- Joined
- Oct 27, 2005
- Messages
- 3,666
- Reaction score
- 1,349
- Points
- 337
- Location
- South Yorks, UK
- Printer Model
- Epson, Canon, HP... A "few"
Ah... Ok, that's somewhat helpful...
Can I make one small note though...
1. There's probably a reason why fuse-able chips were dropped. Most likely related to quality control, reliability, and cost... Factor in the various legal issues OEMs have faced about ink monitoring I wonder if they would also be a factor.
2. Do OEMs really want to lock every door so OEM is the only way? My guess it's a nirvana but in doing so they would create an almost unprecedented level of legal activity. Far better for them to create a difficult problem, one that drains resources, creates additional costs and results in a lot of running around but no legal battle.
My bet is that they are far more likely to go with the next version that has virtually no space for a third party chip but enough for a paper chip. Force your third party chip manufacturers to retool and consider expensive minimised chip technology, processors, etc... Maybe even bio degradeable chips?...
Again you can't forget quality assurance, reliability and cost... Oh and reduced income from reduced printer sales, meaning less R&D funding...
Oh and let's not forget more wasteful printers, less reliable lifespan and the usual 6 month run-around routine third parties do... Put it all together and you have to wonder just how bothered Canon are. Long term they get 3+ months of OEM only sales of consumables then maybe less than 3 months before out comes the next tweaked model...
But that's just me...
Can I make one small note though...
1. There's probably a reason why fuse-able chips were dropped. Most likely related to quality control, reliability, and cost... Factor in the various legal issues OEMs have faced about ink monitoring I wonder if they would also be a factor.
2. Do OEMs really want to lock every door so OEM is the only way? My guess it's a nirvana but in doing so they would create an almost unprecedented level of legal activity. Far better for them to create a difficult problem, one that drains resources, creates additional costs and results in a lot of running around but no legal battle.
My bet is that they are far more likely to go with the next version that has virtually no space for a third party chip but enough for a paper chip. Force your third party chip manufacturers to retool and consider expensive minimised chip technology, processors, etc... Maybe even bio degradeable chips?...
Again you can't forget quality assurance, reliability and cost... Oh and reduced income from reduced printer sales, meaning less R&D funding...
Oh and let's not forget more wasteful printers, less reliable lifespan and the usual 6 month run-around routine third parties do... Put it all together and you have to wonder just how bothered Canon are. Long term they get 3+ months of OEM only sales of consumables then maybe less than 3 months before out comes the next tweaked model...
But that's just me...