6 ms·

> Proprietary cassettes for dishwashing machines? That's next level. Although it is proprietary, to be fair on two points: there wasn't really any "DRM", it wa

by tomxor 6y ago

> Proprietary cassettes for dishwashing machines? That's next level. Although it is proprietary, to be fair on two points: there wasn't really any "DRM", it was literally just a one byte counter on an EEPROM so that a cartridge could digitally record the number of washes remaining, and the machine made no attempt to prevent this being changed. The manufacturer also did not prohibit the cartridges from being refilled by owners, this is in stark contrast to printer manufacturers. I agree they could have done way more to make it easy for users to refill, although it's not prohibited it's completely impractical without some EE knowledge, and as the author says sending cartridges around the world is not a very efficient way of getting detergent back into these things. To be honest a better design would be no cartridges and a couple of reservoirs with level sensors (As you essentially suggested regarding measuring detergent level), since the machine already seems to be capable of pumping an accurate amount of liquid out of the cartridges they wouldn't even need to measure, just fill... I suspect the reason they didn't do this was for a more "consumer friendly" design where users have to do the least possible work, as it is more of a luxury product than a utility. I'm not entirely convinced they are trying to make a serious margin on the cartridges, they work out about 3x the cost of the most expensive dishwasher tablet, but they have to send the thing back to france to be reprocessed and programmed... probably not at a scale to be very cost effective. I do love the article though, it's great to be able to hack on stuff like this when the manufacturer made poor decisions.

jtbayly 6y ago
Printer cartridges used to be easier to fill, too. Give them time.
- tomxor 6y ago
  You might be right, time will tell. Or they might never develove into that position due to slightly better consumer protection laws since the HP thing.
- Mordisquitos 6y ago
  On the other hand, one could argue that if the dishwasher manufacturer's intention was indeed to prevent user refills, they would have known to already implement their own strict "DRM-style" technological limitations, drawing from the history of printer cartridges. The fact that they haven't may well be a sign of good faith.
- adrr 6y ago
  My new printer has ink tanks that I can put any type ink into. No cartridges.
  - MaxBarraclough 6y ago
    Which printer is that?
    - slacktide 6y ago
      The one Shaq is hawking.
    - adrr 6y ago
      Epson ecotank. Other manufactures have tank inkjets as well to be more eco friendly and economical.
    - bayindirh 6y ago
      HP also has one. It's more expensive than normal ones, so it doesn't smell like razor-cartridge business model. I'd happily buy one of these but, my current one runs like a champ and it's ink-advantage model, so it's really cheap to run.
      - sagarm 6y ago
        Lasers are better if you don't print that often. I got one ten years ago and I'm still on the starter toner!
        bayindirh 6y ago
        I have both laser and inkjet printers. Inkjet is for color, photos, and its scanning capabilities. Got a laser for printing papers during master and Ph.D. Mine has split drum and toner. Its life is very long, but I need to find a new drum for it soonish, and it's a bit hard to find. Also Samsung's transfer to HP isn't helping. Don't want to throw it away because it's a small business printer and a flawless machine from my point of view.
- bayindirh 6y ago
  A small bit of trivia: In the days of HP Deskjet 500C/510/550C trio, HP sold official black cartridge refill kits. It was a bit clunky, but you inserted your cartridge to a contraption, pulled some levers in order presented on the device and you'd have an officially refilled cartridge. The black cartridges on these printers were transparent, held really liquid ink to the brim and the refill device had aluminum, HP branded ink bottles. Oh, the cartridges had air-pillows inside to maintain a positive pressure at all times.
Symbiote 6y ago
Is is exactly DRM: it's a digital method intended to restrict the user from undesirable usage (from the manufacturer's point of view). Early restrictions on printer cartridges in the 1990s were simple: they could be bypassed with a bit of tape, or pressing a combination of buttons on the printer. Later, the chips could be reset, probably in a way similar to this. Now, there are encryption keys etc. > suspect the reason they didn't do this was for a more "consumer friendly" design That is naïve.
- tomxor 6y ago
  >> suspect the reason they didn't do this was for a more "consumer friendly" design > That is naïve. We are supposed to avoid this kind of retort on HN, but I'll try to read underneath the surface. I am more likely than most to infer exploitative and manipulative intent behind the choices of large corporations. However I am also very much a realist. Consider that this company (whom I never herd of before this post) is not some multinational behemoth like Samsung. This product is coming from a very new, small manufacturer of luxury, miniature home appliances in France (so far a manufacturer of 1 appliance it seems). Given their niche target market, it seems far more likely to me that their choice to use cartridges is an attempt to fit that market, than an attempt to milk people for huge margins at scale on a consumable. Yes it's far from economical, but nether is their product. I may be wrong, but I am not naive.
  - ac29 6y ago
    The cartridge system certainly doesn't seem inconvenient, but given that they designed the system to hold at least 2-3L of water in a user refillable compartment, it slightly baffles the mind that holding 130mL of detergent and 35mL of rinse aid in a similar fashion was deemed impossible (or impractical).
    - nousermane 6y ago
      From manufacturer's perspective, to make a user-refillable detergent/rinse container is against own interests all round: - Give up on additional revenue; - Costly to make machine more robust/tolerant to variations in composition/pH/viscosity/etc. of 3rd-party detergent; - No good way to enforce rinse/calcite removal inside machine - without DRM, user can just pour water as "rinse" liquid, and then lie when RMAing the washer that eventually clogged up and broke.
tyingq 6y ago
I'm confused. Yes, normal consumers can probably figure out how to put detergent and rinse liquid in. But what percentage of customers is going to be able to overwrite an i2c EEPROM? It is DRM for almost everyone.

by tomxor 6y ago

jtbayly 6y ago

Printer cartridges used to be easier to fill, too. Give them time.

tomxor 6y ago
You might be right, time will tell. Or they might never develove into that position due to slightly better consumer protection laws since the HP thing.
Mordisquitos 6y ago
On the other hand, one could argue that if the dishwasher manufacturer's intention was indeed to prevent user refills, they would have known to already implement their own strict "DRM-style" technological limitations, drawing from the history of printer cartridges. The fact that they haven't may well be a sign of good faith.
adrr 6y ago
My new printer has ink tanks that I can put any type ink into. No cartridges.
- MaxBarraclough 6y ago
  Which printer is that?
  - slacktide 6y ago
    The one Shaq is hawking.
  - adrr 6y ago
    Epson ecotank. Other manufactures have tank inkjets as well to be more eco friendly and economical.
  - bayindirh 6y ago
    HP also has one. It's more expensive than normal ones, so it doesn't smell like razor-cartridge business model. I'd happily buy one of these but, my current one runs like a champ and it's ink-advantage model, so it's really cheap to run.
    - sagarm 6y ago
      Lasers are better if you don't print that often. I got one ten years ago and I'm still on the starter toner!
      - bayindirh 6y ago
        I have both laser and inkjet printers. Inkjet is for color, photos, and its scanning capabilities. Got a laser for printing papers during master and Ph.D. Mine has split drum and toner. Its life is very long, but I need to find a new drum for it soonish, and it's a bit hard to find. Also Samsung's transfer to HP isn't helping. Don't want to throw it away because it's a small business printer and a flawless machine from my point of view.
bayindirh 6y ago
A small bit of trivia: In the days of HP Deskjet 500C/510/550C trio, HP sold official black cartridge refill kits. It was a bit clunky, but you inserted your cartridge to a contraption, pulled some levers in order presented on the device and you'd have an officially refilled cartridge. The black cartridges on these printers were transparent, held really liquid ink to the brim and the refill device had aluminum, HP branded ink bottles. Oh, the cartridges had air-pillows inside to maintain a positive pressure at all times.

Symbiote 6y ago

Is is exactly DRM: it's a digital method intended to restrict the user from undesirable usage (from the manufacturer's point of view). Early restrictions on printer cartridges in the 1990s were simple: they could be bypassed with a bit of tape, or pressing a combination of buttons on the printer. Later, the chips could be reset, probably in a way similar to this. Now, there are encryption keys etc. > suspect the reason they didn't do this was for a more "consumer friendly" design That is naïve.

tomxor 6y ago
>> suspect the reason they didn't do this was for a more "consumer friendly" design > That is naïve. We are supposed to avoid this kind of retort on HN, but I'll try to read underneath the surface. I am more likely than most to infer exploitative and manipulative intent behind the choices of large corporations. However I am also very much a realist. Consider that this company (whom I never herd of before this post) is not some multinational behemoth like Samsung. This product is coming from a very new, small manufacturer of luxury, miniature home appliances in France (so far a manufacturer of 1 appliance it seems). Given their niche target market, it seems far more likely to me that their choice to use cartridges is an attempt to fit that market, than an attempt to milk people for huge margins at scale on a consumable. Yes it's far from economical, but nether is their product. I may be wrong, but I am not naive.
- ac29 6y ago
  The cartridge system certainly doesn't seem inconvenient, but given that they designed the system to hold at least 2-3L of water in a user refillable compartment, it slightly baffles the mind that holding 130mL of detergent and 35mL of rinse aid in a similar fashion was deemed impossible (or impractical).
  - nousermane 6y ago
    From manufacturer's perspective, to make a user-refillable detergent/rinse container is against own interests all round: - Give up on additional revenue; - Costly to make machine more robust/tolerant to variations in composition/pH/viscosity/etc. of 3rd-party detergent; - No good way to enforce rinse/calcite removal inside machine - without DRM, user can just pour water as "rinse" liquid, and then lie when RMAing the washer that eventually clogged up and broke.

tyingq 6y ago

I'm confused. Yes, normal consumers can probably figure out how to put detergent and rinse liquid in. But what percentage of customers is going to be able to overwrite an i2c EEPROM? It is DRM for almost everyone.