You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I HATE buying printers. I had an Apple branded laser printer back in the late 1990s that was a flipping workhorse and that I loved, but it eventually died. And my B&W HP printer in my office at work is a bit similar: 1000s of copies without so much as a hiccup.
But for the home? Nothing but shite. One complete piece of it after another.
Anyway, now in the market again, as the Brother printer I bought a number of years ago in the hope that it would be a reincarnation of my old Apple printer, is finally kaput (after never once giving us a decent print of anything). What we need/want is a fairly low-volume output machine (probably ink jet) that prints decent quality photos, but does not have to be photo-specific. Should be wireless, and be able to work with a whole mix of devices and laptops in the home.
Preferably no more than £100 unless you tell me that what I am hoping for is a moon on a stick, and I absolutely, resolutely must spend more.
Suggest away...
Bought a HP envy 5030 for £60, does everything I need.
Hp Envy something or other here too alongside their instant Ink thing.
I have a 2 month instant ink code if you want it, may work on top of other codes.
There were ink supply issues over last couple of months but HP eventually delivered the backlog and threw us a few more months. Think we have 7 or so free months in total.
HP envy here too. Buying process was going to ho site and clicking on sale items or something and choosing the cheapest.
It has just worked from the start.
Printed from my phone, tablet and various computers.
Envy here too 6230 iirc
For balance I have a canon inkjet and I'm currently trying to manually clean the print head because one of the colours just stopped printing. So inkjets aren't ideal at being left for a while not printing. But your experience may vary!
Gave up on inkjets and bought the cheapest, nastiest black and white laser printer I could find, and if I need photos printed I use the printer in Boots. I think the printer cost 40 pounds and is wifi enabled, no drivers needed.
I'm sitting right next to a six year old HP Envy 4500 that I paid John Lewis £60 for, use the insta ink service for £1.99 a month and never had any issues. When the 4500 dies (which is hopefully a long way off) I'll buy another.
Can't understand why folk are still paying more for cartridges than they do for a printer
G
Think you'll struggle to buy a printer at the moment.
Yep, HP with Instant Ink here too - only costs £1.99 a month for on demand cartridges (sent to my home address when they get an alert via the app to say I am running low) based on 50 pages a month and it costs absolutely nothing for <15 pages a month.
Yep HP envy here. 4520 I think. Instant ink is great. Got the 2 free months free while my daughter at home doing her uni dissertation so definitely got my money’s worth. Would have been £30 a month buying cartridges.
WiFi not foolproof. It does seem to not always be found on my wife’s phone (pixel) But never a problem with any iPhones. Sometimes gets lost by the laptop and has to be re-added. Maybe a router problem I don’t understand.
Went through a few inkjets, cheap and expensive, before settling on a colour laser for home that’s been perfect for us. Not the best for photos but specialist printing is cheap for the odd pic to put on display.
Brother often have cashback deals, our chunky laser (with 4 cartridges full for 4000 pages) was about 90 quid all in.
So with my son being at home for the 3rd time since September as someone on his year group has tested positive I think it's time we had a printer.
I was all set to buy the hp envy with Instant ink but then heard about this
Do we still think instant ink is a good thing?
Was looking at he hp envy 6010
A timely thread and thanks to @trickydisco I'll be rethinking my approach of going the HP route...
Our Canon still works,.and was fine for home use before lockdown, but the cartridges are lasting only a month or so now, and always give up the ghost when you need them the most.
I pay £1.99 a month to print. I still think that's cheap.
I have a cheap HP laser printer (non-DRM) I bought many years ago. I'm on the second toner cartridge.
In the rare event we have needed colour pages we used the shop in the village.
I think I'd be fairly wary of buying a DRM-enabled printer in future.
Do we still think instant ink is a good thing?
Yes!
You pay (a pittance) per month and get ink. Why would you expect it to be free?
Do you expect money back from your car insurance if you don't crash?
Another ENVY/instant ink user. HP colorChoice paper is worth it too if you catch it on offer, makes everyday stuff much better.
Yes!
You pay (a pittance) per month and get ink. Why would you expect it to be free?
Do you expect money back from your car insurance if you don’t crash?
As my posts show thats not the issue i'm alluding to. I'm talking about HP changing their terms (free ink for life), cartridges with DRM and changing subscriptions models or effectively turning it into a brick down the line when you don't comply with their new way of so
Did you actually read the links in my post?
It was eventually traced down to a firmware “feature” that practically shut down printers that were running on 3rd party cartridges sold by the likes of 123inkt. But the more startling revelation that the “expiration date” might have actually been pre-programmed into a firmware update dating way back in March this year, considering there hasn’t been any firmware update since then.
HP confirmed to Dutch media that it does, in fact, push software updates that would make HP printers reject non-HP cartridges, to “protect innovation and intellectual property”. What it didn’t really confirm or explain is why it had a pre-programmed date for printers to suddenly stop working, months after the software was already installed.
The printers sound great but talking to ppl who have emails recently it doesn't sound great
Did you actually read the links in my post?
I did. You asked me if I still thought it was a good idea, I said yes. Because I still get cheap hassle-free printing, which is why I chose the service.
The printers sound great but talking to ppl who have emails recently it doesn’t sound great
Still not sure what the issue is. Is it because the terms were changed?
I did. You asked me if I still thought it was a good idea, I said yes. Because I still get cheap hassle-free printing, which is why I chose the service.
without taking into account future changes to terms, not being able to use other cartridges, being locked in, sneaky firmware updates?
So you don't think HP changing their 'free ink for life' terms is a bit bad?
Still not sure what the issue is. Is it because the terms were changed?
It is because you've bought a physical product tied to a supply contract, which it appears that the supplier can unilaterally change to your detriment while simultaneously denying you the ability to continue to use the product you've bought because no aftermarket or alternative consumables work with it due to actions by that manufacturer leaving you with the choice of
1) scrap the product with the attendant cost, waste and environmental consequences
2) acceed to the less favourable terms and pay more/get less
It's anti competitive (although may not reach the legal definition) because it removes consumer choice and puts the manufacturer in a position where they can screw consumers on price/terms every time they choose to.
I really wouldn't want to encourage that kind of corporate behaviour.
"I'm all right jack" will only work for consumers until this becomes the dominant / only model and we all pay even more over the odds for ink than we do now.
A much more sustainable model would refillable ink chambers on a fixed head.
It's like drug use ... sucker us in with cheap deals now, cane the pricing later when we're hooked.
Fixed printheads and refillable ink tanks are not more sustainable. Ink jet printheads are precision devices which need looking after. They do not last long in a domestic setting.
The HP design with replaceable heads and ink is the best option.
The HP design with replaceable heads and ink is the best option.
for one specific usecase
The other underhand tricks no thanks.
For the domestic market user case, which is what we're talking about. If you're talking about industrial inkjet fine, we can discuss that as well.
It is because you’ve bought a physical product tied to a supply contract
That's not that unusual, is it?
Are you saying that you could previously use it with traditional paid-for cartridges, but now you can't?
It’s like drug use … sucker us in with cheap deals now, cane the pricing later when we’re hooked.
It would be if all manufacturers did it for all their printers. I bought my HP specifically because I wanted Instant Ink, as I consider it to be a better option. Of course, I'm under no illusion that it is likely on average to result in HP getting more money, but I may still come out ahead if I decide I want to start printing loads of photos again. But part of it is that HP want to tie me into that printer - which is fine by me, I have no wish to buy another printer; and they want a regular income which is also fine by me as I want regular outgoings.
I can see you'd be annoyed if you purchased the printer expecting to be able to use cartridges the old fashioned way and now can't - that is a shitty thing to do. However you asked if Instant Ink as a whole is still a good deal, and the answer for me is still yes.
“I’m all right jack”
I feel like you are inflating this somewhat. I do not subscribe to that philosophy.
"fixed printheads and refillable ink tanks are not more sustainable"
That's strange - Epson seem to think they are.....
There are 1000's of patents related to ink jet printing. HP have over 3000. Many are to do with how they are made, and how you can remove a printhead and fit a new one while maintaining the accuracy you need for good print quality. Just because Epson, and many others don't use replaceable heads doesn't make it better, or more sustainable, it just means they are restricted in what they can do by HP's IP.
“I’m all right jack”
I feel like you are inflating this somewhat. I do not subscribe to that philosophy.
@molgrips sorry was not having a dig - just a bit too flippant with my language I should have expressed myself better, unreserved apology for any insult caused. 🙂
I quite like the idea of the model, I worry about the execution of it long term and I'll now shut up as I don't want the OPs thread to go off the rails any more than it already has.
NP, it's the internet 🙂
I actually wanted the Epson refillable tank one, to begin with, but it was expensive and I had concerns about using low volume of ink.
Hmm, it seems that you can still use your printer without Instant Ink, by buying cartridges normally. It's just the free tier that ended.
In other words, they increased the price of the (optional) 15 pages/month service by 99c. That doesn't sound so bad when you put it like that?