Region-Coded Ink Cartridges??

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 11, 2010.

  1. An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    in another region??

    <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 11, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Me Guest

    On 11/05/2010 8:35 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    > in another region??
    >
    > <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>

    Epson do the same.
    They seem to have a strange attitude - charge like wounded bulls in the
    export market, yet charge only 50% of that price to their domestic market.
    If our meat exporters used the same principle, I'd have just had lamb
    loin for dinner instead of the saveloy soup.
    Epson use an extra bit of obfuscation - they name identical printers
    differently for export and their domestic market.
    Me, May 11, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>, Alan Keatinge <> wrote:
    >On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    ><_zealand> wrote:
    >
    >>An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    >>in another region??
    >>
    >><http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>

    >
    >I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son who
    >lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than here. He
    >sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and wouldn't work.
    >Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for the
    >same thing here.


    Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, May 12, 2010
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Me Guest

    On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    > In article<>, Alan Keatinge<> wrote:
    >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>
    >>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    >>> in another region??
    >>>
    >>> <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>

    >>
    >> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son who
    >> lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than here. He
    >> sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and wouldn't work.
    >> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for the
    >> same thing here.

    >
    > Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    > company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >

    As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like US$5
    billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third party
    makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many billions
    are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good job on this
    (from a beancounters POV of course).
    So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good policy
    for HP/Epson/Canon.

    I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    cartridge.
    Me, May 12, 2010
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On May 12, 5:49 pm, Me <> wrote:

    > I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    > from R&D funded from ink profits.  OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    > moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    > R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    > same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    > capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    > cartridge.


    L/T I think their profits will be eroded anyway, as the volume of
    printing declines - From a personal perspective, I've printed 3 pages
    in the last two weeks.

    Of course having said that, we have one senior Manager at my firm who
    prints absolutely every email and files it in countless arch-leaver
    files. Of course, that's on top of the 15Gb (and growing) mailbox they
    already have.
    Simon, May 12, 2010
    #5
  6. In article <hsdfhg$u7s$>, Me <> wrote:
    >On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >> In article<>, Alan

    > Keatinge<> wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >>> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    >>>> in another region??
    >>>>
    >>>> <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    >>>
    >>> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son who
    >>> lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than here. He
    >>> sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and wouldn't work.
    >>> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >>> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for the
    >>> same thing here.

    >>
    >> Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    >> company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >>

    >As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like US$5
    >billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third party
    >makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many billions
    >are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good job on this
    >(from a beancounters POV of course).
    >So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good policy
    >for HP/Epson/Canon.


    The theory is great ... the practice drives people away from buying
    the company's branded ink to the generics. How can that be at all good for
    the company concerned ? Certainly, once the printer is out of warranty,
    there's nio reason to buy expensive ink.

    >I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    >from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    >moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    >R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    >same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    >capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    >cartridge.


    And how long do they think customers will put up with this sort of thing ?
    There are at least a few of us that aren't stupid ... aren't there ? :)
    Bruce Sinclair, May 13, 2010
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Me Guest

    On 13/05/2010 11:57 a.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    > In article<hsdfhg$u7s$>, Me<> wrote:
    >> On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>> In article<>, Alan

    >> Keatinge<> wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >>>> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    >>>>> in another region??
    >>>>>
    >>>>> <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    >>>>
    >>>> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son who
    >>>> lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than here. He
    >>>> sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and wouldn't work.
    >>>> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >>>> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for the
    >>>> same thing here.
    >>>
    >>> Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    >>> company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >>>

    >> As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like US$5
    >> billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third party
    >> makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many billions
    >> are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good job on this
    >> (from a beancounters POV of course).
    >> So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good policy
    >> for HP/Epson/Canon.

    >
    > The theory is great ... the practice drives people away from buying
    > the company's branded ink to the generics. How can that be at all good for
    > the company concerned ? Certainly, once the printer is out of warranty,
    > there's nio reason to buy expensive ink.
    >

    Yes - but the lost profit from lost sales to third parties will be less
    than the margin lost if they reduce prices - even if unit sales
    increase. As I said, it's a multi billion dollar business. They will
    analyse the effect of price on revenue and the bottom line very very
    thoroughly.
    >
    >> I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    >>from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    >> moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    >> R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    >> same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    >> capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    >> cartridge.

    >
    > And how long do they think customers will put up with this sort of thing ?
    > There are at least a few of us that aren't stupid ... aren't there ? :)
    >

    The makers seem to keep moving to smaller and more expensive cartridges,
    and have been doing so for about the last 15 years.
    I doubt they will change unless forced by regulation.
    Me, May 13, 2010
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 13/05/2010 3:13 p.m., Allistar wrote:
    > Me wrote:
    >
    >> On 13/05/2010 11:57 a.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>> In article<hsdfhg$u7s$>, Me<>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>>>> In article<>, Alan
    >>>> Keatinge<> wrote:
    >>>>>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >>>>>> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges
    >>>>>>> bought in another region??
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>

    > <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son
    >>>>>> who lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than
    >>>>>> here. He sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and
    >>>>>> wouldn't work.
    >>>>>> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >>>>>> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for
    >>>>>> the same thing here.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    >>>>> company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >>>>>
    >>>> As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like US$5
    >>>> billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third party
    >>>> makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many billions
    >>>> are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good job on this
    >>>> (from a beancounters POV of course).
    >>>> So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good policy
    >>>> for HP/Epson/Canon.
    >>>
    >>> The theory is great ... the practice drives people away from buying
    >>> the company's branded ink to the generics. How can that be at all good
    >>> for the company concerned ? Certainly, once the printer is out of
    >>> warranty, there's nio reason to buy expensive ink.
    >> >

    >> Yes - but the lost profit from lost sales to third parties will be less
    >> than the margin lost if they reduce prices - even if unit sales
    >> increase. As I said, it's a multi billion dollar business. They will
    >> analyse the effect of price on revenue and the bottom line very very
    >> thoroughly.
    >>>
    >>>> I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    >>> >from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    >>>> moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    >>>> R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    >>>> same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    >>>> capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    >>>> cartridge.
    >>>
    >>> And how long do they think customers will put up with this sort of thing
    >>> ? There are at least a few of us that aren't stupid ... aren't there ? :)
    >>>

    >> The makers seem to keep moving to smaller and more expensive cartridges,
    >> and have been doing so for about the last 15 years.
    >> I doubt they will change unless forced by regulation.

    >
    > Why should they be regulated? Nobody forces you to buy their cartridges. I
    > would never buy a printer that had region encoded cartriges or any other
    > means of preventing other compatible cartridges from being used.


    How about if the printer maker uses copyright law to stop compatible
    cartridges from being sold ?
    https://www.eff.org/cases/lexmark-v-static-control-case-archive
    victor, May 13, 2010
    #8
  9. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Me Guest

    On 13/05/2010 3:13 p.m., Allistar wrote:
    > Me wrote:
    >
    >> On 13/05/2010 11:57 a.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>> In article<hsdfhg$u7s$>, Me<>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>>>> In article<>, Alan
    >>>> Keatinge<> wrote:
    >>>>>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >>>>>> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges
    >>>>>>> bought in another region??
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>

    > <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son
    >>>>>> who lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than
    >>>>>> here. He sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and
    >>>>>> wouldn't work.
    >>>>>> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >>>>>> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for
    >>>>>> the same thing here.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    >>>>> company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >>>>>
    >>>> As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like US$5
    >>>> billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third party
    >>>> makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many billions
    >>>> are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good job on this
    >>>> (from a beancounters POV of course).
    >>>> So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good policy
    >>>> for HP/Epson/Canon.
    >>>
    >>> The theory is great ... the practice drives people away from buying
    >>> the company's branded ink to the generics. How can that be at all good
    >>> for the company concerned ? Certainly, once the printer is out of
    >>> warranty, there's nio reason to buy expensive ink.
    >> >

    >> Yes - but the lost profit from lost sales to third parties will be less
    >> than the margin lost if they reduce prices - even if unit sales
    >> increase. As I said, it's a multi billion dollar business. They will
    >> analyse the effect of price on revenue and the bottom line very very
    >> thoroughly.
    >>>
    >>>> I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    >>> >from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    >>>> moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    >>>> R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    >>>> same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    >>>> capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    >>>> cartridge.
    >>>
    >>> And how long do they think customers will put up with this sort of thing
    >>> ? There are at least a few of us that aren't stupid ... aren't there ? :)
    >>>

    >> The makers seem to keep moving to smaller and more expensive cartridges,
    >> and have been doing so for about the last 15 years.
    >> I doubt they will change unless forced by regulation.

    >
    > Why should they be regulated? Nobody forces you to buy their cartridges. I
    > would never buy a printer that had region encoded cartriges or any other
    > means of preventing other compatible cartridges from being used.
    >

    Almost all have "means of preventing other compatible cartridges from
    being used", so there aren't going to be many (if any) printers for you
    to choose from.
    Those means are usually circumvented by third party suppliers. The OEM
    manufacturers have at various times threatened to sue (for claimed
    violation of IP rights), but backed off when even a hint appeared that
    regulation could be the result.

    I'm all for market regulation in the real world where patent and
    copyright regulation also exists. Global corporates might whine about
    wanting a "free" market and letting the market self-regulate, but
    *always* omit recognition of the fact that they're protected by
    regulation, and use those regulations fiercely to protect themselves and
    suppress competition.
    Me, May 13, 2010
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    > In article <hsdfhg$u7s$>, Me <> wrote:
    >> On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>> In article<>, Alan

    >> Keatinge<> wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >>>> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges bought
    >>>>> in another region??
    >>>>>
    >>>>> <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    >>>> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a son who
    >>>> lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than here. He
    >>>> sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and wouldn't work.
    >>>> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >>>> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29 for the
    >>>> same thing here.
    >>> Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    >>> company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >>>

    >> As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like US$5
    >> billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third party
    >> makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many billions
    >> are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good job on this
    >> (from a beancounters POV of course).
    >> So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good policy
    >> for HP/Epson/Canon.

    >
    > The theory is great ... the practice drives people away from buying
    > the company's branded ink to the generics. How can that be at all good for
    > the company concerned ? Certainly, once the printer is out of warranty,
    > there's nio reason to buy expensive ink.


    Print quality and consistancy is the reason to go for the proper inks.

    Lost count of the number of wasted sheets because the off brand ink was
    either misfiring some jets or just ended up with a massive colour cast
    over certain shades on it. Forget printing greyscale with cheap inks -
    all it does is purpley blue on the warehouse generic brand I last tried.

    Put epsons back in, let it purge out the other stuff and its back to
    looking like it should.

    Generics are great for drafts, pie charts, kids assignments - but if it
    needs to look ok, is going on photo paper or is being presented then its
    often bad.

    I did get some good generic ink for my crappy pigment based printer that
    I do dvd-r prints on, since the dye stuff bleeds badly on printable
    discs, budget-store on ebay. It looks prettymuch the same. Got some for
    my other cheapie one I do documents on (dye based) the first lot was ok,
    moved onto the second lot and they were no better than cheapies)

    >> I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    >>from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    >> moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use (Epson
    >> R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900) using the
    >> same technology - but their marketing department (I assume) reduced ink
    >> capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased the price per
    >> cartridge.

    >
    > And how long do they think customers will put up with this sort of thing ?
    > There are at least a few of us that aren't stupid ... aren't there ? :)


    Sure has advanced, my latest epson photo printer is about 3 times the
    speed and has smaller drop size than the 4 year old one it replaced. The
    dinosaur A3 ones I got (1280 I think) are so damn slow that it can take
    hours to do a small booklet on it in the best modes.
    Richard, May 13, 2010
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Me Guest

    On 14/05/2010 3:29 a.m., Richard wrote:
    > Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >> In article <hsdfhg$u7s$>, Me <>
    >> wrote:
    >>> On 12/05/2010 3:40 p.m., Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >>>> In article<>, Alan
    >>> Keatinge<> wrote:
    >>>>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:35:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    >>>>> <_zealand> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink
    >>>>>> cartridges bought
    >>>>>> in another region??
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635733/hp-subdivides-world>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> I have a Canon Pixma IP4600 which works very well. I also have a
    >>>>> son who
    >>>>> lives in the States where Canon cartridges are far cheaper than
    >>>>> here. He
    >>>>> sent me one to try. Identical size but different number and
    >>>>> wouldn't work.
    >>>>> Now I use a brand called Tonney sold by an Sydney firm TEG Computers.
    >>>>> Including freight they cost approx, $17 each compared to about $29
    >>>>> for the
    >>>>> same thing here.
    >>>> Yep. A classic case of a bad policy resulting in fewer sales of the
    >>>> company's fine products. Unbelievable. :)
    >>>>
    >>> As margins are very high on inks (IIRC HP declares something like
    >>> US$5 billion profit from printer consumables PA) lost sales to third
    >>> party makers will be factored in to profit calculations. When many
    >>> billions are involved, they're going to try to do a very very good
    >>> job on this (from a beancounters POV of course).
    >>> So while it's bad policy for you and me, I'm sure it's very good
    >>> policy for HP/Epson/Canon.

    >>
    >> The theory is great ... the practice drives people away from buying
    >> the company's branded ink to the generics. How can that be at all good
    >> for the company concerned ? Certainly, once the printer is out of
    >> warranty, there's nio reason to buy expensive ink.

    >
    > Print quality and consistancy is the reason to go for the proper inks.
    >
    > Lost count of the number of wasted sheets because the off brand ink was
    > either misfiring some jets or just ended up with a massive colour cast
    > over certain shades on it. Forget printing greyscale with cheap inks -
    > all it does is purpley blue on the warehouse generic brand I last tried.
    >
    > Put epsons back in, let it purge out the other stuff and its back to
    > looking like it should.
    >
    > Generics are great for drafts, pie charts, kids assignments - but if it
    > needs to look ok, is going on photo paper or is being presented then its
    > often bad.
    >
    > I did get some good generic ink for my crappy pigment based printer that
    > I do dvd-r prints on, since the dye stuff bleeds badly on printable
    > discs, budget-store on ebay. It looks prettymuch the same. Got some for
    > my other cheapie one I do documents on (dye based) the first lot was ok,
    > moved onto the second lot and they were no better than cheapies)
    >

    I've bought printable disks some with a "fast dry" finish which gives a
    water resistant finish with pigment inks, and some with a swellable
    polymer coating that probably looks good with dye based inks, but smears
    easily. TDK printable disks I have seem to be okay.
    With pigment inks on the right gloss/semi-gloss paper finish, the prints
    are water-proof to the extent that if they get smeared with a little
    gunk/sneeze/finger marks when on display, they wipe clean without damage
    using a damp microfibre cloth. But it takes a couple of days for them
    to dry thoroughly - there's a solvent used (coalescing solvent) to fuse
    the acrylic binder and they don't achieve full hardness until it's
    evaporated. It also fogs glass if you frame them too soon after printing.

    >>> I did hear an argument that some of the great printing technology is
    >>> from R&D funded from ink profits. OTOH, the technology really hasn't
    >>> moved forward much in the past 5 years - the photo printer I use
    >>> (Epson R1800) has been replaced by something not much better (R1900)
    >>> using the same technology - but their marketing department (I assume)
    >>> reduced ink capacity in each cartridge by 30% or so, and increased
    >>> the price per cartridge.

    >>
    >> And how long do they think customers will put up with this sort of
    >> thing ? There are at least a few of us that aren't stupid ... aren't
    >> there ? :)

    >
    > Sure has advanced, my latest epson photo printer is about 3 times the
    > speed and has smaller drop size than the 4 year old one it replaced. The
    > dinosaur A3 ones I got (1280 I think) are so damn slow that it can take
    > hours to do a small booklet on it in the best modes.
    >

    The 1280 technology IIRC dates back to models released around the turn
    of the century. Yes they are slow. I don't think the new A3 pigment
    ink models (1900/2880) are much faster than the 5YO models they
    replaced. Speed could perhaps be ranked in $ of ink per minute they
    consume.
    Me, May 13, 2010
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 14/05/2010 9:05 a.m., Allistar wrote:

    >
    > Yes - I argue that such regulation shouldn't exist. With it, there is no
    > free market.


    Should that include the freedom to deceive the customer ?
    victor, May 13, 2010
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 14/05/2010 10:56 a.m., Allistar wrote:
    > victor wrote:
    >
    >> On 14/05/2010 9:05 a.m., Allistar wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Yes - I argue that such regulation shouldn't exist. With it, there is no
    >>> free market.

    >>
    >> Should that include the freedom to deceive the customer ?

    >
    > I would expect any sale agreement to state that the product being purchased
    > lives up the the promises made. If no such clause exists in the sale
    > agreement, then I wouldn't buy the product. No need for regulation - just
    > personal responsibility.


    So what happens when the deal doesn't meet your expectations ?
    victor, May 14, 2010
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    Allistar wrote:

    > I would question any consumer that intentionally buys printers like that.
    > The solution to such companies is that they change their ways because no
    > one buys their products. If people willingly buy their products, what's the
    > issue?


    What would you ask them?

    I am quite happy with my low cost printers. When they die, I gut them
    for cool parts like motors and gears and stuff, put the rest of the
    plastic in the recyclebin since its all numbered and a few circuitboards
    that I keep around meaning to take to the next e-waste collection.
    Richard, May 14, 2010
    #14
  15. In message <hsitnf$2ir$>, Richard wrote:

    > I am quite happy with my low cost printers. When they die, I gut them
    > for cool parts like motors and gears and stuff ...


    What do you use them for?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 14, 2010
    #15
  16. In message <hsb4s1$1k9$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > An HP printer bought in one region won’t work with HP ink cartridges
    > bought in another region??


    Looks like HP is offering to help change the region setting on the
    customer’s printer
    <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1648662/hp-unlocks-printer-regionalisation>.

    Which begs the question: why the bloody hell do they have this
    regionalization in the first place?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 15, 2010
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Sat, 15 May 2010 23:56:20 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > Looks like HP is offering to help change the region setting on the
    > customer’s printer
    > <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1648662/hp-unlocks-printer-regionalisation>.
    >
    > Which begs the question: why the bloody hell do they have this
    > regionalization in the first place?


    Perhaps to prevent people buying printers cheaper from one region and importing them into the region
    where they live?


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, May 15, 2010
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    John Little Guest

    Lawrence wrote:

    > Which begs the question: why the bloody hell do they have this
    > regionalization in the first place?


    IIUC in New Zealand competition law "regionalization" is
    anticompetitive, not least because it makes parallel importing more
    difficult. Of course the Americans lobby hard against this stuff, and
    other countries bend over readily, so they have it in the first place.

    I'm stating an ideal there, but it's an ideal worth pursuing in NZ.

    Regards, John
    John Little, May 16, 2010
    #18
  19. In message
    <>, John
    Little wrote:

    > IIUC in New Zealand competition law "regionalization" is
    > anticompetitive ...


    In Australia their Commerce Commission equivalent, the ACCC, announced an
    investigation of DVD-Video region codes on exactly this basis. This was a
    few years ago, I don’t think there’s been an announcement of any outcome
    yet.

    I don’t think such practices have actually been ruled illegal anywhere in
    the world, least of all in NZ.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 16, 2010
    #19
  20. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 16/05/2010 3:01 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message
    > <>, John
    > Little wrote:
    >
    >> IIUC in New Zealand competition law "regionalization" is
    >> anticompetitive ...

    >
    > In Australia their Commerce Commission equivalent, the ACCC, announced an
    > investigation of DVD-Video region codes on exactly this basis. This was a
    > few years ago, I don’t think there’s been an announcement of any outcome
    > yet.
    >
    > I don’t think such practices have actually been ruled illegal anywhere in
    > the world, least of all in NZ.


    It doesn't need a ruling, DVD player distributors in nz only distribute
    region free players rather than risk consumers complaints to the
    commerce commission, or retailers before the disputes tribunal.
    I expect HP will have to change their policy because they have no
    defense. They could say that using aftermarket cartridges might cause
    damage that would invalidate the guarantee, and that would justify the
    use of authorization keys, but not region codes.
    victor, May 16, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. lbbs
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    628
  2. MICHAEL

    EPSON INK CARTRIDGES

    MICHAEL, Oct 7, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    1,159
    John H. Guillory
    Nov 25, 2004
  3. Mike Graham

    Ink is ink is ink? Or no?

    Mike Graham, Aug 13, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    620
    Mike Graham
    Aug 13, 2003
  4. Chris

    DVD burner region coded???

    Chris, Sep 16, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    405
    Jan Gruetz
    Sep 16, 2003
  5. Max Volume

    Region-coded DVD-R

    Max Volume, Oct 1, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,094
    Max Volume
    Oct 3, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page