Dell Takes the Low Road Regarding Ink Cartridges 430
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.
The Low Road? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Low Road? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Inkjet printers suck! (Score:2, Insightful)
Even the lowest end laser printers are so much more reliable and faster then the highest end ink jet.
Only 1 paper jam ever with my HP.
My epson ink jet cost only $50 but I blew over $150 over the years for ink.
I still use my original ink cartridge on my laser printer because it can do over 2.5k copies!
The quality of the ink is better as well and the images are sharper.
That's sensational...ism! (Score:5, Insightful)
Dell has released an extremely cheap printer. This extremely cheap printer uses ink cartridges which create a revenue stream for Dell, but also wear out and stop functioning to spec after a certain amount of time.
Some third party is upset that they cannot refill those cartridges, even though they were not designed to be refilled, and are at the end of their lives.
Consumers have a multitude of options regarding printing technology, at widely varying costs per page. Dell's decision has not eliminated any of the other suppliers or technologies.
In short, unless you manufacture inkjet refill kits, don't worry about this, it doesn't matter and it would change your life in the least.
Re:Can I just say ... (Score:1, Insightful)
They are extremely reliable and the ink never smudges because its fused onto the paper. In an inkjet its sprayed on by bubbles.
Also if you can buy a used HP corporate laser pritner with networking support, you can use linux with it. The higher end department printers are real printers and not winprinters which mean Linux can communicate with them.
Re:The Low Road? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That's sensational...ism! (Score:5, Insightful)
Some third party is upset that they cannot refill those cartridges, even though they were not designed to be refilled, and are at the end of their lives.
They're more pissed that they are being prevented from refilling the cartridges by technology put there for the purpose, and that they are unable to manufacture knockoffs due to the DMCA.
In short, unless you manufacture inkjet refill kits, don't worry about this, it doesn't matter and it would change your life in the least.
Unless you happen to like the idea of competition, that is. Allow this, and you will see more and more things that you buy come with strings attached regarding usage, and those strings will be backed up by legal force.
no change in life? I beg your pardon (Score:5, Insightful)
So, what do you think happens to the old printer? it gets tossed; and then it gets dumped in a landfill or china - neither is a very good option.
I don't see how does that *not* impact my life.
Besides, environmental issues aside, while cheap, printers DO COST MONEY TO MAKE, and throwing them away because the manufactures decides on a fucked-up business model only drives up the cost eventually.
I really don't like this model the inkjet people has taken on. I mean, I understand it with games consoles, but the analogy don't really compare. It's like if Xbox costed less than your typical came and always came with coupon for a free game of your choosing - or a car that's so cheap you will buy it for the tank of gas that the dealer gives you. It's not a good business model anywhere else, why would the printer people get all drunk over it?
Re:Inkjet printers suck! (Score:4, Insightful)
Last inkjet printer I bought sits in the closet waiting for it's next set of cartridges. Every time I think I need to print something in color I price the carts and say "nevermind". That's what cheap printers with expensive ink create. A customer who you make nothing (or next to nothing) off of when you sell him the printer and who never can bring himself to pay for the expensive refills.
Don't buy Dell Printers (Score:5, Insightful)
It's as easy as that. I usually "buy" (i.e.price) the cartridges first.
a thought... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Low Road? (Score:4, Insightful)
The DMCA is being used to restrict product usage and as a barrier to entry of competitors. You are so ready to assert that Dell has the right to make their money back. Guess what? No one said they couldn't. What you miss is that they are preventing others from making money too. What about them? Oh, you forgot. Golly gee. You are quick to point out that Dell sells printers at closet to cost. Know what? So what! That's THEIR decision to. I don't have a problem with them deciding on their prices. No one said they couldn't.
Hell, if they want to epoxy their ink cartridges to their printers I don't care. I care when there is a law that says I can't take a Dremel to the epoxy and get more use out of it (which, thankfully the DMCA doesn't not cover).
Don't cry to the customers or voters if their loss leader costs the company. Consumers are not there to bail you out of your sorry ass decisions. I would gladly purchase a printer for $500 if I had a choice of reasonably priced brand name as well as alternative ink sources--oh, wait, I did--it's called a laser printer. Yeah, I bypassed the problem that is inkjets.
Dell leveraging stupid, overly broad laws (it's a DMCA violation, as Lexmark has already tested in court, and there is at least another case law example you can use re the DMCA and this sort of technology involving, of all things, garage doors) and changing the business fight (in this case, based on evolving technologies) to a legal one. If you honestly believe Dell has the right to be in the marketplace, drop all the other crap and make it a business slugfest.
Oh, btw, I do say the same thing of MS and the Xbox. MS knew full well that crypto'ing their code they were not only getting protection by crypto but also legal protection via the DMCA protection. (Note that I did not say copyright protection, because the key provents flat out code usage, including user rolled applications--so much for a company that "innovates" and puts out DRM crap->they can't even tell the difference between pirated copies and apache). MS bleeds on Xbox, and I'm glad they do. I don't buy from Xbox, and now I won't be buying from Dell (I used to buy about $2,000 of equipment through their accessory store).
Re:The Low Road? (Score:5, Insightful)
Diffrent business models are scary... (Score:3, Insightful)
It is the exact same way with cellphones, look at the cost of a unlocked (gsm) cellphone compared to the cost of getting the same phone under contract with a cellphone provider that locks you into the use of that one provider. Granted, some people do go for the unlocked phones, but the vast majority are fine with a locked phone from the provider because it is the same phone but much cheaper. Same with DirecTV who eat a loss of somewhere around $200 for each reciever they sell. Oh, and it only works with DirecTV.
If there was a market for printers that used some sort of universal cartrage, someone would make it thanks to capitalism. If you want something close get a laser, there is much less focus on consumables in that market, but of course you are going to pay a much higher upfront cost. (I have a laser and personally I wouldn't use anything else)
If you don't like it don't buy an ink jet printer, and/or make the market known for a inkjet printer that is not subsidised and uses an open design for cartriges, but frankly gripping at length at how Dell is trying to screw the consumer with a perfectly legitiment business model (And one that most consumers like) is not productive and gets quite tiresome.
Re:Inkjet printers suck! (Score:2, Insightful)
Distorting customer perception... (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I would consider "ink" as a commodity product. Just like I expect my car to run on gas from any petrol station (assuming right octane at least
I don't have a problem with the business model though as long as it is clearly labeled. "Can only be used with [brand] ink cartridges. Third-party cartridges or ink refill is not possible. Attempts to circumvent this is illegal under the DMCA and punishable by [whatever it is]." in red. That should kill sales pretty quick...
Kjella
ink prices (Score:2, Insightful)
Transparency! (Score:2, Insightful)
"The market" can work things out if the consumers have the information. You can imagine a series of printers that cost more but take "commodity" ink being popular with some people while some people like the "minimum up-front cost" Dell/Lexmark path.
Nutrition labels, car MPG labels, appliance Energy Star labels ... these are all cases where a little government arm-twisting gives us a much more competitive and responsive market.
The theme is: use transparency to bring to the surface costs being shifted to the consumer. If they still choose to consume ... so be it. This same great strategy is the basis of yesterday's article about
requirng labels [slashdot.org] on copy-restricted materials.
Gas would cost more on the Low Road (Score:4, Insightful)
Printer vendors *could* add real value this way... (Score:3, Insightful)
People actually should be careful about third-party cartridges and refill kits; some of these are very bad, and if you're not careful with refill kits you can cause problems either by introducing air bubbles or debris. Some printers (Canon and HP that I know of) include the print head with the cartridge, and the head isn't designed for a very long life; the quality will probably degrade after a few refills. Epson printers use a long-life head technology, but the flip side is that if you damage the heads, you're either looking at an expensive repair or a new printer. Refill kits are also messy. However, that really should be for the user to decide.
Dell will fail (Score:2, Insightful)
Where are you gonna get ink?
Why buy from Dell when it's just a remarked Lexmark? Just buy the Lexmark, the ink/toner will be much more widely available, and probably less expensive.
No retail sales! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Inkjet printers suck! (Score:4, Insightful)
I do the same thing. To take it further, I often opt to not print at all, and instead just scribble down what I want off the screen onto a post-it. If I didn't have a nag in the back of my mind about the cost of ink every time I hear my printer doing the hula, I would print a helluva lot more stuff out. So, in a way, having expensive ink makes me more environmentally friendly. (tongue in cheek)
To get back on topic, Dell and the low road, what exactly would you have them do? Despite people knowing about the money being made on the ink, the first theing they consider when buying a printer is the cost of the printer. Dell can't exactly reverse the trend of the existing market just because they now have their name on a printer. If Dell decided to do the "normal" thing... by charging enough to make a profit on the hardware, then selling the ink for the profit that it is worth, how would they get their printers into the market? People would look at the price of them and say... "um, no".
FUD: Post is Misleading and Incorrect (Score:4, Insightful)
- a regular cartridge with no lockout chip ($129/$99/$35)
- a "use and return" cartridge with lockout chip ($99/$75/na).
I feel pretty certain that Dell wants to keep you as a cartridge customer, but they aren't locking you in. Oh, and only one of the four printers is an inkjet. The others are lasers. Even better, the inkjet does not include this technology. Bottom line: Dell is getting into the laser printer cartridge refilling business. No wonder the OP is complaining.Re:That's sensational...ism! (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but if all these companies go broke, I could care less. The government/law should not protect a flawed business model.
Re:Funny (Score:2, Insightful)
This is good though, because its another rediculous invocation of the DMCA that will eventually lead to the court challenge that brings it down.
Re:Refills suck (Score:2, Insightful)
However, "many" if not "most" people today find themselves having to use their printer for much more than this.
For example, I'm a university student. I have to print not only papers and multiple drafts to take to class, but also many library catalogs offer journals in full-text online form now.
Between all the uses of my printer that are required, I use a ream of paper every month or so. Not many compared to even a small office.
When (like with a Lexmark I tossed into the trash) I can't even get 200 pages out of a cartridge, and am told that a replacement will cost $30 to $50, just for the black, and probably as much for the colour, that's just ridiculous. Would I pay $100 or $200 for a printer to have $10 or even $15 cartridges, rather than a $40 printer that costs that $30 to $50? Hell yeah. However, consumers are increasingly either not given the choice, or are not well informed. Most consumers who buy a new printer don't know to check the ink cost first. Or, worse, the printer with the features they need only comes with expensive ink.
Myself, I'm holding onto my Canon BJC-610. Recently, the refill cartridges I use have been discontinued, and I was able to buy 10 of each black and colour tanks (4 tanks total) for about $4 each on clearance. The name-brand Canon cart is $14 or so, which is still a bargain compared to most. However, I noticed my last trip to Circuit City that this printer is no longer listed in their ink catalog at all. Staples still has the ink, but I am getting the eerie feeling that Canon would rather not support an affordable ink supply anymore.
After that happens, I guess I'll just have to go feral in looking for ink supplies.
I'm a big fan of Canon Printers (Score:3, Insightful)
So I bought a Lexmark Z51 - it did decent printouts and it still works. But the ink is quite expensive.
But Canon - I got an s800, and it prints out beautiful pictures. Then it stopped working after only a year! Damn. But it turned out my kid had stuffed a pencil in a rather delicate part of the printer's anotomy, and once a pencil-ectmy was performed, the printer was all better! Able to survive a hostile environment. Plus the ink is really cheap. So there you have it - cheap, durable, and excellent output. And no Carly.
Re:The Low Road? (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny, neither of my Epson printers has an integrated print head. Yes, the really, really cheap ones do, but don't over-generalize.
Re:Don't buy Dell Printers (Score:3, Insightful)
I wish someone would read slashdot, and get story ideas for a computer magazine. Really, this is what people want to know.
Re:Gas would cost more on the Low Road (Score:5, Insightful)
A car company, however, can't require you to use only their parts. This has nothing to do with antitrust laws, however, and the laws that prevent such activity only apply to automobiles. Sorry, thanks for playing.
Simply put, what they're doing is legal. Unethical, yes, immoral, probably, consumer-unfriendly, sure, but legal nonetheless. They have a right to do this, just like you have the right to tell them where to shove their products.
That having been said, it wouldn't hurt to do a nationwide advertising campaign that explains to people why they should look for third-party ink refills before choosing a printer---educate the masses. When they see their business drying up, they will reconsider this stupidity....
Slightly surprising... (Score:4, Insightful)
[1](well, this is ink and thus a bit expensive... but fedex on single cartridges would make it that much worse)
Re:Funny (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Funny (Score:3, Insightful)
I was just thinking about it this morning... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the same with mobile phones and prepaid cards vs. fixed accounts. It's the same with season tickets. It's the same with pre-paying for anything. it's the same with buying expensive light-bulbs that last for much longer. People value the freedom to change their habits over time and this includes stopping with that printer long before they recover their investment in ink.
It's very funny to see one set of people trying to convince consumers to switch to a more cost-effective strategy (e.g. buy ecological light bulbs) while other companies get criticised for pandering to what people really want.
Dell is - IMHO - entirely right in doing this, so long as there are competitive printer+ink offerings from other printer manufacturers. Yes, it's crass, but that is what most people want.
If printers and ink really are cheap, this just means there is a huge market opportunity for a smart Taiwanese company to sell cheap printers _and_ cheap cartridges. This is what the free market is all about.
Re:chip (Score:2, Insightful)
Reverse Engineering and Dell Corporate History (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny, people in my office still use the term 'IBM-Compatible' when talking about Intel based PCs. Are printers next?