11 ms·

Why is printer ink so expensive?

93 points by throw7 2y ago

GordonAShumway 2y ago
Erm, why on earth does anyone buy inkjet anymore? Seriously just go get one of those cheap and cheerful brother laser printers!
- cojo 2y ago
  Cannot emphasize this enough. I think one of my best purchases in the past year or two was investing in the MFC-L3780CDW Brother laser printer. Took some research and timing but couldn’t be happier with no longer having to worry about ink clogging / going bad if I haven’t printed for a while. Toner cartridges aren’t exactly cheap, but they will print a ton of pages, and they take way longer to go bad from what I’ve experienced so far…
  - neuralRiot 2y ago
    At home I have a laser Brother from around 2000s that i rescued from the dumpster, the last time I needed it it had spent probably 5 years untouched in the garage, plugged it in and printed away without problems, no clogs, no firmware updates, no 2gb of install packages just a driver, no BS.
- criddell 2y ago
  But make sure you buy Brother toner because when you use third party toner the print quality is intentionally degraded. Cheap, but not all that cheerful IMHO. https://www.reddit.com/r/printers/comments/s9b2eg/brother_mfc_firmware_update_nongenuine_toner_now/ https://www.reddit.com/r/printers/comments/s9b2eg/brother_mf...
  - gwbas1c 2y ago
    2nd: My print quality sucks with 3rd party ink
  - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
    That link is about ink in the MFC models and is a good reason to not buy Brother inkjets if they're going to do that. However, I've not had any issue with third party toner in my Brother DCP colour laser printer and haven't heard of any such issues.
    - jkaplowitz 2y ago
      It’s about toner in a Brother MFC laser printer (these do exist - I’ve owned one too), not ink in a Brother MFC inkjet.
      - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
        Ah, I see. I got thrown by the use of "ink" in the reddit post.
    - mindslight 2y ago
      The problem is the modern incarnation of the company intentionally destroying their customers' products after a purchase, so explaining it away as only one product line isn't really applicable. The problem is any trusting of that company going forward, by buying any new products of theirs. My printer is an HP DeskJet 1220C, which first came out in 2000 (it's got USB and parallel ports). I like it because the "ink cartridges" include the print heads, meaning they're easy to replace if they start getting clogged [0]. But that doesn't mean I'm going to recommend HP as a brand to anyone, given the shenanigans of their newer printers. [0] As what happened to my previous-to-me but newer-model Photosmart 6520. Cleaned them out good with alcohol, got it working again, then it clogged up again in short order. Figuring out the actual problem there has been a bit beyond me.
      - criddell 2y ago
        It seems like printer companies are overcharging for ink but they probably aren't. None of the printer companies are generating huge profits. I believe people are probably buying the wrong printer. If they print a lot, they should be buying an ink-tank printer. The printers cost a little more, but the consumables are very inexpensive. If they are infrequent printers, they should buy whatever cheap printer they want and then sign up for that companies ink subscription. You mentioned HP and they probably have the best ink subscription program. For light use it's $1.49 / month which is going to be enough for a lot of people. It's nice to never have to order ink.
- monkmartinez 2y ago
  Hear! Hear!!!! Practical, reliable, affordable and just works technology; The amazing Brother HL-L2320D printer. I can't remember the last time I bought toner. The thing just keeps on printing. I think they make a wireless version, but I can't be bothered to change something that just works the way this printer has. We have fancy printers at work that are also Laser based and they are not as reliable the printer sitting next to me.
- edb_123 2y ago
  Aren't ultra-fine particles still a potential health issue with laser printers? Especially in home office or domestic use, where they typically aren't placed in a separate printer room?
  - Filligree 2y ago
    Less than it used to be, but yes. Though it applies to printing and maintenance, and the whole point of buying a laser printer for home is that it can sit still for months at a time.
  - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
    I think the biggest exposure would come from handling/replacing the toner cartridges. Make sure that you keep them closed and don't shake them around (e.g. to distribute the toner within). I think they're also not great for releasing gases and certainly my one does have a chemical smell when printing, so I just make sure that I'm in a different room for doing a large print (it helps that the printer is network connected).
    - blibble 2y ago
      that smell is ozone (chlorine-like), which the human nose is super sensitive to probably some burnt toner too
- arethuza 2y ago
  We have one of the combined Brother last printers and scanners with ADF - don't use it very often but incredibly convenient when you need it.
- TuringNYC 2y ago
  1000%, for most normal usage a $200 Brother printer's built-in toner would last years before considering a toner replacement.
  - mlok 2y ago
    It's been my situation, I have had my Brother laser printer for... more than 8 years and I still run on the toner that was delivered with the printer ! Yellow ran low a few years ago, and the printer wouldn't print anymore, so I select "print black & white", and the printer happily keeps working using the black toner only :)
- pjmlp 2y ago
  Because they still cost 3x as an inkjet in most places, and then a toner cartidge costs about 100 €. Doesn't matter if they happen to print longer, most folks care about the money on the spot.
  - MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
    You can get a b/w one close to 100€. People just don't know.
    - kurttheviking 2y ago
      im in the market for a printer, mind recommending one?
      - rsynnott 2y ago
        The canonical article on the matter: https://www.theverge.com/23642073/best-printer-2023-brother-laser-wi-fi-its-fine https://www.theverge.com/23642073/best-printer-2023-brother-... The version with no scanner that they recommend is about 100 euro (I think that precise version is now discontinued, but its successor, the Brother-HL-L2400DW, is also about 100 euro).
      - MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
        Get one with Wifi, it is very much worth it. I can print from my phone, and put the printer anywhere.
    - pjmlp 2y ago
      With scanner in Germany, only if some discount action, meanwhile most similar inkjets are around 80 €, and naturally cheaper in similar discount actions.
- VoodooJuJu 2y ago
  - ink is better for photo quality prints (color quality, thicker paper, longevity) - laser toner is bad for your health - laser has a larger upfront cost
- pandemic_region 2y ago
  Another Brother-Bro here, HP seriously needs to get out of the consumer market.
- paxys 2y ago
  Because you can get a basic inkjet printer with included cartridges for $30 vs $350 for a color laser printer + toner. I'm sure the latter makes sense if you are printing at scale, but for occasional use there's really no point spending that much.
  - dragontamer 2y ago
    But if you are only printing occasionally why not go to FedEx and print your document there? I've chosen to have Black and White only at home, and go to FedEx for my color pages. I do black and white text often enough that it's worth it. But I really don't do color enough to warrant a printer (or upgrading to a more expensive color printer even)
    - Loggias 2y ago
      Because it’s really inconvenient and not the best use of my time?
    - paxys 2y ago
      Because I want to print at home? And don't want to pay $1+ a page?
      - dragontamer 2y ago
        Uh huh. You know it's 10c a page, you can email it to them and pick it up later... right? It's also a FedEx, so I'm pretty sure they can FexEx you the printout for an additional fee and deliver it. But FedEx Office Centers are all over my area and are common pickups during grocery shopping or other tasks I have around town. There probably is a cheaper local printer that you should support rather than big business FedEx btw. Local marketing and local printers would likely accept your print jobs and supporting your town is a good idea. -------- Consolidated office print jobs also stock rarer papers (cardstock, oversized, legal, etc. etc) and support more styles of print jobs anyway. You should have a home printer for your most common printing task (which is almost certainly jost plain black and white documents). But if you need serious print jobs with good bindings, cover sheets and less common paper weights (ex: 100lb cardstock or something) in colors and other advanced features that's a printer you go to. I mean the printer in your local towns main street, and FedEx if they've taken over your town.
- wrp 2y ago
  A few reasons. Laser doesn't do well with thicker or textured paper. More durability in commercial situations. And then there is color. The Epson EcoTank line seems to be selling very well.
  - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
    Colour laser printers whilst being more expensive, produce better quality output for colour documents than ink does in my opinion. You don't get the horizontal lines that you sometimes get with inkjets where the ink overlaps a bit. However, inkjets are probably better for printing photos, but I'd recommend just using a photo printing service if that's what you're after (assuming that they're not private photos that you don't want to share).
- grujicd 2y ago
  What's the quality of color prints on current lasers? Last time I checked it was quite below inkjets. Not that I would recommend inkjet to anyone, they're unusable in home setting where you have long periods of time without printing.
  - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
    Colour photos are probably better on inkjets, but colour documents look great from my Brother colour laser. Images come out really well, but they're not glossy like you might want for a photo.
- TrackerFF 2y ago
  Because the VAST majority of people that purchase printers are super casual users, that will maybe print out 10-20 pages a year, and let the printer collect dust rest of the time. Being the "IT guy" among family/friends/colleagues, 9 out of 10 times that's the case. Someone asks me if I can help them with their printer, they bought it 1-3 years ago, they've barely used it, but need new ink cartridge. It's always the same printers. They saw one on sale for $40 or whatever at some big box store, a bought it.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    In which case you _particularly_ want laser, because laser printers will keep working for that sort of duty cycle, whereas if not used semi-regularly, most ink cartridges will need replacing even if not empty.
    - massysett 2y ago
      Someone printing 10 to 20 pages a year is not interested in the capital expenditure of a laser printer. They want something with as little up-front expenditure as possible.
    - Filligree 2y ago
      Although those aren’t the only two technologies. I have a wax printer, which has similar behaviour for photo prints. Only… it isn’t quite precise enough to do text very well, and it’s A5. But otherwise it’s great! I don’t look forward to running out of consumables. For some reason these aren’t made anymore.
- lucasoshiro 2y ago
  The reality of different places are... different. Here (Brazil) the cheapest laser printer costs 3x the price of an ink jet printer, and it only prints monochrome. Doesn't make sense for a printer for personal use in a home that will be used once in a while. To be honest, nowadays I would prefer ink tank, as their extra cost (here) are smaller than the price of the cartridges that will need to be bought in the next years. And they are cheaper than the cheapest laser printers sold here.
- xgyvvfb 2y ago
  /rant from color laser owner Because inkjets print prettier pictures, are more versatile, don't have long start up times, don't generate indoor ozone. There are professional inkjets available that are more respectful of your right to buy cheap supplies than even brother - specifically I can pour bottled ink into printers of at least two manufacturers. And (professional) modern inkjets keep up with print speed.
- amelius 2y ago
  +1 for Brother. Happy with mine. It works well with Linux.
  - warner25 2y ago
    Regarding Linux and printers, I use Fedora as my daily driver, and I have a cheap HP OfficeJet printer from 2016, and I'm amazed by how well it "just works" with both printing from any application and scanning with the GNOME Document Scanner application. My wife actually has more issues printing from her Windows 10 machine (e.g. we periodically have to go through the Windows settings to "add printer" again) and scanning with the actual HP software. I've used Linux on and off since 2005, and every time I've come back to Linux I've been impressed with the progress made on things like this.
- not_your_vase 2y ago
  You know, my biggest problem is not the price per se. I have an inkjet, and use it maybe twice a year. But every time when I use it successfully, it is extremely convenient to be able to print at home. So convenient, that I wouldn't even mind the price. What I mind is, that because I use it so rarely, that damn expensive cartridge dries up every 2 or so years, after printing maybe like 30 pages. That's what kills me. That's one thing that it's more expensive than gold, but it has awful quality. "Funny" thing is, I used to have a Xerox laser printer years ago. The toner dried stopped working in it also if it wasn't used for months. The main difference was that the toner cost 3 or 4 times the price of an inkjet cartridge. Fuck printers.
  - BenjiWiebe 2y ago
    Well I can confidently say it wasn't the toner drying up in your laser printer. Toner is a completely dry powder to begin with.
    - not_your_vase 2y ago
      Yes. I have realized this when I wrote the comment, and tried to use the "stopped working" instead. But in my infinite wisdom I found it appropriate not to delete completely the original "dried out" words before posting.
- lizknope 2y ago
  Black and white? Color? Printing documents or photos? How much and how often are you printing? I bought a B&W brother laser printer in 2015 and loved it. I had a cheap $80 inkjet and while it worked fine I printed so rarely that my ink cartridge would dry out. The original brother toner cartridge lasted me 4 years so I'm happy just because of that. I ended up giving that to my parents and got a brother color laser printer. It's nice for documents but inkjets are superior for photo printing. But for the last 10-15 years I can upload photos to the Walgreens a mile away and get them in less than an hour on real photo paper and don't have to worry about them fading like a lot of inkjets.
- RogueToaster 2y ago
  Depends what your substrate is. Inkjet still works better for things like vinyl, photo paper, and heat-sensitive stuff. I'm not sure you can do borderless printing on a laser printer, either. For everyday office and personal print jobs, it's hard to beat the convenience and relative reliability of a laser printer, but inkjets still have their (niche) place in the world.
- smnrg 2y ago
  Even though I'm sure someone has created a laser-printed photo exhibition to make an artistic point, photographers (and galleries, and museums) still exist–both hobbyists and professionals.
criddell 2y ago
If ink is way overpriced and printers are locked down to use only the overpriced ink, then the printer business should be insanely profitable. Is it?
lenerdenator 2y ago
Because the compensation package for HP's c-suite ain't gonna pay for itself.
- gruez 2y ago
  This is innumerate. HP made 53.72 billion in revenue in FY23. Eyeballing the executive compensation list[1], total executive compensation is maybe $50M. That means if the executives decided to work for free AND 100% of the savings went to customers (as opposed than shareholders, which seems more likely), that'd only drop prices by 0.1%. [1] https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/tech/nyse-hpq/hp/management https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/tech/nyse-hpq/hp/management
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    Okay, then planned retirement communities in expensive-to-insure parts of Florida paid for by Baby Boomers' retirement and pension funds aren't going to pay for themselves. Either way, we have externalities between the people actually making the ink cartridge and the people buying the ink cartridge that drastically inflate the price.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >Okay, then planned retirement communities in expensive-to-insure parts of Florida paid for by Baby Boomers' retirement and pension funds aren't going to pay for themselves. If you multiply out percent of stocks owned by boomers (54%)[1] and 65+ year olds living in Florida (10%)[2], you get 5.4%. Which is a minuscule share. If you apply the "planned retirement communities in expensive-to-insure parts of Florida" criteria that drops the percentage even further. Moreover Florida isn't even the top state for seniors. California has more seniors. This still seems like a pathetic attempt to construct a despised demographic for a "us vs them" narrative. [1] https://www.fool.com/research/how-many-americans-own-stock/ https://www.fool.com/research/how-many-americans-own-stock/ [2] https://www.prb.org/resources/which-us-states-are-the-oldest/ https://www.prb.org/resources/which-us-states-are-the-oldest... >Either way, we have externalities between the people actually making the ink cartridge and the people buying the ink cartridge that drastically inflate the price. What you're describing as "externalities" is literally the opposite. It's fully internalized. People who buy printers are parties to a transaction between them and the manufacturer. That's not an externality, any more than starbucks selling overpriced coffee isn't an "externality" to its customers.
lucb1e 2y ago
The page isn't very convincing. Sure, the low competition and DRM makes it likely more expensive than need be, but there are actually competitors and they aren't that much cheaper. Are the compounds that make up printer ink, to give it the right fluidity or whatnot, perhaps simply fairly expensive? Taking old cartridge (with the right chips and everything) and topping it up from a syringe (they hold only a few ml anyway), so you don't have to break anything, can't be expensive or hard to do if the ink itself wasn't expensive. Everyone should want to get in on this business model. Since the page doesn't say anything about the actual cost price, I wonder if it isn't so lucrative as they make it seem
- ElevenLathe 2y ago
  > Taking old cartridge (with the right chips and everything) and topping it up from a syringe (they hold only a few ml anyway), so you don't have to break anything, can't be expensive or hard to do if the ink itself wasn't expensive. Everyone should want to get in on this business model. Since the page doesn't say anything about the actual cost price, I wonder if it isn't so lucrative as they make it seem If you mean setting up a business refilling other peoples' empty cartridges, this was briefly a thing when people still wanted to print things in color, and therefore wanted inkjet printers. It wouldn't be a standalone business, but an additional service at copy shops, computer stores, and sometimes cell phone shops (the sketchy-ish independent kind). When everyone has a color screen in their pocket all the time, there is little demand for this. Also, the means to do this are very very cheap and the process requires no special skill. You can buy refill kits with the syringes and enough ink for dozens of cartridges for less significantly less than the cost of a single cartridge. If you're interested in cheaping out on printer cartridges, it makes more sense to just buy one of these. A service that requires $20 worth of capital and no skill is never going to be the basis of a lucrative business.
benreesman 2y ago
Because there’s about as much competition in printer ink as there is in printers or mobile phones or display advertising vendors or web browser engines or fucking anything. Enshittified passively (on paper) owned by State Street (actively managed behind closed doors in reality, look it up) modern terrible-tastic McKinsey certified fuck the consumer is just how we do now.
jasode 2y ago
>So why do printer companies charge so much for ink? Because they can. Because they have merged with or bought most of their competitors. Because they have weaponized laws to make it illegal for you to modify your printer, or for rivals to make ink cartridges that work with it. Because they can send updates to your printer whenever they want, not just to add features or protect your security, but to steal functionality from you. I realize that style of writing appeals to the "us vs them" mentality but I'd rather read about the underlying economics and finances. The inkjet printer manufacturers are using a "razor and blades" business model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor_and_blades_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor_and_blades_model The blog's paragraph could have also mentioned that aspect and as a bonus, also educated readers enough to generalize the business practice and later "pattern match" on similar scenarios such as "cheap mobile phones" that are locked down with 2 year contracts. I.e. "teach a man to fish ... yada yada"
- the_snooze 2y ago
  Yeah, the econoomics of this market explains it all. Printers are a commodity; you really can't differentiate one from another, so it's a race to the bottom on prices. But it still costs money to make+ship them at high enough volume to take advantage of economies of scale. The only way you can play in this market is by being large enough to sell the printer at a loss and recouping money on recurring supplies/subscriptions on the back end.
  - adamc 2y ago
    Which, ironically, creates economics that encourage people to buy printers and then not use them (much). An industry built around selling you things you will then not want to use is an industry with big problems. It works for razor blades because we need to shave regardless -- yes, you could chose to have a beard, but short of that, demand is constant. For printing, that just isn't true. And I print much less than I once did.
- krisoft 2y ago
  > I realize that style of writing appeals to the "us vs them" mentality but I'd rather read about the underlying economics and finances. But this is the underlying economics and finances. They can use a "razor and blades" business model because of all the things mentioned in the text you quoted. If they didn't do those things I could just order from amazon a cheap ink for their cheap printers from a rival and they would either go bankrupt or need to sell printers closer to what they make them for. But you can't because they made it illegal for the rivals to create those cheap ink cartridges. In fact talking about "Razor and blades model" obscures this fact, not illuminates it.
TuringNYC 2y ago
Psychologically, I think it is people consumers feel "stuck" with a printer once they purchase it, and the cost of ink is bad but not bad enough to precipitate a switch. I also wonder how many people dont want to rock the boat on an IT configuration that is working (certainly the case for my mom!)
itsanaccount 2y ago
[flagged]
rvnx 2y ago
There is a sad but similar problem with consumables for diabetics. You get the glucose meter for free (or almost), but you have to pay for the consumables (the strips and lancets), and get locked there. Strips which are only compatible to specific models within the same brand offering.
- avalys 2y ago
  Lancets? What is the exact market problem you are proposing affects lancets?
65 2y ago
Makes me wonder why thermal US Letter sized printers are not more popular? There are some portable ones I can find at quick glance but not many desktop versions. Thermal printers do not require ink and most things you print are in black and white anyway. Are there downsides to thermal printers I don't know about?
- xythobuz 2y ago
  Sure. The prints fade quickly, especially in the sun. And they are susceptible to heat, rubbing your fingernail along is enough friction heating to cause a black line. So they are not all that usable for something more permanent than a burger receipt.
- jonhohle 2y ago
  It depends on whether what you are printing is intended to last, and for how long. A thermally printed receipt in a car in Phoenix during the summer might last a few days before becoming unreadable. I have Ticketmaster receipts from around 2000, that are unfortunately fading and will eventually be blank tickets again.
- mikestew 2y ago
  Ignoring the crap print/paper quality, and the one-sided printing, there’s also exposure to BPA. https://www.plasticpollutioncoalition.org/blog/2016/12/23/is-bpa-on-thermal-paper-a-health-hazard https://www.plasticpollutioncoalition.org/blog/2016/12/23/is...
- pbhjpbhj 2y ago
  They fade very quickly, perhaps that can be fixed, if you only need the prints transiently then it wouldn't matter. I stopped printing anything 5 years ago. If I need to print then the local supermarkets do printing - you just take in a usb stick with the files on.
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
  "US Letter" is a horrible paper size - what is it with the U.S. and ridiculous measurements? ISO 216 is the international standard (e.g. A4 size) and because they use an aspect ratio of the square root of 2, you can fold in half one size to get the next smaller size. Thermal printers tend to be expensive as you use either special paper or special printing ribbons. They quite often create fumes which isn't pleasant and the prints tend to fade after a while, so not much good for archiving.
CommonGuy 2y ago
I bought an Epson EcoTank five years ago and am very happy with it. The ink is dirt cheap. The only downside is that you have to print something every 2-3 months, otherwise the quality degrades noticeably for the next few printouts. But after that it has always returned to normal quality for me.
- Finnucane 2y ago
  If you're using a printer less frequently than every two or three months you're probably better off using a service and not having a printer. Let the maintenance be someone else's problem.
  - Ekaros 2y ago
    Or laser. My cheapest HP colour laser printer is over 10 years old and still works.
    - grues-dinner 2y ago
      Pretty sure the HP LaserJet IIIp (introduced 1989!) in my parents attic will still work if I would find a cable for it. They definitely don't make them like that any more.
      - throwanem 2y ago
        They don't weigh sixty pounds, draw ten kilowatts, or top out at 300dpi and 4M of RAM any more, either.
        grues-dinner 2y ago
        I mean, who doesn't love loading in the fonts manually? And it went to 4.5M of RAM, thank you very much, and definitely didn't draw 10kW, not even 1kW at maximum (but not far from it, and a cool 150W standby). And not even 55lb: sylphlike, really!
sly010 2y ago
FWIW ink is not expensive, but traditionally the nozzles and electronics and the printhead are all bundled with the cartridge, making it expensive. The big companies now offer inkjet printers with ink and print head separate (eg Canon pixma) and for those printers the ink (in a literal bottle) is priced much more reasonably. There are other issues of course, I am not trying to give them slack here. If you don't use self cleaning once a week, the printer head clogs and you have to replace it anyway. If you use self cleaning too much, the waste ink reservoir fills up and your whole printer is toast unless you reset the firmware somehow. But there is a whole community for those kind of things.
- Clamchop 2y ago
  > traditionally the nozzles and electronics and the printhead are all bundled with the cartridge Canon at least was selling individual ink tanks (by the color, no integrated head) for their BubbleJet printers way back in the 90s.
observationist 2y ago
Things cost what people will pay for them. You use various techniques to figure out whatever the maximum price of a product or service will be, and you maximize that number. Any and every tactic and strategy that isn't explicitly illegal is part of the toolkit put to this end. If it's illegal, but the fines cost less than the profit, it'll be used. Things like principles and dignity and ethics are fluff for ad campaigns or players too small to matter. Once past a certain threshold of size and age and complexity, publicly traded corporations enter an ecosystem utterly divorced from things like cost and value, they start playing with perceptions and mass psychology, with "what can we get away with" instead of "how can we be the best product in the market". Consolidations and mergers and acquisitions make giant, soulless bureaucratic blobs out of companies that effectively lack any meaningful identity. What's the effective difference between Pepsi and Coke? Brother and HP? Samsung and Apple? Any cable company or ISP? Any email provider? The modern marketplace has been overcome by robber baron corporations and colluding nonhuman agents utilizing implicit rules and arbitraging the human rights differentials at every effective level. They're enabled by a sub-24 hour news cycle and the phenomena that allows outrageous things to happen with such incredible frequency that unless you truly bungle messaging and meme yourself into a Bud Light or Jaguar type situation, you can get away with anything. The ecosystem of giant corporations that enable enterprise level products allow these companies to economically detach from the humans who actually use the products, while still dictating arbitrary prices and inflicting shitty service and product quality on consumers with no effective pricing dynamics. You can't break into the printing "market" because they already have regulatory capture via IP and case law supporting their respective moats, and they have all the benefits of vertical integration and supply chains. You'll be acquired or litigated out of existence if you present any sort of meaningful threat to any aspect of these businesses. So they jack the price of ink up to the maximum that they can get away with. Despite no increase in supply costs, no increase in value to the end user, the rate of increase will continue to rise until one or more enterprise customers get bothered enough to complain, and the contract will get renegotiated. Government contracts and deals with other massive bureaucracies are preferred, because the inertia means years of guaranteed income, often contractually inflated by contingencies like mandatory renegotiations and inflation hikes to the seller's advantage. But hey, it's a global free market where anyone can sell amazing new inventions and get a commensurate return on the value they bring to the world!
sinuhe69 2y ago
I'm using a Epson L120 (EcoTank which are refillable) as my home printer. The black ink is dirt cheap and you can buy it everywhere. Good color inks are more expensive, but if you don't use it for photo printing but simple color illustrations, they are more than fine.
Just_Harry 2y ago
In my later school years, when I had semi-regular need for printing things in colour, I took to drilling holes in the inkjet cartridges and refilling them with cheap ink using syringes. Which worked out to about £5 for the syringes, £5 for 400 ml of CMYK ink, and my dad already had a power drill—which was equivalent to about £104-worth of black ink cartridges, and about £312-worth of colour ink cartridges. (Now it would be about £160 of black and £480 of colour). It only took 15-to-30-minutes to refill both cartridges, including drilling the holes. Some printer manufacturers have implemented DRM for ink to prevent this kind of thing.
GuB-42 2y ago
What the article doesn't mention is how cheap printers are. $50 for a printer/scanner combo is really cheap, inkjet printers are high-precision machines and paper is finicky. Notice how you don't find cheap knockoff printers on AliExpress, like they do with most consumer electronics, they just can't compete. You can find knockoff cartridges though. Printer manufacturers are not fundamentally evil, they just have a business model that rely on expensive ink. Make it so that they can't use that business model anymore and printers will become much more expensive (like the "ecotank" line). Maybe it is a good thing, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. 3rd party cartridges for cheap printers are a hack, it only works when it is not widespread enough so that printer manufacturers can still make profit thanks to those who buy the overpriced ink.
- fy20 2y ago
  Is this the same for large format printers? Because they even have region locking. A friend bought his Epson used from Germany for around €7500. During COVID times he needed more ink, but his supplier said it would be a month or two due to supply chain issues. He borrowed a cartridge from a friend who had the correct colour, but his printer wouldn't recognize as it, as our part of Europe is a different region to Germany (ink is the same price in both). He even spoke to unofficial technicians to see if they could unlock it, but the only solution would be replacing the motherboard to change the region.
_aavaa_ 2y ago
Ah yes, "Felony Contempt of Business Model". https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-business-model-lexmarks-anti-competitive-legacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-busine...
greatgib 2y ago
What I don't understand is why we don't see Chinese manufacturers disrupt the market with cheap knockoff of printers. That should be quite easy for them and give good rentability. Probably a lot easier than 3d printer knockoffs or smartphone that are still commons.
ppp999 2y ago
Bought a $80 refurbed b&w HP laser printer years ago and I'm happy with it... Toner is also very cheap
RecycledEle 2y ago
Could IEEE or another group put together standards for generic print heads and ink?i'd love to buy a generic printer.
- RecycledEle 2y ago
  Maybe Amazon would benefit from open-sourcing the designs for consumables for their products?

93 points by throw7 2y ago

Erm, why on earth does anyone buy inkjet anymore? Seriously just go get one of those cheap and cheerful brother laser printers!

cojo 2y ago
Cannot emphasize this enough. I think one of my best purchases in the past year or two was investing in the MFC-L3780CDW Brother laser printer. Took some research and timing but couldn’t be happier with no longer having to worry about ink clogging / going bad if I haven’t printed for a while. Toner cartridges aren’t exactly cheap, but they will print a ton of pages, and they take way longer to go bad from what I’ve experienced so far…
- neuralRiot 2y ago
  At home I have a laser Brother from around 2000s that i rescued from the dumpster, the last time I needed it it had spent probably 5 years untouched in the garage, plugged it in and printed away without problems, no clogs, no firmware updates, no 2gb of install packages just a driver, no BS.
criddell 2y ago
But make sure you buy Brother toner because when you use third party toner the print quality is intentionally degraded. Cheap, but not all that cheerful IMHO. https://www.reddit.com/r/printers/comments/s9b2eg/brother_mfc_firmware_update_nongenuine_toner_now/ https://www.reddit.com/r/printers/comments/s9b2eg/brother_mf...
- gwbas1c 2y ago
  2nd: My print quality sucks with 3rd party ink
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
  That link is about ink in the MFC models and is a good reason to not buy Brother inkjets if they're going to do that. However, I've not had any issue with third party toner in my Brother DCP colour laser printer and haven't heard of any such issues.
  - jkaplowitz 2y ago
    It’s about toner in a Brother MFC laser printer (these do exist - I’ve owned one too), not ink in a Brother MFC inkjet.
    - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
      Ah, I see. I got thrown by the use of "ink" in the reddit post.
  - mindslight 2y ago
    The problem is the modern incarnation of the company intentionally destroying their customers' products after a purchase, so explaining it away as only one product line isn't really applicable. The problem is any trusting of that company going forward, by buying any new products of theirs. My printer is an HP DeskJet 1220C, which first came out in 2000 (it's got USB and parallel ports). I like it because the "ink cartridges" include the print heads, meaning they're easy to replace if they start getting clogged [0]. But that doesn't mean I'm going to recommend HP as a brand to anyone, given the shenanigans of their newer printers. [0] As what happened to my previous-to-me but newer-model Photosmart 6520. Cleaned them out good with alcohol, got it working again, then it clogged up again in short order. Figuring out the actual problem there has been a bit beyond me.
    - criddell 2y ago
      It seems like printer companies are overcharging for ink but they probably aren't. None of the printer companies are generating huge profits. I believe people are probably buying the wrong printer. If they print a lot, they should be buying an ink-tank printer. The printers cost a little more, but the consumables are very inexpensive. If they are infrequent printers, they should buy whatever cheap printer they want and then sign up for that companies ink subscription. You mentioned HP and they probably have the best ink subscription program. For light use it's $1.49 / month which is going to be enough for a lot of people. It's nice to never have to order ink.
monkmartinez 2y ago
Hear! Hear!!!! Practical, reliable, affordable and just works technology; The amazing Brother HL-L2320D printer. I can't remember the last time I bought toner. The thing just keeps on printing. I think they make a wireless version, but I can't be bothered to change something that just works the way this printer has. We have fancy printers at work that are also Laser based and they are not as reliable the printer sitting next to me.
edb_123 2y ago
Aren't ultra-fine particles still a potential health issue with laser printers? Especially in home office or domestic use, where they typically aren't placed in a separate printer room?
- Filligree 2y ago
  Less than it used to be, but yes. Though it applies to printing and maintenance, and the whole point of buying a laser printer for home is that it can sit still for months at a time.
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
  I think the biggest exposure would come from handling/replacing the toner cartridges. Make sure that you keep them closed and don't shake them around (e.g. to distribute the toner within). I think they're also not great for releasing gases and certainly my one does have a chemical smell when printing, so I just make sure that I'm in a different room for doing a large print (it helps that the printer is network connected).
  - blibble 2y ago
    that smell is ozone (chlorine-like), which the human nose is super sensitive to probably some burnt toner too
arethuza 2y ago
We have one of the combined Brother last printers and scanners with ADF - don't use it very often but incredibly convenient when you need it.
TuringNYC 2y ago
1000%, for most normal usage a $200 Brother printer's built-in toner would last years before considering a toner replacement.
- mlok 2y ago
  It's been my situation, I have had my Brother laser printer for... more than 8 years and I still run on the toner that was delivered with the printer ! Yellow ran low a few years ago, and the printer wouldn't print anymore, so I select "print black & white", and the printer happily keeps working using the black toner only :)
pjmlp 2y ago
Because they still cost 3x as an inkjet in most places, and then a toner cartidge costs about 100 €. Doesn't matter if they happen to print longer, most folks care about the money on the spot.
- MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
  You can get a b/w one close to 100€. People just don't know.
  - kurttheviking 2y ago
    im in the market for a printer, mind recommending one?
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      The canonical article on the matter: https://www.theverge.com/23642073/best-printer-2023-brother-laser-wi-fi-its-fine https://www.theverge.com/23642073/best-printer-2023-brother-... The version with no scanner that they recommend is about 100 euro (I think that precise version is now discontinued, but its successor, the Brother-HL-L2400DW, is also about 100 euro).
    - MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
      Get one with Wifi, it is very much worth it. I can print from my phone, and put the printer anywhere.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    With scanner in Germany, only if some discount action, meanwhile most similar inkjets are around 80 €, and naturally cheaper in similar discount actions.
VoodooJuJu 2y ago
- ink is better for photo quality prints (color quality, thicker paper, longevity) - laser toner is bad for your health - laser has a larger upfront cost
pandemic_region 2y ago
Another Brother-Bro here, HP seriously needs to get out of the consumer market.
paxys 2y ago
Because you can get a basic inkjet printer with included cartridges for $30 vs $350 for a color laser printer + toner. I'm sure the latter makes sense if you are printing at scale, but for occasional use there's really no point spending that much.
- dragontamer 2y ago
  But if you are only printing occasionally why not go to FedEx and print your document there? I've chosen to have Black and White only at home, and go to FedEx for my color pages. I do black and white text often enough that it's worth it. But I really don't do color enough to warrant a printer (or upgrading to a more expensive color printer even)
  - Loggias 2y ago
    Because it’s really inconvenient and not the best use of my time?
  - paxys 2y ago
    Because I want to print at home? And don't want to pay $1+ a page?
    - dragontamer 2y ago
      Uh huh. You know it's 10c a page, you can email it to them and pick it up later... right? It's also a FedEx, so I'm pretty sure they can FexEx you the printout for an additional fee and deliver it. But FedEx Office Centers are all over my area and are common pickups during grocery shopping or other tasks I have around town. There probably is a cheaper local printer that you should support rather than big business FedEx btw. Local marketing and local printers would likely accept your print jobs and supporting your town is a good idea. -------- Consolidated office print jobs also stock rarer papers (cardstock, oversized, legal, etc. etc) and support more styles of print jobs anyway. You should have a home printer for your most common printing task (which is almost certainly jost plain black and white documents). But if you need serious print jobs with good bindings, cover sheets and less common paper weights (ex: 100lb cardstock or something) in colors and other advanced features that's a printer you go to. I mean the printer in your local towns main street, and FedEx if they've taken over your town.
wrp 2y ago
A few reasons. Laser doesn't do well with thicker or textured paper. More durability in commercial situations. And then there is color. The Epson EcoTank line seems to be selling very well.
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
  Colour laser printers whilst being more expensive, produce better quality output for colour documents than ink does in my opinion. You don't get the horizontal lines that you sometimes get with inkjets where the ink overlaps a bit. However, inkjets are probably better for printing photos, but I'd recommend just using a photo printing service if that's what you're after (assuming that they're not private photos that you don't want to share).
grujicd 2y ago
What's the quality of color prints on current lasers? Last time I checked it was quite below inkjets. Not that I would recommend inkjet to anyone, they're unusable in home setting where you have long periods of time without printing.
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
  Colour photos are probably better on inkjets, but colour documents look great from my Brother colour laser. Images come out really well, but they're not glossy like you might want for a photo.
TrackerFF 2y ago
Because the VAST majority of people that purchase printers are super casual users, that will maybe print out 10-20 pages a year, and let the printer collect dust rest of the time. Being the "IT guy" among family/friends/colleagues, 9 out of 10 times that's the case. Someone asks me if I can help them with their printer, they bought it 1-3 years ago, they've barely used it, but need new ink cartridge. It's always the same printers. They saw one on sale for $40 or whatever at some big box store, a bought it.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  In which case you _particularly_ want laser, because laser printers will keep working for that sort of duty cycle, whereas if not used semi-regularly, most ink cartridges will need replacing even if not empty.
  - massysett 2y ago
    Someone printing 10 to 20 pages a year is not interested in the capital expenditure of a laser printer. They want something with as little up-front expenditure as possible.
  - Filligree 2y ago
    Although those aren’t the only two technologies. I have a wax printer, which has similar behaviour for photo prints. Only… it isn’t quite precise enough to do text very well, and it’s A5. But otherwise it’s great! I don’t look forward to running out of consumables. For some reason these aren’t made anymore.
lucasoshiro 2y ago
The reality of different places are... different. Here (Brazil) the cheapest laser printer costs 3x the price of an ink jet printer, and it only prints monochrome. Doesn't make sense for a printer for personal use in a home that will be used once in a while. To be honest, nowadays I would prefer ink tank, as their extra cost (here) are smaller than the price of the cartridges that will need to be bought in the next years. And they are cheaper than the cheapest laser printers sold here.
xgyvvfb 2y ago
/rant from color laser owner Because inkjets print prettier pictures, are more versatile, don't have long start up times, don't generate indoor ozone. There are professional inkjets available that are more respectful of your right to buy cheap supplies than even brother - specifically I can pour bottled ink into printers of at least two manufacturers. And (professional) modern inkjets keep up with print speed.
amelius 2y ago
+1 for Brother. Happy with mine. It works well with Linux.
- warner25 2y ago
  Regarding Linux and printers, I use Fedora as my daily driver, and I have a cheap HP OfficeJet printer from 2016, and I'm amazed by how well it "just works" with both printing from any application and scanning with the GNOME Document Scanner application. My wife actually has more issues printing from her Windows 10 machine (e.g. we periodically have to go through the Windows settings to "add printer" again) and scanning with the actual HP software. I've used Linux on and off since 2005, and every time I've come back to Linux I've been impressed with the progress made on things like this.
not_your_vase 2y ago
You know, my biggest problem is not the price per se. I have an inkjet, and use it maybe twice a year. But every time when I use it successfully, it is extremely convenient to be able to print at home. So convenient, that I wouldn't even mind the price. What I mind is, that because I use it so rarely, that damn expensive cartridge dries up every 2 or so years, after printing maybe like 30 pages. That's what kills me. That's one thing that it's more expensive than gold, but it has awful quality. "Funny" thing is, I used to have a Xerox laser printer years ago. The toner dried stopped working in it also if it wasn't used for months. The main difference was that the toner cost 3 or 4 times the price of an inkjet cartridge. Fuck printers.
- BenjiWiebe 2y ago
  Well I can confidently say it wasn't the toner drying up in your laser printer. Toner is a completely dry powder to begin with.
  - not_your_vase 2y ago
    Yes. I have realized this when I wrote the comment, and tried to use the "stopped working" instead. But in my infinite wisdom I found it appropriate not to delete completely the original "dried out" words before posting.
lizknope 2y ago
Black and white? Color? Printing documents or photos? How much and how often are you printing? I bought a B&W brother laser printer in 2015 and loved it. I had a cheap $80 inkjet and while it worked fine I printed so rarely that my ink cartridge would dry out. The original brother toner cartridge lasted me 4 years so I'm happy just because of that. I ended up giving that to my parents and got a brother color laser printer. It's nice for documents but inkjets are superior for photo printing. But for the last 10-15 years I can upload photos to the Walgreens a mile away and get them in less than an hour on real photo paper and don't have to worry about them fading like a lot of inkjets.
RogueToaster 2y ago
Depends what your substrate is. Inkjet still works better for things like vinyl, photo paper, and heat-sensitive stuff. I'm not sure you can do borderless printing on a laser printer, either. For everyday office and personal print jobs, it's hard to beat the convenience and relative reliability of a laser printer, but inkjets still have their (niche) place in the world.
smnrg 2y ago
Even though I'm sure someone has created a laser-printed photo exhibition to make an artistic point, photographers (and galleries, and museums) still exist–both hobbyists and professionals.

criddell 2y ago

If ink is way overpriced and printers are locked down to use only the overpriced ink, then the printer business should be insanely profitable. Is it?

lenerdenator 2y ago

Because the compensation package for HP's c-suite ain't gonna pay for itself.

gruez 2y ago
This is innumerate. HP made 53.72 billion in revenue in FY23. Eyeballing the executive compensation list[1], total executive compensation is maybe $50M. That means if the executives decided to work for free AND 100% of the savings went to customers (as opposed than shareholders, which seems more likely), that'd only drop prices by 0.1%. [1] https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/tech/nyse-hpq/hp/management https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/tech/nyse-hpq/hp/management
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  Okay, then planned retirement communities in expensive-to-insure parts of Florida paid for by Baby Boomers' retirement and pension funds aren't going to pay for themselves. Either way, we have externalities between the people actually making the ink cartridge and the people buying the ink cartridge that drastically inflate the price.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >Okay, then planned retirement communities in expensive-to-insure parts of Florida paid for by Baby Boomers' retirement and pension funds aren't going to pay for themselves. If you multiply out percent of stocks owned by boomers (54%)[1] and 65+ year olds living in Florida (10%)[2], you get 5.4%. Which is a minuscule share. If you apply the "planned retirement communities in expensive-to-insure parts of Florida" criteria that drops the percentage even further. Moreover Florida isn't even the top state for seniors. California has more seniors. This still seems like a pathetic attempt to construct a despised demographic for a "us vs them" narrative. [1] https://www.fool.com/research/how-many-americans-own-stock/ https://www.fool.com/research/how-many-americans-own-stock/ [2] https://www.prb.org/resources/which-us-states-are-the-oldest/ https://www.prb.org/resources/which-us-states-are-the-oldest... >Either way, we have externalities between the people actually making the ink cartridge and the people buying the ink cartridge that drastically inflate the price. What you're describing as "externalities" is literally the opposite. It's fully internalized. People who buy printers are parties to a transaction between them and the manufacturer. That's not an externality, any more than starbucks selling overpriced coffee isn't an "externality" to its customers.

lucb1e 2y ago

The page isn't very convincing. Sure, the low competition and DRM makes it likely more expensive than need be, but there are actually competitors and they aren't that much cheaper. Are the compounds that make up printer ink, to give it the right fluidity or whatnot, perhaps simply fairly expensive? Taking old cartridge (with the right chips and everything) and topping it up from a syringe (they hold only a few ml anyway), so you don't have to break anything, can't be expensive or hard to do if the ink itself wasn't expensive. Everyone should want to get in on this business model. Since the page doesn't say anything about the actual cost price, I wonder if it isn't so lucrative as they make it seem

ElevenLathe 2y ago
> Taking old cartridge (with the right chips and everything) and topping it up from a syringe (they hold only a few ml anyway), so you don't have to break anything, can't be expensive or hard to do if the ink itself wasn't expensive. Everyone should want to get in on this business model. Since the page doesn't say anything about the actual cost price, I wonder if it isn't so lucrative as they make it seem If you mean setting up a business refilling other peoples' empty cartridges, this was briefly a thing when people still wanted to print things in color, and therefore wanted inkjet printers. It wouldn't be a standalone business, but an additional service at copy shops, computer stores, and sometimes cell phone shops (the sketchy-ish independent kind). When everyone has a color screen in their pocket all the time, there is little demand for this. Also, the means to do this are very very cheap and the process requires no special skill. You can buy refill kits with the syringes and enough ink for dozens of cartridges for less significantly less than the cost of a single cartridge. If you're interested in cheaping out on printer cartridges, it makes more sense to just buy one of these. A service that requires $20 worth of capital and no skill is never going to be the basis of a lucrative business.

benreesman 2y ago

Because there’s about as much competition in printer ink as there is in printers or mobile phones or display advertising vendors or web browser engines or fucking anything. Enshittified passively (on paper) owned by State Street (actively managed behind closed doors in reality, look it up) modern terrible-tastic McKinsey certified fuck the consumer is just how we do now.

jasode 2y ago

>So why do printer companies charge so much for ink? Because they can. Because they have merged with or bought most of their competitors. Because they have weaponized laws to make it illegal for you to modify your printer, or for rivals to make ink cartridges that work with it. Because they can send updates to your printer whenever they want, not just to add features or protect your security, but to steal functionality from you. I realize that style of writing appeals to the "us vs them" mentality but I'd rather read about the underlying economics and finances. The inkjet printer manufacturers are using a "razor and blades" business model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor_and_blades_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor_and_blades_model The blog's paragraph could have also mentioned that aspect and as a bonus, also educated readers enough to generalize the business practice and later "pattern match" on similar scenarios such as "cheap mobile phones" that are locked down with 2 year contracts. I.e. "teach a man to fish ... yada yada"

the_snooze 2y ago
Yeah, the econoomics of this market explains it all. Printers are a commodity; you really can't differentiate one from another, so it's a race to the bottom on prices. But it still costs money to make+ship them at high enough volume to take advantage of economies of scale. The only way you can play in this market is by being large enough to sell the printer at a loss and recouping money on recurring supplies/subscriptions on the back end.
- adamc 2y ago
  Which, ironically, creates economics that encourage people to buy printers and then not use them (much). An industry built around selling you things you will then not want to use is an industry with big problems. It works for razor blades because we need to shave regardless -- yes, you could chose to have a beard, but short of that, demand is constant. For printing, that just isn't true. And I print much less than I once did.
krisoft 2y ago
> I realize that style of writing appeals to the "us vs them" mentality but I'd rather read about the underlying economics and finances. But this is the underlying economics and finances. They can use a "razor and blades" business model because of all the things mentioned in the text you quoted. If they didn't do those things I could just order from amazon a cheap ink for their cheap printers from a rival and they would either go bankrupt or need to sell printers closer to what they make them for. But you can't because they made it illegal for the rivals to create those cheap ink cartridges. In fact talking about "Razor and blades model" obscures this fact, not illuminates it.

TuringNYC 2y ago

Psychologically, I think it is people consumers feel "stuck" with a printer once they purchase it, and the cost of ink is bad but not bad enough to precipitate a switch. I also wonder how many people dont want to rock the boat on an IT configuration that is working (certainly the case for my mom!)

itsanaccount 2y ago

[flagged]

rvnx 2y ago

There is a sad but similar problem with consumables for diabetics. You get the glucose meter for free (or almost), but you have to pay for the consumables (the strips and lancets), and get locked there. Strips which are only compatible to specific models within the same brand offering.

avalys 2y ago
Lancets? What is the exact market problem you are proposing affects lancets?

65 2y ago

Makes me wonder why thermal US Letter sized printers are not more popular? There are some portable ones I can find at quick glance but not many desktop versions. Thermal printers do not require ink and most things you print are in black and white anyway. Are there downsides to thermal printers I don't know about?

xythobuz 2y ago
Sure. The prints fade quickly, especially in the sun. And they are susceptible to heat, rubbing your fingernail along is enough friction heating to cause a black line. So they are not all that usable for something more permanent than a burger receipt.
jonhohle 2y ago
It depends on whether what you are printing is intended to last, and for how long. A thermally printed receipt in a car in Phoenix during the summer might last a few days before becoming unreadable. I have Ticketmaster receipts from around 2000, that are unfortunately fading and will eventually be blank tickets again.
mikestew 2y ago
Ignoring the crap print/paper quality, and the one-sided printing, there’s also exposure to BPA. https://www.plasticpollutioncoalition.org/blog/2016/12/23/is-bpa-on-thermal-paper-a-health-hazard https://www.plasticpollutioncoalition.org/blog/2016/12/23/is...
pbhjpbhj 2y ago
They fade very quickly, perhaps that can be fixed, if you only need the prints transiently then it wouldn't matter. I stopped printing anything 5 years ago. If I need to print then the local supermarkets do printing - you just take in a usb stick with the files on.
ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
"US Letter" is a horrible paper size - what is it with the U.S. and ridiculous measurements? ISO 216 is the international standard (e.g. A4 size) and because they use an aspect ratio of the square root of 2, you can fold in half one size to get the next smaller size. Thermal printers tend to be expensive as you use either special paper or special printing ribbons. They quite often create fumes which isn't pleasant and the prints tend to fade after a while, so not much good for archiving.

CommonGuy 2y ago

I bought an Epson EcoTank five years ago and am very happy with it. The ink is dirt cheap. The only downside is that you have to print something every 2-3 months, otherwise the quality degrades noticeably for the next few printouts. But after that it has always returned to normal quality for me.

Finnucane 2y ago
If you're using a printer less frequently than every two or three months you're probably better off using a service and not having a printer. Let the maintenance be someone else's problem.
- Ekaros 2y ago
  Or laser. My cheapest HP colour laser printer is over 10 years old and still works.
  - grues-dinner 2y ago
    Pretty sure the HP LaserJet IIIp (introduced 1989!) in my parents attic will still work if I would find a cable for it. They definitely don't make them like that any more.
    - throwanem 2y ago
      They don't weigh sixty pounds, draw ten kilowatts, or top out at 300dpi and 4M of RAM any more, either.
      - grues-dinner 2y ago
        I mean, who doesn't love loading in the fonts manually? And it went to 4.5M of RAM, thank you very much, and definitely didn't draw 10kW, not even 1kW at maximum (but not far from it, and a cool 150W standby). And not even 55lb: sylphlike, really!

sly010 2y ago

FWIW ink is not expensive, but traditionally the nozzles and electronics and the printhead are all bundled with the cartridge, making it expensive. The big companies now offer inkjet printers with ink and print head separate (eg Canon pixma) and for those printers the ink (in a literal bottle) is priced much more reasonably. There are other issues of course, I am not trying to give them slack here. If you don't use self cleaning once a week, the printer head clogs and you have to replace it anyway. If you use self cleaning too much, the waste ink reservoir fills up and your whole printer is toast unless you reset the firmware somehow. But there is a whole community for those kind of things.

Clamchop 2y ago
> traditionally the nozzles and electronics and the printhead are all bundled with the cartridge Canon at least was selling individual ink tanks (by the color, no integrated head) for their BubbleJet printers way back in the 90s.

observationist 2y ago

Things cost what people will pay for them. You use various techniques to figure out whatever the maximum price of a product or service will be, and you maximize that number. Any and every tactic and strategy that isn't explicitly illegal is part of the toolkit put to this end. If it's illegal, but the fines cost less than the profit, it'll be used. Things like principles and dignity and ethics are fluff for ad campaigns or players too small to matter. Once past a certain threshold of size and age and complexity, publicly traded corporations enter an ecosystem utterly divorced from things like cost and value, they start playing with perceptions and mass psychology, with "what can we get away with" instead of "how can we be the best product in the market". Consolidations and mergers and acquisitions make giant, soulless bureaucratic blobs out of companies that effectively lack any meaningful identity. What's the effective difference between Pepsi and Coke? Brother and HP? Samsung and Apple? Any cable company or ISP? Any email provider? The modern marketplace has been overcome by robber baron corporations and colluding nonhuman agents utilizing implicit rules and arbitraging the human rights differentials at every effective level. They're enabled by a sub-24 hour news cycle and the phenomena that allows outrageous things to happen with such incredible frequency that unless you truly bungle messaging and meme yourself into a Bud Light or Jaguar type situation, you can get away with anything. The ecosystem of giant corporations that enable enterprise level products allow these companies to economically detach from the humans who actually use the products, while still dictating arbitrary prices and inflicting shitty service and product quality on consumers with no effective pricing dynamics. You can't break into the printing "market" because they already have regulatory capture via IP and case law supporting their respective moats, and they have all the benefits of vertical integration and supply chains. You'll be acquired or litigated out of existence if you present any sort of meaningful threat to any aspect of these businesses. So they jack the price of ink up to the maximum that they can get away with. Despite no increase in supply costs, no increase in value to the end user, the rate of increase will continue to rise until one or more enterprise customers get bothered enough to complain, and the contract will get renegotiated. Government contracts and deals with other massive bureaucracies are preferred, because the inertia means years of guaranteed income, often contractually inflated by contingencies like mandatory renegotiations and inflation hikes to the seller's advantage. But hey, it's a global free market where anyone can sell amazing new inventions and get a commensurate return on the value they bring to the world!

sinuhe69 2y ago

I'm using a Epson L120 (EcoTank which are refillable) as my home printer. The black ink is dirt cheap and you can buy it everywhere. Good color inks are more expensive, but if you don't use it for photo printing but simple color illustrations, they are more than fine.

Just_Harry 2y ago

In my later school years, when I had semi-regular need for printing things in colour, I took to drilling holes in the inkjet cartridges and refilling them with cheap ink using syringes. Which worked out to about £5 for the syringes, £5 for 400 ml of CMYK ink, and my dad already had a power drill—which was equivalent to about £104-worth of black ink cartridges, and about £312-worth of colour ink cartridges. (Now it would be about £160 of black and £480 of colour). It only took 15-to-30-minutes to refill both cartridges, including drilling the holes. Some printer manufacturers have implemented DRM for ink to prevent this kind of thing.

GuB-42 2y ago

What the article doesn't mention is how cheap printers are. $50 for a printer/scanner combo is really cheap, inkjet printers are high-precision machines and paper is finicky. Notice how you don't find cheap knockoff printers on AliExpress, like they do with most consumer electronics, they just can't compete. You can find knockoff cartridges though. Printer manufacturers are not fundamentally evil, they just have a business model that rely on expensive ink. Make it so that they can't use that business model anymore and printers will become much more expensive (like the "ecotank" line). Maybe it is a good thing, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. 3rd party cartridges for cheap printers are a hack, it only works when it is not widespread enough so that printer manufacturers can still make profit thanks to those who buy the overpriced ink.

fy20 2y ago
Is this the same for large format printers? Because they even have region locking. A friend bought his Epson used from Germany for around €7500. During COVID times he needed more ink, but his supplier said it would be a month or two due to supply chain issues. He borrowed a cartridge from a friend who had the correct colour, but his printer wouldn't recognize as it, as our part of Europe is a different region to Germany (ink is the same price in both). He even spoke to unofficial technicians to see if they could unlock it, but the only solution would be replacing the motherboard to change the region.

_aavaa_ 2y ago

Ah yes, "Felony Contempt of Business Model". https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-business-model-lexmarks-anti-competitive-legacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/felony-contempt-busine...

greatgib 2y ago

What I don't understand is why we don't see Chinese manufacturers disrupt the market with cheap knockoff of printers. That should be quite easy for them and give good rentability. Probably a lot easier than 3d printer knockoffs or smartphone that are still commons.

ppp999 2y ago

Bought a $80 refurbed b&w HP laser printer years ago and I'm happy with it... Toner is also very cheap

RecycledEle 2y ago

Could IEEE or another group put together standards for generic print heads and ink?i'd love to buy a generic printer.

RecycledEle 2y ago
Maybe Amazon would benefit from open-sourcing the designs for consumables for their products?