is via the chip on the cartridge. According to the serial number on my printer it was made during the last week of April :-( Just to make sure the printer wasn't faulty I bought a set of Epson branded carts this evening and lo-and-behold they work fine.



Now you are making wise choices. Always use the best ink for your printer. If you want to use crap ink then get a crap printer. A lexmark inkjet printer will do the job.

 

[Frank]

What makes you think that only Epson is capable of making good inks? We are not

talking rocket science here.

You're dealing with a know idiot. Meashershithead is brain dead. He has
no idea what you're talking about and not a clue as to what he is
talking about.
Best to kill file his stuck-on-stupid ass and be done with him.
Frank

 

[SteveG]

Sounds like a sleezy vender who took out the good Epsons carts to resell
separately and put in crap and give you a little discount but since the
carts cost half or more of the printer I guess you got a bad deal.

SG: Not at all. It was obvious that the box had not been opened and
resealed - you can't do that without tearing the waxed coating. Epson
(in the UK) have two different retail packages; one with carts and one
without. As you have no idea how much discount I got by purchasing the
"without" package you have no basis on which to determine if I got a
good deal or not. Trust me ... I did.

 

[SteveG]

Is this something new, or is this retailer "unbundling" factory products
and selling parts separately. This was a common practice in New York
City among camera retailers but was stopped by some legislation.

Art

SG: Epson have been selling printers (at least in the UK) for some while
without cartridges (or USB leads). They usually offer retailers the
option of packages with or without the cartridges. The one I purchased
was "without" but the retailer, who has a good reputation, included the
compatibles free of charge. Okay, I know nothing is really for free

I could tell that the printer box hadn't been opened as it's almost
impossible to remove the sealing tape without tearing the waxed outer
layer of the box.

 

[SteveG]

I think that this is great. It helps protect some of their customers
who make poor choices.

It probably will be illegal.

You really cannot blame them.

Now you are making wise choices. Always use the best ink for your
printer. If you want to use crap ink then get a crap printer. A
lexmark inkjet printer will do the job.

Let me clue you in to something here. I know about the compatible
cartridge industry - which you obviously don't - as I used to be the
Sales Director for a company that recycled old cartridges. There is
nothing inferior or damaging about the ink used, indeed in many cases it
is of superior quality to the branded stuff. The factories where these
cartridges are manufactured are just as high-tech as the branded ones.
You may be surprised to learn that some of these factories actually
produce the branded article too!

As to your points above. No manufacturer has a right to make decisions
for it's customers. How would you react if your car manufacturer said
you have to use their brand of petrol/diesel, and then increased the
price of that fuel by 50%? Ink is a consumable item. It does not damage
the printer - even HP acknowledged that in an open letter to wholesalers
more than 5 years ago.

There is nothing illegal about making a compatible part for anything,
unless it infringes a patent. Don't you think that the printer
manufacturers would have sued the pants off all the compatible makers by
now if they thought they could?

You're right about not blaming the guy for not telling me how it was
done ... but I had to ask They're as entitled to their commercial
secrets as anyone else.

I didn't make a wise choice. I had no choice. If I wanted to use the
printer I had to buy the branded cartridges ... where's my freedom to
choose?

 

[SteveG]

You're dealing with a know idiot. Meashershithead is brain dead. He has
no idea what you're talking about and not a clue as to what he is
talking about.
Best to kill file his stuck-on-stupid ass and be done with him.
Frank

What, and take away one of my favourite sports ... fishing

 

[SteveG]

Another reason for me to hang onto my older RX500 model. Probably, the newer
versions will have this special firmware built in. Imagine car manufacturer's
designing
their cars so that only factory equipment could be installed. There would be a
revolution. The printer manufacturer's think they can get away with anything.
Someone should file a class action suit against these crooks.

Sherwin D.

Firstly, many thanks for everyone that responded to my post - even
Measekite. I did some additional digging today by talking to an IT
acquaintance of mine and it appears that Epson have been a bit sneaky -
as is their want.

If the printer was manufactured before 1st March 2007 then it should
work fine with compatible cartridges. If it was manufactured during
March then it may work/may not but if it was manufactured after 1st
April 2007 (naughty date that) it has firmware embedded that will only
recognise Epson branded carts. The after-market cartridge manufacturers
are, apparently, working on a method of defeating this ...

A quick phone call to Epson UK's tech support this afternoon
(eventually) confirmed this scenario but he wasn't prepared to give out
any details about how the detection is done. My guess is via the chip on
the cartridge. According to the serial number on my printer it was made
during the last week of April :-(

Just to make sure the printer wasn't faulty I bought a set of Epson
branded carts this evening and lo-and-behold they work fine.

I have my lawyer looking into it as we speak ... but I don't hold out
much hope :-(

 

[SteveG]

Interesting - I have bought my last Epson printer. Pity, good printer,
crap company.

This is my thoughts too. I've not bought anything but Epson for so long
I can't remember the last time. Ink jets, monochrome lasers, colour
lasers, scanners ...

 

[measekite]

SG: Not at all. It was obvious that the box had not been opened and
resealed - you can't do that without tearing the waxed coating. Epson
(in the UK) have two different retail packages; one with carts and one
without. As you have no idea how much discount I got by purchasing the
"without" package you have no basis on which to determine if I got a
good deal or not. Trust me ... I did.

I would imagine that if you add the price of a set of Epson ink carts to
the cost you paid for the printer the sum would be higher than the
complete package.

 

[measekite]

Let me clue you in to something here. I know about the compatible
cartridge industry - which you obviously don't - as I used to be the
Sales Director for a company that recycled old cartridges. There is
nothing inferior or damaging about the ink used, indeed in many cases
it is of superior quality to the branded stuff. The factories where
these cartridges are manufactured are just as high-tech as the branded
ones. You may be surprised to learn that some of these factories
actually produce the branded article too!

As to your points above. No manufacturer has a right to make decisions
for it's customers. How would you react if your car manufacturer said
you have to use their brand of petrol/diesel, and then increased the
price of that fuel by 50%? Ink is a consumable item. It does not
damage the printer - even HP acknowledged that in an open letter to
wholesalers more than 5 years ago.

There is nothing illegal about making a compatible part for anything,
unless it infringes a patent. Don't you think that the printer
manufacturers would have sued the pants off all the compatible makers
by now if they thought they could?

The CAN. Epson DID. And Epson WON. Now nobody can guage relabeled ink
because the relabeler will not disclose what they are selling and nobody
knows who made it.

You're right about not blaming the guy for not telling me how it was
done ... but I had to ask They're as entitled to their commercial
secrets as anyone else.

I didn't make a wise choice.

Thats for sure. You should have bought the complete package. Actually
you should have purchased a Canon IP4300. The printer is better and
gets better ink mileage.

 

[measekite]

:-*

What, and take away one of my favourite sports ... fishing

 

[Branwynn]

:-*

It's childish to reply to your own post. I never do.

 

[SteveG]

I would imagine that if you add the price of a set of Epson ink carts to
the cost you paid for the printer the sum would be higher than the
complete package.

Then your imagination would be WRONG!!

 

[SteveG]

The CAN. Epson DID. And Epson WON. Now nobody can guage relabeled ink
because the relabeler will not disclose what they are selling and nobody
knows who made it.

SG: Well the remanufacturers that I used to deal with are still in
business; selling refilled carts from the major printer manufacturers
and doing good business too. The plain fact is that the printer
manufacturers sell printers as a loss leader in the fervent hope that
you will buy their overpriced inks for it. This used to work really well
until the Internet enabled the masses to see that they could buy
alternatives at a much lower cost.

HP used to threaten to void printer warranties if you used non-branded
inks or carts on the basis that they would damage the printer. This was
successfully challenged in the European courts as HP was unable to
produce even one case where the ink or non-branded cart had directly
caused a printer to fail. They then sent a letter to all of their staff,
wholesalers and retailers (in Europe) telling them not to tell customers
that they can't use after-market inks or carts.

Thats for sure. You should have bought the complete package. Actually
you should have purchased a Canon IP4300. The printer is better and
gets better ink mileage.

SG: The point I was making, Dummy, came in the remainder of the
paragraph, which you appear to have ignored. I appreciate ENGLISH isn't
your first language but comprehension is the same in most modern languages.

As to using a Canon printer ... not in a million years. It's personal
choice, after all.

 

[Taliesyn]

SG: Well the remanufacturers that I used to deal with are still in
business; selling refilled carts from the major printer manufacturers
and doing good business too. The plain fact is that the printer
manufacturers sell printers as a loss leader in the fervent hope that
you will buy their overpriced inks for it. This used to work really well
until the Internet enabled the masses to see that they could buy
alternatives at a much lower cost.

That is correct. The Internet, Ebay, and newsgroups have given us total
freedom to find good alternatives. I've saved several thousand dollars
over the last 10 years by buying non-OEM inks. We know the printers
were sold as loss leaders because often they were priced at the level of
a set of ink cartridges, which more than probably costs less than a buck
to manufacture. Had they priced them more fairly, say $15 US a set there
wouldn't be this need today for alternative inks. But no, they had to
get greedy. Real greedy. This is what happens when there is no
government regulation. Much like gasoline gouging. Sorry, I couldn't
resist ;-)....

HP used to threaten to void printer warranties if you used non-branded
inks or carts on the basis that they would damage the printer. This was
successfully challenged in the European courts as HP was unable to
produce even one case where the ink or non-branded cart had directly
caused a printer to fail. They then sent a letter to all of their staff,
wholesalers and retailers (in Europe) telling them not to tell customers
that they can't use after-market inks or carts.

They're always looking for new ways to increase their market share of
the ink business... placing ridiculous securitiy devices on cartridges,
which often causes them to read incorrectly or even fail to operate...
threaten consumers with all kind of "scary" pop-up warnings at cartridge
change times...giving away printers at half the ink cartridge cost, etc,
etc, etc. Let me ask you, did you ever see them selling their OEM inks
at 50% off. No. Case closed. It's a money grab.

Canon doesn't tell you who manufactures their inks. So why should anyone
else. This is normal business practice.

-Taliesyn

 

[TJ]

That is correct. The Internet, Ebay, and newsgroups have given us total
freedom to find good alternatives. I've saved several thousand dollars
over the last 10 years by buying non-OEM inks. We know the printers
were sold as loss leaders because often they were priced at the level of
a set of ink cartridges, which more than probably costs less than a buck
to manufacture. Had they priced them more fairly, say $15 US a set there
wouldn't be this need today for alternative inks. But no, they had to
get greedy. Real greedy. This is what happens when there is no
government regulation. Much like gasoline gouging. Sorry, I couldn't
resist ;-)....

In the US, and probably Canada as well, a significant part of the
gasoline price is there precisely because the government stepped in and
dictated the change in formulation for summertime driving. Summertime
gas is more expensive to produce. It is the price we pay for "cleaner"
air. Government taxes don't reduce the price any, either.

The printer ink market would be much better served if the government
ignored it completely and didn't approve patents for any little change
in a cartridge or printer. Patents should be reserved for true
innovation. That way, the marketplace would determine the price of ink,
instead of the OEM's holding people hostage with the help of the
governments.

In my experience here in the US, every time the government "helps" us
out with regulation, the prices of things go up.

TJ

 

[measekite]

SG: Well the remanufacturers that I used to deal with are still in
business; selling refilled carts from the major printer manufacturers
and doing good business too. The plain fact is that the printer
manufacturers sell printers as a loss leader in the fervent hope that
you will buy their overpriced inks for it. This used to work really
well until the Internet enabled the masses to see that they could buy
alternatives at a much lower cost.

Now let me clue you in on something. OEM inks, as you said are
overpriced. You deal with a relabeler. They buy ink in large bulk from
who know (they may no even know who is the formulator either) repackage
and relabel it (many times inaccurately) and resell it to people who do
not know what they are getting. The ink as tested by Wilhelm Labs is
inferior as to quality and longevity when compared to OEM ink. Wihelm
is the most respected name in the industry. You do not command that
respect.


I am not against choices and I do wish that a reputable mfg, for
instance Pantone, would mfg refilled carts for all of the printers and
sell them under their own name (so they can be tracked for quality) and
properly package then and sell them in all stores and venues. That is
not the case now so what you have is a bunch of fly by nites repackaging
junk the get from China. And we all know what comes from there like Pet
Food Tootpaste and Cough Syrup with all of the illicet chemicals in it
and who knows what is in the ink..

HP used to threaten to void printer warranties if you used non-branded
inks or carts on the basis that they would damage the printer. This
was successfully challenged in the European courts as HP was unable to
produce even one case where the ink or non-branded cart had directly
caused a printer to fail. They then sent a letter to all of their
staff, wholesalers and retailers (in Europe) telling them not to tell
customers that they can't use after-market inks or carts.

In the cazse of HP and the integated printhead the only way that will
damage the printer is when they leak. And if the printhead goes bad,
well thats the relabeler since HP does not have to warrant that.
More stupid talk. A customer is allowed to know what the reseller is
selling them.. Remember GM was sued for putting a Chevy engine in
tgheir Old carts without disclosing it to the customer.

 

[measekite]

That is correct. The Internet, Ebay, and newsgroups have given us total
freedom to find good alternatives. I've saved several thousand dollars
over the last 10 years by buying non-OEM inks. We know the printers
were sold as loss leaders because often they were priced at the level of
a set of ink cartridges, which more than probably costs less than a buck
to manufacture. Had they priced them more fairly, say $15 US a set there
wouldn't be this need today for alternative inks. But no, they had to
get greedy. Real greedy. This is what happens when there is no
government regulation. Much like gasoline gouging. Sorry, I couldn't
resist ;-)....



They're always looking for new ways to increase their market share of
the ink business... placing ridiculous securitiy devices on cartridges,
which often causes them to read incorrectly or even fail to operate...
threaten consumers with all kind of "scary" pop-up warnings at cartridge
change times...giving away printers at half the ink cartridge cost, etc,
etc, etc. Let me ask you, did you ever see them selling their OEM inks
at 50% off. No. Case closed. It's a money grab.

It is only the jerks that do not realize that a mfg has the right to
make their products the way they choose. Just look at the crappy ink
the relabelers are selling. They have the right to make crap, the
relabeler has the right to sell the crap (but they do not have the right
to not properly label it) and the idiots have the right to buy and use
the crap. Why they even have the right (freedom of speech) to lie,
exaggerate, and use poor judgement to praise the crap. Even the kids.

Canon doesn't tell you who manufactures their inks. So why should
anyone else. This is normal business practice.

Dum de dum dum Canon is the formulator of their inks.

 

[Taliesyn]

I am not against choices and I do wish that a reputable mfg, for
instance Pantone, would mfg refilled carts for all of the printers and
sell them under their own name (so they can be tracked for quality) and
properly package then and sell them in all stores and venues. That is
not the case now so what you have is a bunch of fly by nites repackaging
junk the get from China. And we all know what comes from there like Pet
Food Tootpaste and Cough Syrup with all of the illicet chemicals in it
and who knows what is in the ink..

Most of us in this newsgroup do not drink our printer inks, even if
they're American made. There was a strange glow coming from one brand I
tried so I tossed them out the window. Next day there was a hole 10 feet
in diameter. Other than than I've seen nothing of note . . . ;-)

I just printed a gorgeous 92 page booklet (full pages folded in half) in
High Quality on 6.3 mil 120g/m2 matte paper. It's got about 80 photos in
full color. Staples are hand inserted in measured holes. Booklet is then
pressed under a 100 pound weight for 2 days until it is perfectly flat.
An exacta knife is then used to squarely trim the vertical right side of
the booklet. Booklet comes with an accompanying 2 CD set, again with
labels and liners in full color. My cost in ink (I used a full set of
cartridges) - $5.00. Had I used OEM, it would have been close to a $100
(Canadian dollars). Am I obsessed with aftermarket ink? No. I just use
it because of the price. No one should have to pay $100 for ink to
create a booklet and 2 CDs.

-Taliesyn