HP Stops Selling Printers, Starts Selling Prints

An anonymous reader writes "HP has launched a new line of business printers but there's a big catch — you won't be able to buy one. For the first time in history, the company will make customers purchase printing services, rather than the product itself. At its biggest printer launch since the LaserJet in 1984, HP's new business-class Edgeline printers will only be available through a managed services contract. Pricing will be per page, depending on the quality of the printout. Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now."

Comments

Misleading Summary Title

[EveryNickIsTaken]

So, they're not stopping selling printers, they've just released a new line of contracted/leased service printers. Nice work.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[gEvil (beta)]

Chalk another one up to Zonkism.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[Nimey]

Nice "editing", Zonk. I hope Slashdot is paying you what you're worth.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[Jeff DeMaagd]

True, it would be stupid to stop selling printers anyway. A printer in which I don't get a print in less than a few minutes isn't very useful to me.

Ink for business printers is a lot cheaper than with consumer printers anyway. That's the nature of the business, you want a cheap printer, they want you to pay for the ink. If you want cheap ink, then you pay for a more expensive printer. HP and many other companies treat their consumer products differently from their business products because they are different markets with different expectations.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[nine-times]

Or rather that they've released a line of printer where they've stopped hiding the monthly charges in the "ink costs".

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[shaitand]

'True, it would be stupid to stop selling printers anyway. A printer in which I don't get a print in less than a few minutes isn't very useful to me.'

You do still get the print right away. The printer is physically present in your business but you pay a lease and pay for each page you print.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[iamhassi]

"A printer in which I don't get a print in less than a few minutes isn't very useful to me."

Did you RTFA? This is the technology we read on /. oh so long ago:
"new Memjet technology can print 60 full-color pages per minute. Instead of having a print head that moves side to side like current inkjets, the print head spans the full width of the page."

From TFA:
"Edgeline uses a page-wide stationary print-head, decreasing wear and tear by removing contact with the paper."

Here's an amazing (unbelievable?) video of the Memjet printer in action
I've been waiting for this ever since I heard of it: All the photographic quality of a inkjet with faster speeds than laser printers and saving ink to boot. Very disappointed we won't see it at home now, but it's only a matter of time before it filters down.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[Pollardito]

luckily they got him back when you could still just buy Slashdot Editors and pay once, none of this managed editing services jibberish

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[AndersOSU]

Psst, that's what patents are for. So don't expect to see this on the consumer white market for quite a while.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[Ewan]

On our managed printers, an engineer pops in every month or so to do a 10 minute long "service check", and while he's blowing the dust out of the paper feeders he checks the internal counters, then you get a bill for your months usage. Go long enough without the scheduled checks, and the printer shuts itself off.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[phulegart]

No, it is essentially the same model as the way commercial copiers are handled, except from the article, there is no charge for just having the printer in your business.

You see, the current copier leasing model charges you a monthly fee for having the copier, as well as charging you a per-copy rate for each copy you make. The copier has a counter (or two counters for those that keep track of mono and multi color copies separately) and either a technician comes out and physically reads the counter, you are called on the telephone to read off the counter numbers to the company rep, or in some cases, your copier is called directly via it's own connection to your line, and the counters are read without physical user interaction.

So your internet connection has nothing to do with it.

HP is just not going to sell these commercial copiers to the companies that want them. HP is only going to lease them, and then instead of charging a monthly fee, they are going to charge based on the number of prints. They will most likely get these totals by one of the methods I described above, or quite possibly even over an internet connection, but you can be assured they will not have only ONE method of getting these totals. There will be multiple methods available to them to get the total numbers of prints per month, as it is how they are saying they are going to charge their customers.

These are not going to be print services over the internet. You are not going to connect your company computers to an HP server where they mail you the prints you make.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[packeteer]

I'm sure business' will pick this up just for that reason. There will be a more of less defined cost that wont be overrun. If they work into the payment plan to have someone else take care of any problems come up i see a lot of small business' using this that don't have the resources for a dedicated worker.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[Lars T.]

I've been waiting for this ever since I heard of it: All the photographic quality of a inkjet with faster speeds than laser printers and saving ink to boot. Very disappointed we won't see it at home now, but it's only a matter of time before it filters down.

It would filter down a lot sooner if printer manufacturers would adopt this fantastic new business model where you charge what products are actually worth and not adopt this "buy this cheap, pay for extras to keep us afloat" mentality. This is just another version of a company wanting a constant, consistant revenue stream verses having to actually innovate and keep product lines fresh to get new sales.

Everyone wants to be a utility,
Well, the problem is - that's what the public bought, the cheap printers over the expensive ones with the low priced consumables. Of course now they cry over the price of ink - but we all know the public is stupid.

Re:Misleading Summary Title

[DigiShaman]

Go long enough without the scheduled checks, and the printer shuts itself off.

Depending on what's stated in the contract, this can be a "good thing". Replacement parts are NOT cheap, so by doing proper maintenance to avoid breakdown, money is saved in the long run.

Not having scheduled checks on the printer could be equivalent to not changing the oil in your car. If the engine breaks down from neglect, should the dealership cover the repairs under warranty?

Bad Headline

[cashman73]

I don't see that HP will stop selling printers. They just won't sell this one. You can still buy other HP printers, though. But the Edgeline does seem like a nice printer, though. $50 says that in 5 years, every office will have one (that they own).

Re:Bad Headline

[garcia]

But the Edgeline does seem like a nice printer, though. $50 says that in 5 years, every office will have one (that they own).

I'm not sure why they are now just claiming that they are ink efficient. My HP DeskJet 400C was so ink efficient that I used the same black and white cartridge for 5 years in college until it completely broke down and several hardware rollers came out with the final page of my Senior Thesis.

I replaced it with another HP DeskJet expecting the same kind of service level but found that the printer hardware was cheap, the ink needed to be replaced MUCH MORE often (every two months at my levels), and that it was sometimes less money to buy a new DeskJet each time at Walmart than to replace the ink cartridge.

I don't own a printer any more and only use a printer at work when I absolutely must have something printed out (tax time is about the only thing I can think of in recent memory).

Let's go back to the ink efficient days of the DeskJet 400C and fuck these contract based service packages.

Re:Bad Headline

[iminplaya]

Let's go back to the ink efficient days of the DeskJet 400C and fuck these contract based service packages.

What? Are you one of those radical/liberals who place customer value and/or human rights above corporate profits? Infidel! Heathen!

Re:Bad Headline

[SQLGuru]

That's part of the business model of printers these days. Provide a subsidy on the hardware and make it up in consumables (ink, paper, etc.). Keep in mind, that printer that is cheaper than new ink cartridges only comes with "starter" cartridges which hold less ink than the normal ones. So, it might be cheaper, but you also get less ink (and therefore have to replace more frequently). But, you can probably make up the difference by selling the older printer on eBay or something.

I'd like to see the profit point on printers. How many ink cartridges do I have to buy for them to make up the loss on the hardware? Do companies plan for that payback over time? What is their estimate on how long it takes?

Layne

Re:Bad Headline

[vimh42]

$50 says that in 5 years, every office will have one (that they own).

Sort of. People will decide they don't want to pay the service contract and some entrepreneurs will come up with ink refills and firmware hacks (in case there is some on-line killswitch). A new round af lawsuites will hit.

Re:Bad Headline

[pla]

Let's go back to the ink efficient days of the DeskJet 400C and fuck these contract based service packages.

You actually can get inkjets that don't cost a fortune in ink to run. The catch? You pay a bit more up-front (but you also get a much better quality of device than the $49 wallyworld inkjet special).

First thing to look for - separate CMYK cartridges, possibly with separately replaceable printheads. That alone will save a fortune over tri/quadcolor cartridges. I don't, however, recommend the ones that take more than four colors - very, very few people need that level of color accuracy, and they tend to cost more yet hold even less ink than the el cheapo tricolor ones.

Second, look for a printer that takes ink cartridge holding significantly more than 7ml. Most printers may take seemingly large ink tanks, but it has no correlation with the actual quantity of ink inside.


As one that meets both criteria that I can personally recommend (no, I don't work for HP or make anything off you buying one of these), the HP Business Inkjet 1200 line (C8154A). It costs $150 up front, but that includes a complete set of inks and printheads. Under normal use, you'll probably never need to replace the printheads; The inks hold 28ml for CMY and 69ml for black (although as usually, the set that comes with it only comes half full, but even those will last a decent time). And the cost the same as the pathetic 3-7ml and tricolor ink cartridges, for 4-9x as much ink. Oh, and it has a built-in duplexer at that price, too (it comes as a separate part, but I've never seen that printer sold without the duplexing unit)



As an aside, with all inkjet printers (especially those with printheads built into the ink cartridges), you can also improve printhead life (for those who seem to have trouble with that - Personally, I do not) by wasting a test page at least once a week (if you haven't used the printer otherwise), to keep them from getting clogged with dried ink. It sounds wasteful, but will cost you less in the long run.

Re:Bad Headline

[AndersOSU]

I used the same black and white cartridge for for about three years. Then it ran out of white.

Re:Bad Headline

[afidel]

Laserjet 4's are indeed built like tanks, however over ~2 years they will cost you more in wasted electricity than it costs to buy a new LJ1200. So unless you are doing something to kill printers in less than 2 years you are better off chucking the old workhorse and buying a new printer with an actual low power sleep function and new fast warming fuser. You'll probably get better resolution and faster PPM too. This doesn't apply to businesses that actually use the printer at a high volume obviously.

Wow...

[Jaysyn]

... who says they need Carly Fiornia to make stupid decisions...

Re:Wow...

[jimstapleton]

Actually, this is a business class printer, not a home printer.

Which means it's not such a bad decision - businesses seem to like things like this, where the only responsibility to them is to have static per-page cost of the printer.

Re:Wow...

[arminw]

......Actually, this is a business class printer, not a home printer.......

The idea of leasing expensive things is nothing new. When Xerox made their first copiers, these were available only on a lease-service basis. IBM mainframes were not sold, but leased. Many businesses lease their equipment and buildings. Cost per page isn't the only consideration for many buisnesses. Leasing has tax advantages. Maybe some /. readers don't know this?

So why is this worthy of an article on the main page here? Must be a slow news day.

What a pity

[DamnRogue]

"Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now." So they've innovated their way out of their own ability to gouge their customers? My heart bleeds...

Re:What a pity

[AvitarX]

But printers usually don't come with full ink.

I don't mean to single you out, lots of people say printer cheaper than ink, but ink in new printers is usually 1/4 or 1/2 a store baught cartridge (check product numbers).

Re:What a pity

[LordKronos]

Cello! Don't forget it also comes with half empty "starter" ink cartridges.

Re:What a pity

[shaitand]

Those are starter cartridges. Some brands like HP try to trick you now. They sell the starter size cartridges (and call them 'normal') in addition to a normal size cartridge they now call 'large'. That way the salesman call tell you they come with a full cartridge and the part number matches. It still has the same amount of ink in it as the starter cartridge of old.

How innovative

[CastrTroy]

Many businesses have been getting printers they way for a long time. The only difference is that this time it's the printer manufacturer that's getting the service contract, and not some third party company. In my opinion, this makes perfect sense. The company who made the product is probably the one most qualified to fix and service it. Granted, you probably won't be able to shop around, because if you want that printer, there's no competition, but you'll still be able to compare with other printer brands.

Re:How innovative

[Anonymous Coward]

It will still be the same third party companies supporting these printers. They will just be "Authorized HP Printer Service Representatives."

Re:How innovative

[hackstraw]

Many businesses have been getting printers they way for a long time.

Xerox is doing the same thing. IBM is doing the same thing, different way.

We are in a post-industrial world. The industrial revolution brought us dirty factories and practically slave labor and goods for cheap. For the most part, industry is done in China now. However, some goods are still made here in the US because its cheaper to make them here than to ship them here for things like cars, but most of the doodads you buy are made in china or some other asian country.

The big to do is not in making things, but the service sector. IBM, Xerox, now HP are all moving in that direction. Heck, even GM now makes more money off of financing than they do off of making cars. To me, its strange. It proves to me that humans are becoming more worthless by the minute by their own smartness and laziness in getting stuff done.

A little over 100 years ago, most people worked in producing food. Now, nobody really does that. In fact, many farmers are paid not to produce food. Then it was industry. Now that is done, and moved overseas, now we just do services, but what in the world are we going to service? Food production? Industry? Those things are not here, I guess we can service service? Seems strange to me.

Re:If selling ink doesn't work, how about the prin

[Intron]

All printers are sold at a loss. Money is made on ink cartridges. This decision just carries it to the logical extreme.

cartridge refills

[hjf]

Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now.

Bull. They realized they can't win against cartridge refills. So this is what they're doing to stop refillers.

Re:cartridge refills

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. They claim only a 30% ink saving ... kind of hard to believe that they can't makee it up by increased demand, same as everyone else does when they lower costs.

That printer sounds like its based on the tech

[rolfwind]

of this company here:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/ 22/1241222

Basically the ultrawide print head and instataneous drying times, etcetera. Any confirmation?

Re:That printer sounds like its based on the tech

[rolfwind]

I'll answer my own question, due to the similarities in technology features, boasts of print speeds, and memjets unwillingness to make a product but rather license it - it seemed plausible that HP licensed it but that is probably not the case.

In the article on the /. article I linked to above about memjet, it says:
"HP's competing printer costs $16,000

While Edgeline could be the closest competitor to Memjet in terms of speed, it appears to be far more expensive (than memjet)."

Interesting competition coming up, if memjet is indeed the real thing and not a hoax.

Re:That printer sounds like its based on the tech

[gurudyne]

No, HP developed this over 3 years ago and is just now releasing it in quantity. The hardware was finished 2 years ago. The software needed to be polished for a while, considering the target market.

Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient

[drgonzo59]

Sounds like a big marketing hype.

COMPANY: Our technology is so good we can't even sell it. But of course if you are willing to pay a premium we might consider it....

COSTOMER: Oh, wow. This shit has to be good if they can't sell it. We have to see if HP will sell it to _us_. We'll even offer them to pay extra.

COMPANY: Suckers...!

...

Reminds of when I went shopping for cars with my uncle in Odessa, Ukraine. This guy was selling used cars. At the end of the lot he had a car covered under a sheet. My uncle asks, what's model you have there. He said "That's not for sale." He then proceeded to tell us how that was a special model blah blah blah. Then my uncle talked him into selling it, payed extra for the 'special' features. Then as we drove away it, the salesman took the sheet and put it on the car right next to it. Seems like HP is doing the same thing here...

Re:And this is....

[Purity Of Essence]

Why free enterprise DOES work:

Another company will come out with a similarly efficient printer that they WILL sell, and HP won't get squat.

I respectfully disagree

[Weaselmancer]

HP is allowed to sell their goods any way they wish. That is capitalism at work.

The catch is, so are their competitors.

How long before you see a Lexmark with this exact same technology at work? Do you think they'll go on a services model? Do you think absolutely everyone in the market will? Even the guys in China?

And when someone finally does start selling the same printer technology rather than leasing it, what will HP have to do to keep up?

Re:I respectfully disagree

[Volante3192]

Since it's a business model, HP will patent it. Competition problem solved.

China factor?

[owslystnly]

I noticed that the product launch was in China, and that had me thinking...

The chinese are notorious for buying something, reverse engineering it, and within a period of time having a duplicate chinese version for sale. Maybe HP is trying to prevent that from happening?

Re:-ING form of verbs!

[EveryNickIsTaken]

Shit. Thanks for making me feel more dumberer.

Re:And this is....

[Itninja]

The only thing I don't own outright are my home (I rent) and my car (until I pay it off). And, as far as those go, ownership is 90% posession, so I at I own 90% percent :)

Capitalism is a system based on the base greed of men (and women). It's not "work hard and see reward"; it's "you want something, you work to get it".

Re:And this is....

[stoicfaux]

Communism instills ownership of the state on all tangible assets. Corporatism instills that ownership is of the corporation via all applicable tools to do so. Ask yourself this: How much stuff do you OWN (not rent, borrow, lease, or other keywords) ?

In communism the state owns everything. Therefore you own 0%, which is a much lower rate than under coporate capitalism.

In communism, one owner owns everything. We call this a monopoly. Under coporate capitalism, I can choose between several coporations to sell my soul to. Even better, I can choose to sell just parts of my soul to various coporations instead of being force to sell 100% of my soul to one state monopoly.

Since 1959

[Anonymous Coward]

leasing their 914 instead of selling it was the decision that catapulted them into the Fortune 50. Few offices could afford to buy a 914 (at many thousands), but leasing one for a few hundred, and paying a few extra for those extra prints was fine.

Maybe it's just high-maintenance

[Animats]

Maybe the problem with the thing is that it takes significant maintenance support. Xerox copiers and printers back in the selenium drum era were leased, because they cost so much and required considerable skilled maintenance. If this new technology has that problem, a lease-only approach at introduction makes sense.

Competition Comes from Older Models

[TechyImmigrant]

I'd be willing to bet that they have it in mind to avoid the competition to future models that this model represents.

For example, I'd have a quite nice office class networked, duplexing, HP laserjet 4si printer nestled under my desk at home. It's a 200lb beast that keeps on printing. The $100 cartridges last a year. I got it for $200 off ebay and $50 for a service kit. To buy something similar new would cost me $4-$5k. I expect that it will keep going for years.

Just as test equipment manufacturers know about their old scopes, HP knows that one of it's biggest competitors is not other printer manufacturers, but the installed base of high quality, high reliability, maintainable workhorse printers they sold in the past.

Leasing printing services rather than selling printers means they never suffer from this new model surviving 15 years down the road, competing with their new new model.

Re:If selling ink doesn't work, how about the prin

[B'Trey]

Because most people won't bother to search out the cost per page printed over the life of the printer. They'll see one printer for $599 and one for $1599 and buy the cheap one. It's the same principle as the "Bad security products drive out good security products" story that posted a couple hours ago.

Good riddance

[Safety Cap]

Ever since the Engineers were forced out (early retirement/riffed) and replaced by people who didn't know or work under Bill or Dave, HP's products have sucked.

Their calculators have become a laughing stock. The lucky folks who still have a functional 12c from the days of old (early 80s) will enjoy them for decades more to come. I'd sooner use a bag of rocks than a 12c built during/after the Lewis Platt (successor: Carly) regime.

While this announcement is for a business printer, expect this trend to continue. Cheap printers are a commodity, so squeezing pennies out of the market will eventually lead to "virtual printers" or somesuch idiocy. Smart people are willing to pay for quality, someone just needs to offer a quality printer.

HP isn't the company to do it. Not any more.

Re:Good riddance

[savanik]

Smart people are willing to pay for quality, someone just needs to offer a quality printer. Have you noticed that the vast majority of American consumers aren't that smart? Hence why HP offers a line of crappy, cheap printers with high priced ink - for the 'stupid consumer' market segment. It's been doing gangbusters so far.

HP doing what Xerox has done for years, Woo!

[spun]

That's news you can use! Thanks Zonk, and thanks for the oh-so-accurate headline. Come on, the only news here is that HP is so late to the game when almost every other big player has offered both options for years.

Re:HP doing what Xerox has done for years, Woo!

[Hes Nikke]

technically, HP has been in the pay per print (we call them clicks) business for years. now they're just moving it down to slight lower end hardware that isn't running 18 hours a day.

Flamebait summary...

[evilviper]

Everything in the summary is based on info in TFA, notably EXCEPT that:

Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now."

TFA didn't say that, and I don't see any source for it. What TFA did say was that it will "lower colour operating costs by up to 30 percent".

30% isn't exactly enough to make inkjet cartridge sales worthless, now is it?

Re:That's why you don't buy HP

[cultrhetor]

When one makes a strong - almost commanding - declaration such as that, he should at least have the courtesy to support his statement with a fact or two.

Better society!?

[vethia]

Better society? Are you kidding me? You're expecting a printer company to go out and better society? Before you start frothing at the mouth at the 'capitalist pigs' trying to make money on their products, consider this: if creating these printers makes them no money, HP will not manufacture them at all. It's not in their interest to offer a product that will put them out of business.

Yes, it's possible that the efficiency of the printer would cause HP to lose money from ink sales of cartridges for this printer. But did it ever occur to you that such efficient technology might cost a lot more to develop and manufacture? The company needs to recoup costs for these aspects too. Like it or not, they are not creating these printers out of the goodness of their hearts. They're doing it in order to run a business. Maybe someone else will take it upon him or herself to create some magical free printer for the masses, but I doubt it.

Lastly, these products don't seem designed to be used in the home. That isn't the market that HP is after. When you purchase a contract for one of these machines, it's not like buying a printer--it's like buying a miniature Kinko's that you put in your office and pay as you go for the service. You don't even have to maintain it, if I understand the article correctly. HP does it for you. Sounds like a deal that many companies would be interested in, but if they're not? Nobody's going to make them buy it. There are plenty of printers for sale on the market. Customer demand will determine whether or not this business model is successful--if someone buys it, there must be someone out there who wants it.

Re:The HP Channel ain't gonna like this...

[swb]

They have been pissing on their channel for a long time with online sales; this is just them dropping drawers and shitting on the channel, too.

HP just realizes that they participate in a functional duopoly with a direct-sales competitor who doesn't really have a channel and that they don't need to be slaves to theirs.

I'm surprised that they would approach this printing market, though. One of the advantages owning your own printer has is that its much cheaper to own than any of the "managed services" pay-per-page copiers already in the market.

Re:-ING form of verbs!

[MiniMike]

That should be "morer dumberer". Sheeshing.

Gee, No.

[wandazulu]

I want a print-out of something so I can mark it up, scribble, etc. If I want the level of quality this thing suggests, I'll take it to a bureau and get it professionally printed and bound.

It also reminds me of an office I worked in back-in-the-day where the copier had an odometer and Xerox charged based on the monthly count; it was cheaper to have a typist re-type the one page or two page document 3 or 4 times. If we needed a lot of copies, which wasn't often, we might take it to the local Kinkos, depending on what we wanted. Xerox eventually canceled the contract because it was more expensive to send a guy to read the meter than what they were billing. Funny thing is, they let us keep the copier.

Xerox Document Center already does this...

[happy_place]

Xerox has a system that charges businesses per page... It's called their document center, we have one where I work... and you don't own the printers, etc... and you get yelled at by the boss if you print anything in color... Imo, This is really just HP attempting to play catchup. --Ray

Not news

[MrNougat]

So HP is getting into the market that Canon and Xerox and Lexmark and Toshiba and Kyocera and Sharp and and and are already in? I suppose the interesting deal is that HP would be doing the printer leasing direct from the factory instead of having a local leasing and servicing middleman do it. But it's not like the business model is revolutionary.

Re:That's why you don't buy HP

[Anubis350]

There are lots of excellent choices out there. I'm not sure why you'd choose HP.

Very good linux drivers?

Ditch ink, get a laser.

[Kadin2048]

Let's go back to the ink efficient days of the DeskJet 400C and fuck these contract based service packages.

Why don't you just buy a laser printer?

I can't believe anyone with a clue is still using ink-based printers, with lasers being the price they are now. You can get a fairly inexpensive Samsung or maybe even an HP laser printer for $100 - 150, sometimes on sale for under 100, and with a full toner cartridge get thousands of pages out of it.

They're so far superior to ink-based printers that I just don't understand why anyone wouldn't use them. The only thing they don't do, or that you have to pay a significant amount extra for, is color. But really, for the occasional color print you can keep one of those more-expensive-than-liquid-gold ink printers around if you really need it. Or pay the $250 or $300 to get a color laser (and probably step up to something that'll do duplexing).

Inkjet printers need to die, as a technology. The only niche market they deserve to keep is for photo printing for the terminally impatient and un-quality-conscious folks who can't or don't want to drive down to their local CVS/WalMart and use a lightjet.

Re:Ditch ink, get a laser.

[walt-sjc]

Inkjet's still have a market - very wide format (larger than 11x17.) Also, they are better for photos than laser, although I prefer my Kodak thermal transfer printer for photos.

Color lasers also tend to to be freakin huge, and noisy. My last inkjet went into the garbage can a couple months ago, when I picked up a Ricoh SP C410dn that works VERY well. At 100 pounds and 19wx25dx19h, it wants a dedicated table. I specifically avoided color lasers that work on the carousel system, where color prints are one fourth the speed of black and white. The quality of color output on modern color lasers is VERY good. I would term it "near photo quality." A good modern 6 color inkjet will still be better for photos however. Just avoid Epson, and their printheads that can't be cleaned without tearing the whole printer apart...

Memjet response?

[brownsteve]

Perhaps this is HP's response to the full-page-width MemJet technology mentioned earlier on ./?

Re:Cost per page printed

[shaitand]

'I'm in IT, and we measure all costs per page, managed or unmanaged. Most people don't even think of cost over the life of the printer, and choose inkjets because they are 1/5 the price of laser, and spend much more over the life of the printer buying ink.'

True but its an artificial increase. Once upon a time I printed 500-2000 page books on my HP deskjet printers. Not one printer died and the cartridge lasted. Now you'd run out of ink if you printed a 200 page book.

Re:That's why you don't buy HP

[Dan Ost]

HP printers are almost universally supported under Linux.

I don't think any other brand of printer can say the same.

It Depends...

[superbrose]

Thanks to the excellent Linux support by the HPLIP Project I am faithful to HP, at least for the time being. I am quite impressed that pretty much all features of my all-in-one printer have been working for years, without any major glitches.

I have seen the Windows HP drivers (quite a while ago) and have to say that at the time they were far too intrusive for my liking and I would not have used the HP software under Windows. So I'd buy an HP printer for Linux, but if I were using Windows I'd probably compare lots of makes first and my choice might be different.

Re:HP's loss...

[shaitand]

You realize that they are going to leave the printer sitting on your desk right? They are going to lease you the printer, then they provide the maintainence, repairs, ink, paper, etc. At the end of the month they charge you based on the number of pages you used.

What's the big deal, nothing new here

[fullmetal55]

I really don't understand the objection to this. Anyone who works with printers these days knows that this is already a standard business model for companies like Xerox, Minolta, etc. who sell laser printer/scanner/copiers and charge per page. the per page cost usually includes toner, maintenance, service, and it's usually very reasonable. I've seen per page contracts as low as .3 cents a page. HP finally caught up with the bandwagon. and is trying to jump on. This isn't new, this isn't revolutionary, the only thing revolutionary about this printer is the method of printing. which i don't know if it will have a big market. It'd have to be competitive to our colour laser Minolta... in both price and performance/quality.

Re:Broken model?

[danpsmith]

Here's a new idea. Why not make a printer, and sell it for what it costs to make, plus fair profit for the company? You could even use this same wacky business model for the ink! I know it doesn't quite follow the over-simplified model of selling a printer at just enough to cover your costs, then soak the end user with grossly overpriced consumables because that ensures a source of renewable income, thus making the your budget spreadsheet nice and pretty, but I think people have made it work in the past. Like every company that ever sold anything before the 1970's.

You are missing something here. In the 1970s a lot of these companies were newer and therefore not completely used to screwing over the customer quite yet. Unfortunately the way corporations operate is by constantly cutting margins and finding new ways to screw the consumer. The problem is that investors want the company to put out more profits while making the same product with, in some cases, the same marketshare. So if your company is making one thing en masse, and everyone pretty much already has one and is satisfied etc, that's a dry market. No growth. No growth, no investors. No investors in public corporate speak and no money, no money, no company. The end result, companies have to keep cutting margins on old things especially if they have few new products, because they have to turn more and more profits. The model is flawed. Every cost must eventually be cut and that's why all major printer makers now follow this model.

Re:-ING form of verbs!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Stopping selling" is fine. HP(subject) is stopping(verb) (the act of)selling(object).

Re:So....

[Hydian]

There is a ton of money to be made in service contracts. More than there even is in ink. They base it on pages printed rather than ink used because all of the mechanical parts wear equally no matter how much ink coverage there is per page.

Companies like these agreements because they don't have to worry about things like warranties running out or maintaining seperate service agreements with someone to come fix their printers when things inevitably break. It also works out nicely for tax purposes since the money spent is a straight cost rather than a purchase. The company also avoids being stuck with old equipment. Pretty much the same reasons that leasing computer assets is so popular.

Re:-ING form of verbs!

[fbjon]

We need a grammar Schindler, to save the thousands of grammar mistakes here from the horrible persecution and injustice directed towards them.

This may just be a touch of sensationalism...

[AaronPSU777]

"Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now."

Got a link for this? I fail to see how an ink-efficient printer would affect their current business model. If anything it would improve their margins. Let's say the edgeline uses 50% less ink than other printers, simply put 50% less ink in the edgeline cartridges and charge the same price for them, problem solved.

I think we're all aware that current pricing structures for printer cartridges is a joke, it has little or no basis in what the cartridges actually cost to manufacture, so it's not like an edgeline printer would be some disruptive force in the marketplace.

Re:-ING form of verbs!

[treeves]

Touche.
Since Oskar Schindler saved thousands of Jews by employing them in his factories, the closest analogue would have to be the Slashdot editors, since they give all those grammar mistakes a place to stay.

Re:News for nerds, stuff that really matters

[Mister Whirly]

Sure, try this site for a news alternative to Slashdot. Mostly, it's is a little more accurate. Mostly.

Re:-ING form of verbs!

[Mawbid]

I take all my grammar advice from George Carlin and he once said on the subject of prostitution "Selling is legal, fucking is legal, so why isn't selling fucking legal?"

So clearly, two -ings in a row are fine ;-)

Why? Simple

[Master of Transhuman]

The OfficeJet 6310 has SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY MEGABYTES of support software for it. It installs a DOZEN or more drivers on your machine, some of which appear to PORT SCAN the ENTIRE PORT RANGE OVER AND OVER, with others that will peg your CPU at 100%.

Obviously this new line of HP junk has so much crap associated with it that it can't even fit on a DVD, so they have to sell it as a managed service since no ordinary IT user could possibly control this POS.

I can no longer recommend HP to anyone. Buy Epson, folks. HP is done. Put a fork in it.