HP is in the rent-a-printer business now
HP is in the rent-a-printer business now
You already barely own your printer, anyway, but is renting it better?
Friends don't let their friends buy HP.
You're viewing a single thread.
I can see it being an option for some people. If you print low volume but regularly every month. And you need a printer that always just works. The problem is the monthly limits! The base package is 20 pages per month, just printing out a pdf manual or something would eat that up in a minute. I would want unused prints to be added to next month.
Otherwise it is very similar to how it works for businesses having larger office printers.
And it's still more expensive than a brother printer after a year and a half, and one of those will last decades.
Brother FTW 🐐
Canon tho!
Canon is better than HP for sure, but not as reliable, compatible, or unobtrusive as Brother. I bought a higher-end Canon photo printer that just would not work well outside of Windows, and my main drivers are Linux and Android. Brother has never failed me there.
I'm 2.5y into testing that claim, with a MFC-J6930DW. So far, no issues at all.
I've deployed half a dozen in the last dozen years. All still going.
I have a brother color laser, only had to change toner. My mom has a brother laser, haven't changed toner. These things run like trucks.
I spent way longer than I ever hoped to primarily selling printers. This is the answer. I'd wager a solid 80% of people would be better off buying a cheap brother laser and just going to walgreens/office depot/where ever the 2 times a year they need to print in color
Yea I definitely fall into the 20 pages or less a month category. Hell I probably fall into the 20 pages or less a year category. But I'd never add a subscription for something I can just buy out.
It's not just a subscription, it's a two year contract with a large early cancellation fee.
I know it's not necessarily an option for everyone, but the printer at the library always works and costs way less or is free.
Or a copycenter.
Printing shops have existed as long as there have been printers. People rarely need to print anything anyway but most will convince themselves against it because they think it's a hassle or that they will print a lot more than they actually do.
Many people I know end up replacing their ink cartridges almost every time they have to print because it's been so long that the ink has dried up...
And it doesn’t take up space. Like seriously, I haven’t really printed at home since college
Those who see this as an option are not well. They are neglected by the tech literates who could help them do better and the people who understand the value of ownership that could help them be better.
I don't know what are you talking about. I have a Canon printer is being 10 years since I bought it and its working like new. This is the reason why HP can get away with this idiotic move.
A laser printer always just works.
My 1996 laser just got replaced 6 months ago. I replaced the toner once or twice... Because I'm a low volume printer.
Low volume is probably also just B/W. But even a color laser isn't that much. Canon has a line of office color that aren't awfully expensive, and not large.
Why would I pay for a lease that over it's contract term is as much as a Canon color laser that will:
-
Run longer on it's starter toners
-
Never clog
-
Probably run for 10 years or more
-
If you are over the initial pages, then it is $1 per 10-15 pages. Which is much cheaper than the original $6.99 for first 20 pages. $1 per 15 pages probably costs the same if you own HP printer and buy HP ink.