Epson Stylus Color 600 - no black print
James Sherman
re-adding the printer, downloading the drivers. No luck. Color prints good,
even the links in email messages. Epson says take it to a repair center, I
think it could be software since parts of it work. Ideas or suggestions
welcome. TIA.
Why Knot?
new. I thought it was junk! Plus the next time I travel for a long time I'll
take the printer with me and use it occasionally instead of leaving it for a
few months.
"James Sherman" <jshe...@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:v9ua6c3...@corp.supernews.com...
Taliesyn
> It took three days, patience, and his guidebook, but my printer works like
> new. I thought it was junk! Plus the next time I travel for a long time I'll
> take the printer with me and use it occasionally instead of leaving it for a
> few months.
I have no doubt about Arthur's expertise in unclogging clogging Epsons.
It's what he likes to do. But I do take strong issue with printers
taking a relaxing "bath" for three days while the works piles up. I have
to have a printer that is ready when I'm ready, and doesn't require
countless head cleanings using up precious ink. But hey, that's just
me.
-Taliesyn
Bob O`Bob
> I have no doubt about Arthur's expertise in unclogging clogging Epsons.
> It's what he likes to do. But I do take strong issue with printers
> taking a relaxing "bath" for three days while the works piles up. I have
> to have a printer that is ready when I'm ready, and doesn't require
> countless head cleanings using up precious ink. But hey, that's just
> me.
You've never actually even used an Epson, have you?
I've had direct experience with at least a couple dozen, and I've never even heard of
an Epson clogging unless it had first sat idle for significantly more than just 3 days.
You apparently just read the newsgroup and then internalize the problems which people
bring here as if they were precisely statistically representative of the whole universe
of printers from each manufacturer.
Odd, since Canon had so many seriously troubled models late in the BJC line and even
into the S line.
Oh, wait - weren't you the one who knew someone with the unusual experience of
being *happy* with the troubled (and, IIRC, quickly-discontinued) 500 model?
Bob
--
sometimes life is just weirder than even I can imagine
Taliesyn
> Taliesyn wrote:
>
>
>>I have no doubt about Arthur's expertise in unclogging clogging Epsons.
>>It's what he likes to do. But I do take strong issue with printers
>>taking a relaxing "bath" for three days while the works piles up. I have
>>to have a printer that is ready when I'm ready, and doesn't require
>>countless head cleanings using up precious ink. But hey, that's just
>>me.
>
> You've never actually even used an Epson, have you?
Epson 500 and Epson 740. Watched my sister's Epson 740 die of clogging.
Mine was still functioning, but often required extensive head cleaning,
half cartridge of ink or more. When I had to clean the color head,
black ink cartridge would be emptied too in the process. Spent too
many hours fiddling and not printing. Finally said that's it, bought a
Canon i850. Best career move I ever made.
> I've had direct experience with at least a couple dozen, and I've never even heard of
> an Epson clogging unless it had first sat idle for significantly more than just 3 days.
You apparently live in a parallel universe where your Epsons don't clog.
> You apparently just read the newsgroup and then internalize the problems which people
> bring here as if they were precisely statistically representative of the whole universe
> of printers from each manufacturer.
I follow the stories intently, because I was in the market for a new
printer. And by far the biggest problem I've seen in the newsgroup
is that of Epsons clogging. You must be skipping those articles. I
haven't. If I'm wrong, may the god of inkjets strike me down now!
>
> Odd, since Canon had so many seriously troubled models late in the BJC line and even
> into the S line.
I hated the original Canon 4100, or whatever the model was. My sister
had one. What a silly printer! And I had read in the newsgroup that the
Canon S series had print head issues -wearing out, clogging.
But the new "i" series has been re-designed, and the print head is
user serviceable. I read the rave reviews on the Internet (including
a 95% satisfaction rating), and the wave of contented users in this
group. Also, there were no stupid electronic chips on the cartridges.
What more could I ask for! I knew the i950 or the i850 would be for me.
Sadly, I couldn't justify buying the i950 because my use for it doesn't
require the *absolute* best printer.
>
> Oh, wait - weren't you the one who knew someone with the unusual experience of
> being *happy* with the troubled (and, IIRC, quickly-discontinued) 500 model?
>
That's my father. He was using a 24-pin dot matrix ribbon printer and I
had to twist his arm to take the 500. Old people are hard to separate
from their old printers. I'm not that old yet, so fortunately I don't
have any qualms about changing printers. I'm certainly not married to
any brand. Tried them all, 'cept HP. And I haven't heard a common wave
of euphoria about any HP model in this newsgroup.
-Taliesyn
_______________________________________________________________________
"Happiness is a warm printer"
budgie
wrote:
I can't speak for him/her, but I am one of those printer users who may
do a lot of printing one week and zip for the next three. I had a
SC800 which clogged so often I gave up bathing it and gave it away.
Reverted to an old HP690C which DOES start and run perfectly after
several months of no activity.
I suspect YOU are a little quick to jump onto someone. (S)he may not
be the average colour printer user, but there are still HORDES of us
who don't use Epsons frequently enough to avoid blockages, and who
find the interminable cleaning/soaking just a huge PITA.
Of course, YMMV.
Taliesyn
Any printer that requires frequent use or else it clogs, is defective.
There's simply no argument.
Oh... Taliesyn is a "he", at least the last time I did a nozzle
check. ;-)
Hey Budgie, I'm not great on abbreviations. I figured out "PITA"...
"Pain In The Donkey". But I haven't got a clue what YMMV means...
-Taliesyn
Bob O`Bob
>
> I suspect YOU are a little quick to jump onto someone.
And I suspect _you_ haven't read this newsgroup for any length of time at all.
As you would certainly have seen, that poster appears to have an anti-Epson obsession.
Bob
dor...@attglobal.net
Hey honey, I need a nozzle check!
Taliesyn
> budgie wrote:
>
>>I suspect YOU are a little quick to jump onto someone.
>
>
> And I suspect _you_ haven't read this newsgroup for any length of time at all.
Budgie is wise beyond her/his years. She/he (I guess it's my turn now
with the he/she's) gave up on Epson, and she/he had a completely
different model from mine. As you can see, this clogging problem is
right across the line. "I" didn't invent it.
> As you would certainly have seen, that poster appears to have an anti-Epson obsession.
>
Not any more than your appearance of an Epson "pro-session". We just beg
to differ.
-Taliesyn
Taliesyn
> I'll have to remember that : "a nozzle check."
>
> Hey honey, I need a nozzle check!
>
Not to mention the "deep cleaning" cycle. ;-)
Bob O`Bob
> Bob O`Bob wrote:
> > As you would certainly have seen, that poster appears to have an anti-Epson obsession.
> >
>
> Not any more than your appearance of an Epson "pro-session". We just beg
> to differ.
That's probably your impression exclusively.
I doubt others share it.
I prefer truth, meaningful statistics, and verifyable facts.
AAMOF, I have given up on Epson, but not because of any clogging problems.
Bob
--
Deathwalker
I've gone a week without using mine. Mind you mine is a canon so i don't
need to apply for a home engineering course or buy a chemistry set to mix up
my own cleaning compounds. I just turn the thing on and it goes. As a
consumer product should.
"Bob O`Bob" <b...@cluestick.org> wrote in message
news:3EA31B...@cluestick.org...
Deathwalker
<dor...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3EA36835...@attglobal.net...
> I'll have to remember that : "a nozzle check."
>
> Hey honey, I need a nozzle check!
I think you need to perform a cleaning cycle.
Deathwalker
"Bob O`Bob" <b...@cluestick.org> wrote in message
news:3EA37B...@cluestick.org...
> Taliesyn wrote:
> > Bob O`Bob wrote:
> > > As you would certainly have seen, that poster appears to have an
anti-Epson obsession.
> > >
> >
> > Not any more than your appearance of an Epson "pro-session". We just beg
> > to differ.
>
> That's probably your impression exclusively.
> I doubt others share it.
actually we do. i have a dead epson styluss colour IIs a 480 and a 600 or
rather i did. Now the dustman has them. My local shops also has a lot of
epsons waiting for repair (well declogging). His advice is that its cheaper
to buy a new printer from him (lexmark) than pay him to strip down remove
the head etc.
budgie
wrote:
>budgie wrote:
Probably with good cause, as I have. Why should ppl put up with shit?
budgie
wrote:
>Taliesyn wrote:
Want statistics? Go do a google groups search on this or any other
printer-related group. Search on clogging, then on clogging AND
Epson. You'll soon discover:
(a) there's a serious shitload of posts about clogging Epsons of a
range of models; and
(b) the vast majority of *clogging* posts relate to Epson.
I don't dispute that Epsons can be really fine printers. Mine was -
whenever it was in going order. But the price of keeping it
operational was not acceptable. I gave up on it because of clogging -
and I know I'm far from alone.
budgie
wrote:
>Bob O`Bob wrote:
>> budgie wrote:
>>
>>>I suspect YOU are a little quick to jump onto someone.
>>
>>
>> And I suspect _you_ haven't read this newsgroup for any length of time at all.
>
>Budgie is wise beyond her/his years.
Impossible - you can't get THAT wise and still breathe { ;-)>
Why Knot?
For several years I have left the printer off for Jan and Feb and went
south. No problems resulted. This year I made it FOUR MONTHS, and pushed my
luck too far.
The three days was getting the dried ink to loosen up so I could get clear
nozzle checks. I've used the printer for about six years and never had a
problem prior to this instance of extreme neglect. I am happy with this
printer.
"Deathwalker" <ian-l...@blueyonder.co.ukspam> wrote in message
news:fdOoa.28564$LC6.21...@news-text.cableinet.net...
Bob O`Bob
"that's what she said"
Bob O`Bob
> On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:04:08 -0700, Bob O`Bob <b...@cluestick.org>
> >I prefer truth, meaningful statistics, and verifyable facts.
> >AAMOF, I have given up on Epson, but not because of any clogging problems.
>
> Want statistics? Go do a google groups search on this or any other
> printer-related group. Search on clogging, then on clogging AND
> Epson. You'll soon discover:
> (a) there's a serious shitload of posts about clogging Epsons of a
> range of models; and
> (b) the vast majority of *clogging* posts relate to Epson.
Though you may think you've refuted it, you've actually reinforced my point.
Those are NOT meaningful statistics. They're entirely self-selected.
Epson has sold probably a few millions of printers.
Have you seen tens of thousands of complaints?
Let me give you a better example of why what you're looking at is invalid
for anyone to *conclude* that Epsons have any major problem with clogging:
Let's look at motorcycle helmet use for a minute. Their statistics are
widely published. If you look at the results of all non-fatal motorcycle
accidents, and compare those with helmeted riders against those with
non-helmeted riders, you'll find a DRAMATIC increase in the numbers of
neck injuries (many of them very serious) among the helmeted riders.
Obviously this PROVES that motorcycle helmets CAUSE neck injuries, right?
Wrong. Because the first thing done in that so-called comparison was to
restrict it, quite improperly, to NON-fatal accidents. What those increased
numbers of riders with neck injuries really represents is people who would
almost certainly have been killed without a helmet. The spectrum of
accidents compared to one another was entirely invalid.
In the same way, reading just this newsgroup, where people with problems of one
sort or another are generally directed, does not give any kind of representative
information about the incidence of problems in the GENERAL population.
Because most won't have any reason to seek out this group. RIght now, Epson
sells more inkjets than any other manufacturer. Probably more than all the
others put together. That's a much more believable explanation for why the
numbers of Epson owners HERE with problems appear to exceed the numbers of
other makes owners with problems. It has nothing at all to do with any
generally-applicable expectation of failure. There are, with almost absolute
certainty, more totally satisfied Epson owners than the total number of people
who've ever read, much less posted to, this group.
Form a place where people hear they might get answers to their problems, and
you'll get an influx of people who have problems. It says nothing about their
proportion within the overall population.
Bob
Taliesyn
[edited for brevity]...
> RIght now, Epson sells more inkjets than any other manufacturer.
> Probably more than all the others put together.
Dead wrong - HP is king. Last I read HP had about 46% share. That leaves
the three other major makers with the other half of the pie.
On a related note I read an article, forget where, that said one major
player will likely fall out of the printer wars. Funny thing, Lexmark
said it wasn't one of them. Hmmm... that leaves only Epson and Canon...
Time will tell.
-Taliesyn
Bob O`Bob
> On a related note I read an article, forget where, that said one major
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> player will likely fall out of the printer wars. Funny thing, Lexmark
> said it wasn't one of them. Hmmm... that leaves only Epson and Canon...
> Time will tell.
Yeah, right. Quite an authoritative source you've got there.
budgie
wrote:
>budgie wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:04:08 -0700, Bob O`Bob <b...@cluestick.org>
>
>> >I prefer truth, meaningful statistics, and verifyable facts.
>> >AAMOF, I have given up on Epson, but not because of any clogging problems.
>>
>> Want statistics? Go do a google groups search on this or any other
>> printer-related group. Search on clogging, then on clogging AND
>> Epson. You'll soon discover:
>> (a) there's a serious shitload of posts about clogging Epsons of a
>> range of models; and
>> (b) the vast majority of *clogging* posts relate to Epson.
>
>
>
>Though you may think you've refuted it, you've actually reinforced my point.
>
>Those are NOT meaningful statistics. They're entirely self-selected.
>Epson has sold probably a few millions of printers.
>Have you seen tens of thousands of complaints?
So do HP sell millions. Do you see even thousands of clogging
complaints about HP? Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing any.
(snip irrelevant MCH "analogy")
If you say so, oh Epson-droid.
But you are VERY alone with your view. For good reason. Most of us
see the merits and drawbacks of various printers with two eyes.
Arthur Entlich
advantage of doing occasional cleaning maintenance as I suggest, you
would neither have had such a mess nor would you needed three days to
get it working again.
The ink cap that protects the heads from drying needs to have a good
fit. If a lot of dried ink accumulates on the outside of the head, the
ink cap doesn't fit properly and the heads can dry. It is a progressive
situation.
Also, before leaving for a long trip, or putting the printer into long
term storage, there are some things you can do to lessen the possibility
of a clog while its not in use. As I stated, do a preventative
cleaning. Add a few drops of cleaning fluid onto the pads before
shutting down. And if you are going to be leaving the printer for
several months without use, you can even put it into a plastic bag to
keep things a bit humid.
BTW, I think Epson could do a better job educating the owners of the
printers how to avoid clogs, but the problem is that some people would
make a bit stink about it if they stated a few tricks to keep the
printer in tip-top shape. I should also mention that Epson has improved
the ink capping system for their printers in recent years (they seem to
have had a bad run with some 925 models from the sounds of things).
They went to a one head system, rather than two, with one cleaning
station and one cap. The older models had separate black and colored
heads, and separate cleaning stations and caps, and this seemed to be
more difficult to maintain. They improved the method of wiping down the
head.
Art
Arthur Entlich
Taliesyn wrote:
> Why Knot? wrote:
>
>> It took three days, patience, and his guidebook, but my printer works
>> like
>> new. I thought it was junk! Plus the next time I travel for a long
>> time I'll
>> take the printer with me and use it occasionally instead of leaving it
>> for a
>> few months.
>
>
> I have no doubt about Arthur's expertise in unclogging clogging Epsons.
> It's what he likes to do. But I do take strong issue with printers
> taking a relaxing "bath" for three days while the works piles up. I have
> to have a printer that is ready when I'm ready, and doesn't require
> countless head cleanings using up precious ink. But hey, that's just
> me.
>
> -Taliesyn
>
I resent the implication. I like to inform people how to maintain their
printers to get them back to peak performance. I rarely need to do
these procedures to my own printers, because a quick regular maintenance
takes care of it.
"Why Knot" would also have found the process much less involved if he
was doing the same. I am not blaming him, Epson should be more up front
about this maintenance schedule.
I don't apologize for Epson. There are a lot of things they could do
much better. But fundamentally, the reason they have such a following
among professional photographers and artists is because when one
measures all the issues they still come out on top.
And Epson seems to be getting the picture too, they are targeting their
products for artists, and reducing the marketing for the general public.
Art
Arthur Entlich
Epson printers, and some family members have owned some as well. I
believe he also admitted he used generic and refilled carts most of the
time, and that his printers lasted him something like 3-4 years (with
some intermittent clogging). He had 740s which were very good printers
in their time, and I bet could have been easily brought back to full
operation with a bit of cleaning.
The part of this that I find most annoying is that he is so sure his new
Canon is going to provide him with not only as good, but better service
than the Epson's did. Yet, that is yet to be seen. The 740 was
released in 1998. I'll be interested in 2007 what he thinks of his
Canon printer. BTW, the year the 740 came out, so did the Epson 3000.
In fact, they have similar head designs. The Epson 3000 is still being
produced and still sells well, and I'm not sure anything has been done
to change it in all these years.
Art
Arthur Entlich
Taliesyn wrote:
> budgie wrote:
>
> Hey Budgie, I'm not great on abbreviations. I figured out "PITA"...
> "Pain In The Donkey". But I haven't got a clue what YMMV means...
>
> -Taliesyn
> _____________________________________________________________
>
It's a very American expression... car culture... Your Mileage May Vary.
Art
Arthur Entlich
now Epson is either number two or three, the stats change a lot.
Lexmark has made a lot of printers for other companies under other
branding. They made Compaq printers before HP bought Compaq, and now
they make Dell printers and others.
I think you are correct that one of the two will lose the war, Canon or
Epson. That is likely the reason Canon put so much money into
redesigning their printers, because prior to that they certainly would
have been out of the game, as has Xerox, Tektronics, and a few others.
I could see Epson targeting only medium and wide carriage markets for
artists and photographers, and get out of the home printer market
completely. As I stated many times, they are the Porsche of printers
and they require more attention, and the people who appreciate what they
are tend to be graphic professionals who are willing to put a little
extra time into maintaining them for the other advantages they offer.
Epson has the medium to wide carriage market cornered of the main
consumer players. Epson also provides most of the heads for other wide
carriage products.
So, it's possible Epson will drop out of the lower end market. It might
make less headache for them in the long run.
Art
Arthur Entlich
budgie wrote:
>>
>
> So do HP sell millions. Do you see even thousands of clogging
> complaints about HP? Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing any.
This is plain silly, I have seen occasional HP head clogs reported, but
the cartridge is supposed to be tossed after one use, so there really
isn't much to clog. I don't think I've heard of Epson printers clogging
on the first cartridge either.
>
> (snip irrelevant MCH "analogy")
>
The point obviously went right over your head (do you use a motorcycle
without a helmet by any chance, and have you crashed ;-) (now, that was
sarcasm)...
> If you say so, oh Epson-droid.
>
> But you are VERY alone with your view. For good reason. Most of us
> see the merits and drawbacks of various printers with two eyes.
>
Yes, he's alone with millions of others. Sometimes you can be alone in
a crowd. ;-)
Art
Bob O`Bob
> I should also mention that Epson has improved
> the ink capping system for their printers in recent years (they seem to
> have had a bad run with some 925 models from the sounds of things).
> They went to a one head system, rather than two, with one cleaning
> station and one cap. The older models had separate black and colored
> heads, and separate cleaning stations and caps, and this seemed to be
> more difficult to maintain.
I think the two-caps thing may have been an experiment (which didn't work out).
My 400 and many other early models have a single seal around the cap/cleaning station.
Bob
--
Bob O`Bob
>
> So do HP sell millions. Do you see even thousands of clogging
> complaints about HP? Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing any.
Actually, in office environments, I've been around dozens, perhaps
hundreds of HP inkjets, from the very first little ThinkJet to
some recent PhotoSmart and OfficeJet models.
In general, the folks using them are quite used to the idea that if one
doesn't do any printing at all for a month or two "the ink dries up"
Oddly, they never notice that sometimes the set of cartridges in some
printers, such as those of the executive secretaries - used regularly
but not in high volume - can last several times longer without any
"drying up" effect being observed at all.
And when they replace these "dried out" ink cartridges with new ones,
and I suggest they give the old one a little shake and listen to the
liquid sounds, it still doesn't make much of an impression.
Yes, HP's may clog, under quite similar kinds of conditions.
But nobody notices - they just pay for a whole new head every time.
Bob