[MaxBarraclough]

I've been wondering for a while why it is that market forces haven't given us a printer that escapes the razor business model (low unit price combined with extortionate ink prices and anti-consumer practices to oppose third-party ink solutions). Seems to me that the way for a printer company to beat the competition would be to offer a product that isn't anti-consumer. Is that essentially what this printer is doing?

Can anyone comment on how it compares to a cheap laser printer?

[alex_duf]

I'm still researching that topic and it seems even the eco-tank brick themselves once the ink-pad is deemed to be too full.

So even if you replace the ink-pads you have to use some kind of illegal software to reset the number of pages printed, so the printer think it's brand new and allow you to print again. This really should be an option, even if it's hidden far down the printing menu.

Which I guess is prone to the usual arms race between the OEM and the pirate, so assuming your printer software is up to date, it's probably hard to reset the page count.

So yeah, still searching to see how much a problem it is, but that's a big no-no for me if true. Particularly for a product that brands itself as being more environment conscious...

[MaxBarraclough]

I don't get you. It uses refillable ink tanks, right? Why would they be over-full, and why would the manufacturer care? How could they ever detect third-party ink?

My assumption was that they were charging more for the printer and being 'permissive' regarding ink (that is to say, allowing the customer to do what they want with equipment they own).

They look like they're somewhat high maintenance. [0][1]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRo0ADOPMSs

[1] https://www.tonergiant.co.uk/blog/2017/03/buy-epson-ecotank-...

[the_pwner224]

TL;DR Epson is really greedy.

https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/429699/Epson+ECO+TANK+%2...

> Epson uses an "inkpad" to clear its printer (jets?) before printing. Eventually the amount of ink deposited in this blotter-type system fills and must be replaced. Unfortunately it seems as if replacing the inkpad is very messy and difficult. Our printer is used so frequently that the inkpad needs to be replaced every six months.

> Epson charges enough to make replacing the entire unit a (sadly) reasonable option.

https://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/498327/ink+pad+finished+...

> As suggested in the video after cleaning the waste ink pads you need to reset the counters.

> Go online and search for Epson XP-620 reset waste ink counters to find results for suppliers of the reset software which you can purchase online

[MaxBarraclough]

Sounds like a horror show. This [0] isn't very reassuring either, even if doesn't pertain to this product in particular.

[0] https://epson.com/Support/wa00369

[TheOtherHobbes]

I suspect you're confusing your personal - understandable - desire for cheap ink with "market forces."

Basic business analysis suggests there are very few practical ways in which a newcomer to the market could produce a product with no anti-consumer features that is also realistically profitable.

Selling on low price -> volume alone - assuming a newcomer could even make that happen - won't do it.

Note I'm not disagreeing that we all want cheap inks without gouging. But I am disagreeing that it's realistic to expect "market forces" to provide this when they're far more likely to do the opposite. And in fact have been doing the opposite for decades now.

[MaxBarraclough]

I'm not thinking of myself here, I very rarely print anything. Roughly once a year. I don't even own a printer myself, I'm generally able to use someone else's, or if it really comes to it, I'm happy to pay a professional printing service a few pounds.

My assumption is that people who print a few pages a week would rather spend more upfront, and less on ink. It's not a technical question, it's a matter of someone making a standard inkjet printer and charging more for it while charging less for ink, and removing restrictions against third-party ink.

> Selling on low price -> volume alone - assuming a newcomer could even make that happen - won't do it.

Why not? Why wouldn't people buy this if it existed? Why wouldn't a newcomer to the market go this route?

> they're far more likely to do the opposite. And in fact have been doing the opposite for decades now.

This seems to be true, but I don't understand why. Doesn't it just take one of the printer companies to break away from the pack?

Perhaps I'm overestimating how willing people would be to spend upfront to minimise their long-term ink costs.

[hutzlibu]

If a company would market a printer which is actually not cheating you - and people would believe it - you would have a pretty outstanding feature in a market, allmost everyone hates.

It is just, that probably no one would believe it.

[userbinator]

why it is that market forces haven't given us a printer that escapes the razor business model

There are, they are called industrial printers. The ones used for printing packaging and other very high-volume applications. Relatively low resolution, but ultra high speed and printable area size. They also cost much more than any individual or business not in the printing industry would ever want to pay for a printer. Something like this...

https://www.uscutter.com/Roland-VersaCAMM-VS640i-Wide-Format...