[HN Gopher] Tell HN: HP printers force you into agreement
___________________________________________________________________
Tell HN: HP printers force you into agreement
The HP Smart App forces you to agree to use only their ink before
you can use their app. That shouldn't be a big deal since modern HP
printers work fine out of the box without a driver. However, after
you've printed a bunch of pages, they stop working and display the
error message "Printer setup incomplete. Your HP+ printer must be
set up using the HP Smart app. Visit 123.hp.com to download the app
and complete the guided setup. Any pages you have printed were
intended for setup and have been exhausted." Conveniently, this
usually doesn't happen until it's too late to return the printer.
Author : bryanlarsen
Score : 132 points
Date : 2022-12-10 21:13 UTC (1 hours ago)
| neilv wrote:
| I think my next printer will have to be a non-HP.
|
| I've wrangled my current LaserJet, but I keep hearing stories
| that make the HP company sound like the kind I want nothing to do
| with anymore.
| femto wrote:
| For Australian's: the ACCC has been onto this, though is this a
| new attempt by HP?
|
| https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/hp-to-compensate-print...
|
| "Customers of HP PPS Australia Pty Ltd (HP) who bought certain
| models of HP printers without being informed non-HP ink
| cartridges may not work in them could be eligible for
| compensation, the ACCC announced today."
|
| "HP has given the ACCC a court-enforceable undertaking to
| compensate customers who were unable to use non-HP ink cartridges
| due to an undisclosed technology in their printers."
|
| ...
|
| "HP has undertaken to compensate consumers $50 who were prevented
| from using a non-HP cartridge."
|
| "HP has since made available an automatic firmware update for
| download which removes the DSF from certain inkjet printer models
| and allows customers to use non-HP cartridges."
|
| "The undertaking is available at HP PPS Australia Pty Ltd ."
|
| https://www.accc.gov.au/public-registers/undertakings-regist...
|
| "Details of how to claim compensation are on the HP website."
|
| "Consumers can also contact HP via 1800 625 236 for more
| information."
| fmajid wrote:
| 300% of the printer price (treble damages) would be adequate
| compensation, methinks.
| varenc wrote:
| Digression: Does anyone have a printer recommendation from a
| manufacturer that doesn't pull this crap?
|
| I would love to patronize the least scummy manufacturer.
| Particularly I'm looking for a larger format printer that can do
| 11"x17" pages.
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| Brother's laser printers are nice. Lexmark also exists, but
| they're more of a business brand, and, as such, will cost more
| varenc wrote:
| Sadly it seems that Brother's only 11x17 "Ledger Size"
| printers are inkjet... alas. But the MFC-J5855DW inkjet
| printer from Brother looks decent. Will look at Lexmark too!
|
| edit: Lexmark does look very nice, but their 11x17 printer is
| the $3500 C925... which is a bit more printer than I need.
| liketochill wrote:
| I went down the same rabbit hole after my epson WF-7620 ran
| out of ink in 9 months and only printed 100 pages at most.
|
| Gotta have 11x17 printing and scanning for control panel
| drawing packages
| someweirdperson wrote:
| With ink drying in heads and lasers emitting unhealthy dust,
| and manufacturers trying to lock them down, I'm considering a
| dot matrix printer as my next printer. Back to the roots. Looks
| like Epson is still making them, even including an ethernet
| port.
| rolenthedeep wrote:
| Dot matrix printers also produce a lot of dust. Like, an
| incredible amount of dust.
| rolenthedeep wrote:
| Brother is generally good. The model I had (can't remember
| which) let you override the low toner warning and just print
| until it runs dry.
|
| No scummy driver shenanigans, works perfectly with third party
| cartridges. Once you realize the value of not being treated
| like shit, the price of their machines is pretty reasonable.
| You do get what you pay for.
|
| Xerox also seems to be less terrible, but I don't have any
| experience personally.
|
| If you can find a laser printer to fit your needs, choose laser
| every time. If you specifically need inkjet, you will have to
| pay extra for a professional model. Also make sure you keep up
| maintenance so the heads don't clog.
|
| Consumer printers are dirt cheap because these companies sell
| them at a loss and use shitty tactics to force or trick you
| into buying only their heinously overpriced cartridges, then
| buy more than you need, and eventually the printer kills itself
| to make you buy a new one.
|
| Business oriented printers tend to cost a LOT more, but you get
| a better quality printer and less evil corporate bullshit.
| frostburg wrote:
| I have an Epson SC-P600 that prints A3+, with excellent quality
| (I use it mostly for photos and digital negatives), but it's
| expensive to use, features questionable design choices (ink
| pads etc.) requires arcane driver / RIP setups for the best
| results etc.
|
| A newer model is out (P700) which solves somes issues (like the
| matte/glossy black ink swap) but is probably more locked down
| (important if you plan to use for example full greyscale ink
| sets like the piezography ones).
|
| I had a better experience lately with (smaller, ink bottle
| type) Canons, I especially like the easily user replaceable
| print heads. Drivers and software still terrible.
|
| What are you goint to be printing?
| tuyguntn wrote:
| I don't understand how management makes a decision at HP. Do you
| guys actually use your own printers or do you have 24/7 person
| who prints stuff for you and your kids all the time?
|
| I need to go through their shitty app, sign up, sign in just to
| print something on my own printer. From time to time they have
| bugs in the app and I am kicked out of my own printer because app
| always needs to be logged in with user.
|
| Come on HP, maybe drop this bullshit "better user experience"
| practices? I bought a hardware from you, take my money, print and
| shut up
| Spivak wrote:
| Am I missing something, why not just agree to it and then
| disregard? There's no way the contract is enforceable, doubly
| when it was forced on you.
|
| It's like how putting up a sign that says "we are not liable for
| blah blah" doesn't mean shit.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| As part of agreeing you have to connect the printer to the
| internet and create an account.
| CarbonCycles wrote:
| You can't. Their cartridges have some sort of way to recognize
| only HP cartridges (rfid? NFC?)
|
| I think this may be my last HP printer as well. Company has a f
| the consumer mentality.
| onetokeoverthe wrote:
| theCrowing wrote:
| make a rule on your router to deny all traffic going outside from
| the ip of your printer and the nagging goes away.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Tried that. Still couldn't print.
| Neil44 wrote:
| We're an IT company and haven't supplied HP for a while now
| because of stupid shit like this.
| barbazoo wrote:
| I wonder if that's "only" for the very first setup or every time
| you install the printer driver or something like that. Otherwise
| the printer will be useless once HP turns off that particular
| server or pulls the app. What a shit company.
| agilob wrote:
| What do hp printers do that Brother doesn't?
| someweirdperson wrote:
| Automatically order new ink when running low.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| It was half the price. Should have known better.
| ptk wrote:
| I think this is only an issue with the models that end in 'e' if
| I'm not mistaken. They're pushing it hard, but if you know to
| look you can find the same model without these absurd
| restrictions. For example, the HP LaserJet M209dwe (d=duplex,
| w=wireless, e=HP+) will require an Internet connection and HP's
| Smart app, but there is also an HP LaserJet M209dw that does not
| have these restrictions.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| HP _inkjet_ printers. I've never seen this with my laser
| (m255dw).
| ketralnis wrote:
| Why would HP gouge home users without also gouging the more
| lucrative business market?
| zimpenfish wrote:
| One would assume that the business market has more money and
| more lawyers to point at suppliers who annoy them. Plus a
| greater network of people, e.g. at business gatherings, they
| can use to name-and-shame said suppliers.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| You haven't _yet_.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| This is happening on a laser printer, the M209dwe.
| dcj4 wrote:
| Don't buy stuff from HP. They're scamming customers, it's known.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| This is a lame strategy! What kind of people do this? What kind
| people pay employees to deceive the customers.
| tdeck wrote:
| The kind that want to make a profit and see that doing this is
| profitable.
| cortesoft wrote:
| The sad truth is that no printer company that doesn't do this
| is going to be able to compete. HP and the like sell their
| printers at a loss, and consumers aren't going to pay multiple
| X the cost of one of these types of printers to avoid the
| shenanigans. Any company who tries to price the printer itself
| at the appropriate cost isn't going to sell enough.
| someweirdperson wrote:
| Is that app for phones only or also for classic computers? I
| don't think it is reasonable to assume a phone is needed to use a
| printer. Information on devices made for carrying around doesn't
| usually need to be printed.
| perlgeek wrote:
| Recently bought a new printer, avoided anything with "smart" or
| "cloud" in the name/description.
| userbinator wrote:
| Absolutely scummy, and yet another example of something labeled
| "smart" that's hostile to the user.
|
| There needs to be open source firmware for 2D printers too, like
| there have already been plenty developed for 3D ones. No need to
| reinvent the whole thing, but just replace the electronics.
| Presumably the printhead/cartridge interface is still much the
| same and they haven't gone to the effort of
| obfuscating/encrypting that yet...
| https://spritesmods.com/?art=magicbrush
|
| It's unfortunate that printers turned from being based on
| standard protocols _that were documented in the manual they came
| with_ (ASCII, ESC /P2, PCL, PostScript, etc.) to these
| proprietary closed systems. None of the printer manufacturers,
| including HP, used to be like this.
| sverhagen wrote:
| Wait a minute, wasn't I already installing proprietary drivers
| in the early nineties? And also, those "standard" protocols,
| weren't those just simpler versions of this proprietary stuff,
| using the (yes, this part was standardized) pc ports like LPT
| or RS-something? The fact that they were documented doesn't
| make it all that much less proprietary, does it? Still, scummy
| nonetheless.
| jchw wrote:
| I've given up on virtually all brands of printers. The last brand
| standing that doesn't seem like absolute shit is Brother. I have
| an ~~inkjet~~ laser printer of theirs that I have connected to
| the network, which I use with IPP and AirPrint with no issues. HP
| printers have been horrible anti-consumer garbage for as long as
| I can remember at this point.
| jdlshore wrote:
| I abandoned an HP PageWide color inkjet MFP for a Brother color
| laser MFP and couldn't be happier. Brother's front panel tech
| and UI isn't as polished, but the printer is rock solid and the
| company isn't scummy.
|
| (There's an easily-found way to reset toner counts, for
| example, and get anther 25-50% more pages from a cartridge.
| Although I no longer use it as running out of toner mid-job is
| a hassle. The toner is cheap enough, and long-lasting enough,
| that I happily set-and-forget with their auto-order system.)
|
| The only thing that's bothered me about them is they're making
| it harder and harder to figure out how to return toner
| cartridges for recycling.
| williamscales wrote:
| Yep, I chucked my HP inkjet and got a single function Brother
| mono laser printer. I figure if I need to print in color, I am
| probably better off just paying to use a really good photo
| printer.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Curious, how often do you find yourself printing these days?
|
| At this point I print so infrequently that going to the print
| shop for $1 is a more sound decision than spending $100 on a
| printer i use a handful of times a year.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Not the original poster but I also have a monochrome laser
| printer from Brother. I find myself printing anywhere from
| 500 to about 3000 pages per year. I find it paid for itself
| in the first year. I also have one of the "professional"
| network scanners for digitizing. The printer I got is an
| MFC with duplex automatic scanning and a flatbed.
| Occasionally Costco will drop the price by $100 and you get
| a pretty good deal. Starter toner cartridges are good for
| about 1500 pages.
| mschild wrote:
| True, but print shops are harder and harder to find. I live
| in Berlin and the closest print shop is almost 2km away.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Unfortunately even Brother has resorted to similar means to
| locking their cartridges. I got Brother because they have
| been reliable, but was disappointed to see Epson and others
| with better Linux support when in the past I had thought
| Brother had good support. You can use IPP Everywhere or
| whatever they call it but you lose access to a lot of the
| printer and page options.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| This is the best solution for home use, totally agree. Is a
| shame that they turned inkjet technology into a scam.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| The printer in question is a laser printer, the M209dwe.
| Oxidation wrote:
| My Brother colour laser is an absolute tank (by weight, if
| nothing else) and happily uses the cheapest eBay toner going.
| It can sit idle for months then get plugged in and hammer out
| 400 pages, double sided. I'll never use an inkjet again,
| they're always nightmares.
|
| We'll see how long it goes before the fuser carks it, but so
| far it's been pretty cost effective, considering the thing
| itself was PS200.
| manuelflara wrote:
| what model you got? at that price it sounds great
| josephcsible wrote:
| Brother recently went as evil as the rest of them:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31860131
| catiopatio wrote:
| I'm happy with Xerox's commercial/office color laser printers;
| I also have one that works fine with IPP and AirPrint.
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| I've had good luck with Brother. Will avoid HP.
|
| I returned a cartridge at Staples, a few years ago. I think
| they offered a dollar or two, not much.
| scottcodie wrote:
| When a company takes an action solely to limit competition with
| no consumer benefit, they should be immediately investigated for
| antitrust behavior.
| indymike wrote:
| It seems like this agreement should be agreed to before purchase
| of the device. It is a revision of the buy-sale deal at the
| store. Even worse, HP isn't even a party to the retail sale (yes
| it is their product, but the store sold it to me, not HP).
| EMIRELADERO wrote:
| FYI: This is probably unenforceable in most jurisdictions,
| including the US. Look up the term "unconscionability",
| particularily in US common contract law.
| gsich wrote:
| Yeah, so how can OP get his printer to ... print?
| reaperducer wrote:
| _This is probably unenforceable in most jurisdictions,
| including the US_
|
| Tell that to the printer and see how far you get.
|
| Apparently it is being enforced. By HP. Otherwise this post
| wouldn't exist.
|
| HP's lawyers know nobody is going to spend $5,000 on a lawyer
| to get Justice for a $100 printer.
| dabinat wrote:
| Why aren't startups trying to disrupt the printer industry? It's
| been a racket for a long time.
|
| The only reason I can think of is that gouging customers must be
| the only real way to make money in that industry.
| mepian wrote:
| The margins in the printer industry must be razor-thin, that's
| why.
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| Which is why they do this junk, they are trying to squeeze
| every penny out
| genocidicbunny wrote:
| They are, and in this age of paperless everything, less and
| less useful to the average consumer. Anyone who still does a
| lot of printing is going to go with something that can better
| handle the volume, like a laser printer.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Also, the technology is pretty hairy, _lots_ of patents
| (enforceable ones, too), and a _very_ demanding customer
| base.
|
| I used to work for a company that made a very nice, but
| expensive, dye-sub printer.
|
| They decided not to continue the line, which disappointed a
| lot of folks, as the printers actually had some of the best
| tech, in them, but it wasn't worth it.
| someweirdperson wrote:
| > lots of patents
|
| Printers from 20 years ago were pretty ok, so patents
| shouldn't matter much by simply building old-fashioned
| ones.
| mrjin wrote:
| Oh well, the margin for the printers is mostly negative. For
| consumables, the margin is actually super high. But you
| simply cannot get into the market without a popular printer,
| isn't it?
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| Unfortunately, consumers are price sensitive beings even if it
| doesn't make sense. We prefer cheaper upfront costs even if it
| costs more in the long term. For example, a decent toner
| printer can cost $300 plus $75/cartridge later on. But the $50
| printer works "just as well" and has "only" $50 cartridges, so
| it's "cheaper" (ignoring pages/cartridge). This leads to a big
| race-to-the-bottom (like airline seat prices[a]) that makes
| margins razor-thin. As such, the manufacturers price gouge you
| on the ink.
|
| [a]: Everyone complains about airline seat spacing, but nothing
| short of regulation will fix it because the margins are too
| thin to _not_ pack everyone like sardines. If you have more leg
| room on your planes, you make less per flight, and that could
| put you in the negative.
| mrjin wrote:
| It's actually worse than that. I have a laser printer which
| costed me $36, came with a toner actually printed over 400
| pages. The genuine replacement toner costs $110 but can only
| deliver nominal 1000 pages. But that not quite a big problem
| as there are generic toners for around $10 and can actually
| deliver over 1000 pages. But I heard later models were
| virtually blocked from using generic toners via automatic
| firmware update as result quality dropped dramatically.
|
| The Canon inkjet I had was a completely different story.
| Genuine cartridges cost over $80, can print no more than 100
| pages. Most importantly, after I dump the empty cartridges,
| the scanner stopped working.
|
| We need serious probe into those malicious behaviors.
| Gigachad wrote:
| It would be as viable as disrupting the cassette industry. A
| printer is quickly becoming a thing the average person doesn't
| own.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _A printer is quickly becoming a thing the average person
| doesn't own._
|
| Even the U.S. Postal Service has noticed this.
|
| When shipping a package, you can buy the postage online, then
| use a QR code on your phone to print the paid label at the
| Post Office and drop off the package at the same time.
| gorbachev wrote:
| Because the big manufacturers sell a billion printers and
| trillion units of ink every year and can make enough money due
| to volume of their sales. A small startup can't and will have
| to sell their printers and/or ink at a much higher price.
|
| Unless someone comes up with a phenomenally cheaper way of
| manufacturing printers and the ink, there's not a chance a
| startup will succeed. I don't think that's gonna happen.
| mrjin wrote:
| There is virtually no way. Most if not all printer on the
| market are sold at loss, even at massive scale. The
| possibilities to lower the cost have been exhausted. There is
| absolutely no chance a startup can get around that hard
| limit.
| mrjin wrote:
| The answer is simple. There is not enough margin. Most if not
| all printers are sold at loss then the vendors will recoup via
| consumables.
| toast0 wrote:
| It's a dieing market. How are you going to get VC money to
| build into a market that is saturated and has negative growth.
|
| May as well pitch them on manufacturing floppy disks while
| you're at it. That's a better market because the only
| competition is new old stock and used disks.
|
| Ink jet is terrible unless you print at least a few times a
| month, better if you print a couple times a week. Even then,
| it's not great. Laser is decent, but you have to actually pay
| for the equipment; once you do, they do scale down to very
| occasional printing, toner doesn't dry out, etc. I'm sure some
| of the rubber pieces will fail over time, used or not, that's
| just how rubber is, but in most climates, that's stil going to
| take a while.
| baumgarn wrote:
| I've had absolutely excellent experience with my Brother black
| and white laser printer, cost 100 EUR, with casual printing I
| only had to replace the toner cartridge once in about 5 years
| for 25 EUR
| mtmail wrote:
| > Why aren't startups trying to disrupt the printer industry?
|
| Related question "Ask HN: Why are there no open source 2d
| printers?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24786721 with
| the top comment from somebody who worked at HP printer division
| (hint: patents)
| messe wrote:
| > this usually doesn't happen until it's too late to return the
| printer.
|
| Not if you're in a country with reasonable consumer laws. I
| reckon this would easily be considered as "not fit for purpose"
| in most of the EU if you tried to challenge it in small claims.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| Yep, i'd return it, because it doesn't do the thing you bough
| it for anymore. (EU)
| hedora wrote:
| In the US, you could easily argue that you were unaware of the
| EULA and want your money back.
|
| If the company refuses, then they are pretty clearly violating
| contract law. ("By the way, if you read this far, you owe me
| $10" is not a legimate contract, because you are forced to
| agree.) If that is the case, then it would be completely
| reasonable for the courts to render the entire EULA invalid,
| and fall back on first sale doctrine (no restrictions on the
| copy of the software you bought, etc, etc.)
| tdeck wrote:
| What does "easily argue" mean in practical terms? Filing a
| case in small claims court? Credit card chargeback that
| inevitably gets disputed by the merchant and reversed?
| Haranguing customer service until they just give up and send
| you a coupon? In theory you might have a legal argument, but
| whether that's of any real use is another matter.
| sva_ wrote:
| Is there a reason why somebody would buy a HP printer in 2022?
| doublerabbit wrote:
| Anyone in my family, probably yours too.
|
| To the outside tech user, they just want a printer and HP is
| global brand. My father would, considering our first ever
| computer was an HP so he'd be stuck with the mindset everything
| HP is great.
| josephcsible wrote:
| Because you need a printer, and their competitors are all just
| as scummy?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-10 23:00 UTC)