Pointless really when you can buy refillable cartridges and good quality ink
at a fraction of the cost.
That Epson would still need to be used regularly or the print head would
clog and worse the ink tubes leading to it.
I think ink jet and cheap are two words not often in the same sentence these
days and of course use any make you like but not Epsom. the local tip is
piled high with cheap epson printers and broken lexmark ones.
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
Remember, if you don't like where I post
Not true but admittedly it takes a lot more time and effort then most people are prepared for
I won a bet a few years ago from a friend who had an Epson SX600 left in a loft for 4years unused
its still in use now in our pub and working fine
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 16:35:21 +0100, Brian-Gaff wrote:
I'd expect to see evidence of imprint marks from the soles of size 9
work boots on many of the 'broken' Lexmark printers (and probably
likewise the 'cheap' Epson printers). :-)
 Actually (let's be all inclusive, why not?) and say *all* 'cheap'
inkjet printers. The ink jet 'principle' was a nice idea... in principle
but, in practice for occasional home use, it was one with a very obvious
and glaring flaw which I don't need to spell out to anyone who has ever
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 10:36:46 +0100, Dave W wrote:
So good, you had to say it twice? :-)
You exaggerate of course for effect but I do see your point. However,
modern photo inks are a lot better in this regard compared to the early
inks of two decades ago. However, compared to actual wallpaper, they're
likely to become noticeably faded after a year or three, so maybe not
such a good alternative to the more conventional wall covering materials.
My point was to beg the question as to what you'd be doing with the
thousands of 'nicely turned out prints' you could produce 'cheaply' with
such a printer. Hiding them away from damaging UV in photo albums is
merely a form of 'archival storage' harking back to the pre-digital age
This has its charms but since most of the photographed images involved
were recorded directly from electronic sensors in cameras and document
scanners, archiving the image files produced onto electronic digital
storage media serves this purpose much better.
I suppose the main charm of archiving photo-prints in photo albums is
elimination of any dependence on electricity supply to power the display
technology required to retrieve and display the photo album's content.
After all, in the decades following the seemingly inevitable Nuclear
Armageddon, the survivors will only need the light of day or that of a
tallow candle by which to view the visual records of a bygone age.
Maybe it's a product aimed at the "Survivalist" section of the market
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.