Michael k Vegfruit
(
profile
),
30 Nov, 2006 @ 06:15am
Re: Re: 3rd party ink
"The decision to use 3rd party ink should rest with the owner of the printer not the manufacturer of the printer."
Certainly: but if a printer manufacturer knows that using third party inks will damage the the printer, and warn about this, should they be expected to honour warranties to people who use other inks? It might not be fair for Epson to use the courts to stop third parties selling inks to work on their printers, but it would be equally unfair to expect them to replace a printer that's broken because you've tried to refill the cartridge with Dulux.
Michael k Vegfruit
(
profile
),
30 Nov, 2006 @ 02:05am
Going back to the beginning:
"So if you want to be able to buy 3rd party ink then so be it but dont bitch when a new basic inkjet printer costs $300."
Does anyone have a clue what the real costs for printer manufacture are? Would a basic printer really be five times as expensive as it is now, if ink was sold at close to cost price? Does strike me as odd that no-one's broken this "give the printer away for free, extort money for ink" model.
×
Email This Story
This feature is only available to registered users. You can register here or sign in to use it.
Re: Re: 3rd party ink
"The decision to use 3rd party ink should rest with the owner of the printer not the manufacturer of the printer."
Certainly: but if a printer manufacturer knows that using third party inks will damage the the printer, and warn about this, should they be expected to honour warranties to people who use other inks? It might not be fair for Epson to use the courts to stop third parties selling inks to work on their printers, but it would be equally unfair to expect them to replace a printer that's broken because you've tried to refill the cartridge with Dulux.