I've found cheaper Canon's less than reliable too. But the same has applied to cheaper Epson's as well.
I've used a Canon Pixma Pro 10S now for 6 years. Bought it second hand and needed a new printhead (£120) early on, since when its just worked. I've used Precision Colors ink without problems, Canon ink is too expensive and I'd be reluctant to print. Ink Owl and OctoInk are just as good. Prints A3+ (14"x19") with very little fuss.
The main disadvantage with these smaller Canon's is they cannot use roll paper, or print longer than 26". I have a Canon prograf 6400 for that.
The current equivalent Canon models are just as good or better, but a bit more complicated to use with non OEM ink. The attitude of Canon, and Epson, in seeking to oblige their customers to buy their ink, at prices higher than vintage champagne, is very much to be deplored, though it is very good ink.
According to reviews (I haven't used one), ink tank printers haven't reached the same level of quality of output yet, though it may come. Six inks is not enough to match ten or twelve, including grey shades. Also ink tank printers tend to be dye based, and pigment inks are more archival, and better on matt papers, canvas etc. than dye.
Higher range, and a 17" printer for photos will be in the higher range, Epsons produce great quality output too, but are reputed to clog after a period of non use more readily than Canons, they purge the inkline when changing from matt black to photo black, which wastes ink, and they do not have replaceable printheads, meaning when the printhead finally goes the printer is finished, with Canon the head can easily be replaced by the owner for around £120 to £200 depending on the model. It's a quick and easy job.
Scanners I'd definitely stick with Epson. Have the V750, it is excellent.
Cameras, mine are Olympus (or MF/LF film).

Olympus have a sensor vibration cleaning which has been very effective in keeping the sensors of all my various M4/3 cameras dust free over 10 years of using them in all sorts of conditions, though like any sensible user I try to change lenses infrequently in the field, then point the camera down, and do it quickly in a sheltered spot.
Once saw one Canon user wandering about on a dry Pakistani hillside with no lens or lens cap on, couldn't help but tell her the danger of dust in the works, and got a very frosty reception!

Never take a camera from a cool place into a hot damp environment. Condensation will form everywhere in and on the camera, and the lens. As well as camera malfunction its asking lens fungus to form.

Dry the camera thoroughly. I'd remove the lens, sd card, and battery, open all the compartments and put it in a dry cabinet, an airing cupboard, or a sealed box (tupperware is good) with lots of dessicant silica gel. (dry the gel in the oven on a low heat first so it sucks all the moisture from the air in the box). Leave the camera there, warm but very very dry, for a week at least. You might be lucky.

Too much technology? yes, it can distract, it can ruin a shot when the photographer doesn't quite get the settings right, it can prevent the photographer learning what determined a technically good picture when he or she or the camera, took it, but most of all I resent it because it takes a big place in the budget. I'd like to buy a well designed, well made, high quality piece of kit with just the tech needed to make it work as a camera should. I don't need 20 different styles of jpeg or many of the other fancy settings. 10, 15 frames a second, 8K video, or a cache that can hold 60 shots, a sensor with 256000 iso sensitivity, but if I want a high quality camera this, and the research that went into it, is the sort of stuff I'm obliged to fund. Its one of the reasons why the less expensive, simple, but optically very good non OEM lenses from various Chinese manufacturers are making headway.
There is a joy to using an old pro quality film camera from the 80's or 90's that comes from using a piece of almost perfect engineering, workmanship and design. There has not yet been a digital camera to compete on those terms with an Olympus OM1 or 2 imo, even from Olympus themselves.
A high quality, high optical spec digital camera with a few basic optional auto functions and the money devoted to producing the best picture possible in the hands of a person who has learnt (or is still trying to learn in my case) the principles of photography rather than the complex menu of options in the camera's software is all I ask.
Just allow me to spend my cash on a good tool designed to last and to allow me to participate in the photography, not a "point and press the button" lower end camera, or a "program me, point, then press the/several button(s)" modern high end camera.

Dixie Idaho Rancher,previous poster with a sad history of Pro 9000 repair, your "tech" repairman was not that good imo. Did he have an interest in selling you a new printer, or is that just being too suspicious?

I have the Pro10S, and am very pleased with it. Bought second hand 6 years ago, had one problem when I moved abroad for work for 2 years and it stood unused, the red would not print on return, hardly surprising really. I suspect I burnt out the head trying to make it. A new head for about £120 sorted that and its worked great (touch wood) for 3 years since then. If I were you I'd look into changing the print head on your 9000, it might be nothing more than that.

If you were looking to replace it anyway I'd definitely recommend looking at a good used 1 or 10S. Some saving over the latest models, but also with the older ones you can use non OEM ink, reset and refill the cartridges. It is a fraction of the cost, and I end up printing more and so getting better at it, with better results. There are those who will never accept non OEM ink on principle, a view which having used both is very hard to justify. In North America look at Precision Colors or InkOwl (there may be other high quality ink suppliers there, those are the two I've used, in the UK OctoInk. All sell great product, indistinguishable to me from OEM. Where they couldn't get a true match, on the red at one time, they were honest enough to say so and sell bulk Canon red ink. They provide a good service too. There are some high quality German sellers too. There are also a lot of low quality cheap compatibles that I haven't and won't be trying.

That's my reason for suggesting the older models. They are well built and if in good condition, looked after and used regularly will give years of service.

Disadvantage with Canon Pro models is the 26.5" length limit, cannot do big panorama prints, but A3+ is big enough for most home printing.

Canon have installed firmware on the newer models to prevent the reuse of cartridges, so they cannot be refilled and reset. Compatibles can still be used, but that removes a lot of the advantages. I refill about 3x per year, so about 10 refills so far. Cost about £200. OEM would be more like £2000. If I were printing with Canon ink I'd be thinking twice before printing anything. (The printer would probably have clogged from under use)

I use GIMP. I also use a number of other FOSS software programs, I suppose like Photoshop users use Lightroom etc.
Gimp is not as fully featured as Photoshop, but does most of what Photoshop can do, and all I have needed. I would add Rawtherapee, Lightzone, and Darktable, all very capable and free (in both senses) programs developed by enthusiasts and experts in the Linux community (as Android and several of the past Mac OS were), two of which dovetale into Gimp reasonably well. There are those who decry free software, including all FOSS, generally those who haven't used it.

I'd also search out and add various plugins from G'Mic and others, scripts etc. which add further functionality. The range of sharpening and contrast tools there is very good.

Gimp has changed and improved over the years as all such software has, so impressions from a try 10 years ago are not that useful.

My print driver, Turboprint, also meshes with Gimp in its menus so I can print directly from the program. Sadly Qimage, which I am very impressed with trying on a Windows machine, does not run under Linux.

With every change of software there will be a learning curve. I'm used to the Gimp, so it feels natural. You won't be, so it won't feel as good until you are.

These programs won't cost you anything, so worth giving a go, but do give them a good try, not a "doesn't feel familiar, can't work out how to do something first time, therefore will give up" try. Gimp and its friends are very powerful tools, if they had a commercial reason to push them in the market they'd be far more well known and used.

Hope this of some use.

Alkaline batteries can leak (and damage equipment they're in)

Camera batteries are not alkalines, but usually NIMH or Lithium Ion LiON. They don't leak. One less thing to worry about.

I've used mirrorless for 10 years, never bought a manufacturers battery, never had a problem or noticed a difference with aftermarket versions, of which i currently have six (for three cameras).
Sticking with the camera manufacturers batteries is like only putting BMW branded oil into your car and turning your nose up at Castrol or the like, you are, imo, being taken for a ride. Buy your batteries where they buy them from before selling them on to you at inflated prices, in the market. Read the reviews and choose, the cheapest isn't necessaeily best, but there are plenty of reliable brands and sellers there.

I too use an Andbon. Lived for a while in Seychelles, 90% humidity and 30 degrees C, I lost 2 lenses to fungus. I also noted the fogging issue when taking them out of an airconditioned environment. When posted to Pakistan, again very high humidity in monsoon season, i bought a dehumidified cabinet. Had no fungus troubles since. Probably not really necessary now back in UK, but I feel a lot happier having the photo glass in the cabinet. I wouldn't worry about electronics, most electronic items are obsolete by the time they'd be affected, but good lenses are for life.