Epson has just won a precedent setting case sure to be followed by others that will eliminate cartridge clones in the retail space.

Manufacturers have been selling printers at or near cost in order to market their consumables, where they make an outrageous profit. (Just like the old Gillette technique of giving away the razors and making money on the blades - and Just as JVC did with VHS when they removed all licensing costs from manufacturers and passed the licensing on to consumers in the form of Every tape that was subsequently bought or used!)

There is an incredible amount of room to move within the ink pricing game! And the other players are increasingly moving to eliminate any competition in order to increase their profits even more!

Kodak is going to do to them what Wii is doing to XBox and PS3 and Hyundai and Kia are doing to the Japanese - providing a substitute product at a substantially lower price point and as a direct result, grabbing a huge share of the market. And I expect them to grab a large part of the market and force greater competition into a market determined to eliminate competition!

Kodak has finally hit on a strategy that I suspect is going to reap great dividends. And I think its great for them and for the consumer.

And its damned refreshing to see a manufacturer seize an opportunity instead of simply whining about (and/or suing) the competition!

And its about time, with color laser printers no dropping below $300 with the HP 1600. The days of the high end inkjet for general purpose color prints are numbered.

I welcome Kodak onto the scene. Their technologies may improve many current practices used by other manufacturers. Their knowledge on ink as well as paper can benefit the industry. If they are going to offer it at a cheaper price than the others, I for one welcome their entrance.

This is what they (Kodak) do, and they have been doing it for years longer than the others. I believe they can offer something better, but it is the cheaper that concerns me. Their cost is less than half that of their competitors. If this is possible, it will have a dramatic effect on competition.

Current consumers are willing to try third-party vendors for refills and replacement cartridges for their printing needs and this shows that much of what is considered important by leading manufacturers – is not. The approach that Kodak offers is more in-line with what consumers want and they are offering better quality and price – let’s only hope that they can deliver what they propose.

I guess the only thing left now is to see what one of their printers can do and go from their. I would greatly consider throwing out my current printer for one Kodak if it does what they claim it can do. Though quality is important, even if the quality of a Kodak is the same as current manufacturers, the fact that they claim they can do it cheaper is the marketing hook. This will cause a rift in current manufacturing techniques and cause others to offer better quality and competitive pricing to consumers. I see this as a win for the consumer.

This is great news. Ink jet ink is the most expesive liquid on the planet. Anything that can be done to reduce this cost is good (not changing out the print heads or whatever).

Even if this particular solution is problematic, at least it's a step in the right direction.

I second all previous comments...plus in addition calll to mind the software's lack of manual adjusting of quality.

Kodak is further diminishing its brand & setting itself up for another round of lo$$e$...they need to put out the most technologically-advanced + highest-quality output product, as befits their grand old name, and stay completely away from present road of lowering print costs at the expense of functionality.
They could then justify their late entry in their marketing as a case of waiting until they really got it right / bested all other competitors-- instead of the presently-embarassing too little and WAY too late.

"they need to put out the most technologically-advanced + highest-quality output product"

Complete and utter Nonsense!

This totally ignores market realities where color laser printers are approaching the price of mainstream inkjets!

Inkjets Only stand a chance if they can reduce the cost of their consumables.

Kodak is right on target!

With any luck this will trigger a price war and cause the other ridiculously priced inks to be reduced in cost.

>>This totally ignores market realities where color laser printers are approaching the price of mainstream inkjets

Ink does need to shift to be cheaper, and there are a couple of full page head technologies that could lower ink costs and out perform laser printers.

What you seem to miss is that Laser Printers, even the Highest DPI in the world, can not match a $70 Epson Photo Inkjet printer for picture quality.

Gee, I guess I missed the fact that there are more uses for color than simply printing pictures of your cat.

Some of us use them for a more varied purpose than simply printing out photos - and quite frankly, photo processing services are still cheaper per photo and superior to a printer only used for photos.

And most inks are still not UV resistant or waterproof. And they do not compare with the better dye sublimation techniques. And the cost per unit is still too high.

Especially for publishing and more mainstream purposes. As if an inkjet makes sense in an office environment. Despite the attractiveness of soggy pages.

Well, multi-color cartrigdes would increase cost. The thing that truely disturbs me about this printer is the print heads being on the printer rather than the cartridge. The amount of printers I've had to repair because of clogged heads on the printer and the amount of printers that ended up just being replaced when under warranty rather than heads being replaced is just staggering. If I am spending $150 or more on a printer, I want that printer to last rather than it being disposable.

five-ink color cartridge = BAD IDEA. Epson, HP, Lexmark and Canon for the most have learned their lesson about using multi-color carts in their printers. That = old school. Kodak needs to seriously consider using separate color cartridges.

Yep they have learned the lesson so well that they, with the exception of a separate black cartridge, continue to do it!

Couple that to the fact that Epson just won a major case preventing others from cloning their cartridges - meaning no 3rd party ink cartridges in the future! - that having Kodak follow their lead is the LAST thing that makes sense to the consumer!

I wish Kodak well.

HP is the main company that still uses a single ink cartridge for the color inks. Epson and Canon use separate cartridges for most of their printers.

The #57 and #78 multi-color ink cartridges continue along with the #45 and #58 black ink cartridges continue to be the largest sellers of ALL ink cartridges.

The fact that some are offering, or are beginning to offer, different inks in differing formats does not offset that fact.

And simply buying refill ink in bulk is a much more economical solution that buying redundant cartridges where casings are replicated for each elemental color package.

Just because other inks cost less and happen to work in a particular printer doesn't mean the ink is as good as the printer manufacturer's ink. The ink you get in the refill kits has vastly inferior quality when it comes to printing photos.

Again you generalize.

Do a bit more research.

Not all inks are inferior, but it speaks volumes that you seem to only be familiar with the lower quality inks.

Bulk tank refills for high end inkjets are not necessarily lower quality, unless You make that choice. And the cost per unit goes down considerably by using them.

And again, I really don't care about printing the photos of your cat. There is a larger market for printers than simply printing personal pictures. And again, photo services do it better and cheaper.

I think its great that Kodak is providing a challenge in the this market space!