CLI-8 & PGI-5 DISCONTINUED ????

[Ron in NY]

I thought I read somewhere that Canon has discontinued production of their CLI-8
and PGI-5 ink cartridges. If that's so, where are people going to get carts for
the millions of printers and multi-function machines out there that use these 2
carts ??? Are they so idiotic, that just because someone figured out a way to
reset the chips, that they are going to punish the public by discontinuing that
series of carts ???

I just started refilling mine and reset them using the German Redsetter. It
works great, and I think that the colors are just as good or maybe even better.
Has anyone else heard about this stupid move by Canon ????


RON
========================================================
Remove the ZZZ from my E-mail address to send me E-mail.

 

[measekite]

I thought I read somewhere that Canon has discontinued production of their CLI-8
and PGI-5 ink cartridges. If that's so, where are people going to get carts for
the millions of printers and multi-function machines out there that use these 2
carts ??? Are they so idiotic, that just because someone figured out a way to
reset the chips, that they are going to punish the public by discontinuing that
series of carts ???

What you heard is nonsense. It probably is illegal.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

I haven't read anything of this nature, but that doesn't mean you
haven't read it somewhere (it would be interesting to know where).

Without knowing otherwise, it is unusual for an inkjet printer
manufacturer to decide to stop production of ink cartridges, for a
number of reasons:

1) they make almost all their profits on ink
2) it stokes the fire for reasons for 3rd party ink products, as it
would leave a lot of printers orphaned (and angry customers)
3) it creates an opening for 3rd party ink manufacturers to capture a
market share they'd rather protect for themselves

Unlike laser printer toner cartridges, which are very costly to make and
continue to manufacture, when the demand dies down considerably, inkjet
cartridge are relatively simple and relatively inexpensive injection
molding and can be stockpiled empty and filled as needed.

Not suggesting Canon can;'t make a bad business decision, just that it
would be a little unusual in the inkjet market.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

I haven't read anything of this nature, but that doesn't mean you
haven't read it somewhere (it would be interesting to know where).

Without knowing otherwise, it is unusual for an inkjet printer
manufacturer to decide to stop production of ink cartridges, for a
number of reasons:

1) they make almost all their profits on ink
2) it stokes the fire for reasons for 3rd party ink products, as it
would leave a lot of printers orphaned (and angry customers)
3) it creates an opening for 3rd party ink manufacturers to capture a
market share they'd rather protect for themselves

I suspect the parent read that Canon is discontinuing printers that
use the PGI-5 and CLI-8 cartridges. This is true. I'm sure there are
reasons for it, here are my guesses

1) There are chip resetters and aftermarket chips in full production
2) CD printing in the US

The major difference in the new cartridge line is the fact that they
offer European cartridges, rather than just the Japanese/everyone else
cartridges. It's trivial to enable CD printing in the states, and
near as I'm aware the ONLY reason they don't is because of a license
issue with Phillips. We get around it by setting our printers to
another market, usually European, anything but (1) Japanese because
you need the Japanese cartridges and there is no real way to select
English on the Japanese mode AIOs. It seems that actually "trying" to
discourage this feature is in their best interest presuming they still
don't want to offer this feature in this market.

I doubt that Canon would flat out discontinue the line. In
perspective this line is only about 2 years old.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

The likely reason for the separate European cartridge is because the EU
is requiring all printer cartridges be refillable as part of a green
initiative. If the cartridges worked in all model (but Japanese) people
could order the refillable EU cartridges anywhere in the world and use
them. HP also "regionalized" their cartridges a while back such that
Europe was separated. The official word was it was to prevent gray
market sales.

I'm not sure what Epson is up to. My hope is with new attitudes
entering the White House, and a greener attitude in government, North
America will shortly come to similar conclusions.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

 

[Jerry1111]

The likely reason for the separate European cartridge is because the EU
is requiring all printer cartridges be refillable as part of a green
initiative.

I haven't heard anything about it - could you please point me to a source?

If the cartridges worked in all model (but Japanese) people
could order the refillable EU cartridges anywhere in the world and use
them. HP also "regionalized" their cartridges a while back such that
Europe was separated. The official word was it was to prevent gray
market sales.

It was because the HP363 was £7 here and $7 on your side of the lake -
so europeans would just buy loads of cartridges from the USA. They
wanted different prices on different markets. I don't know the
Chinese/Asian market, but I suspect that the prices were even lower than
in the US. I'm not sure if there are any legal grounds to demand
refillable carts in the EU.

I'm not sure what Epson is up to. My hope is with new attitudes
entering the White House, and a greener attitude in government, North
America will shortly come to similar conclusions.

Everyone should. Then people will start buying expensive printers.
But... hang on... won't they be more willing to do a bit of research
before ordering expensive printer? Now it's probably just a situation of
grabbing first printer on the shelf (after all the printer costs about
as much money as tank of diesel in my car), or picking up the one in
most colorful packaging.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

Hi Jerry,

I have been trying to nail down the exact legislation, so far without
success. I found a lot of preliminary discussion and some of the group
work, but not the finalized EU rulings.

It appears to be part of the EU Waste and Recycling Strategy, and the
work was started a number of years ago. I recall seeing the
announcements back several years ago which indicated the actual rulings
would be going into effect in 2008 or 2009.

I'll continue trying to find the actual wording, and if anyone else
finds it in the meantime, please post.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

 

[Jerry1111]

Hi Jerry,

I have been trying to nail down the exact legislation, so far without
success. I found a lot of preliminary discussion and some of the group
work, but not the finalized EU rulings.

Knowing how things are usually going in Brussels, I'd expect a piece of
legislation which will oblige _manufacturers_ to recycle their carts. In
other words: you can return empty cart to the shop and the mfg will do
something with it (instead of thowing it to the landfill). I wouldn't
expect any legislation to support refilling.

It appears to be part of the EU Waste and Recycling Strategy, and the
work was started a number of years ago. I recall seeing the
announcements back several years ago which indicated the actual rulings
would be going into effect in 2008 or 2009.

I'm not aware of anything. We'll see.

I'll continue trying to find the actual wording, and if anyone else
finds it in the meantime, please post.

Will do.

Best Regards,

Jerry1111

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

That would be stupid.  The mfg spend a great deal of time, effort and
money to engineer the best printers they can at each price point so why
would they create a weak link so people can degrade them and make them
perform at a point that is not desirable.  

If for example they create a product line that wasn't successful in
the marketplace, and it cost too much money to continue to support it,
by all means let the 3rd parties take care of it.

And it's a matter of law, or it should be. The manufacturers
shouldn't hold a monopoly on consumables. Even the current
aftermarket solutions, even if they are not as archival, cost 90% less
than OEM or for the pigmented ink solutions about 75% less than OEM.
I'm doing my small part to help prevent excess waste which includes
reusing my cartridges and using a CISS.

 

[measekite]

If for example they create a product line that wasn't successful in
the marketplace, and it cost too much money to continue to support it,
by all means let the 3rd parties take care of it.

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard of. A customer who purchased a
printer has the right and the mfg has the obligation to provide supplies
for what he bought. If they do not want to do that then they need to
refund the money and take the equipment back and not palm their customer
off to the riff raff garbage in the industry.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard of.  A customer who purchased a
printer has the right and the mfg has the obligation to provide supplies
for what he bought.  

There is no such right dude. Let's say Brother released a typewriter,
it didn't sell well, and they discontinued making the ribbon for it.
That would like suck but they're under no obligation to do so. If a
third party wanted to step in and make ribbons for it, great. They be
of similar, lesser, or greater quality than OEM.

Look at the freaking 1980s with all the PCs that got dumped on the
market. TI got out of the PC business and closed out all their TIs,
at K-mart for $50. Was TI obligated to continue making software for
this machine they abandoned? It would have bee nice but they
didn't.

If they do not want to do that then they need to
refund the money and take the equipment back and not palm their customer
off to the riff raff garbage in the industry.

You're a nut. After a year they are under no obligation to honor the
warranty. How many printers have been abandoned with no win98, 2k,
xp, or vista drivers? Hmmmmm?

You sir are full of shit.

 

[measekite]

There is no such right dude. Let's say Brother released a typewriter,
it didn't sell well, and they discontinued making the ribbon for it.
That would like suck but they're under no obligation to do so. If a
third party wanted to step in and make ribbons for it, great. They be
of similar, lesser, or greater quality than OEM.

Look at the freaking 1980s with all the PCs that got dumped on the
market. TI got out of the PC business and closed out all their TIs,
at K-mart for $50. Was TI obligated to continue making software for
this machine they abandoned? It would have bee nice but they
didn't.


You're a nut. After a year they are under no obligation to honor the
warranty. How many printers have been abandoned with no win98, 2k,
xp, or vista drivers? Hmmmmm?

You sir are full of shit.

Stop looking in the mirror when you say that.

There are legalities where a mfg must mfg parts and supplies for what they
sell for a certain period even after the item is discontinued.

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

Stop looking in the mirror when you say that.  

There are legalities where a mfg must mfg parts and supplies for what they
sell for a certain period even after the item is discontinued.

Ok, what are they? How long is this period?

If this is true, then why is it not uncommon to see printers without
drivers for the next operating system.

You're making assertion without facts. Back them up or GTFO.

 

[measekite]

Ok, what are they? How long is this period?

If you want to know then do the work to find out. I really do not care.

If this is true, then why is it not uncommon to see printers without
drivers for the next operating system.

If you had a good grounding in logic then you would not ask that. They
are not obligated to provide for future external products.

You're making assertion without facts. Back them up or GTFO.

In dreard

 

[IntergalacticExpandingPanda]

I hate to say it but Measekite is right. I believe it is 7 years for parts
manufacturers to supply a part, at least here in the USA.

Ah, this would explain the point that drivers start disappearing for
lasers. Awesome, thanks!

We are talking parts, physical parts like heads,capacitors, any electronics
part that goes into the making of a product

Ok, where would ink come in? I seem to remember a few inkjets by NEC
where the ink cartridges became impossible to find, as were the
drivers.

 

[Robert Neville]

Ok, what are they? How long is this period?

If this is true, then why is it not uncommon to see printers without
drivers for the next operating system.

You're making assertion without facts. Back them up or GTFO.

http://www.repairnyc.com/repair-services/nationwide-service/77-parts-laws.html

Apology accepted.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

It varies with the country and sometimes the state unfortunately.

I (and many others) have been lobbying for a standard at least country
wide for years in this regard. It will take people indicating to their
representatives that they wish this legislation for it to become law in
more places.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/