The ideal inkjet printer


A

anon

The Ideal inkjet printer



I intend this article as a base for discussion, and in no way is it intended
to place any bias towards or against any particular printer manufacturer.
Indeed all printers have their advantages and disadvantages, be it print
quality, cost, speed, ease of use, reliability and maintenance. I intend and
make no judgement or jibe towards any individual manufacturer and name none.



I wish printer manufacturers would read this newsgroup and get a grasp on
the problems people encounter with inkjet printers and resolve them. All
printers have their advantages and disadvantages and it is a shame that
no-one has really taken measures to ease these burdens on the end-user when
new models are designed.



I have considered laser printers but in my opinion laser printing is
excellent for the workplace or home office, however in my assessment their
tonal blending still falls short of the photographic quality required for A4
sized prints, and inkjet has the facility to create colour blends and
various finishes from gloss to matt whereas toner cannot.



Each of the following inkjet specs are further expanded on below.

a.. Four separate ink chambers / cartridges
b.. Clear plastic cartridges
c.. Optical ink level monitoring
d.. Option to refill chamber and/or replace cartridges with cheaper
original ink
e.. Better cartridge design
f.. Larger ink reservoir
g.. Replaceable snap-in print head


Discussion.

1) Four separate ink cartridges.

A few printer manufacturers have already started to use this technology and
it is a step towards cutting costs as only the empty colour needs replacing.



2) Clear plastic cartridges.

I once saw a printer which has four clear see-through cartridges where the
ink levels could be visually checked.. I am tired of having to replace half
used cartridges because I cannot see how much ink is remaining..



3) Optical ink level monitoring.

If cartridges were transparent, then an optical system could be employed to
prevent printing once a cartridge gets down to a critical level.



4) Option to refill and/or replace cartridges with cheaper original ink.

The bulk of the cost of cartridges is in the cartridge itself. It would be
nice to be able to purchase original inks in bottles and top up the
reservoirs oneself, thus reducing the amount of cost and waste.

People could still have the option of replacing the cartridge if they did
not want to go to the trouble of refilling the existing ones. It would be
nice to have the option of fill and/or replace.

Printer manufacturers need not lose out as they could sell the bottles of
their original inks at more reasonable cost to all concerned and could even
reduce manufacturing costs which would then cascade downwards. Cartridges
could be filled by a syringe to a max mark on transparent cartridges just as
one fills a kettle.



5) Better cartridge design.

Although some cartridge designs are quite elaborate and ingenious, they are
more complex than really need be. A simple gravity-fed tank system would
surely be better.



6) Larger ink reservoir.

The problems with some printers are that they do not take advantage of the
space available within the printer casing. Larger ink reservoirs would mean
that inks would not need to be changed so often and thus reduce chance of
airlocks and reduce waste. Inks could be improved to include an
anti-clogging agent to reduce the chance of clogging.



7) Replaceable print head unit.

I once did see a printer with an ingenious design of a separate removable
snap-in print head tray, thus enabling a swift affordable print head
replacement for the serious photographer or person suffering a clogged print
head.



People will undoubtedly argue that printer manufacturers would not want a
printer to have a long lifespan. However there are printers which do have a
long lifespan at a cost due to more expensive cartridges with built in print
heads. An argument is available that the more affordable printing becomes,
the more people will use them and need more inks and so on. To be honest -
would we not use our cars more if fuel were cheaper? (however I do not want
to get into a discussion on that point here - thank you.)



I would not mind paying a few extra quid on a printer if I knew it would be
a wise investment for a long life and ease of maintenance. Affordable
printer spares would also be welcomed, and people who were into serious
photo printing would be most likely to replace their print head assemblies
regularly to maintain quality.



People would still purchase new printers as the manufacturers concentrated
more on enhanced print quality, speed, different paper sizes, selectable
paper trays, duplex printing, and so on. I myself would like to obtain an
A2 or A3 printer if they could prove themselves to last and all parts be
cost effective and easily interchanged should a fault occur. My problems
with inkjets to date leave me little confidence when deciding to pay out the
extra cost in buying a larger printer as one would not be expected to print
out an A2 or A3 page that often.



Personally I like the all-in-one systems as they save space overall. An A2
or A3 all in one would be fantastic, though admittedly awkward to fit onto
my desktop.



These days we tend to live too much in a throwaway society, and in the case
of inkjet printers a blocked or dry print head is the cause more often than
not. It is a shame that so much material is wasted and thrown into landfill
because a miniscule component such as a print head cannot be simply replaced
by snap in replacement or cartridges cannot be re-used.



Today we live in a modern world, but there's still a long way in which
inkjet manufacturers can go in order to supply a product with an outstanding
name for long term reliability, cost-efficient printing and easily
maintainability. How long will it be before they start to listen to the
people who use them?
 
Ad

Advertisements

A

ato_zee

The problems with some printers are that they do not take advantage of the
space available within the printer casing. Larger ink reservoirs would
mean
that inks would not need to be changed so often and thus reduce chance of
airlocks and reduce waste.

Bigger ink tanks mean more inertia, it would however be useful to be able to
top up without removing the cartridge, less risk of airlocks.
Although some cartridge designs are quite elaborate and ingenious, they
are
more complex than really need be. A simple gravity-fed tank system would
surely be better.

Gravity operates continuously, the aim is to get a syphon action where
fresh ink is drawn in to replace discharged ink.
These days we tend to live too much in a throwaway society, and in the
case
of inkjet printers a blocked or dry print head is the cause more often
than
not. It is a shame that so much material is wasted and thrown into
landfill
because a miniscule component such as a print head cannot be simply
replaced
by snap in replacement or cartridges cannot be re-used.

They aim to sell printers, and ink, for what the market will pay, thereby
optimising the bottom line. Retail price does not reflect cost to produce.
If you produce 10 million printers, for a world wide market, using
automation and cheap labour, the cost per unit is only a small fraction
of the retail price. If printers had cheap, easily replaceable, parts plus
a long life we wouldn't have to keep buying them (to add to landfill).
Cartridges, and the dyes for formulating inks, come cheap in industrial
quantities, and cartridge manufacturing is automated, down to dropping
the finished product into its box.
 
M

measekite

anon said:
The Ideal inkjet printer



I intend this article as a base for discussion, and in no way is it intended
to place any bias towards or against any particular printer manufacturer.
Indeed all printers have their advantages and disadvantages, be it print
quality, cost, speed, ease of use, reliability and maintenance. I intend and
make no judgement or jibe towards any individual manufacturer and name none.



I wish printer manufacturers would read this newsgroup and get a grasp on
the problems people encounter with inkjet printers and resolve them.

If they did they would determine that most of the clogs are the result
of 3rd party ink that is not up to snuff and it is difficult to find the
very few that are. But they already know this. And they already know
that they are way over priced when it come to ink.
All
printers have their advantages and disadvantages and it is a shame that
no-one has really taken measures to ease these burdens on the end-user when
new models are designed.



I have considered laser printers but in my opinion laser printing is
excellent for the workplace or home office, however in my assessment their
tonal blending still falls short of the photographic quality required for A4
sized prints, and inkjet has the facility to create colour blends and
various finishes from gloss to matt whereas toner cannot.



Each of the following inkjet specs are further expanded on below.

a.. Four separate ink chambers / cartridges
b.. Clear plastic cartridges
c.. Optical ink level monitoring
d.. Option to refill chamber and/or replace cartridges with cheaper
original ink
e.. Better cartridge design
f.. Larger ink reservoir
g.. Replaceable snap-in print head


Discussion.

1) Four separate ink cartridges.

A few printer manufacturers have already started to use this technology and
it is a step towards cutting costs as only the empty colour needs replacing.



2) Clear plastic cartridges.

I once saw a printer which has four clear see-through cartridges where the
ink levels could be visually checked.. I am tired of having to replace half
used cartridges because I cannot see how much ink is remaining..



3) Optical ink level monitoring.

If cartridges were transparent, then an optical system could be employed to
prevent printing once a cartridge gets down to a critical level.



4) Option to refill and/or replace cartridges with cheaper original ink.

Now that is a great idea. Bulk OEM and Goodbye whores.
The bulk of the cost of cartridges is in the cartridge itself. It would be
nice to be able to purchase original inks in bottles and top up the
reservoirs oneself, thus reducing the amount of cost and waste.

People could still have the option of replacing the cartridge if they did
not want to go to the trouble of refilling the existing ones. It would be
nice to have the option of fill and/or replace.

Printer manufacturers need not lose out as they could sell the bottles of
their original inks at more reasonable cost to all concerned and could even
reduce manufacturing costs which would then cascade downwards. Cartridges
could be filled by a syringe to a max mark on transparent cartridges just as
one fills a kettle.



5) Better cartridge design.

Although some cartridge designs are quite elaborate and ingenious, they are
more complex than really need be. A simple gravity-fed tank system would
surely be better.



6) Larger ink reservoir.

The problems with some printers are that they do not take advantage of the
space available within the printer casing. Larger ink reservoirs would mean
that inks would not need to be changed so often and thus reduce chance of
airlocks and reduce waste. Inks could be improved to include an
anti-clogging agent to reduce the chance of clogging.

And the carts should be cheaper per ml.
7) Replaceable print head unit.

I once did see a printer with an ingenious design of a separate removable
snap-in print head tray, thus enabling a swift affordable print head
replacement for the serious photographer or person suffering a clogged print
head.

Canon and some HP printers already have that/ The problem is it costs
too much.
People will undoubtedly argue that printer manufacturers would not want a
printer to have a long lifespan. However there are printers which do have a
long lifespan at a cost due to more expensive cartridges with built in print
heads. An argument is available that the more affordable printing becomes,
the more people will use them and need more inks and so on. To be honest -
would we not use our cars more if fuel were cheaper? (however I do not want
to get into a discussion on that point here - thank you.)



I would not mind paying a few extra quid on a printer if I knew it would be
a wise investment for a long life and ease of maintenance. Affordable
printer spares would also be welcomed, and people who were into serious
photo printing would be most likely to replace their print head assemblies
regularly to maintain quality.



People would still purchase new printers as the manufacturers concentrated
more on enhanced print quality, speed, different paper sizes, selectable
paper trays, duplex printing, and so on. I myself would like to obtain an
A2 or A3 printer if they could prove themselves to last and all parts be
cost effective and easily interchanged should a fault occur. My problems
with inkjets to date leave me little confidence when deciding to pay out the
extra cost in buying a larger printer as one would not be expected to print
out an A2 or A3 page that often.

What are the sizes in inches for A2,3,4?
 
D

Derek Baker

measekite said:
If they did they would determine that most of the clogs are the result of
3rd party ink that is not up to snuff and it is difficult to find the very
few that are. But they already know this. And they already know that
they are way over priced when it come to ink.


Now that is a great idea. Bulk OEM and Goodbye whores.


And the carts should be cheaper per ml.


Canon and some HP printers already have that/ The problem is it costs too
much.


What are the sizes in inches for A2,3,4?

Inches what are those, don't you know the whole world's metric? :) But
seriously: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_size
 
B

Burt

Although my choice is my Canon i960 for its beautiful photo prints and
excellent aftermarket refill inks and carts, your criteria pretty heavily
tilted toward the Canon printer line. What would have tipped the responses
toward Epson would have been greater image permenance and the primary choice
of the graphic artist and professional photographer community. If a print
head build into the cartridge was a criteria (not a bad idea as all inkjets
have the potential to clog) HP would have had a shot at the best choice.
Interesting thread. Canon would win hands down if the inks were more
permenant and a replacement print head was priced as a consumable. And my
Toyota Camry would be the ideal car if it handled like my Porsche and got
100 miles to the gallon! What was the old homily - If wishes were horses,
beggers would ride. I don't mean to be cynical, but the fact is that the
inkjet technology is pretty amazing, but like everything else in the world,
it isn't perfect.
 
Ad

Advertisements

M

measekite

Burt said:
Although my choice is my Canon i960 for its beautiful photo prints and
excellent aftermarket refill inks and carts, your criteria pretty heavily
tilted toward the Canon printer line. What would have tipped the responses
toward Epson would have been greater image permenance and the primary choice
of the graphic artist and professional photographer community.

Usually in favor of their pigmented printers like the R800/1800. The
majority of the Epsons use dye based inks like the Canon.
 
Ad

Advertisements

A

Arthur Entlich

Many of the features you are looking for already exist in the Canon 4
color printer.

It uses four colors, and each color cartridge is separate. It uses
transparent ink cartridges and an optical ink level system. The
cartridges are relatively easy to refill.

The head is removable and replaceable.

The cartridges are still relatively small, but that is because even
Canon makes a good deal of the money in the inkjet business on ink
cartridge sales.

I don't know how much longer Canon will design their printers in this
manner. Canon had to do something to reenter the inkjet market. Their
product and deservedly, their reputation was miserable because their
printers had very poor reliability at one point. Canon recognized they
were losing market share and so they redesigned the printers from
scratch, and overall, they have done a good job, as far as can be
determined. They still have a short track history, since the printers
are recent introductions.

The main complaints that exist about Canons as they stand today are:

They need a better ink set that has better permanence.

The heads fail and are relatively costly, if they are available.

They do not have a full paper selection

They don't have drivers for a wide variation of papers

Otherwise they have good qualities. They are fast, relatively quite,
and not costly to run.

If Canon can come out with an effective ink set, and more reliable
heads, or at least cheaper replacement heads, they would have a very
likable printer.

Art
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top