HP TV ads claim its printers are 'made to be less hated'
Open link in next tab
TV ads claim HP printers are 'made to be less hated'
https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/07/hp_made_to_be_less_hated/
Apparently they're being serious
I am a professional photocopier technician, focusing on office sized, but also desktop laser photocopiers. I am certified in HP, Lexmark, various Xerox models, and various Canon photocopiers.
I say with all of my heart: Fuck HP.
Ricoh, we just bought a big one for our volunteer office and it has NOT been a PITA for six whole weeks. No attention needed from me, the elderly and/or technology illiterate volunteers print all day with zero stress. Thank you, Ricoh, you beautiful. golden. Bastards.
I wish i had the answer to this, as i work ewaste in the silicon valley, but HP isnt one of our clients.
I remember programming rude messages into the LCDs of those old HP Laserjets in college. Good times
It's not their printers which are hated, it's their business model of selling overpriced ink and toner cartridges to a price that's higher than champagne prices and using technical devices to make it impossible to use other toner sources, firmware to make printers stop working when ink runs anywhere near low (they define 'low' as 33% ink left), while at the same time ensuring that as much ink and toner as possible are wasted through unnecessary testing and calibration and cleaning processes.
No, we hate their fucking printers as well. Non-removable printheads and automatic retraction to try to stop you from unclogging their shit hardware. I'd also include the firmware in critique of their printers, what you mention above, as well as limiting black printing if color is low (even with dedicated black cartridges). Arbitrarily restricting scanning on some models, etc.
We decidedly DO hate their printers.
That are all symptoms of said business model. And Hewlett Packard isn't the only company with such abominations.
To add to your point, their printers are indeed hated, but it is simply a symptom of their terrible business model and not the problem itself.
Not to forget possibility of machine identification code (in best case waste of toner/ink, in worst case dangerous).
He smiled as he typed.
'Our printers are made to be less hated.'
"Lol," he said. "Lmao."
We have some old, great HP printers. Rock solid.
As they die, Brother, my Brother.
Fuck the latest HP.
Iirc Brother printers are heading down a similar dark path. Though I don’t recall where I got that info, so take it with a grain of salt.
Edit: I somehow misspelled brother.
Every Brother printer I have personally owned over the past 20 years was a colossal piece of shit.
And yet, somehow still better than HP.
I can’t stand that company (their laptops are shite as well, except for maybe some of the Omens).
I'll have to take your word for it because I've had a xerox laser for 2 years now that works flawlessly and the software isn't nearly as abhorrent as brother's
I have two Brother laser printers, an older one and a newer one. Both still work great. When I see people recommending Brother online it's mainly the laser printers. Maybe they're just made differently from the inkjet printers.
I'm glad you are having good experience with a Xerox and I would like to know how they compare to Brother ones on a price point. Do they cost a lot more? Also good to know about the software. I've personally only used my printers with the default drivers that came with Linux.
P.S. I also have a Kyocera laser printer which I've never had any issues with.
I have a 4050 and a 1200 still going strong. When they do go I have a Kyocera and a Brother to replace them.
Whitman was eBay.
You're probably thinking of Carly Fiorina. But it's not like she was the only turd CEO there.
•
The HP logo is all it takes to make printers hated at this point. Couldnt give me one even if it included 10yrs of ink.
I hated my mom's Epson way more than any HP I've ever used. It was nice because it was a ink-tank model, but the software was awful.
This is kinda like saying I'd rather step in the slightly smaller pile of shit.
With all the interest in 3D printer and large communities building their own printers, where are the amateur 2D printers? Did we just jump to 3D printing because it was cooler (which I also admit is amaizing)?
I just want a basic 2D inkjet or laser printer that doesn't stop printing because magenta is low or doesn't waste ink to “clean” the print head, nor make up weird errors because it doesn't have access to the internet.
What about printers without ink? Would it be too hard/complicated to use a lower power laser (instead of a laser cutter) to burn/scorch a thin micrometric, if not nanometric, layer of normal everyday printing/copy white paper?
As a child, I remember scorching magazine/journal paper and all sorts of wood materials with my grandmother's handheld magnifying lens under the summer sun in the yard. I was able to draw stuff without burning some of the material completely.
What about printers without ink?
Laser printers have existed for a long time and they don't use ink, but they do use toner. I'm gonna assume just scorching the paper has been proven to be a bad idea, because someone would have tried to market a toner-free printer by now otherwise.
My best guess is that it's very hard to scorch paper to a color anywhere near black without creating a serious fire hazard. Even if you could calibrate the laser just right, the next batch of paper could burn because it has a slightly different weight, texture, or composition.
You'd probably end up being special paper stuff something in it that turns black at a fairly low temperature. That's pretty common for things like receipt printers.
Zink Paper is an alternative but nowhere as cheap as regular paper+ink
The paper has several layers: a backing layer with optional pressure sensitive adhesive, heat-sensitive layers with cyan, magenta and yellow dyes in colorless form, and an overcoat.
This is a good opportunity to ask if there's a better printer company whose printers we should buy instead.
In addition to Brother, Ecotank style printers (printers that refill from ink bottles instead of cartridges) are pretty good even if they come from usually shittier printer companies. The ink is extremely cheap and there's no way to prevent people from using different brands of ink bottles.
You have to pay more up front for the printer, but that's because they're sold with the idea that the printer company makes its money upfront instead of overcharging you for ink later.
Just adding to this, toner printers are ideal if you’re printing only a few items per year. If ink dries, it makes for some intensely frustrating issues. I’m 90% of the way to finding HP’s CEO and bringing my clogged nozzle printer down on their stupid face.
Those printers are definitely gold for heavy users. Cheap ink. If you don't use it a lot, would the ink dry and damage the printer? Or evaporate and vanish?
Honest question because imk cartridges dry out all the time.
It is possible for the ink to dry out in the print nozzles if don't print often enough. I never print with yellow and I did have my yellow nozzle clog once. I bought a flush kit off Amazon, and flushed out the nozzle as directed.
It was somewhat annoying, but not too terrible.
I'd think so. Back when we used ink cartridges they would sometimes become clogged. You could instruct the printer to go through a cleaning routine. Wasted a lot of ink to clean them. That or replacing the cartridge would work. These were HP printers.
The only thing more eco-friendly than buying an eco-friendly printer, is to not buy a new printer at all.
Both of my local libraries offer printing at $0.25 a page. For photos, I just go to the photo lab at the store and print them there.
Both are cheaper than owning a printer unless you're doing a ton of it, and in the former case, I get to support a library just a little bit.
•
People often suggest Brother. I have two Brother printers and they are....tolerable. They are much better than HP, but that bar is very low. I think all printers kind-of suck. Lasers are better than inkjet for most uses, and much more affordable than they used to be.
I kind of feel like we haven't seen a significant advancement in home printer technology in a long time (except for 3d printing, but that's a very different animal).
I've had an Oki mono laser printer for so long, I gave it to my kids. It was a "cheap" printer in the scheme of things, but it was a compact duplex printer and I only ever needed a new $50 toner for it over the years.
It also didn't come with a 650MB printer driver package with a shitty tray application or a subscription.
Brother. Been using their cheap black and white laser printers for like a 15 years with zero issues. I got a refurbished one like this a few years ago it just works: https://www.brother-usa.com/products/RHLL2350DW
Even the wireless functionality just works. Shows up on my computers and phones with zero configuration.
-
Go laser, at least for BW. It'll last years on one cartridge and ink never clogs because, well, no ink. My 1996 Lexmark just died.
-
I hear Brother is one of the better for consumer. I have a Canon color laser, and it's a POS. Fortunately I bought it second hand for $50.
I got a cheap cannon a few years back £20 brand new. It's purely wired and the print quality is meh, but i don't print a lot and it has a scanner. I've never really had any trouble with it and with Linux and when I used to have a Mac it's always been plug and play. Of course they still get you with Ink prices though. But it could be a lot worse.
My guess if you buy a HP printer, they send a Brother laser printer, which is going to make consumers much happier.
Hahaha. Now this explains why MSoft have started pushing hp smart app. Absolute scum bags them both. Wonder how much MSoft accepted to push that software out?