Kodak Printers Breed Cheap Ink

In March, Kodak will introduce three printers, priced at $149.99, $199.99 and $299.99, that use much cheaper ink - the move is expected to put pressure on the company's rivals. Unveiled in New York, the three All-in-One EasyShare printers boast low-priced black ($9.99) and color ink ($14.99) cartridges, as opposed to the typical $30 price tag. "After today, the inkjet market will never be the same," Kodak CEO Antonio Perez said. The company believes the high cost of ink limited more printing.

Market-leading printer companies, including Hewlett-Packard, Epson and Canon, have enjoyed up to a 70% profit selling ink. That revenue is under thread by lower-cost, after-market ink which, according to Lyra Research, comprises from 30-40% of the market. In China, 90% of the ink is sold by non-brand-name suppliers. The ink prices will allow consumers to produce 10-cent prints. Printing digital pictures at home, which now costs around 25 cents per photo, will equal that of online printing services, said Lyra Research President, Charles LeCompte.

News source: InternetNews

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Free iPod Video Converter 1.34 Build 891

Next Story

Nvidia nForce Version 15.00 for Vista


Commenting is disabled on this article.

Theres new printers are great. To find out more about kodak's new printers. Check out www.inkisit.com for fun games and hilarious videos about kodaks launch of these new printers. Kodak FTW.

Wow, although $25 for a refill is great its still 5 times more than I pay for my canon 3000, which does have 3 separate carts for each color and a larger black tank.

I presume these are kodak printers that have 'built-in' print heads, similar to my canon, so the ink carts are just tanks basically and don't contain the expensive print head that drives up cost of most lexmark, HP and newer canon printers...
Could be wrong, if so, provided kodak can give good prints at home, these printers will be a huge seller.

Ok thanks for the info.. but I wonder why this part was left out of the story here at Neowin. I could call this a major part of the story, no?

Canon has Chromalife 100 which is suppose to last 100 years as well. I believe the real numbers are 10 years exposed, 30 years under glass and 100 years in dark storage.

Canon also has the Pro9500 featuring pigment ink which should last for 200 years.

Canon has Chromalife 100 which is suppose to last 100 years as well. I believe the real numbers are 10 years exposed, 30 years under glass and 100 years in dark storage.

Canon also has the Pro9500 featuring pigment ink which should last for 200 years.

I see a shakeup coming in the printer industry for a good reason:

The product is approaching maturity, from the customer's perspective. If I buy a printer in 2010, will it produce significantly better or more durable prints than a comparable one today? I'm skeptical.

If you can't wow the customer with a significantly better print job, you have to find another way to be competitive.

Speed isn't that impressive beyond a point. I don't see any obvious benefit to more than 10 or 12 pages per minute... how often am I cranking out 100-page print jobs at home?

Price will work... until everyone matches your price by further advancing technology.

Then you have to break down to operation cost.

HP also is one of the few "Refill Neutral" companies you have. Unlike Lexmark, which has been in Court of many years telling the consumer they don't actually own the cartridge they just paid for.

For text, Kodak claims the individually available black cartridge can produce about 350 pages of normal mode text on a letter page (based on industry-standard 5 percent coverage). That comes to roughly 3 cents per page for ink costs alone. From Here

350 pages, at 5% coverage. Oh yeah, it's going to be great. Not. It's no deal.

The Canon I have right now can print 500+ pages in normal mode and 1500+ in draft mode. The cool thing is draft mode is pretty good for text documents so I'm able to use it for most things that I print.

I refill them for $1 so 1500+ pages for $1 is better then any Laser printer can do even.

Right now Canon OEM ink is $12 per cart, this seems like marketing hype.

Also you can refill them for about $1 per cart with good ink like Hobbicolors sold on eBay.

Ummm, well my i350 cannon black official cartridges costs $10CND and the colour costs $20CND, so what has happened here is that Neowin has posted marketing spin as actual NEWS nice!

I work at a Cartridge World. I bet you'll get about 100 pages at 5% page yield or about 20 photos. Theres always a catch.

if you do a lot of printing and want cheap affordable printing that matches top printing you want to look for getting a CIS / Continuous Ink System (I believe my system actually beats the quality of Epsons prints on my R1800). Its about 1/8th of the printing costs for my printer but prices vary. My printer uses the more expensive longer lasting pigment ink.

My Canon is about 20$ Canadian per cartridge from Canon. Unless they can rival the image quality, those 5$ aren't worth it.

Lasers are cheaper to use, and in fact if you check the pirce for a full cartridge set for a laserjet, it'll probably cost about the same as the printer(and all HP Laserjet come with full cartridges, except for two, but they cost pretty mucht he same as the larger version)

So yeah . laser beat ink in price. BUTInk are superior as far as quality goes. ink actually has higher real DPI, but more importantly they have a higher color quality. No laserjet can create the quality image you get with an inkjet and photo paper.

Of course, getting good quality prints with an inkjet requires you to use original ink, not the half baked third party stuff. If you compare the same print with original ink and third party ink, you'll notice. And that's outside of other quality features of original ink, like the fact it lasts for a lot longer before fading, some of it is waterproof and such.