Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 485 posts

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#251

Post by andrew_ »

alerighi wrote: post #18

I stopped buying inkjet printers. They are a scam, the ink costs a fortune and they are built as cheap as they can, meaning that they will break and you have to throw them away because they are impossible to repair, they are slow and when you need them they don't work because they were not used for too much time. After having 5 broken printers in the garage I said enough, that is a useless waste, and invested some mo…

I've got a 20 year old Xerox Laser that's rock solid. Picked it up second hand. I print so little that I'm still on the first toner cartridge I bought. The scanner works well and gets lots of use (only downside is that it doesn't work over the network on Mac, which I can live with)

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#252

Post by sagarm »

tsimionescu wrote: post #38
orev wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the low number of pages printed at home, I don’t mind buying the actual name-brand toner. If you’re only changing it every 2 years, the cost doesn’t matter much, and at least the company (i.e. Brother) gets some profit from being a good citizen. Going with non-OEM toner in that situation just drives the company into needing to find more revenue streams, such as locking down the cartridges, which undermines you. At…

How about they make their money by selling a good printer? I don't have to buy has from my car company if I want a good car.

I'm using a 10 year old Brother with the starter toner. Still going strong, but I haven't given Brother a cent since I bought it for $100. Can they survive off that? Hopefully.

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#253

Post by 14 »

dv_dt wrote: post #21
alerighi wrote: post #18

I stopped buying inkjet printers. They are a scam, the ink costs a fortune and they are built as cheap as they can, meaning that they will break and you have to throw them away because they are impossible to repair, they are slow and when you need them they don't work because they were not used for too much time. After having 5 broken printers in the garage I said enough, that is a useless waste, and invested some mo…

After similar shenanigans from HP, I went to Brother laser printers and haven’t looked back since.

Me too but almost makes me want to buy a second one and just put it in storage in case the day comes when Brother too succumbs to corporate pressure to “improve products”.

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#254

Post by hodgesrm »

hyperbovine wrote: post #217
EvanAnderson wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fed a diet of the necessary consumables-- toners/drums, fusers, rollers, separation pads, etc-- a 1990s LaserJet will outlive us all. For me, "peak LaserJet" was probably the LaserJet 4 w/ an integral JetDirect. The 4000 that followed was pretty solid and faster but more plastic-ey than the 4.

Not surprising at all--HP in the early 1990s was still very much an engineering-focused company (both H and P were on the board until `93) that made high-quality, durable products. This was right before it got gobbled up by MBAs and celebrity CEOs, who spun it off into a hundred subunits hawking flimsy plastic trinkets and "business consulting".

I got an HP Laserjet in the late 80s for a computer center I ran at the University of Washington in Seattle. It was the best piece of hardware I've ever purchased. The clincher was the care with which they packed it and the simple instructions to take it out of the box and get it running.

I knew it was going to be great before even powering up for the first time.

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#255

Post by wantoncl »

codazoda wrote: post #246
EvanAnderson wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fed a diet of the necessary consumables-- toners/drums, fusers, rollers, separation pads, etc-- a 1990s LaserJet will outlive us all. For me, "peak LaserJet" was probably the LaserJet 4 w/ an integral JetDirect. The 4000 that followed was pretty solid and faster but more plastic-ey than the 4.

I have a 15 year old Wi-Fi Brother Laser that is still going strong. I’ve replaced toners a few times and the drum once. I’m sure it will last another 10 years. They still sell a brand new model that is almost identical.

Would you have the model numbers for yours and the newer model? Thanks in advance.

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#256

Post by jonplackett »

alerighi wrote: post #18

I stopped buying inkjet printers. They are a scam, the ink costs a fortune and they are built as cheap as they can, meaning that they will break and you have to throw them away because they are impossible to repair, they are slow and when you need them they don't work because they were not used for too much time. After having 5 broken printers in the garage I said enough, that is a useless waste, and invested some mo…

The simple reply is ‘I need colour and I don’t have space for a gigantic colour laser jet printer in my room’

I’d love a master jet but it’s just not in any way affordable / practical.

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#258

Post by jerkstate »

kube-system wrote: post #96
lotsofpulp wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But between Consumer Reports, Wirecutter, the 18 million review websites, Costco, I feel like such an obviously superior brand and product should have had its reputation widely known by now, like Toyota/Honda.

I think you highly overestimate the amount of research the average person does on a printer purchase. Yes, some people will buy a CR magazine or ask their friends/relatives opinion for a $30k car, but will they do that before buying a $60 printer?

My Consumer Reports (online) subscription is probably the best $10 per year I spend

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#259

Post by limeblack »

jader201 wrote: post #146
alerighi wrote: post #18

I stopped buying inkjet printers. They are a scam, the ink costs a fortune and they are built as cheap as they can, meaning that they will break and you have to throw them away because they are impossible to repair, they are slow and when you need them they don't work because they were not used for too much time. After having 5 broken printers in the garage I said enough, that is a useless waste, and invested some mo…

I got my first printer in high school, around 90-91. It was an HP laserjet printer, when they were first going mainstream. I loved it, it always printed well, and the toner seemed to last forever. Of course, it was B/W, but that was all I needed. Fast forward to today, I have never owned an inkjet printer. Over the past 30 years I’ve owned a total of 3 laser printers. The second was in 2005, because I wanted a scanne…

> I agree, inkjets should’ve died a long time ago.

Aren’t inkjets better for photos?

www.ldproducts.com/blog/pros-cons-of-inkjet-and-laser-printers/amp/

Re: Canon sued for disabling scanner when printers run out of ink

#260

Post by dreamcompiler »

dylan604 wrote: post #153
dreamcompiler wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inkjet printers can do a fantastic job of printing photos and color documents, and maybe four times a year I would really like to do that at home. Unfortunately nobody seems to have built an inkjet printer with nozzles that don't gunk up, and cleaning the nozzles doesn't work very well and uses more ink and time than the document you wanted to print in the first place. It's probably possible to design an inkjet print…

If your only color print needs are for photos, look into dye sub printers. You can go years in between printing, and use the same roll with no issues. These are pretty much what you get when you order from any brick&mortar store printing from digital files or any modern photobooth kiosk

Yes dye subs do a great job and they don't gunk up. But unfortunately as you said they are only for photos, they require special paper, and they only print in smaller sizes (i.e. you cannot use one to print a color page of a business report). Their supply costs are high too but that's not a big deal if you use them rarely.
Post reply on HN