4 ms·

Waste ink pads are a necessary evil for inkjet printers. Cheap home printers don't get use replaceable ink pads for cost reasons. The Epson Workforce line that

Waste ink pads are a necessary evil for inkjet printers. Cheap home printers don't get use replaceable ink pads for cost reasons. The Epson Workforce line that uses high capacity ink pouches does (they're called "maintenance boxes"). I don't get the outrage in the article, as filling the ink pad even in consumer printers takes tens of thousands of pages, even hundreds of thousands for sprinter used multiple times a day that doesn't need to flush ink.

skyyler 4y ago
The outrage is that these machines are designed to fail. If it's a wear part, make it user replaceable. Programming the printer to just stop working is horrible.
- nickff 4y ago
  Replaceable wear parts cost extra money, and consume extra resources (which cost is a great proxy for). Many consumer products will never be used enough to make user-replace-ability cost effective or an effective use of resources. If you want to find evidence of this, look at all the computer and other consumer grade that is thrown away with no failed wear items (thrown out due to changes in preferences, obsolescence, or poor maintenance).
  - skyyler 4y ago
    >look at all the computer and other consumer grade that is thrown away with no failed wear items One of my hobbies is rescuing these devices from E-Waste, so I'm acutely aware of them. The huge difference is that these devices are usually pretty out-of-date. Sure, that first generation iPad that went into an otterbox on day one is just fine, mechanically. But can a normal person use it to do much of anything useful? The youtube app doesn't work. Safari won't load any webpages. The app store loads, but most apps (even compatible ones!) won't install. Not even just things being "too slow", they can't speak modern protocols. Printers haven't changed that much. When's the last time there was a change to PostScript that made old printers not just obsolete, but unusable?
    - nickff 4y ago
      I agree that these devices are usually able to accomplish useful tasks, but they're still being thrown away in massive numbers. If you find a way to re-allocate or otherwise re-use these devices, more user-serviceability will be worthwhile, but that's a big 'if'.
      - skyyler 4y ago
        You don't seem to understand. These printers are designed to fail. There's enough E-Waste being generated without these sorts of anti-user moves. Those old devices you're talking about were thrown out because they are old. Not because they were designed to fail. I pull PowerBooks from this era out of the trash literally every week. They're basically useless to anyone but collectors. They still work! But they're not very useful for modern tasks, for most people. Sure, giganerds like me can get use out of them. But good luck finding software to run on them...
        nickff 4y ago
        Everything is designed to fail, the only questions are when and how. These printers are designed to stop working before the absorbent pad is full/used up. My guess is that most of these printers are thrown away long before the 'soft-failure' is triggered.
        skyyler 4y ago
        I reject your notion that everything is designed to fail. I regularly use machines that are older than you are. They certainly were not designed to fail. The waste pad on every professional grade inkjet printer I've ever seen is a snap-fit part that costs under $25. But no, defend this practice of throwing away a printer because a sponge is saturated.
        nickff 4y ago
        I work in an electronics OEM, and I can tell you that all our products have a variety of age-related failure modes. We design them to last a long time, but not forever. LEDs age, as do capacitors, transistors, and batteries. Electro-mechanical systems are even worse!
  - kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
    In this case it amounts to a replaceable sponge. Inkjets already have elaborate mechanisms to support replacement of cartridges. There is no cost justification for omitting something so simple other than driving future demand with forced obsolescence.
- williamscales 4y ago
  I think a fine compromise would be simply disclosing the expected lifetime of the wear parts when you purchase the printer. Epson could say "the lifetime of the ink pads is around 100,000 pages" (or whatever).
  - blendergeek 4y ago
    The outrage is not that Epson doesn't make it easy to replace the part. The outrage is that Epson printers (might?) have a secret page counter and the printers kill themselves after a certain number of pages whether or not the ink pads still work. Even if the user replaces the ink pads, the printer will still refuse to work because the counter is used up. This sort of behavior is unethical, user hostile, and should be criminal.
    - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
      > This sort of behavior is unethical, user hostile, and should be criminal. Yes it is, and yes it should be. But even if it isn't criminal, it is just begging for a class-action lawsuit.
    - MikePlacid 4y ago
      Outrage directed at something marked with “(might?)” seems to me extremely counter-productive.
      - blendergeek 4y ago
        I added the might, not because I am unsure if the counter exists (it defintiely seems to), but because Epson won't aknowledge its existence.
    - Gigachad 4y ago
      There is likely no way to detect how full the ink pad is though. A counter does make perfect sense but it should be legally required to allow the user to replace the pad and reset the counter. Most service alerts are based on usage counters. But all of this is very specific and complex so there isn’t enough demand for laws to mandate such things.
tengwar2 4y ago
Tens of thousands isn't a large enough number to be reassuring. I use an Ecotank 4500, and because of the nature of my work buy paper five reams at a time. So far I have 13k sheets on the clock. If the printer fails at 20-30k, I'm going to be seriously annoyed. Fortunately it seems that aftermarket waste ink collectors exist, though there is always a concern that Epson might shut these down with legal or technical measures. However this doesn't address a major concern: I bought this printer for availability. Cheaper running costs are important, of course, but what really matters to me is that it should not suddenly refuse to work. Yes, I have another printer on a different site, but I don't want to have to trog over there late at night because some damn fool has (a) not designed for maintenance; (b) put in a misleading error message; and (c) not designed in a warning of the lines of "this printer will cease to function after approximately 5000 more sheets.
wmf 4y ago
Just document it!
14 4y ago
Why does the scanner need to stop working then? It is independent and requires no use of ink. There is no confusion why this is the way it is to anyone here thinking critically for 2 seconds.
tinus_hn 4y ago
People would probably consider it more fair if the part just broke instead of the firmware seizing up after a fixed number of prints.

skyyler 4y ago

The outrage is that these machines are designed to fail. If it's a wear part, make it user replaceable. Programming the printer to just stop working is horrible.

nickff 4y ago
Replaceable wear parts cost extra money, and consume extra resources (which cost is a great proxy for). Many consumer products will never be used enough to make user-replace-ability cost effective or an effective use of resources. If you want to find evidence of this, look at all the computer and other consumer grade that is thrown away with no failed wear items (thrown out due to changes in preferences, obsolescence, or poor maintenance).
- skyyler 4y ago
  >look at all the computer and other consumer grade that is thrown away with no failed wear items One of my hobbies is rescuing these devices from E-Waste, so I'm acutely aware of them. The huge difference is that these devices are usually pretty out-of-date. Sure, that first generation iPad that went into an otterbox on day one is just fine, mechanically. But can a normal person use it to do much of anything useful? The youtube app doesn't work. Safari won't load any webpages. The app store loads, but most apps (even compatible ones!) won't install. Not even just things being "too slow", they can't speak modern protocols. Printers haven't changed that much. When's the last time there was a change to PostScript that made old printers not just obsolete, but unusable?
  - nickff 4y ago
    I agree that these devices are usually able to accomplish useful tasks, but they're still being thrown away in massive numbers. If you find a way to re-allocate or otherwise re-use these devices, more user-serviceability will be worthwhile, but that's a big 'if'.
    - skyyler 4y ago
      You don't seem to understand. These printers are designed to fail. There's enough E-Waste being generated without these sorts of anti-user moves. Those old devices you're talking about were thrown out because they are old. Not because they were designed to fail. I pull PowerBooks from this era out of the trash literally every week. They're basically useless to anyone but collectors. They still work! But they're not very useful for modern tasks, for most people. Sure, giganerds like me can get use out of them. But good luck finding software to run on them...
      - nickff 4y ago
        Everything is designed to fail, the only questions are when and how. These printers are designed to stop working before the absorbent pad is full/used up. My guess is that most of these printers are thrown away long before the 'soft-failure' is triggered.
        skyyler 4y ago
        I reject your notion that everything is designed to fail. I regularly use machines that are older than you are. They certainly were not designed to fail. The waste pad on every professional grade inkjet printer I've ever seen is a snap-fit part that costs under $25. But no, defend this practice of throwing away a printer because a sponge is saturated.
        nickff 4y ago
        I work in an electronics OEM, and I can tell you that all our products have a variety of age-related failure modes. We design them to last a long time, but not forever. LEDs age, as do capacitors, transistors, and batteries. Electro-mechanical systems are even worse!
- kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
  In this case it amounts to a replaceable sponge. Inkjets already have elaborate mechanisms to support replacement of cartridges. There is no cost justification for omitting something so simple other than driving future demand with forced obsolescence.
williamscales 4y ago
I think a fine compromise would be simply disclosing the expected lifetime of the wear parts when you purchase the printer. Epson could say "the lifetime of the ink pads is around 100,000 pages" (or whatever).
- blendergeek 4y ago
  The outrage is not that Epson doesn't make it easy to replace the part. The outrage is that Epson printers (might?) have a secret page counter and the printers kill themselves after a certain number of pages whether or not the ink pads still work. Even if the user replaces the ink pads, the printer will still refuse to work because the counter is used up. This sort of behavior is unethical, user hostile, and should be criminal.
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    > This sort of behavior is unethical, user hostile, and should be criminal. Yes it is, and yes it should be. But even if it isn't criminal, it is just begging for a class-action lawsuit.
  - MikePlacid 4y ago
    Outrage directed at something marked with “(might?)” seems to me extremely counter-productive.
    - blendergeek 4y ago
      I added the might, not because I am unsure if the counter exists (it defintiely seems to), but because Epson won't aknowledge its existence.
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    There is likely no way to detect how full the ink pad is though. A counter does make perfect sense but it should be legally required to allow the user to replace the pad and reset the counter. Most service alerts are based on usage counters. But all of this is very specific and complex so there isn’t enough demand for laws to mandate such things.

tengwar2 4y ago

Tens of thousands isn't a large enough number to be reassuring. I use an Ecotank 4500, and because of the nature of my work buy paper five reams at a time. So far I have 13k sheets on the clock. If the printer fails at 20-30k, I'm going to be seriously annoyed. Fortunately it seems that aftermarket waste ink collectors exist, though there is always a concern that Epson might shut these down with legal or technical measures. However this doesn't address a major concern: I bought this printer for availability. Cheaper running costs are important, of course, but what really matters to me is that it should not suddenly refuse to work. Yes, I have another printer on a different site, but I don't want to have to trog over there late at night because some damn fool has (a) not designed for maintenance; (b) put in a misleading error message; and (c) not designed in a warning of the lines of "this printer will cease to function after approximately 5000 more sheets.

wmf 4y ago

Just document it!

14 4y ago

Why does the scanner need to stop working then? It is independent and requires no use of ink. There is no confusion why this is the way it is to anyone here thinking critically for 2 seconds.

tinus_hn 4y ago

People would probably consider it more fair if the part just broke instead of the firmware seizing up after a fixed number of prints.