Originally posted by sinus007 . . . Of course, it could be different with Epson printers/paper.
-- or other printers/papers/ink/drivers/profiles . . .
Exactly! There are many variables that come to play in the final output. The print may be fantastic . . . but is it a true representation of the original (e.g., photoshop/other application screen image or actual viewed scene?) Try using a 'swellable' paper with pigment inks and the results will vary . . . let's see . . . high quality ink, printer, and paper but color shifts, fades in time, etc.. Try using the best of everything (even from the same manufacturer) but without the appropriate driver/profile and the results will be missing the mark. Then of course, longevity comes to into play . . . I've got drawers of prints that rarely (never) get viewed; sometimes that is less of an issue (maybe/maybe not.) But if you are selling or displaying prints, all parts of the puzzle are worthy of consideration; your product is your signature.
Of course, this all is an individual opinion . . . I take, print, display, and archive photos for my own satisfaction. Maybe it all comes down to what is individually acceptable to you and suits the purpose it was intended for. In the end, I would agree that the best combination is the best cost effective combination of product that meets your standards criteria and the target audience.