My Canon Pixma is acting a bit crazy and I am working to fix it but, just in case, I've been looking at printers. I have been interested in Epson as they say that all of their printers will be 64 bit, which would resolve another issue.

At one review site a fellow said that he could not get a firmware upgrade from Epson and that they said it was because their "Epson Inks Only" policy allows them to discontinue servicing people who break that rule.

I thought: "Wow. So how did they know?" Does the above sound plausible?

I don't see how Epson would ever know if you used non-Epson inks. I don't know about their service policy, but it's possible that that information is accurate.

A sensor in the cartridge?

Under any circumstances, such a policy sounds very much like restraint of trade.

I found How to Make an Epson Printer Recognize Clone Cartridges.

Yes, Epson inks have a chip in each cartridge. I have used Epson printers for decades and find them trouble free until they stop working or a part breaks. This is not a frequent occurrence and over the decades 3 of my 4 Epson printers are still functioning. They are easy to set up and the wireless printing is very straightforward. They also continue to function with every MacOS upgrade that I do.

The thing about Epson inks is that they are very good quality and most importantly, directly out of the printer they do not smear on the page. An Epson printer representative at a MacWorld Expo told me Epson is not in the printer business, they are in the ink business. Even so, they do manufacture a lot of different printers.

tacit once posted that printer ink is the most expensive liquid on the planet, and I've never doubted him.

The machines are just a come-on for the ink.

Which is why printers are so cheap and often sold at or below cost. The manufacturers have to have some incentive to keep building the printers. If you think about it this is simply a variation on software subscriptions.

I can fully understand a policy that says: “If you don’t use our ink cartridges, your Warranty is void”, and I’m okay with that. However, the fellow at the review site said that Epson went further and refused a firmware upgrade, which meant his printer no longer worked with his computer.

If that’s correct it is, in my humble opinion, a step too far. Saying “If your printer breaks, you’re on your own to get it fixed” is one thing. Saying: “If you don’t use our ink, we’ll make sure your printer stops working” is quite another.

It makes me think that this statement has merit.

I wonder why that would be necessary. My old Canon, now on its way to printer Heaven, always accepted clone cartridges that came with their own chips. Periodically I would, on advice provided by joemike, pop in a full set of Canon manufactured cartridges to correct minor issues. Don’t ask me why it worked, it just did.

I’m guessing the printer manufacturers looked at people like Gillette and Wilkinson for the business model. These companies always provide sturdy razors that will last a long time because they know the real money is in selling the blades forever.

Or "one of" given the exorbitant prices per ounce for some of the big name perfumes.

I've learned something interesting in my search for a new printer. There is a clear effort to maintain the high ink profits even when one might think that volume should get a discount. Some of the printers, with separate cartridges per colour, offer "XL" versions of the cartridges.

However, when I did the math, the printing cost per sheet between a regular sized cartridge and a larger one, was miniscule.

Just an observation for what it is worth. I have a Canon Pixma that I really liked until I decided Canon's ink prices were too high so I began experimenting with different highly rated, third party Canon compatible ink cartridges. The printer quickly became flakey and unreliable, after trying several different low cost brands I finally switched back to Canon cartridges and once again my Pixma prints beautifully and is completely reliable.

I don't think there is any chip or device in the Canon cartridges, rather the Canon cartridges are tuned to the printer and superior quality. I only tried three different brands and there may be a satisfactory alternative out there I haven't tried, but I was spending too much money on ink cartridges that I was ending up throwing away.

there's a VERY GOOD REASON all the major printer manufacturers are giving you a little credit for turning in your empty ink carts. Not only does this make them look like they're giving you a deal, but it also helps keep their "patented" cartridge identifying chips off the used/refilled cartridge market.

(they can't claim "patent infringement" if you're reselling carts with genuine identifier chips in them!)

As mentioned earlier I have flipped back to Canon cartridges in order to resolve oddball issues, and it has worked. This time around I have done a few things like cleaning the printhead but shied away from a full set of Canon cartridges.

The rationale was simple, the set of cartridges would cost almost as much as new printer and so, since I will in future need a new printer anyway (32 bit versus 64 bit issue), why bother? Just go to the new printer now.

I had been looking at some Epsons that were interesting until I saw the post from the person who was refused a firmware update, allegedly because Epson objected to the compatible cartridges, so I'm looking elsewhere. It's still not clear to me if it's plausible that Epson could actually know....but, why take a chance?

FWIW, I have only used Epson printers and have been completely satisfied. My SC P600 produces superb photo prints, which is why I bought it. I use only Epson inks because I have been totally happy with them. The one time that I received a defective cartridge, Epson immediately shipped a replacement at no charge.

The bottom line, for me, is that you get what you pay for.

👍 Absolutely!

I'm pretty sure that point would be argued by the people who bought Volkswagen Diesels...or any number of other major brand products that proved faulty.

Where inks are concerned, you, being a photographer who prints, have a much greater need for high quality than I. For me, reasonably good is just fine.

You forgot to mention all the garbage out there that commands astronomical prices simply because it's got some person or company's name attached to it.

Hmmmm....maybe it's no more mysterious than reading the small print. I'm just setting up a new Canon and, in the section where you can agree or not to send information to Canon, it has this line about what is sent: "Usage history such as the type of ink installed, ink usage information, the number of sheets printed, scanning frequency, and maintenance information, etc."

Because the premise is product improvement, I'm guessing most people think "well, sure" and click without reading. I'm also guessing Epson has similar language. Ergo: the fellow I first mentioned who had his service stopped.