Epson wins litigation - aftermarket carts already in short supply

  • Thread starter Thread starter anonymous
  • Start date Start date
Stick said:
Measerkite You are talking rubbish once again!
Check out the inkjet investigation on trustedreviews.com.
Click to expand...
I have read many reviews on trusted reviews. I do trust a few. Not the
ones that apply to this forum.
 
measekite said:
I have read many reviews on trusted reviews. I do trust a few. Not the
ones that apply to this forum.
Click to expand...

You can't read, nor have you ever used any after market inks according
to why you've said. So what does that make you other than a stupid idiot
with no experience at all?
How about a real jerk.
So do the chinese toy mfg.
Click to expand...

So you still play with Chinese toys?
You're a fool and we all know it.
Get lost.
Go back to your moms basement and don't ever leave again.
Frank
 
"measekite"

| >
| > Measerkite You are talking rubbish once again!
| > Check out the inkjet investigation on trustedreviews.com.

| I have read many reviews on trusted reviews. I do trust a few. Not the
| ones that apply to this forum.

You're read many reviews and subscribe to only those that support your
preconceived notions.

Others here have vastly different REAL WORLD experiences, including years on
the engineering/manufacturing side of the process.

You have no clue about the goings on behind the scenes and even less about
patent issues.

Those (very very few) issues where your assertions bear some validity are
greatly negated by the utter BULLS|IT you harp on incessantly.
 
Greetings Art,

One of the features of the new printers and carts is the proprietary way
they work together. I doubt you will get a particular answer to this
question as it seems to be a closely held technology.

If I recall correctly, Kodak invented 8mm tape and marketed it pretty well
back in the early 80's but the fight between VHS and Beta seemed quash the
8mm format option at the time. Kodak offered 8mm format video gear as well
(Kodavision) but it went by the wayside when VHS took the market place. It
was then that 8mm was sold. Of course, later that 8mm tape became the format
of choice, i.e. smaller cams.

I believe they have a winner in the new printer market. Bill Gates
foundation bought 2.6 million shares of Kodak stock back in the spring once
the product was announced. Not sure if that was related, but seems like
pretty impressive confidence if it was.

Talk to you soon.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company
 
Hi Gary,

The earlier printers, I am assuming you mean the PPM 100, 200, and 300
inkjets, were actually Lexmark based not HP. The new printers do use a
removable head and a 5 color cart. I doubt that there will be individual
carts made available as the printer and ink carts work in concert. Very
efficient.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company
 
Greetings Art,

One of the features of the new printers and carts is the proprietary way
they work together. I doubt you will get a particular answer to this
question as it seems to be a closely held technology.

If I recall correctly, Kodak invented 8mm tape and marketed it pretty well
back in the early 80's but the fight between VHS and Beta seemed quash the
8mm format option at the time. Kodak offered 8mm format video gear as well
(Kodavision) but it went by the wayside when VHS took the market place. It
was then that 8mm was sold. Of course, later that 8mm tape became the format
of choice, i.e. smaller cams.
Click to expand...

Near as I'm aware, Kodak was the first to offer a 8mm camcorder circa
1984 built by Matsushita. Video8 offered 255 lines of resolution
roughly on par with VHS at the time. I don't see how marketing
comes into play as it was Sony/JVC who really used 8mm, followed by
hi8 circa 1989. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,952506,00.html

At the time of the release of the Kodavision 2000, only about 10% of
the market had VCRs at all, and it was their hope they would be put on
the map as far as portable-to-home systems. It didn't, which is easy
seen by the number of pre-recorded 8mm tapes available on the market
vs VHS or Beta. Sony released a walkman edition with a flip up LCD
screen, but that too was a flop.

To be honest, Kodavision is so obscure I don't know how compatible it
is with other Video8 systems. A big milestone, but a very obscure
product. All is academic now we are on digital and firewire is the
standard. Digital convergence bridges the gaps between formats.
----

But all of this has nothing to do really with the new Kodak printers
and their choice to use an integrated 5 tank cartridge. How the ink
is used is a legit question that should be answered by Kodak. In
other printers, sometimes a multi-tank cartridge ends up being cheaper
in the long run rather than individual tanks.

I'd settle for volume and page yield @ 5% per tank.

But needless to say it's silly to compare an inkjet to camcorder
technology.... it's not like there is a universal standard for ink
cartridges. In fact they change from model to model, company to
company. I don't see Kodak establishing a single ink cartridge.
I believe they have a winner in the new printer market. Bill Gates
foundation bought 2.6 million shares of Kodak stock back in the spring once
the product was announced. Not sure if that was related, but seems like
pretty impressive confidence if it was.
Click to expand...

A major software mogul investing in a company which produces hardware
which would increase demand for their product is an academic
maneuver.

Kodak is a late player. The price for black in is at least on par
with prior generation Canons. Seeing the actual product would be the
next step, not confidence in other people's opinions. Don't get me
wrong, I am interested in an alternative to Epson for a photoquality
pigment printer, just lack information other than marketing.
 
Hi Gary,

The earlier printers, I am assuming you mean the PPM 100, 200, and 300
inkjets, were actually Lexmark based not HP. The new printers do use a
removable head and a 5 color cart. I doubt that there will be individual
carts made available as the printer and ink carts work in concert. Very
efficient.
Click to expand...

How is this efficient? No matter how you look at it, one color will
be used up faster than the others, usually the light load inks first.
It's not efficient it's wasteful by any definition. It may be cheaper
to produce a multi-tank cart, and in the long run it might be cheaper
for the end user to waste ink.

There is NO real technical reason why separate cartridges couldn't
have been employed by Kodak. The ink is separated. There MAY be a
cost benefit as Kodak only has to package and seal one tank. The head
design appears to be closer to Canon in design, and Canon offers
printers with in excess of 8 tanks @ about 15ml a piece. I wonder who
actually produces the heads for Kodak.

Concert? It's a thermal based printer, it's not a micropizeo design
like epson. That should make it more tolerant to the balance between
ink flow and ink overflow.
 
Hi Zake,

Yes, I have one in my office and I am copying the old movies and tapes I
recorded of my Daughters. I was in on the introduction but could not recall
the specific date. Seems you have done your internet homework well.

As to the release or proprietary information, that is not going to happen.
It is not much different that asking Coca Cola how they make Coke.
Proprietary information is just that and is held close. Sorry, Zake, not
sure what your business is but I am sure you understand.

Talk to you soon.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company
 
Hi Zake,

Yes, I have one in my office and I am copying the old movies and tapes I
recorded of my Daughters. I was in on the introduction but could not recall
the specific date. Seems you have done your internet homework well.
Click to expand...

Well, the point is, Kodavision was a flop. Kodak has a good idea
which you could say was ahead of it's time. But the entertainment
market went VHS. Don't get me wrong, I liked 8mm somewhat, I really
liked hi8 but the relative cost of even SVHS never really fell and
mass media went toward DVD. Not to speak of the fact of compatibility
was a big selling point for VHS camcorders.

These are not good years for Kodak. 1986 IIRC was when they pulled
out of the instant camera market later loosing close to 1 billion
dollars to Polaroid. Not a flop but Patents are pesky little
buggers. And those disc cameras, huge flop.
As to the release or proprietary information, that is not going to happen.
It is not much different that asking Coca Cola how they make Coke.
Proprietary information is just that and is held close. Sorry, Zake, not
sure what your business is but I am sure you understand.
Click to expand...

Here is an example of the level of information offered by the other
guys
http://www.canon.com/technology/pdf/tech2007e.pdf

It's superficial but still more detail than i'm seeing from Kodak.
But I do think I understand, the lack of information would suggest
that they are using someone else's proprietary technology. It would
explain why I'm having a hard time finding trivial things like patent
information on their current generation of printers.
 
Arthur said:
I agree about Eastman Kodak's tape (Video). Their broadcast videotape
was one of the best I used. I believe it was made for them by TDK. I
was saddened when it went off the market.
Click to expand...

The tape that I was referring to was audio tape, and I'm 100% certain
that they made it themselves. They seemed to have been more established
in France with these products -- I'm not certain. But I once saw a
French Broadcasting syndicated radio program that arrived on an unusual
"throw-away" professional material. It had a textured back surface for
extra traction through the capstan assembly.

I figured that for an outfit that made both plastics and wrote the book
on coating substrates with emulsions, it would be almost childs' play
for Kodak to turn out outstanding audio tape.

I used two different formulations: low print through, and high output. I
don't think that they even made a regular consumer version, although
they did package the low print in retail boxes.

Richard
 
No, the black cartridge is $10 US list, the color cartridge, which
includes all 5 colors (CcMmY) is $15 US list. The whole fill costs $25 US.

Art
 
Arthur said:
OK, I was unaware Kodak made or sold branded audiotapes.

Art
Click to expand...

I used to work for Kodak (in the UK) in the late 1960s. Kodak, in those
days, made their own audio tape. It was mainly used by professional
broadcasting companies. It was good because Kodak used machinery
designed to coat photographic films. The coating was thus much more even
than most audio tapes.
 
Howard said:
I used to work for Kodak (in the UK) in the late 1960s. Kodak, in those
days, made their own audio tape. It was mainly used by professional
broadcasting companies. It was good because Kodak used machinery
designed to coat photographic films. The coating was thus much more even
than most audio tapes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this reality check, Howard. That was my logic. Where was your
Kodak tape made?

I bought a couple of rolls in a small camera store in Connecticut. The
tape I'm talking about was made in USA; it was packaged on both
professional 10 1/2" aluminum reels (which I later bought from a
mail-order electronics house) and on regular consumer 7" reels. Maybe 5"
reels, too. The base was polyester -- unknown for tape at the time. It
had outstanding tensile and breaking characteristics: unlike Mylar,
which stretched, Kodak's tape broke cleanly, and therefore, could be
spliced. It fed through the machine smoother than anything else. And I
still have some recordings that I made on it -- it's lasted nicely, too.

Richard
 
Richard said:
Thanks for this reality check, Howard. That was my logic. Where was your
Kodak tape made?

I bought a couple of rolls in a small camera store in Connecticut. The
tape I'm talking about was made in USA; it was packaged on both
professional 10 1/2" aluminum reels (which I later bought from a
mail-order electronics house) and on regular consumer 7" reels. Maybe 5"
reels, too. The base was polyester -- unknown for tape at the time. It
had outstanding tensile and breaking characteristics: unlike Mylar,
which stretched, Kodak's tape broke cleanly, and therefore, could be
spliced. It fed through the machine smoother than anything else. And I
still have some recordings that I made on it -- it's lasted nicely, too.

Richard
Click to expand...


Now you are really testing my memory. :-)

I believe (note: only believe) it was made at Hemel Hempstead in the UK.
It is possible that it was brought across from the USA but, since the
same procedures were used in the UK, I doubt it was necessary.

It is pleasing to hear such good reports of it. At the time, I was
working in sales and I often heard similar feedback. Although I left the
company in 1969 (career change - I joined the police) I still hold fond
memories of Kodak's commitment to quality and attitudes to customer
relations.
 
Hi Zake,

Not really Zake, the technology was developed right here in good ol
Rochester and other parts of Kodak. We have an excellent technology base.
Many find it quite interesting.

As to web sites and what is offered for detail, Kodak has that as well. Try
visiting the following as well as searching through Kodak web pages.
Interesting.

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/index.jhtml?pq-pa...
Click to expand...

This is a great example of marketing speak. Asking about aspects of
the technology only to get back a response "many find it quite
interesting" is in most circles rude.

This website is the best example of a complaint about Kodak. For
example it doesn't specify whether or not are using thermal or
micropiezo on the current generation ezshare 5x00 series of printers.
All data suggests it's thermal based... your link is rather useless.

https://www.chipworks.com/blogs.aspx?blogday=30&blogmonth=4&blogyear=2007
http://cathieburke.1000nerds.kodak.com/default.asp?item=488521

Here is some actual information on Kodak's "proprietary" technology.
It looks like they are out sourcing the manufacturing of the
printhead (6J2032) to www.st.com (STMicroelectronics). While similar
to canon/hp, their 1000nerds site suggests they are using glass rather
than resins for the nozzles. Again going cmos rather than bonding is
a move canon and hp made long ago. HP is already at one die. What's
not clear is how the bubble is dissipated.

I'll have to comb though the patents at a later time... but the big
user concern is with head clogging.
 
Thanks for the second link! I couldn't get to the correct info on the
first link from Chipworks, will have to dig a bit further.

From reading the second link's info, I was able to correct an error in
my thinking about the Kodak printer's ink design.

I have been assuming (incorrectly) that the two cartridges were Black,
and color containing CcMmY inks. That is NOT correct, and it also
explains somewhat why the ink usage may be more even than I had anticipated.

The inks used in the Kodak inkjets are as follows:

Black Cartridge: Text black ink only

Color Cartridge: Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Photo Black and Clear coat.

In other words, the Kodak printer design is actually four color, not a
six color printer. The set up probably means the ink colors will run
out about the same time, although I'd guess the photo black may have
left over ink if they are supplied in equal volumes per color.

The clear coat probably both helps to give an even surface regardless of
ink coverage, and might also protect the ink surface from abrasion.

I was surprised to read how large the ink droplets were. There are two
nozzle or drop sizes, one is 2.7 picolitres and the other is 6.5
picolitres. Those are rather substantial sizes for a high color load
ink which is used in this setup. Canon and Epson 4 color printers use
as small as 1 picolitre droplets.

Anyway, this is all quite interesting, and I'm disappointed people who
knew were unable or unwilling to correct my assumptions to set the
record straight, since this stuff appears to not be under NDA.

Thanks for helping to set the record and my assumptions straight.


Art
 
I have been assuming (incorrectly) that the two cartridges were Black,
and color containing CcMmY inks. That is NOT correct, and it also
explains somewhat why the ink usage may be more even than I had anticipated.

The inks used in the Kodak inkjets are as follows:

Black Cartridge: Text black ink only

Color Cartridge: Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Photo Black and Clear coat.
Click to expand...

I was rather surprised my self. Since it uses pigments I would have
also expected it to be CcMmYK. Also the setup would seem to be
similar to canon in the fact their general purpose models only use
small nozzles on Cyan and Magenta.
I was surprised to read how large the ink droplets were. There are two
nozzle or drop sizes, one is 2.7 picolitres and the other is 6.5
picolitres. Those are rather substantial sizes for a high color load
ink which is used in this setup. Canon and Epson 4 color printers use
as small as 1 picolitre droplets.
Click to expand...

In all fairness the Pixma Pro 9500 only offers a 3pl min drop size,
the only other thermal based pigment printer I'm aware of, and even
that was delayed almost a year.

I'm not sure Epson offers 4 color printers other than their Stylus
series, which those are also 3pl. These printers however are not
marketed as lab quality photo printers. They have printers as low as
1.5pl but near as i'm aware they don't include their 4 color
printers.
Anyway, this is all quite interesting, and I'm disappointed people who
knew were unable or unwilling to correct my assumptions to set the
record straight, since this stuff appears to not be under NDA.
Click to expand...

Kodak is a very young player in this market. I think their first
volley of marketing simply didn't include technical specs to share, so
the natural response was "proprietary and efficient". Polite but 100%
useless.
 
Back
Top