Live data from Hacker News

HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

old.reddit.com

71–80 of 314 posts

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#71
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm amazed that this hasn't been regulated. The best way to regulate it is for people to stop buying HP printers. I haven't bought one for about 20 years.

> The best way to regulate it is for people to stop buying HP printers. Except that there is always a new batch of people who don't know any better: * https://xkcd.com/1053/ So companies can survive on that ignorance.

But people would ask their knowledgeable friends, or Google, about what printer to buy. Where's the point where the bad reputation of the company grows enough that sales begin to decrease?

Maybe they already are in a death-spiral, and that's why they're becoming more cunty about the ink...

Next, HP should pay influencers to write/record rave reviews about their printers, so if someone googles what printer to buy they think HP is good.

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#72
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now, what? They make decent laptops, but with incredibly sharp, non-rounded edges, which have actually cut* some user's palms. https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLaptops/comments/iioylp/just_... edit: * Yes I exaggerate here, but it is annoyingly sharp

That seems like a slight exaggeration to me. The linked Reddit poster put the word "cuts" in quotation marks, indicating illustrative use of the word. Most likely they meant harmless (but uncomfortable) pressure indentations from resting their forearms against the edges for a while. It does not seem likely that they meant the edges of their laptop drew blood (which is what you seem to be suggesting).

Edited...

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#73
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm amazed that this hasn't been regulated. The best way to regulate it is for people to stop buying HP printers. I haven't bought one for about 20 years.

Ideally, and by that I mean the average consumer is well-informed in every product they purchase, yes. But the average customer really doesn't know any better. You can't expect people to know an alternative exists when and unregulated market will always promote marketing over quality. >I haven't bought one for about 20 years. Just the fact that you are commenting on HN shows that you aren't the average consumer when…

> unregulated market

There is no such thing as an unregulated market. The only meaningful difference is between a free market--a market that is regulated solely by the voluntary choices of market participants--and a non-free market--which is at least to some degree also regulated by rules dictated and enforced by entities who are not market participants (the most common such entities, of course, being governments). Both types of markets are regulated; they're just regulated by different mechanisms.

> will always promote marketing over quality

No, a market in which consumers are either unable to perceive quality, or are unwilling to take the time to do so (possibly for rational reasons such as the lack of time or the product being so cheap that it's not worth the effort) will always promote marketing over quality.

But that doesn't mean this is a "problem" that either needs to be or can be fixed by outside regulation. It can't be fixed by outside regulation because outside regulation makes the problem worse, not better; it makes consumers think their interests are being protected, when in fact regulatory capture means all that is really happening is that the biggest players are getting further entrenched because the cost of regulatory compliance shuts out potential competitors.

It doesn't need to be fixed because consumers have the choice of what to buy or not to buy, and if they either can't or won't (again, possibly for rational reasons) take the time to choose based on quality, either they don't buy at all or they choose based on something else, and take the consequences. That's what not taking the time to perceive quality means: you choose to be at the mercy of whatever marketing or other information you do use to determine what to buy (or whether to buy), however unreliable it is.

> no regulation

More precisely, absence of outside regulation from entities like governments that are not market participants. See above.

> means leaving sheep alone with wolves

No, it means consumers make the choice of whether or not to be sheep, and take the consequences. Which is the only way to actually regulate a market and have the regulation actually improve anything. The wolves can't prey on consumers who refuse to be sheep, and that choice is up to the consumer.

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#74
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm amazed that this hasn't been regulated. The best way to regulate it is for people to stop buying HP printers. I haven't bought one for about 20 years.

> The best way to regulate it is for people to stop buying HP printers. And to also outlaw those practices. Some things just shouldn't be left to market forces.

> Some things just shouldn't be left to market forces.

No things should be left to government regulators. They make things worse, not better. Regulatory capture is a thing. I'm sure HP would love it if government regulation entered this arena; sure, they might have to pay some costs of compliance, but their competitors, who don't have as deep pockets as they do, will be hurt worse than they are--meaning their market position will improve.

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#75
post #62

For those of you who haven't already, I highly recommend just biting the bullet and switching from HP to Brother for your home printing needs. I was a HP customer for decades . I had models going back to perforated paper dot-matrix printers. Finally last year I had a down-and-out fight to get my HP to do a basic task, and I bit the bullet and ordered a Brother at the recommendation of my friend. My mfc-l3750cdw Broth…

I agree on the Brother printers, I’ve only had two Brothers in the past 13 years, and the only reason I upgraded was to go from Black and White Laser, to Color Laser, it was still going strong. The best part about it was you would buy a toner cartridge and when it would tell you it’s getting low, put some electrical tape over the clear hole in the side and it would continue to print for another 1.5k. On top of that I…

I still have an LCD screen Brother color laser printer that works great. The LCD is one or two lines. Works with any toner and paper and linux and wifi and I think AirDrop too (untried). It definitely is a beast but I think all color laser printers are big because they need 5 toner cartridges.

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#76

17 mentions of Ecotank on the 1st page of comments is a little bit sus. That said it's hard to beat older pre chip Brother laser printers for home use. Can often find a used one for around $50.

There was a flagged post on EcoTank yesterday, that was basically an ad with no news. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35040214

My comment is currently I believe the top comment there, talking about how these things have a designed-to-fail Ink Waste Tank or Ink Waste Pad, and an internal Ink Counter that locks up the printer after a certain amount of printing. I'm not 100% absolutely certain, but I've ran into numerous semi-trustworthy reports & videos while searching for printers. (Amid many glowing reviews of people who've had theirs for 1 week to a couple of months.)

I seriously lusted after the EcoTank L1800 for a while, after @leashless posted about them being a super interesting "10x" product back in 2015 then 2018. But by then they were already only available in a couple secondary markets (ex: Brazil). For a while though they had been sold widely. It feels quite likely to me that Epson knew they built a deliberately designed-to-fail product, sold it for a bit, realized they were going to get in trouble, sold it only to a couple assorted countries, didn't change the product, & now is trying again. https://twitter.com/leashless/status/630192409293508609 https://twitter.com/leashless/status/630192409293508609

(The cheap Moonman M2 fountain pens leashless linked were/are indeed pretty sweet though.)

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#78
post #14

This news story could be a massive ad for something like https://www.epson.com.au/v2/ecotank/ , which came up in the Reddit thread. I saw there (Porcomaster's reply) that you can get good third party ink as well, so that's really complete freedom which deserves being celebrated in contrast to HP. I'm on an old Epson Artisan cartridge based printer currently for colour photos, but want to replace it as they are just t…

Funnily enough I have a printer that refills like that, and it's HP. Paper and cheap syringes of toner are all it should need for a long time.

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#79
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best way to regulate it is for people to stop buying HP printers. And to also outlaw those practices. Some things just shouldn't be left to market forces.

> Some things just shouldn't be left to market forces. No things should be left to government regulators. They make things worse, not better. Regulatory capture is a thing. I'm sure HP would love it if government regulation entered this arena; sure, they might have to pay some costs of compliance, but their competitors, who don't have as deep pockets as they do, will be hurt worse than they are--meaning their market…

You're letting perfect be the enemy of good. Government is not intrinsically bad. Regulations have achieved many good things. Just because there is corruption and abuses of power doesn't mean society should refrain from employing regulatory measures through their representatives.

Healthy markets exist, in part, because of regulatory action, not in spite of it.

Re: HP have updated their printers to ban ‘non-HP’ cartridges

#80
post #53
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also like my brother, but it will attempt to detect and reject non-authentic ink. I don't update mine anymore because the last time I did, it rejected my cartridges.

I have a brother HL-2360DW circa 2017, with a new brother large-size authentic toner cartridge. I never hooked it to the internet, never updated the firmware. And it started saying low toner even though I've put (far?) less than 250 sheets through it. There was a way to turn off the low toner warnings, I did it, and seem to be ok, but it makes me wonder. EDIT: wow, it sells for $449 on amazon. I paid $115 in 2017.

The Amazon price is high because you’re buying a discontinued product from a niche seller.
Post reply on HN