Slashdot Mirror
Dell Takes the Low Road Regarding Ink Cartridges
Anonymous Coward writes "Dell released a line of printers today, manufactured by Lexmark. As covered by by Yahoo they '..contain a chip that disables the cartridge if it is refilled and replaced in a Dell printer..' and 'The cartridges are different sizes than cartridges from other printer vendors, including Lexmark, the spokesperson said. This will limit the amount of knockoff cartridges available, but only until someone figures out how to reverse engineer Dell's cartridges.'" In the interest of full disclosure, note that the poster sells knockoff carts.
If Lexmark does it on their own, would Dell's version be any different?
--------
Free your mind.
I bought my HP laserjet for $240. About the $289 dollar inkjet from Dell. Inkhet printers are typically $200-$100.
After switching to laser I will never go back. I do not need color for most documents and the quality and reliablity are so much better. My epson inkjet blows goatballs and always jams.
http://saveie6.com/
I don't think it will.
As long as most people blindly accept the pap they get from Dell, they will buy printers like this one as well. The end result? Dell sells printers and ties them to the cartidges. They're just looking to capitalize on their place in the market . . . appealing to the ignorant buyers in households who know no better options.
Real markets depend upon easy access of producers and consumers, and an informed consumer on the products of the market. In this case, we have neither; ergo, we have no market. We have another Windoze in the making.
It's situations like this one that make me doubt the "free market."
...tizzyd
Actually, Canon printers are somewhat more expensive that their Epson equivalents, but have much cheaper running costs due to lower cartridge prices. So some manufacturers are taking the higher inital cost/lower long term cost route.
Actually, AT&T owned the entire phone system, including the phone wire in your house! They only made you use their phone instruments because, legally, they were theirs. In the MCI vs. Ma Bell case, they got clobbered over long distance service competition. No longer [owning/being responsible for] the phones and the house wiring was something the Regional Bell Operating Companies that were spun off from AT&T wanted.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I don't know about current printheads, but I refilled my old Canon BJ200 carts enough times that... well, the printer wore out (twice -- once under warranty, once afterward) before the carts did. The only one I lost was due to bumping and damaging the printhead itself. I used the same 3 carts for about 5 years total.
Generally when they started printing poorly, the only thing wrong was that either the printhead or the print path was dirty. Nothing a good cleaning couldn't fix. I soon learned to swish the printhead in alcohol whenever I refilled the cart, to keep it pristine, and sometimes I'd run a little alcohol thru it prior to refilling.
As to whether some are now *designed* to "wear out", that's another question.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
The problem is that after a point, they've made back their money, and they're just gouging.
A comparable situation is the contract requirements with mobile phones. They rig them in a way that makes them back the subsidy they've given you on the phone, BUT they don't tie you there after they've made their money back.
Possible technical approaches to making the money back without permanently locking in the consumer include:
1-- storing the cartridge chip ID; after some number of different official cartridges are recorded, unlock the printer.
2-- sell only a package of the printer and cartridges at a price that covers costs; additional cartridges are reasonably priced or clonable.
3-- sell the printer at its true cost.
It's just like a fascist dictatorship, without the punctual rail service!