A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Printers
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A caution on Canon printers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 27th 04, 09:36 AM
Andrew Mayo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A caution on Canon printers

I have been an enthusiastic advocate of the Canon S520/600/6xx series
of printers because they are fast, produce good quality results and
have separate ink tanks which are cheap to replace.

When I purchased my S520 some 18 months ago, I was told then that the
printhead was expected to last about 5,000 pages and that the
replacement cost would be in the region of USD50. As the printhead is
clearly user-replaceable, I considered this to be similar to laser
printers, where the toner cartridge and drum are often independently
replaceable.

Yesterday the printhead failed unexpectedly; it will not print black,
and is not clogged, so clearly there is an electronics failure.

I went to purchase a replacement and was gobsmacked to find that
(a) they are almost impossible to get from any normal computer
wholesaler, at least in London.
(b) the cost has now risen to something like USD160!. This is pretty
much the price of the printer.

As a consequence I have purchased an Epson C86; the ink tanks are not
as cheap, but I feel seriously misled by Canon.

In particular, with dwindling global resources, I am appalled that a
perfectly serviceable printer, whose manufacture undoubtedly
contributed to environmental damage, cannot be repaired because its
manufacturer has decided to inflate the cost of an
end-user-replaceable spare part to outrageous levels.

There is no way Canon can convince me that the cost of this printhead
in any way represents the actual manufacturing cost. If this were so,
the cost of one set of ink tanks plus the printhead, which are of
course bundled with the printer itself, would mean that the entire
rest of the printer could be manufactured by Canon for perhaps USD5,
which is clearly ridiculous.

I realise that modern consumer appliances are often cheaper to replace
than repair. However, in this case, the print head was clearly
intended to be a user-replaceable consumable component, and I am quite
certain that when the printer was first sold, the cost of this
component was quoted at an entirely reasonable level, based on a 5,000
page replacement interval. Clearly, a printhead that only lasts 5,000
pages but costs USD160 is completely uneconomical; had I known Canon
would be so outrageously dishonest, I would never have purchased the
printer in the first place.

I have to say that the conduct of inkjet printer manufacturers
regarding the cost of consumables and the life of their products,
makes the car industry look like a paragon of virtue. It is high time
the EU took an interest in their activities. With declining oil and
gas reserves, global warming and worldwide pollution caused in part by
the manufacturer of consumer appliances, it is simply unacceptable to
foster this 'throw away' culture.
  #2  
Old September 27th 04, 12:39 PM
Arthur Entlich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Although I have no reason to doubt what you have written, I sincerely
hope your information is somehow inaccurate.

It was appearing that Canon was one of the only companies showing some
real leadership in getting away from the "throw away" printer which was
basically a box to sell ink out of. They have reasonably easy to refill
cartridges, which are also relatively cheap even as OEM, they have a
replaceable and user serviceable head, and they are rumored to be coming
out with a one picolitre dot printer which will allow for the removal of
the wasteful light cyan and magenta inks.

Ever since Canon reintroduced their inkjets with their completely
redesigned head, I have been worried about the possibility of head
failure and either difficulty in locating them, or of, the head price
being inflated to make the printer cheaper to replace than repair.

Like yourself, I find the idea of tossing out an otherwise fully
functional printer abhorrent, wasteful, and environmentally unacceptable
and I do hope Canon is not falling into the same business model that
every other printer manufacturer seems to have followed.

I was just beginning to appreciate Canon for what appeared to be high
ethical standards in this market.

If anyone can offer contrary information to that which Andrew has
ascertained about head replacement on current Canon printers, I would
like to hear about it.

Art


Andrew Mayo wrote:

I have been an enthusiastic advocate of the Canon S520/600/6xx series
of printers because they are fast, produce good quality results and
have separate ink tanks which are cheap to replace.

When I purchased my S520 some 18 months ago, I was told then that the
printhead was expected to last about 5,000 pages and that the
replacement cost would be in the region of USD50. As the printhead is
clearly user-replaceable, I considered this to be similar to laser
printers, where the toner cartridge and drum are often independently
replaceable.

Yesterday the printhead failed unexpectedly; it will not print black,
and is not clogged, so clearly there is an electronics failure.

I went to purchase a replacement and was gobsmacked to find that
(a) they are almost impossible to get from any normal computer
wholesaler, at least in London.
(b) the cost has now risen to something like USD160!. This is pretty
much the price of the printer.

As a consequence I have purchased an Epson C86; the ink tanks are not
as cheap, but I feel seriously misled by Canon.

In particular, with dwindling global resources, I am appalled that a
perfectly serviceable printer, whose manufacture undoubtedly
contributed to environmental damage, cannot be repaired because its
manufacturer has decided to inflate the cost of an
end-user-replaceable spare part to outrageous levels.

There is no way Canon can convince me that the cost of this printhead
in any way represents the actual manufacturing cost. If this were so,
the cost of one set of ink tanks plus the printhead, which are of
course bundled with the printer itself, would mean that the entire
rest of the printer could be manufactured by Canon for perhaps USD5,
which is clearly ridiculous.

I realise that modern consumer appliances are often cheaper to replace
than repair. However, in this case, the print head was clearly
intended to be a user-replaceable consumable component, and I am quite
certain that when the printer was first sold, the cost of this
component was quoted at an entirely reasonable level, based on a 5,000
page replacement interval. Clearly, a printhead that only lasts 5,000
pages but costs USD160 is completely uneconomical; had I known Canon
would be so outrageously dishonest, I would never have purchased the
printer in the first place.

I have to say that the conduct of inkjet printer manufacturers
regarding the cost of consumables and the life of their products,
makes the car industry look like a paragon of virtue. It is high time
the EU took an interest in their activities. With declining oil and
gas reserves, global warming and worldwide pollution caused in part by
the manufacturer of consumer appliances, it is simply unacceptable to
foster this 'throw away' culture.


  #3  
Old September 27th 04, 06:41 PM
Cari
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My S600 printhead failed a couple of weeks ago. Since I paid the grand sum
of $5.00 for this unit on EBay a few years ago, I wasn't really worried
about it and got a brand new i560 for $49.95. The S range of Canon printers
is discontinued and a new print head for the S600 would have been about $90.
They are not easily available as the OP stated, whichever country you are
in. I guess the cost of the printhead is offset by the cartridges which are
so cheap.

The S600 is sitting in the garage, along with an old BJC-8200 and an
S800.... all of which suffered the same fate as regards the printhead.
There's also an ancient BJC-4450 in there.... which still works but it's a
little slow for me nowadays!

Anyone want them for the cost of shipping? I call them my 'retired' units!
--
Cari (MS-MVP Printing, Imaging & Hardware)
www.coribright.com

"Arthur Entlich" wrote in message
news:i_S5d.120859$KU5.81567@edtnps89...
Although I have no reason to doubt what you have written, I sincerely hope
your information is somehow inaccurate.

It was appearing that Canon was one of the only companies showing some
real leadership in getting away from the "throw away" printer which was
basically a box to sell ink out of. They have reasonably easy to refill
cartridges, which are also relatively cheap even as OEM, they have a
replaceable and user serviceable head, and they are rumored to be coming
out with a one picolitre dot printer which will allow for the removal of
the wasteful light cyan and magenta inks.

Ever since Canon reintroduced their inkjets with their completely
redesigned head, I have been worried about the possibility of head failure
and either difficulty in locating them, or of, the head price being
inflated to make the printer cheaper to replace than repair.

Like yourself, I find the idea of tossing out an otherwise fully
functional printer abhorrent, wasteful, and environmentally unacceptable
and I do hope Canon is not falling into the same business model that every
other printer manufacturer seems to have followed.

I was just beginning to appreciate Canon for what appeared to be high
ethical standards in this market.

If anyone can offer contrary information to that which Andrew has
ascertained about head replacement on current Canon printers, I would like
to hear about it.

Art




  #4  
Old September 27th 04, 08:49 PM
Laurence Wilmer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Andrew Mayo" wrote in message
om...
I have been an enthusiastic advocate of the Canon S520/600/6xx series
of printers because they are fast, produce good quality results and
have separate ink tanks which are cheap to replace.

When I purchased my S520 some 18 months ago, I was told then that the
printhead was expected to last about 5,000 pages and that the
replacement cost would be in the region of USD50. As the printhead is
clearly user-replaceable, I considered this to be similar to laser
printers, where the toner cartridge and drum are often independently
replaceable.

Yesterday the printhead failed unexpectedly; it will not print black,
and is not clogged, so clearly there is an electronics failure.

I went to purchase a replacement and was gobsmacked to find that
(a) they are almost impossible to get from any normal computer
wholesaler, at least in London.
(b) the cost has now risen to something like USD160!. This is pretty
much the price of the printer.

As a consequence I have purchased an Epson C86; the ink tanks are not
as cheap, but I feel seriously misled by Canon.

In particular, with dwindling global resources, I am appalled that a
perfectly serviceable printer, whose manufacture undoubtedly
contributed to environmental damage, cannot be repaired because its
manufacturer has decided to inflate the cost of an
end-user-replaceable spare part to outrageous levels.

There is no way Canon can convince me that the cost of this printhead
in any way represents the actual manufacturing cost. If this were so,
the cost of one set of ink tanks plus the printhead, which are of
course bundled with the printer itself, would mean that the entire
rest of the printer could be manufactured by Canon for perhaps USD5,
which is clearly ridiculous.

I realise that modern consumer appliances are often cheaper to replace
than repair. However, in this case, the print head was clearly
intended to be a user-replaceable consumable component, and I am quite
certain that when the printer was first sold, the cost of this
component was quoted at an entirely reasonable level, based on a 5,000
page replacement interval. Clearly, a printhead that only lasts 5,000
pages but costs USD160 is completely uneconomical; had I known Canon
would be so outrageously dishonest, I would never have purchased the
printer in the first place.

I have to say that the conduct of inkjet printer manufacturers
regarding the cost of consumables and the life of their products,
makes the car industry look like a paragon of virtue. It is high time
the EU took an interest in their activities. With declining oil and
gas reserves, global warming and worldwide pollution caused in part by
the manufacturer of consumer appliances, it is simply unacceptable to
foster this 'throw away' culture.


Agree with all you say, Andrew, except the bit about buying an Epson.
(Phrases like "shooting self in foot" come to mind).

I'm in the same situation with my S520 showing first signs of head problems,
have found just
http://www.systeminsight.co.uk/acata...ssemblies.html
for £77 which is indeed a silly price.

Maybe they are very expensive because they don't sell many because ...oh
well.

The 520 has been an excellent printer while it lasted, and more than covered
what I used to spend on film and photographic prints - wonder how long a
Pixma IP4000 would last?

Laurence


  #5  
Old September 27th 04, 11:26 PM
PC Medic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Cari" wrote in message
nk.net...
My S600 printhead failed a couple of weeks ago. Since I paid the grand
sum of $5.00 for this unit on EBay a few years ago, I wasn't really
worried about it and got a brand new i560 for $49.95. The S range of
Canon printers is discontinued and a new print head for the S600 would
have been about $90. They are not easily available as the OP stated,
whichever country you are in. I guess the cost of the printhead is offset
by the cartridges which are so cheap.

The S600 is sitting in the garage, along with an old BJC-8200 and an
S800.... all of which suffered the same fate as regards the printhead.
There's also an ancient BJC-4450 in there.... which still works but it's a
little slow for me nowadays!

Anyone want them for the cost of shipping? I call them my 'retired'
units!
--


Hmmm, you do realize that Canon has a Customer Loyalty Program. This enables
owners of Canon products which are no longer under warranty to receive a
discount towards the purchase of a new product. It is also shipped (free) to
your door.



  #6  
Old September 28th 04, 12:11 AM
PC Medic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Andrew Mayo" wrote in message
om...
I have been an enthusiastic advocate of the Canon S520/600/6xx series
of printers because they are fast, produce good quality results and
have separate ink tanks which are cheap to replace.

When I purchased my S520 some 18 months ago, I was told then that the
printhead was expected to last about 5,000 pages and that the
replacement cost would be in the region of USD50. As the printhead is
clearly user-replaceable, I considered this to be similar to laser
printers, where the toner cartridge and drum are often independently
replaceable.

Yesterday the printhead failed unexpectedly; it will not print black,
and is not clogged, so clearly there is an electronics failure.

I went to purchase a replacement and was gobsmacked to find that
(a) they are almost impossible to get from any normal computer
wholesaler, at least in London.
(b) the cost has now risen to something like USD160!. This is pretty
much the price of the printer.

As a consequence I have purchased an Epson C86; the ink tanks are not
as cheap, but I feel seriously misled by Canon.

In particular, with dwindling global resources, I am appalled that a
perfectly serviceable printer, whose manufacture undoubtedly
contributed to environmental damage, cannot be repaired because its
manufacturer has decided to inflate the cost of an
end-user-replaceable spare part to outrageous levels.

There is no way Canon can convince me that the cost of this printhead
in any way represents the actual manufacturing cost. If this were so,
the cost of one set of ink tanks plus the printhead, which are of
course bundled with the printer itself, would mean that the entire
rest of the printer could be manufactured by Canon for perhaps USD5,
which is clearly ridiculous.

I realise that modern consumer appliances are often cheaper to replace
than repair. However, in this case, the print head was clearly
intended to be a user-replaceable consumable component, and I am quite
certain that when the printer was first sold, the cost of this
component was quoted at an entirely reasonable level, based on a 5,000
page replacement interval. Clearly, a printhead that only lasts 5,000
pages but costs USD160 is completely uneconomical; had I known Canon
would be so outrageously dishonest, I would never have purchased the
printer in the first place.

I have to say that the conduct of inkjet printer manufacturers
regarding the cost of consumables and the life of their products,
makes the car industry look like a paragon of virtue. It is high time
the EU took an interest in their activities. With declining oil and
gas reserves, global warming and worldwide pollution caused in part by
the manufacturer of consumer appliances, it is simply unacceptable to
foster this 'throw away' culture.


First I am not sure who quoted the printhead life to you, but I'd say they
were off. I currently own 3 Canon printers and have had 4 others in the
past. All have lasted 3 or more years and seen moderate to heavy use (6 kids
in the house) and never a printhead issue. In fact, I have only had problems
twice in nearly 8 years and both times had a replacement at my door the next
day.
As for cost of the replacement printhead, the original quote was actually a
little conservative, but not by much. The current price you were quoted I
would agree is way out of line and is about twice the actual cost (here in
the states at least). They are only available here from Canon Parts or a
service center and the service center can tack on what ever they want for
the cost of an out of warranty part. Even at the $60 cost though this could
be a good reason to go for Canon's Extended Service Plan. Unlike other
manufactures, they actually cover the printhead under their warranty and the
two year extension continues this coverage. So for about $50 you get 3 years
of coverage and basically have to worry about nothing but ink!

Recently upgraded under their Customer Loyalty Program to move up from an
old printer that was finally starting to give out on me after nearly 4
years. With the discount they offered under the plan and a extended service
plan, cost is still much less than originally paid for the old printer, got
a better printer and shipped right to my door for free.






  #7  
Old September 28th 04, 12:17 AM
PC Medic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Laurence Wilmer" wrote in message
...

"Andrew Mayo" wrote in message
om...
I have been an enthusiastic advocate of the Canon S520/600/6xx series
of printers because they are fast, produce good quality results and
have separate ink tanks which are cheap to replace.

When I purchased my S520 some 18 months ago, I was told then that the
printhead was expected to last about 5,000 pages and that the
replacement cost would be in the region of USD50. As the printhead is
clearly user-replaceable, I considered this to be similar to laser
printers, where the toner cartridge and drum are often independently
replaceable.

Yesterday the printhead failed unexpectedly; it will not print black,
and is not clogged, so clearly there is an electronics failure.

I went to purchase a replacement and was gobsmacked to find that
(a) they are almost impossible to get from any normal computer
wholesaler, at least in London.
(b) the cost has now risen to something like USD160!. This is pretty
much the price of the printer.

As a consequence I have purchased an Epson C86; the ink tanks are not
as cheap, but I feel seriously misled by Canon.

In particular, with dwindling global resources, I am appalled that a
perfectly serviceable printer, whose manufacture undoubtedly
contributed to environmental damage, cannot be repaired because its
manufacturer has decided to inflate the cost of an
end-user-replaceable spare part to outrageous levels.

There is no way Canon can convince me that the cost of this printhead
in any way represents the actual manufacturing cost. If this were so,
the cost of one set of ink tanks plus the printhead, which are of
course bundled with the printer itself, would mean that the entire
rest of the printer could be manufactured by Canon for perhaps USD5,
which is clearly ridiculous.

I realise that modern consumer appliances are often cheaper to replace
than repair. However, in this case, the print head was clearly
intended to be a user-replaceable consumable component, and I am quite
certain that when the printer was first sold, the cost of this
component was quoted at an entirely reasonable level, based on a 5,000
page replacement interval. Clearly, a printhead that only lasts 5,000
pages but costs USD160 is completely uneconomical; had I known Canon
would be so outrageously dishonest, I would never have purchased the
printer in the first place.

I have to say that the conduct of inkjet printer manufacturers
regarding the cost of consumables and the life of their products,
makes the car industry look like a paragon of virtue. It is high time
the EU took an interest in their activities. With declining oil and
gas reserves, global warming and worldwide pollution caused in part by
the manufacturer of consumer appliances, it is simply unacceptable to
foster this 'throw away' culture.


Agree with all you say, Andrew, except the bit about buying an Epson.
(Phrases like "shooting self in foot" come to mind).

I'm in the same situation with my S520 showing first signs of head
problems,
have found just
http://www.systeminsight.co.uk/acata...ssemblies.html
for £77 which is indeed a silly price.

Maybe they are very expensive because they don't sell many because ...oh
well.

The 520 has been an excellent printer while it lasted, and more than
covered
what I used to spend on film and photographic prints - wonder how long a
Pixma IP4000 would last?


I just got the iP4000 and love it.
Had an old S520 (4 years old) that started grinding about 1 in 10 times I
would use it after kids yanked a paper jam out of it.
After calling to see if cost effective to get repaired Canon offered me 10%
off the iP4000 and shipped it next day to my door free of charge. Not a bad
printer for $137 !!



  #8  
Old September 28th 04, 01:33 AM
colinco
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article PC Medic says...
Unlike other
manufactures, they actually cover the printhead under their warranty

Canon are very generous in the US market. In other areas the printhead
is regarded as a consumable like ink.
  #10  
Old September 28th 04, 02:40 AM
Arthur Entlich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



PC Medic wrote:

"Cari" wrote in message
nk.net...

My S600 printhead failed a couple of weeks ago. Since I paid the grand
sum of $5.00 for this unit on EBay a few years ago, I wasn't really
worried about it and got a brand new i560 for $49.95. The S range of
Canon printers is discontinued and a new print head for the S600 would
have been about $90. They are not easily available as the OP stated,
whichever country you are in. I guess the cost of the printhead is offset
by the cartridges which are so cheap.

The S600 is sitting in the garage, along with an old BJC-8200 and an
S800.... all of which suffered the same fate as regards the printhead.
There's also an ancient BJC-4450 in there.... which still works but it's a
little slow for me nowadays!

Anyone want them for the cost of shipping? I call them my 'retired'
units!
--



Hmmm, you do realize that Canon has a Customer Loyalty Program. This enables
owners of Canon products which are no longer under warranty to receive a
discount towards the purchase of a new product. It is also shipped (free) to
your door.


Do they also pay to ship the OLD printer back to them? If printer
companies are going to obsolesce their product by making replacement
parts impossible to come by or horribly overpriced, then they should be
stuck with the old hulk of a printer than has no use to the end user any
longer.

Art





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon multifunction printers and SP2 John Latter Printers 11 October 9th 04 04:08 PM
new Canon printers - iP3000 lew@csus_abcdefg.edu Printers 2 July 26th 04 10:09 PM
HP everyday photo paper with canon printers gigi Printers 1 May 8th 04 04:37 PM
Lyson quad inks for Canon printers Jim Youngmeyer Printers 0 January 30th 04 06:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.