CLI-8 Cartridges, How does the chip really monitor ink?

[billscorpio]

Hi All, I like Kamikaze have read through this whole thread, however in my lack of intellegence I bought a iP6600D and when I got a low ink warning on my cli-8bk I went and bought a new one fell over at the price and started looking for info and came acrossed this forum. I am presently waiting for some ink refill to arrive from Atlantic Ink Jet, But in the mean time I unplugged the printer took my full OEM Cli-8BK out and put the old one that was blinking low ink back in closed the lid turned the printer back on and the printer started blinking the low ink signal again, so I lifted the lid again when the cartridges centered I unplugged it again and put the new OEM Cli-8BK back in ,plugged the printer back in, it knew it was the full one again, I really don't know what all this means, but when my refills arrive I'll fill some cartridges before they go empty unplug the printer to put them out and in just to see if it knows they are refills or not. Maybe this is the least complicated way around this chip thing, which by the way I don't have the knowledge that some of you have on this thread. But I thank you ALL for what I have gained, and would like to encourage you to keep trying as you don't lose until you quit!!! Thanks Again Billscorpio

 

[canonfodder]

Armor, an ink supplier in France posted their newsletter with the announcement of a solution to the chipped printer iP4200 and such. They show December 2006 as the release date.

Their Kit for starting this alternate ink system is Ref # B12288 and includes the Adapter, 5 carts plus 3 color carts.

A search for sellers of this kit came up with several in Norway and France.

I wrote to one in France named GS2I. They have the kit available now for about $100 US plus shipping. I have asked for a definite price including UPS shipping to New England area. I will report their answer.

 

[CPUK]

Hello all, great forum

A well known remanufacturing outlet (in the UK) now has a resetter for these chips. I was curious as to whether anyone else has sourced one?

 

[ghwellsjr]

Funny thing is that the IP3000 and 4000 have very accurate inklevel monitoring without the need of a chip.

It could be argued that Canon had several other legitimate reasons to add a chip to their cartridges besides ink level monitoring:

Without the chip, the printer cannot even tell if there is a cartridge in the print head, a condition that could damage the print head.

Without the chip, the printer cannot tell if a cartridge is firmly implanted in the print head, another condition that could lead to damage of the print head.

Without the chip, the printer cannot tell if the cartridges are inserted in the correct positions. This won't damage the print head but could result in a warranty claim.

Without the chip and the LED, the printer cannot inform the user that the cartridges are correctly inserted.

Without the chip and the LED, the printer cannot inform the user which cartridges need replacing.

Also, it should be noted that the printers that use the unchipped cartridges only have accurate ink level monitoring at the moment a reservoir becomes empty. At this point, the computer begins to report that the cartridge is low (yellow warning). If a user then swaps another cartridge that is truly empty, the printer will not know that it is empty and the print head is at risk of damage. Also, at any time between the initial yellow low ink warning and the red empty ink alarm, if the user swaps a cartridge that is not full but only contains enough ink to cover the sensor in the reservoir (or simply removes the cartridge), the printer and computer will report that the cartridge is full. All of these abnormal situations are handled correctly with the chipped cartridges.

For these reasons, I believe that Canon can effectively argue that they have a legitimate reason to warn the user that the printer is at risk of damage and the warranty void unless new OEM cartridges are used exclusively.

 

[canonfodder]

It could be argued that Canon had several other legitimate reasons to add a chip to their cartridges besides ink level monitoring:

Hey Ghwellsjr, whose side are you on?

I am only kidding! You know, your statements are quite correct, and they do make very strong arguments that Canon is doing the proper thing by adding the chips. But..............

It is also quite evident that Canon serves its own selfish financial purpose of making it difficult for the average customer to do anything but purchase genuine Canon carts at the price set by Canon, and not by competition. If that were not the case, Canon could have allowed for a simple chip reset, with the caution to the user that resetting should only be done when the user is sure that a proper and full ink cart is being installed.

I say it is a selfish purpose, but it is also an intelligent business decision. That is, as long as no law is being broken in the attempt to 'lock in' the ink and ink cartridge sales.

Would Canon be any more correct and 'legal' if they were to mark the package and literature of all chipped- cartridge printers with a 'warning' informing the potential customer of the facts concerning the limitation involved in the chipped carts?

How about: "Be aware that this Canon Pixma iPxxxx Printer only operates with full functionality when used with genuine Canon ink cartridges."

Since most of the consumer electronics magazines accept advertising from all makers of consumer electronic products, they are not likely to cooperate in any way in an attempt to inform the public of the chipped cartridge practices of printer makers such as Canon. The only magazine which might report fairly on this subject is Consumer Reports. Since Consumer Reports is proud that they accept no advertising and no free copies of the products which they review for their reports, they have nothing to lose in reporting negative facts along with the positive facts.

Especially if you are a subscriber to CU, consider making comments to them about the chipped cartridge and its monetary unfairness. When they do printer reviews, this information should be included to make the consumer aware.

 

[websnail]

Hello all, great forum

A well known remanufacturing outlet (in the UK) now has a resetter for these chips. I was curious as to whether anyone else has sourced one?

Well, you can't make a statement like that and not tell us who it is...

Somehow I doubt this is for real though...

 

[Xalky]

It could be argued that Canon had several other legitimate reasons to add a chip to their cartridges besides ink level monitoring:

Without the chip, the printer cannot even tell if there is a cartridge in the print head, a condition that could damage the print head.

Without the chip, the printer cannot tell if a cartridge is firmly implanted in the print head, another condition that could lead to damage of the print head.

Without the chip, the printer cannot tell if the cartridges are inserted in the correct positions. This won't damage the print head but could result in a warranty claim.

Without the chip and the LED, the printer cannot inform the user that the cartridges are correctly inserted.

Without the chip and the LED, the printer cannot inform the user which cartridges need replacing.

Also, it should be noted that the printers that use the unchipped cartridges only have accurate ink level monitoring at the moment a reservoir becomes empty. At this point, the computer begins to report that the cartridge is low (yellow warning). If a user then swaps another cartridge that is truly empty, the printer will not know that it is empty and the print head is at risk of damage. Also, at any time between the initial yellow low ink warning and the red empty ink alarm, if the user swaps a cartridge that is not full but only contains enough ink to cover the sensor in the reservoir (or simply removes the cartridge), the printer and computer will report that the cartridge is full. All of these abnormal situations are handled correctly with the chipped cartridges.

For these reasons, I believe that Canon can effectively argue that they have a legitimate reason to warn the user that the printer is at risk of damage and the warranty void unless new OEM cartridges are used exclusively.

While all of the above could be proved to be reasons for the chip, none of those reasons are a good explanation for a $15 cartridge. The fact of the matter is that a compatible cartridge can be sold, at a profit mind you, for under $4. The chip is a 10 cent item added to keep others ink out. It can easily be proved that the exorbitant price is the result of unfair market practices. All the other reasons pale in comparison to the most obvious reason. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

Warn me that my printer will be out of warranty...thats fine, I'll take my chances. If the warranty is important to you, by all means use OEM cartridges.

The point is, the consumer is suffering a great injustice, end of story.

 

[ghwellsjr]

Canon still has competition--from Epson, HP, and Lexmark to name a few.

The "fair" price of Canon's cartridges is set by Canon trying to maximize their profit. The price that gives them the maximum profit may be $15. Or it may be $13 or $17. No one knows for sure until they try it. And it might be $15 this year and $13 or $17 next year. The price difference between the unchipped and chipped cartridges is about $2--not $11. This is not about the cost of the chip. If it were that simple, then you should be happy if Canon charged 10 cents more for the chipped cartridges as they do for the unchipped ones. Canon takes the risk of setting the price to maximize their profit. There is no one else entitled to get involved in determining what profit Canon should make.

You all should take a lesson from how eBay operates. How would you like it if you offered an item for sale at some starting price and someone came along and said that was too high? Think about it. If your price is too high, it won't sell. And if someone is willing to pay any price for it, who's to say it's too high?

And why do you consider keeping other's ink out as an unfair market practice? They can design and make their own printers with their own cartridge and ink designs and enter the market just like everyone else. Do you think that if your printer is damaged by a third-party ink or cartridge, you can go to that third-party and get them to replace your printer?

We consumers suffer a great injustice when lawyers or govenments try to determine "fair" prices instead of letting the market decide.

 

[Xalky]

You do make some valid arguments. I'm a big believer in the free market economy, there's no question there. We can't blame canon, or any company for that matter, for wanting to maximize profits, that's what they're in business for. I'm in total agreement there.

I say bring on the suit and let the court decide. We can debate this till we're blue in the face,and it won't change a thing. The change will come when somebody does something to affect a change.

 

[jtl]

What would be the basis for a law suit? Canon has the right to charge what ever they want for their ink carts and we as consumers have the right to decide if we will pay that price or seek an alternative.