| General > General Technical Chat |
| What's a good printer for minimal usage ? |
| << < (24/31) > >> |
| nctnico:
--- Quote from: tooki on February 07, 2023, 01:01:38 pm ---People dismiss ink/toner subscriptions so readily, but don’t consider that for some usage patterns, they’re actually a really good deal. I’m not saying that they’re the right thing for everyone, but it’s dumb to reject them categorically without even knowing what they do. --- End quote --- I guess this is aimed at me. I'm not saying that a subscription model is bad. But it should be clear upfront so people can make a well informed choice. With many super cheap printers where you more-or-less get the printer for free and are paying through the nose for the consumables it is absolutely not clear you are buying into a subscription. I get that people feel tricked especially when third party consumables are actively blocked because the manufacturer didn't make clear they are renting equipment. |
| JohanH:
--- Quote from: tooki on February 07, 2023, 01:04:40 pm ---”Nobody told me” except for the agreement they actively agreed to when they signed up for the subscription. I mean, come on, as a consumer you have some responsibility to actually know what you agree to, not just blindly go “yeah yeah” and then get annoyed when you got (literally) exactly what you signed up for. --- End quote --- But when you invent crazy (but lucrative) business ideas, people have the right to call them stupid, at least after they find out that they have been fooled. I use to compare these business concepts to this creative idea: Monthly subscription for removal of big stones from your garden (for keeping the stones away probably; even though the work itself is done once). A fool and his money... |
| paulca:
I believe the marketing model is referred to as the "Razor and blades" model. Razor + 1 blade = £2.99 4 replacement blades = £9.99 Lots of markets have similar. Printer cartridges, pet supplies, air fresheners, etc. etc. I think the people it actually works out in favour for are a very narrow band. There will be a much wider band if "Didn't think it through, didn't read the small print, didn't do the basic maths in their head or just thought it's only a 3.99 direct debit and those cartidges are expensive." Of course the primary threat to this model is 3rd part consumables without the excessive profit making brand mark up. That's why they fight it so aggressively, ironically increasing EVERYONEs costs in the process. The arrogance of these people have a thought process whereby.... if a printer cartridge costs us three times more to make and prevent counterfiets, then by increasing the product premium we increase the elasticity of the margin. Literally elevating the price of their product to add more % on top. It's almost back to front business logic and the only reason they can do what is normally considered monopolising in capitalist law is because they get away with it. |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: nctnico on February 07, 2023, 01:06:18 pm --- --- Quote from: tooki on February 07, 2023, 01:01:38 pm ---People dismiss ink/toner subscriptions so readily, but don’t consider that for some usage patterns, they’re actually a really good deal. I’m not saying that they’re the right thing for everyone, but it’s dumb to reject them categorically without even knowing what they do. --- End quote --- I guess this is aimed at me. I'm not saying that a subscription model is bad. But it should be clear upfront so people can make a well informed choice. With many super cheap printers where you more-or-less get the printer for free and are paying through the nose for the consumables it is absolutely not clear you are buying into a subscription. I get that people feel tricked especially when third party consumables are actively blocked because the manufacturer didn't make clear they are renting equipment. --- End quote --- But they are up-front about it. It’s not like you can’t use the printer without a subscription. It’s entirely up to you whether to opt into that during setup or not. And up to you whether to cancel it later and return to purchased cartridges. (There are some large enterprise printers that exclusively use rental-only toner, IIRC. But they're models that are also only available by rental agreement, where you aren’t buying the machine at all.) HP has a separate thing (mockingly called “HP+”) that isn’t a subscription, but an agreement to only ever use HP ink/toner, with internet access so it can update the firmware to block newer clone supplies. On LaserJets, this is actually done by selling separate, cheaper versions of the printers, just with an “e” on the end of the model number. (So you must decide before purchase whether you want HP+ or not.) On the inkjets, “e” on the model number means that it is capable of HP+, but whether or not you choose it is an irreversible decision you make during initial setup: permanently activate some extra (software) features but block third party inks, or permanently forgo it and give up those features. Unlike with the ink subscriptions, HP has earned some well-deserved criticism for this, because of not making it clear that the HP+ selection cannot be changed once made. |
| tggzzz:
--- Quote from: nctnico on February 07, 2023, 12:36:30 pm --- --- Quote from: rdl on February 07, 2023, 09:13:38 am ---I can't believe people still deal with HP. How quickly we forget. This is the company that remotely disabled printers just because they could when non-OEM ink cartridges were detected. --- End quote --- I still deal with HP but I'm not part of the crowd that rents a printer through buying the consumables. --- End quote --- Quite. I'm still using an HP PSC750 inkjet printer/scanner, which I bought in, I guess, 2005. They stopped making the cartridges about 3/4 years ago. I still have three unused black cartridges with a use-by date of mid 2022. They work fine, and I expect them to work for quite a few years. When they don't I'll consider my options. Major problems: none. Satisfied customer. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |