Did you know Brother makes really good printers that are inexpensive and live a long, happy, life? And their drivers aren't user hostile? This is one of those really good "vote with your wallets" situations.
During previous discussions about this there have been some comments indicating Brother is headed down this road as well. No idea how accurate that is.
HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
101–110 of 461 posts
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#102Yes and:
Authentic HP ink cartridges now have an expiration date. Even when new in package, sealed, and totally fine.
A friend asked me to fix their printer. Error code was nonsensical. Eventually determined an automatic firmware update invalidated their cartridges. Only clue came from other complaints on reddit. HP had no useful info or troubleshooting advice.
Convinced friend to buy a Brother laser printer.
HP is now evil. Got the Jack Welch treatment. I blame Fiorina, Hurd, Whitman, the board, and all the other stooges, for turning a former tech gem into a punch line.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#103How about this - a company that makes printers, but has open sourced their design for cartridges so that other people can make and sell cartridges for those printers? Does something like this exist? Or did HP try their best and bury such companies?
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#104Did you know Brother makes really good printers that are inexpensive and live a long, happy, life? And their drivers aren't user hostile? This is one of those really good "vote with your wallets" situations.
I use a Brother multi-function (MFC-L2710DW).
> And their drivers aren't user hostile?
They offer a closed-source Linux and you need to download an installer from them (an i386 binary, which also works on i686 and x86_64); so, not great. The driver is mostly-reliable, although every once in a while it does kind of give out on you and printing fails, possibly until a restart. I suppose on Windows it's better.
> really good printers that are inexpensive and live a long life?
I bought mine about 4.5 years ago; hardware seems fine so far.
> happy life
yeah, so... not so much when it comes to toners. Either the toner capacity is really low, or the MFP becomes disenchanted with toners quickly. I get "Toner Low" extremely quickly - even with only a few hundred pages printed. Granted, I don't print much these days, but still. And I've already experienced a case in which I put in a new toner and was already told it was low.
Other than that no complaints.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#105It seems like there is enough competition in the printer market that this wouldn't be a thing. Are the margins so thin that all manufacturers depend on ink sales? Otherwise I don't understand why one wouldn't make universal ink compatibility a major selling point and force everyone to follow suit.
They sell printers at a loss and make the money back on ink sales. You can get printers with refillable ink tanks from all (three) major manufacturers, but they cost significantly more because they aren't subsidized by ink sales
And you have to search for them online or order from various strange places because no major stores where people actually go buy "computer stuff" carry them. Coincidence? I think not.
Worse, even the lot more expensive "office" printers (both laser and inkjets) have been sabotaged by such "driver update for your own good" shenanigans in the past. This isn't limited only to the cheapest disposable inkjet junkers.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#106I just want to be clear, because this headline is borderline clickbait. HP is not bricking the printers. The printers will continue to work if you put the HP cartridges back in. I'm not condoning HP at all , not in a million years. But the verb "disable" carries connotations of permanence, so it seems like a disingenuous word choice at best, if it's not outright clickbait. Just so people aren't confused here.
> HP is not bricking the printers. The printers will continue to work if you put the HP cartridges back in. That's semi-bricking the printers. > I'm not condoning HP at all, not in a million years. You're semi-condoning them.
Semi-bricking is like saying someone is semi-pregnant.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#107The CEO and the board must serve prison time for things like this. No measure less than prison for the CEO and all board members is enough to curtail this because it just becomes the cost of doing business. No, you can’t say it wasn’t your decision. If you want to not be held accountable for the work your employees, contractors, and agents do on your behalf, you should have to prove they acted against your express wr…
I don't think prison time is even what's needed here, I think these issues would resolve themselves if corporate fines were continually issued, rather than one-off lawsuits. For instance, a standing ruling that if your printer stops being able to print for no reason other than a contract breach, then the hardware is eligible for a refund. We don't need to put CEOs in prison for making consumer-hostile decisions, we j…
This is a surprisingly naive thing to say in the era of a CEO having a fiduciary duty to maximise shareholder-value over the short-term / their tenure (whichever is shorter)
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you entered a contract in which IKEA rented you a house I love how any interaction with a company means we enter into a one-sided contract with them and own nothing, despite spending money. Don't like it? Just go live in a cave! If you are making a purely legal argument, then you are on shaky ground, and there are limits to what is considered a valid contract (especially in the EU), and what terms it may contain, b…
You signed the contract. You agreed to it, it doesn’t matter how one sided it was. You could sign a contract to eat shit for a dollar. You’re correct in that some countries restrict consent between individuals.
> You agreed to it, it doesn’t matter how one sided it was.
The libertarian philosophy in a nutshell. It doesn't matter if society turns into a corporate fiefdom, as long as contracts and property rights are upheld.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#109I just want to be clear, because this headline is borderline clickbait. HP is not bricking the printers. The printers will continue to work if you put the HP cartridges back in. I'm not condoning HP at all , not in a million years. But the verb "disable" carries connotations of permanence, so it seems like a disingenuous word choice at best, if it's not outright clickbait. Just so people aren't confused here.
Thank you, I did not read the article and assumed (based on other comments which are pretty clearly assuming the same) that the title was accurate.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#110Pre-chip Brother laser printers can be found for $50-100 on Craigslist. Will last for a decade of home use if not more. Toner can be refilled or bought aftermarket for under $20.
> Pre-chip What's the story with the chip?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31860131 presumably.