Rumor 'n' innuendo re: CSF systems

This per the MIS site -- the URL where the following text appears is

http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/1270cfs.html

Member said:

Caution -
We hear rumors that Epson will change the firmware in the printer at
the end of April 2001, to defeat the current Chip Reset Procedure.
If you are purchasing a new 870 or 1270 printer made after 4/30/01
the Chip Reset Procedure may not work and thus the need for a
Continuous Flow System is unnecessary. We hope this does not happen.

Click to expand...

I don't understand why they say this would make a CSF "unnecessary". Why "unnecessary"? If you didn't want to have to be constantly paying for cartridges containing unpleasantly small amounts of ink, would you not continue to find a CSF system necessary?

Can anyone comment on how Epson's changing the firmware would make using a CSF system impossible? (I suspect that "impossible" rather than "unnecessary" is what MIS meant.) Somehow, the printer has to convey to the printer driver that the ink supply is low, yes? If it wasn't done with a chip in, say, the Epson 1200, how was it done?

It would be mighty unpleasant if all of a sudden it became impossible to use one of the MIS or NoMoreCarts systems, and thus to be forever stuck having to buy grotesquely overpriced ink carts. (One of the CFS/CIS sites estimated that the ink costs roughly $4,500 per gallon at list prices.)

Would such a change mean it would be possible to refill the bottles oneself without buying an entirely new cartridge? (I wonder if that wouldn't be hellaciously messy, though.) I am going to send some e-mail to nomorecarts.com to see what they think about this rumor.

This information is basically out of date. It has been said that even if Epson DOES change the firmware, the new software resetter (also available from MIS) will still work. AND the custom chips that are used on the CIS from Nomorecarts will also still work, according to them. So I wouldn't worry too much about a firmware change now...

HOWEVER, look for changes when they release the next generation of printers! I'm sure they'll come up with something even more difficult to crack so that we can't use 3rd party inks....

Travis

Epson has a very good reputation but the more I read about this stuff the more dismayed I become. Clearly there are superior results for photographers working in black and white, obtainable with Quadtone inks--and better color inks available from a number of sources. If Epson redesigns its lines of printers to become unusable with other, better, inks...well, what an ugly blow to art, as it were. Then I guess photographers would have to wait unti some other lines of printers become available that are capable of producing similar quality and of working with third-party inks, and with a reasonable range of papers. But who would do it? The R&D required to develop such a product must be staggeringly expensive.

It's a shame to see this happening. It's a case-study in short-sightedness and mediocrity -- ironic to have the mediocrity standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the excellent job these printers are capable of doing. I understand it's a given that when material is produced in smaller packages, the unit price is necessarily higher. I have no argument with that. But how stupidly wasteful it is for Epson to force its customers always to have to buy plastic boxes of ink that must be discarded when empty, rather than at least provide the choice to refill them. A friend of mine figures that Epson's mission is to make its fortune selling consumables--as he sees it, they practically give the printers away and then make back those losses on the ink. (Well, maybe. The 1280's $500 price tag doesn't seem quite like a "give-away.")

Someone I know worked for Xerox PARC long ago. He tells me that he observed any number of astonishing ideas being toyed with...and then discarded. The concepts are entombed in PARC archives; the academics who thought them up never thought of a use for them. As he was telling me this, he wondered aloud how much farther along computing, in general, would be today if some of those ideas had made it to market--the PostScript story is an example of innovation that had to be wrestled away from PARC entombment. It was no matter to the academics; they were being paid to play. When they got bored with the latest whiz-bang idea, they moved on to something more interesting.

Even if they were working at the genius level, there is only one word for describing what happens when good ideas are discarded for no good reason: mediocrity. That is how Epson's attitude strikes me. How much farther along could inkjet printing have gotten by now if it were not hampered by the manufacturers' short-sightedness and mediocre business-as-usual bean-counter attitudes?

Frustrating. Guess I'd best order a CIS/CSF-compatible printer while I can still get it.

Travis said:

HOWEVER, look for changes when they release the next generation of
printers! I'm sure they'll come up with something even more
difficult to crack so that we can't use 3rd party inks....

Click to expand...

MikeA said:

http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/1270cfs.html

MikeA said:

Caution -
We hear rumors that Epson will change the firmware in the printer at
the end of April 2001, to defeat the current Chip Reset Procedure.
If you are purchasing a new 870 or 1270 printer made after 4/30/01
the Chip Reset Procedure may not work and thus the need for a
Continuous Flow System is unnecessary. We hope this does not happen.

Click to expand...

I don't understand why they say this would make a CSF
"unnecessary". Why "unnecessary"? If you didn't want to have to be
constantly paying for cartridges containing unpleasantly small
amounts of ink, would you not continue to find a CSF system
necessary?

Click to expand...

What they are trying to say is that in order to use the CFS to begin with, you have to be able to reset the chip that is on the cartridge (be it MIS' or NoMoreCarts'). Hence, their convoluted sentence is trying to tell you that the software resetter they currently sell only works with the current version of the firmware embedded on the chip. If Epson had or does change the firmware, the software that gets around the Epson chip may not work and hence your CFS would be essentially rendered useless.

MikeA said:

Can anyone comment on how Epson's changing the firmware would make
using a CSF system impossible? (I suspect that "impossible" rather
than "unnecessary" is what MIS meant.) Somehow, the printer has to
convey to the printer driver that the ink supply is low, yes? If it
wasn't done with a chip in, say, the Epson 1200, how was it done?

Click to expand...

I think MIS means the "purchase" of a CFS is unnecessary in the case where the firmware is changed. As for the communication between the printer and the driver, I believe it is the driver that tells the printer when the ink is low or out and not the other way around. I don't know this for a fact but I suspect the driver, after calculating how many times you've sent something to the printer and approximating how much ink was required for each print job, sends a message to the chip to say something to the effect of "The ink in your cartridge is all gone now so you can't print anymore". In the days of the unchipped cartridges, the driver would show you your ink levels but there was no chip in the printer that would stop the printer from printing. This is just a supposition rather than any kind of fact that I can confirm. Others on this forum probably know the more technical and accurate reasons here.

MikeA said:

It would be mighty unpleasant if all of a sudden it became
impossible to use one of the MIS or NoMoreCarts systems, and thus
to be forever stuck having to buy grotesquely overpriced ink carts.
(One of the CFS/CIS sites estimated that the ink costs roughly
$4,500 per gallon at list prices.)

Click to expand...

If you already had a printer with a CFS hooked up which worked with the software reset, a change from Epson in their firmware wouldn't affect you unless you somehow got a hold of that change and reprogrammed your chip.

MikeA said:

Would such a change mean it would be possible to refill the bottles
oneself without buying an entirely new cartridge? (I wonder if that
wouldn't be hellaciously messy, though.) I am going to send some
e-mail to nomorecarts.com to see what they think about this rumor.

Click to expand...

As Travis mentioned, that rumour seems to have been dispelled for the time being. At the moment you can still purchase a current Epson printer, attach a CFS/CIS and bypass the chip.

Even though my response is a bit convoluted, I hope it helps clear some of it up for you.

Kharim

Kharim Hogan said:

What they are trying to say is that in order to use the CFS to
begin with, you have to be able to reset the chip that is on the
cartridge (be it MIS' or NoMoreCarts').

Click to expand...

...

Kharim Hogan said:

sentence is trying to tell you that the software resetter they
currently sell only works with the current version of the firmware
embedded on the chip. If Epson had or does change the firmware,
the software that gets around the Epson chip may not work and hence
your CFS would be essentially rendered useless.

Click to expand...

Then I wonder if the NoMoreCarts solution -- they supply their own, custom chip -- isn't a good workaround. But...is there also firmware within the printer itself (not on the cart) that can be changed such that even a proprietary chip would no longer be usable? Yet another variable...all moot, as you point out, to someone who owns or is about to buy a printer whose carts' chips can be reset.

Kharim Hogan said:

In the days of the unchipped cartridges, the driver would
show you your ink levels but there was no chip in the printer
that would stop the printer from printing.

Click to expand...

Well...this suggests a possibility I had not considered when I posted my diatribe about Epson a little while ago. It it was possible in the past to go on printing to the point that the cart ran out of ink, then I suppose it was possible to damage the printer if the user kept trying to print afterward ("if I can get just ONE more print..."). Could Epson have developed the chip system partly to prevent the use of third-party inks, but also partly to guard against the possibility of such damage? If the latter, then perhaps they decided it was better to err on the side of caution than to risk an inaccurate evaluation of ink level -- and then possible damage to the printer thereafter. I do love a good conspiracy theory, and this other, more mundane-sounding possibility is somewhat painful for me to consider.

Kharim Hogan said:

As Travis mentioned, that rumour seems to have been dispelled for
the time being. At the moment you can still purchase a current
Epson printer, attach a CFS/CIS and bypass the chip.

Click to expand...

I think I should do so. And of course now I can begin agonizing over which of the two continuous-feed systems is the better one. For some peculiar reason, each manufacturer makes this claim about its own product. NoMoreCarts.com responded to recent e-mail, saying that within the next day or two they will be introducing a new line of inks. As usual, the plot thickens.

The new chip has some virtues but I don't suppose that Epson minded much that it also hindered the use of third party inks. One nice thing is that the printers with the chips can run out in mid print, you can change the cartridge, and the print can continue to the end. This probably means that Epson had to be pretty conservative and leave enough ink so there was no chance that any color really ran out before the printer decided that it was out. Obviously, a CFS system also solves the mid print problem by never running out. The economics of this are interesting. Epson could go to a more "open" ink system but to conserve profit, the printer prices would have to go up. It seems clear that Epson thinks (and is likely correct) that it will make more dollars(yen) by selling cheap printers (perhaps even below cost) that require the use of Epson cartridges. I've had several Epson printers and have printed a lot of prints. It has never taken long for my cost of inks and papers (mostly Epson) to exceed the printer cost. This is probably close to true with my 2000P which is over $900(US). Fortunately, 1270/1280 printers (and their little brothers) will be available (counting refurbs) for some time and the current work arounds for the chipped cartridges will work.

MikeA said:

Kharim Hogan said:

What they are trying to say is that in order to use the CFS to
begin with, you have to be able to reset the chip that is on the
cartridge (be it MIS' or NoMoreCarts').

Click to expand...

...

MikeA said:

sentence is trying to tell you that the software resetter they
currently sell only works with the current version of the firmware
embedded on the chip. If Epson had or does change the firmware,
the software that gets around the Epson chip may not work and hence
your CFS would be essentially rendered useless.

Click to expand...

Then I wonder if the NoMoreCarts solution -- they supply their own,
custom chip -- isn't a good workaround. But...is there also
firmware within the printer itself (not on the cart) that can be
changed such that even a proprietary chip would no longer be
usable? Yet another variable...all moot, as you point out, to
someone who owns or is about to buy a printer whose carts' chips
can be reset.

MikeA said:

In the days of the unchipped cartridges, the driver would
show you your ink levels but there was no chip in the printer
that would stop the printer from printing.

Click to expand...

Well...this suggests a possibility I had not considered when I
posted my diatribe about Epson a little while ago. It it was
possible in the past to go on printing to the point that the cart
ran out of ink, then I suppose it was possible to damage the
printer if the user kept trying to print afterward ("if I can get
just ONE more print..."). Could Epson have developed the chip
system partly to prevent the use of third-party inks, but also
partly to guard against the possibility of such damage? If the
latter, then perhaps they decided it was better to err on the side
of caution than to risk an inaccurate evaluation of ink level --
and then possible damage to the printer thereafter. I do love a
good conspiracy theory, and this other, more mundane-sounding
possibility is somewhat painful for me to consider.

MikeA said:

As Travis mentioned, that rumour seems to have been dispelled for
the time being. At the moment you can still purchase a current
Epson printer, attach a CFS/CIS and bypass the chip.

Click to expand...

I think I should do so. And of course now I can begin agonizing
over which of the two continuous-feed systems is the better one.
For some peculiar reason, each manufacturer makes this claim about
its own product. NoMoreCarts.com responded to recent e-mail,
saying that within the next day or two they will be introducing a
new line of inks. As usual, the plot thickens.

Click to expand...

Leon Wittwer said:

The new chip has some virtues but I don't suppose that Epson minded
much that it also hindered the use of third party inks. One nice
thing is that the printers with the chips can run out in mid print,
you can change the cartridge, and the print can continue to the
end. This probably means that Epson had to be pretty conservative
and leave enough ink so there was no chance that any color really
ran out before the printer decided that it was out. Obviously, a
CFS system also solves the mid print problem by never running out.
The economics of this are interesting. Epson could go to a more
"open" ink system but to conserve profit, the printer prices would
have to go up. It seems clear that Epson thinks (and is likely
correct) that it will make more dollars(yen) by selling cheap
printers (perhaps even below cost) that require the use of Epson
cartridges. I've had several Epson printers and have printed a lot
of prints. It has never taken long for my cost of inks and papers
(mostly Epson) to exceed the printer cost. This is probably close
to true with my 2000P which is over $900(US). Fortunately,
1270/1280 printers (and their little brothers) will be available
(counting refurbs) for some time and the current work arounds for
the chipped cartridges will work.

Click to expand...

This "mid-print resuming" thing must be particular to the 1270 or 1280 series as I've never had that happen on my 870.

Hello all

Epson did not put the chip in there so that you'll have to buy the expensive cartridges. They put it in there to prevent the printhead to run dry.

Why I am saying this? well, if you use the third party chip or the "wrong" chip with the epson printer (like use the B&W chip in the color cartridge). The printer will complain but then still work as long as the chip indicates there is still "ink" in the cartridge.

Epson can modify the printer in such a way that it will reject any Non-Epson chip. They can include a serial # on the chip itself then store that serial # on the printer EPROM/FLASH memory so that you can't never re-use the empty chip with the chip re-set trick (unless you can change the serial # of the chip, you need to know the valid number etc, it's much harder to work around). These things are very easy to incorporate into the logic design of the printer.

Will they get into legal trouble by doing so? Maybe. However you can't really make a case saying that Epson forces you to use Epson ink. Because there is no stoping you to buy the Epson cartridge, flush it out and refill with third-party ink. The most the court can do is to ask Epson to include a note showing you how to flush out epson ink and refill it with third-party ink. Or a way for you to buy empty Epson cartridges for a few dollares less directly from Epson. The court can't ask Epson to remove the chip because Epson can say it's there to prevent the printer head to run dry.

I had a chance to talk with a Epson rep. He knows what he was talking about. He went out of his way to help me with my 11 month old 1270 printer (using MIS ink) fixed and ultimately have the printer replaced with the 1280 w/o any charge to me at all.

It's true that Epson makes much of its money from the ink/paper, not the printer.

-Khanh

MikeA said:

MikeA said:

In the days of the unchipped cartridges, the driver would
show you your ink levels but there was no chip in the printer
that would stop the printer from printing.

Click to expand...

Well...this suggests a possibility I had not considered when I
posted my diatribe about Epson a little while ago. It it was
possible in the past to go on printing to the point that the cart
ran out of ink, then I suppose it was possible to damage the
printer if the user kept trying to print afterward ("if I can get
just ONE more print..."). Could Epson have developed the chip
system partly to prevent the use of third-party inks, but also
partly to guard against the possibility of such damage? If the
latter, then perhaps they decided it was better to err on the side
of caution than to risk an inaccurate evaluation of ink level --
and then possible damage to the printer thereafter. I do love a
good conspiracy theory, and this other, more mundane-sounding
possibility is somewhat painful for me to consider.

Click to expand...

I got no problem with them making money from the ink. They've put a lot of time and money into ceating a good system and they deserve to recoup the cost and possibly make a profit! I don't mind that one bit.

I pay 50 cents in ink and 25 cents for paper for a 8x 10 and that's quite ok by me. I won't begrudge them some profit. That's what makes the world go round.

If people want to do the CIF/CFS that's ok too. - To each his own, I say, but if the average user buys the ink and helps pay for more R&D and a better product in the next generation, why not?

Mike,

My biggest complaint about ALL consumer grade printer manufacturers is the complete lack of support for real B&W work. Most such units, while producing excellent colour prints, are just terrible for black & white, what with dithering or the use of coloured inks to "simulate" a true continous tone monochrome print. With all the hot competition on the printer market these days, surely a company could easily set itself apart from the crowd by offering an OEM solution for real B&W work. Couple that with an optional continous ink setup, and I think you've got a sure fire winner for the more serious amatuer shooters.

Mike.

MikeA said:

It's a shame to see this happening. It's a case-study in
short-sightedness and mediocrity -- ironic to have the mediocrity
standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the excellent job these printers
are capable of doing. I understand it's a given that when material
is produced in smaller packages, the unit price is necessarily
higher. I have no argument with that. But how stupidly wasteful it
is for Epson to force its customers always to have to buy plastic
boxes of ink that must be discarded when empty, rather than at
least provide the choice to refill them. A friend of mine figures
that Epson's mission is to make its fortune selling consumables--as
he sees it, they practically give the printers away and then make
back those losses on the ink. (Well, maybe. The 1280's $500 price
tag doesn't seem quite like a "give-away.")

Someone I know worked for Xerox PARC long ago. He tells me that he
observed any number of astonishing ideas being toyed with...and
then discarded. The concepts are entombed in PARC archives; the
academics who thought them up never thought of a use for them. As
he was telling me this, he wondered aloud how much farther along
computing, in general, would be today if some of those ideas had
made it to market--the PostScript story is an example of innovation
that had to be wrestled away from PARC entombment. It was no matter
to the academics; they were being paid to play. When they got bored
with the latest whiz-bang idea, they moved on to something more
interesting.

Even if they were working at the genius level, there is only one
word for describing what happens when good ideas are discarded for
no good reason: mediocrity. That is how Epson's attitude strikes
me. How much farther along could inkjet printing have gotten by now
if it were not hampered by the manufacturers' short-sightedness and
mediocre business-as-usual bean-counter attitudes?

Frustrating. Guess I'd best order a CIS/CSF-compatible printer
while I can still get it.

Travis said:

HOWEVER, look for changes when they release the next generation of
printers! I'm sure they'll come up with something even more
difficult to crack so that we can't use 3rd party inks....

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Seema said:

I got no problem with them making money from the ink. They've put a
lot of time and money into ceating a good system and they deserve
to recoup the cost and possibly make a profit!

Click to expand...

That they would make money from, profit from, sales of the ink is not what concerns me. Clearly, a company that can't profit from its products isn't going to be able to stay around and develop newer, better ones. At issue for me is the sheer wastefulness of an endless procession of throw-away plastic containers that by design cannot be refilled. A design that supports the choice to add a continuous feed system would be vastly better. Emphasis on "choice." Yes, it would make the printer more expensive. It would be worth paying that much more, considering the eventual savings.

I have no way to verify this claim, but some people claim that fully forty percent of the ink, typically, remains within the cartridge at the point when the printer and driver refuse to continue printing because you are "out of ink." If this is true, it goes beyond erring on the side of caution and is disgustingly wasteful. (Again, I have no way to verify the claim. If the actual figure is lower, then I'll stand corrected.)

Seema said:

If people want to do the CIF/CFS that's ok too. - To each his own,
I say, but if the average user buys the ink and helps pay for more
R&D and a better product in the next generation, why not?

Click to expand...

See above. A design that provides continuous-inking as an option is far better and more efficient. If Epson were to make such a system I imagine that a lot of people would use Epson's own continuous-feed system -- many would probably buy the additional hardware and/or software at the time they purchased the printer.

And Epson could go on profiting from ink sales in either case. The printers are great, no question about it, but the attitude at present is short-sighted. Why stick with a mediocre concept when an excellent one is possible? The guys who designed a system that can place a 4-picoliter dot with great accuracy onto a sheet of paper can surely do even better.

I don't mind paying a company their profit, they are in business to make money. I would rather pay more for the printer and be able to use the consumables from where I please. I would bet that the cardboard box and aluminum foil wrap cost more than the ink in any of the carts.

Seema said:

I got no problem with them making money from the ink. They've put a
lot of time and money into ceating a good system and they deserve
to recoup the cost and possibly make a profit! I don't mind
that one bit.

I pay 50 cents in ink and 25 cents for paper for a 8x 10 and that's
quite ok by me. I won't begrudge them some profit. That's what
makes the world go round.

If people want to do the CIF/CFS that's ok too. - To each his own,
I say, but if the average user buys the ink and helps pay for more
R&D and a better product in the next generation, why not?

Click to expand...

I actually quite disagree with that, if i can run Epson right now and knowing that I can not prevent refilling, cfs, cis, etc from my investment of chip or any other means.

I will offer a plan like a mobile, offer the customer a low price printer (or even give it for free) and you sign the contract to buy ink cartridge for ? number, in ? year.

That probably make you feel better in term of you are feeling like you getting a free good printer - just finance it by buying a cartridges.

I agree that they should get some profit , some money from their product, in order to improve their product.

I waive that right by using MIS ink and my CFS but I am still loyal to them in term of papers. Can they forgive me for that ?

I don't want to say that CFS/CIS is better and more efficient than the original cartridges system. It wasn't designed for that- believe me, my CFS/CIS is working fine but I'm annoyed that I can't close the lid completely - that's all ( but I can live with that though).

Anyway, they're good, and I love my Epson.

Kui

What in particular annoys you about not being able to close the lid? I have not seen a continuous-feed system up close yet, but my impression of the nomorecarts.com system (and perhaps this is true of the MIS system as well) is that the lid does not have to stay open too far. Is it an issue of dirt or dust possibly getting inside the printer? If so could you not cover the machine with some lightweight material when it is not in use? Does having the cover always open significantly increase the noise level?

Kui said:

I don't want to say that CFS/CIS is better and more efficient than
the original cartridges system.

Click to expand...

Why would it not be more efficient? At the very least it is efficient in terms of your being able to purchase a quantity of ink for considerably less per cc than you would otherwise pay. Continuous-feeding systems also do not call for your having to buy many, many little plastic boxes which you must then throw away. Given an intention to cut down on the waste, Epson could work this one out and continue to profit from sales of ink.

I am with Kui about the annoyance of not being able to close the print lid completely. MIS instructions actually ask me to permenantly remove the lid of my 1160 (I understand that nomorecarts system only requires the lid to be open by an inch). The noise level was quite high, and it gets tiring seeing the guts of the printer all the time. I've since put the lid back on and attached something to prop the lid up by an inch. Noise level is now not a problem, but still higher than if the lid were closed.

MikeA said:

Kui said:

I don't want to say that CFS/CIS is better and more efficient than
the original cartridges system.

Click to expand...

Why would it not be more efficient? At the very least it is
efficient in terms of your being able to purchase a quantity of ink
for considerably less per cc than you would otherwise pay.
Continuous-feeding systems also do not call for your having to buy
many, many little plastic boxes which you must then throw away.
Given an intention to cut down on the waste, Epson could work this
one out and continue to profit from sales of ink.

Click to expand...

I think the nomorecarts.com solution is to supply a couple of rubber spacers of some kind to allow the lid to stay up -- but only a little. I could see how the noise would become oppressive with the lid all the way up.

Switching gears a bit...anyone reading this who uses a Niagra feed system (the nomorecarts.com system with the name Niagra on it): do you get good service from those folks? I sent them an e-mail inquiry a while back...no response. The message didn't bounce, so I assume for now that they got it. Nomorecarts.com itself replied very quickly to e-mail I sent them. But the Niagra system appealed to me at the least because there appeared (from the vendor's web site) to be better service. They have a number you can call; nomorecarts.com appears not to want to get into talking on the phone. But of course if the e-mail goes unanswered, then, hmm....

JonathanF said:

I am with Kui about the annoyance of not being able to close the
print lid completely. MIS instructions actually ask me to
permenantly remove the lid of my 1160 (I understand that
nomorecarts system only requires the lid to be open by an inch).
The noise level was quite high, and it gets tiring seeing the guts
of the printer all the time. I've since put the lid back on and
attached something to prop the lid up by an inch. Noise level is
now not a problem, but still higher than if the lid were closed.

Click to expand...

MikeA said:

What in particular annoys you about not being able to close the

Click to expand...

I can't really tell, but it is annoying. Let's say, like , ummh, if you have a car that you made some modifications and that make you cannot close the car's doors completely.

The car still run and plus you got what you want from that change, does this make sense to you ?

Yes, many people might not get this feeling but I do (a little though, like I said i still can live with it).

I use my own built CIS/CFS, so a lot of modifications and researches going on here, you don't have to remove the whole lid but you absolutely need to let it propped opened. In my case, I use the rubber (Stedler between the body and the lid and leave about 3/4 - 1 inch higher than usual and it works fine) When I don't print, I can close the lid almost pretty close.

MikeA said:

Why would it not be more efficient? At the very least it is
efficient in terms of your being able to purchase a quantity of ink
for considerably less per cc than you would otherwise pay.
Continuous-feeding systems also do not call for your having to buy
many, many little plastic boxes which you must then throw away.
Given an intention to cut down on the waste, Epson could work this
one out and continue to profit from sales of ink.

Click to expand...

I think you perhaps mean cost-effectiveness, and if that is, it's a "yes".

And why i still think the cartridge way is the ideal ?, because that's what it was designed for, if Epson gonna do a CIS/CFS system, they probably gonna design the printer differently , may be like a real big model they're making.

That's just my respect to the maker, though. It's like you were born with 2 arms and you think it's not enough and try to get more 10 fake arms which might work fine for you and may be what you meant - effective..

Yeah, belive me , in that case, god made you born with 2 arms.

Just MHO, OK ?

Oh, anyway, eventhough that's my thought,but I'm still using my own built CIS/CFS though, because I am OK to have 10 arms instead of 2 (while I'm aware that this is not what it's meant to be).

Hope you understand.

Do I recommend CIS or CFS, of course , if you think it's good for you.

Kui

JonathanF said:

I am with Kui about the annoyance of not being able to close the
print lid completely. MIS instructions actually ask me to
permenantly remove the lid of my 1160 (I understand that
nomorecarts system only requires the lid to be open by an inch).
The noise level was quite high, and it gets tiring seeing the guts
of the printer all the time. I've since put the lid back on and
attached something to prop the lid up by an inch. Noise level is
now not a problem, but still higher than if the lid were closed.

Click to expand...

Well, thank you for understanding me.

I had problems with noise too and now gone (but with the lid propped opened though) and I can't really let the lid close completely because I can't feel certain at all that it won't get stuck (I had that couple times when I forgot.)

If the noise are really disturbing you, try to see where does the noise come from, in my CFS/CIS system, it came from the tubing moving back and forth on the edge of the body and i make it gone by cushion it with a thin band of rubber (again).

KUi

Khank, you bring up some very good points and I am finding this discussing very interesting.

The message that pops up whenever I turn on the power with my CIS has always made me scratch my head. If they know that you are using a non-Epson chip, then why do they let you continue to use it? Perhaps because of possible legal recourse. I suppose they designed the message to pop up so you would simply know if you happen to buy a non-authentic Epson cartridge? At any rate, it is clear that they could stop us from using any cartridge that doesn't have a non-Epson chip. And they could fix the firmware/driver so that we couldn't do a chip reset either. I'm not sure how they could prevent the software resetter from working since it basically does the same thing to the chip that the print driver does... but I'm sure it's possible.

Yet, they haven't done anything aggressive YET to prevent these things. I'm sure there are a lot of upset execs at Epson that don't like what's going on with the availability of the CIS/CFS units and the chip resets to use refilled carts. However, by the same token, maybe they achieved quite a bit just by preventing these things from happening much sooner. Heck, it took almost an entire year for chip reset to be discovered and allow the use of these alternatives!

Travis

MikeA said:

I have no way to verify this claim, but some people claim that
fully forty percent of the ink, typically, remains within the
cartridge at the point when the printer and driver refuse to
continue printing because you are "out of ink." If this is true, it
goes beyond erring on the side of caution and is disgustingly
wasteful. (Again, I have no way to verify the claim. If the actual
figure is lower, then I'll stand corrected.)

Click to expand...

I don't think there could really be any consistent figure, but I think 40% is quite a bit high unless those people were printing photos with the same colors. I did the chip reset on my OEM carts several times before I starting refilling (and eventually getting the CIS) and I got about 20-25% more ink each time - fairly consistently. The photos that I printed were widely varied. I would agree, however, that even 20-25% wasted ink is too much of a "safe" margin for the printheads to run dry.

Travis