HP printer USB port covered with warning sticker in hopes you won't use it | Boing Boing
HP printer USB port covered with warning sticker in hopes you won't use it | Boing Boing
HP wants you to print things through its cloud service, wherein you pay a subscription fee for ink and your usage is routed through its servers. To encourage you to do this, it covers the USB port …
HP wants you to print things through its cloud service, wherein you pay a subscription fee for ink and your usage is routed through its servers. To encourage you to do this, it covers the USB port …
You're viewing a single thread.
Like 15 years ago I bought the cheapest Brother laser printer. It's still going strong. The ink never dries out or fucks up. I've never felt like the company was trying to rape my asshole. Why anyone still plays the ink jet game I do not fuckin know. I've boycotted HP decades ago and to this day I continue to see reasons to never change that decision.
We got a Brother laser as well. Only print a few times a year, and the toner is always good to go when it does get switched on. Love my Brother!
Why anyone still plays the ink jet game I do not fuckin know.
Space. At least for me, space is the reason. I'm flatting at the moment and can only keep the printer in my room, and it's already quite cramped with all my gear here. If I could get a compact color laser MFD within the same dimensions as my current Brother inkjet, I'd switch in a heartbeart. Most of the compact laser printers I've seen are either monochrome, or don't include form-feed scanning, or have some or the other shortcomings.
Initial cost as well. If you only print very small amount, you're not going to spend couple hundred bucks on the laser printer and then 100 or so bucks on a cartridge for it if you're not going to print often
The thing is since inkjet printers dry out you spend way more on cartridges over time. Sure toner is more expensive, but you but it way less frequently.
Yep just replaced the black toner on my 10+ year old brother. $16 dollar for an off brand.
Yes, but they usually last a few years before they completely dry out to where you can't use them. I've been using the same ink cartridges in my printer for going on 3 years now and it still works
True, but they require a lot of test prints until you get back to an acceptable print quality in my experience
Think I've bought 4 cartridges since getting mine six years ago, so about £120. £20 a year isn't bad... We don't print much, but getting a laser mono is 5x the cost of our printer for the cheapest brother...
The cheapest brother is $120 (USD) https://www.brother-usa.com/products/HLL2300D
If you want color, sure that's more ($250). Still not a long shot from what you paid for your HP, plus that ink (and I'd wager you'd still be going without a single follow up purchase of toner).
For context (per their own product claims):
- Brother Genuine TN227 High-yield replacement toner delivers rich, vivid professional laser print quality you can rely on for up to 3,000 pages (black) and up to 2,300 pages (color) (2)
- Additional replacement toner option available for this model: TN223 Standard-yield (1,400 pages black/1,300 pages color) (2)
That's in the US, but to be fair I'm comparing the cheapest 3-in-1 mono brother to my 3-in-1 HP printer. So £178 vs £50, 3x more. That's forgetting the fact that I'd no longer be able to print in colour. I do understand that if I printed more often a laser would absolutely be cheaper.
My Canon ink jet has done well for years on cheap third party ink. It does color and even decent photo, and created many excellent school presentations for my kids. However it’s likely my last printer.
I don’t even know the last time I printed something, it’s always been for the kids’ schools and now they’re old enough to have no more of those
Problem with Canon is dwindling driver support. The only PC that I can use to print on my MP560 is my Windows server, and that's simply because it's the only Windows box in my house. Linux and Mac both do not have native support. The Mac kexts are ancient and it looks like Linux never got proper support.
Ink and dye printers still rule the photo print space. Laser printers simply don't have sufficient image quality.
Other than that I completely agree that laser printing is the way to go.
This is true but you can always order photos online from Shutterfly, etc. or go to local drug store
Sure, but that's also less fun than doing it yourself!
I went with a laser and small dye sub printer. If you only need occasional 6x4 photos it's probably the best option.
5 years ago with a reasonably priced Samsung colour laser scanner combi. No complaints. When I turn it on, it just prints.