The CEO and the board must serve prison time for things like this. No measure less than prison for the CEO and all board members is enough to curtail this because it just becomes the cost of doing business.<p>No, you can’t say it wasn’t your decision. If you want to not be held accountable for the work your employees, contractors, and agents do on your behalf, you should have to prove they acted against your express written orders.
Did you know Brother makes really good printers that are inexpensive and live a long, happy, life? And their drivers aren't user hostile?<p>This is one of those really good "vote with your wallets" situations.
I just want to be clear, because this headline is borderline clickbait.<p>HP is <i>not</i> bricking the printers. The printers will continue to work if you put the HP cartridges back in.<p>I'm not condoning HP <i>at all</i>, not in a million years.<p>But the verb "disable" carries connotations of permanence, so it seems like a disingenuous word choice at best, if it's not outright clickbait. Just so people aren't confused here.
Has there ever been another company that declined as much from its glory days as HP? During the second half of the 20th century HP was a fabled brand. They made beautiful equipment for which there was often no comparable quality alternative in the world. The pocket calculators they built in the 1980s are still sought-after, not just as collectables but also as daily drivers. They built computers during that era, but they we never a "player" in that industry.<p>Then they shifted their focus to computers and began their long decent into the crappy husk of a company that they are today. The engineers who work there should be ashamed when they implement malware like this printer ink scam.
<i>> to reduce the risk of malware attacks</i><p>What business does an ink cartridge have containing any significant code that could act as malware? What sort of imbecilic or evil (or both) personage designs a system that makes this even remotely possible and then sells it to the general public?<p>Of course there is no answer to that because it isn't a real reason, it is crap regurgitated by a PR drone who knows next to nothing about tech details and has been told to drop the phrase in to make it look like the company is defending their customers from something rather than being a something their customers need defending from…<p>(or worse, the PR person knows a bit about tech, so knows the malware angle is complete bunkum, and was actively lying.)
HP's actions here remind me of what Sony did in 2010. Sony was sued and eventually had to pay.<p>Revising/restricting the features of a product after it is sold can have legal consequences.<p><a href="https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/sony-settles-linux-battle" rel="nofollow">https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/sony-settles-linux-batt...</a><p><a href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/3/20984028/playstation-supercomputer-ps3-umass-dartmouth-astrophysics-25th-anniversary" rel="nofollow">https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/3/20984028/playstation-supe...</a>
I'll never forget how confused I was when my HP printer kept printing ads, randomly.<p>Turns out, it was an official practice by HP.<p>I'll never use any of their products again.
This issue is discussed for over 20 years now, it baffles me that there is apparently still no established solution.<p>By the way, Apple forcing users to install apps only via its 30% fee AppStore has provoked far less outrage. Probably because people are not directly aware of the Apple premium, in contrast to the HP premium.
As the article states, HP has even been sued for this, yet continues to do it as it's a core part of their profits to keep people buying THEIR ink. Profit alone for the printer itself isn't worth it, they'd otherwise they'd not even bother making printers anymore, but that reoccurring revenue from ink is some sweet sweet cash. It's like google/fakebook/twits whining about people blocking ads or using encryption they can't harvest data from as their source of revenue. Worlds smallest violin.
It's like Toyota will disable my car if I did not go to its dealers to do oil changes or regular maintenance.<p>Make your ink cartridge super high quality with reasonable price, I will buy it. Selling a printer at dirty cheap price and expect to recoup the discount via over priced ink cartridges? your sales and marketing department are doing it wrong, and it's not my problem at all.<p>Besides, who needs printers these days anymore?
This is a lesson in combining poor user behaviour with warped incentives.<p>Low-end cartridge printers are often sold at cost or a loss. Why? Because they make the money back on cartridges. That's why you see silly things like this because third-party ink and cartridges destroys that business model. But that business model only exists because users make decisions based on sticker price for the printer. Running costs rarely enter the picture.<p>I saw once a camera store owner said he might sometimes make $1 selling a DSLR and then $10 on a $17 UV filter to go with it. Fast food burger places suffer from this too. McDonalds sells burgers at cost pretty much. They make all their money on the drinks and fries. The so-called "value" in meal deals is pretty much pure profit.<p>If you print any kind of volume, never ever buy a cartridge inkjet printer. Buy a tank printer instead.<p>As an aside, this issue isn't as simple as people make it out to be. The issue comes up with (for example) iPhone accessories. You can't justify Apple's prices but it's also not true that all third-party products are produced equal. Anker, in general, makes excellent products but some third-party chargers have killed people [1].<p>I'm sure most third-party cartridges are fine but that's not necessarily true either. Third-party manufacturers are incentivized to make things as cheap as possible. Will that ink print as well? Will it degrade printer performance over time? Who knows? It's another thing you have to worry about and that's also why these companies don't like third-party products because if poor ink clogs up a printer, who is going to get blamed?<p>Obviously though it's mostly the greed thing though.<p>[1]: <a href="https://www.macgasm.net/news/miscellaneous-news/another-man-electrocuted-killed-using-third-party-apple-charger/" rel="nofollow">https://www.macgasm.net/news/miscellaneous-news/another-man-...</a>
Where are the Open Source Hardware printers?<p>Literally everybody (except printer makers) hates the printer landscape.<p>All we'd need is to pool money to design a cost-effective open source hardware modular monochrome laser printer with open firmware.
Imagine if IKEA sent someone to your house to smash your plates if you used cutlery they didn't like.<p>The CEO and board who are supervising this ought to be barred from ever running a company again.
Honestly this is a waste of money, resources and time.<p>The EU had forced other things nicely like walled gardens.<p>I would love to see a law for inter operability for third parties.
I got tired of the user-hostile shenanigans, bad software, low-quality output, and high TCO (5 or 6 HP or Canon devices over the years), finally came to my senses and bought a Brother. It "Just Works", is fast and quiet and reliable, does exactly what it's supposed to, and is in such stark contrast to the typically terrible printer UX it's almost funny.
Is there anything HP has made in the last 20 years that was actually good? It seems like their MO in recent history is to make flimsy, garbage products, heavily market them, and build in restrictions to force you to buy more of their crap. They're worse than Canon, since at least Canon still makes fairly decent cameras.
How about this - a company that makes printers, but has open sourced their design for cartridges so that other people can make and sell cartridges for those printers? Does something like this exist? Or did HP try their best and bury such companies?
FTDI/Microsoft did something similar to counter "counterfeit" FTDI chips[1]. I remember at least one person who bricked and arduino because of it. I instructed everyone I knew who used no-brand arduinos give them away for their colleagues who use linux.<p>[1] <a href="https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/10/windows-update-drivers-bricking-usb-serial-chips-beloved-of-hardware-hackers/" rel="nofollow">https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/10/windo...</a>
Yes and:<p>Authentic HP ink cartridges now have an expiration date. Even when new in package, sealed, and totally fine.<p>A friend asked me to fix their printer. Error code was nonsensical. Eventually determined an automatic firmware update invalidated their cartridges. Only clue came from other complaints on reddit. HP had no useful info or troubleshooting advice.<p>Convinced friend to buy a Brother laser printer.<p>HP is now evil. Got the Jack Welch treatment. I blame Fiorina, Hurd, Whitman, the board, and all the other stooges, for turning a former tech gem into a punch line.
Pre-chip Brother laser printers can be found for $50-100 on Craigslist. Will last for a decade of home use if not more. Toner can be refilled or bought aftermarket for under $20.
It seems like there is enough competition in the printer market that this wouldn't be a thing. Are the margins so thin that all manufacturers depend on ink sales? Otherwise I don't understand why one wouldn't make universal ink compatibility a major selling point and force everyone to follow suit.
This is from 2020<p><a href="https://www.classaction.org/news/class-action-claims-hp-printer-firmware-update-blocked-use-of-third-party-ink-toner-cartridges" rel="nofollow">https://www.classaction.org/news/class-action-claims-hp-prin...</a>
On one hand you want consumers and a jury to believe that you have no liability
when bad actors use your bad drivers to run malicious code on their machines while at the same time doing basically the same thing to your own customers.
I really do think there needs to be stricter regulations about how products like these can be advertised. Do you really "own" the printer if the manufacturer can decide what ink you're allowed to put in it <i>after</i> you've already paid for it? It really seems disingenuous to market these prints as "purchases" or something that you "buy" like you would a loaf of bread.<p>It's not quite "renting", but it's not really "owning" either because when you "buy" it, it's not just yours, but you actually share some degree of ownership of it with the manufacturer.
Do people still buy HP inkjets? They've been doing this kind of thing for a decade, I'd have thought they should have seen their customerbase wither away by now.
I think Hacker News has enough tech-savvy people who are asked for advice by friends and family to make a dent. Let's make companies regret decisions like this.
Could someone get the EU to mandate a standard interchangeable ink cartridge format to make this nonsense go away?<p>It would be fascinating to watch how HP responds.
"Using a non AT&T phone is not allowed in order to maintain the integrity of our phone system and to protect our intellectual property."<p>I was looking at printers a year or two ago and noticed that HP's were cheaper, but it was clear from the packaging they were selling "internet" connected printers & ink subscriptions. Those were immediate red flags to me.
Seems like there’s one reason to disable HP from one’s life - you never really own what hardware you buy from them.<p>If inkjet printer “technology” hasn’t evolved in 25 years enough to not have to worry as much about third party ink, they probably aren’t competent at printers.<p>Or perhaps the corollary that inkjet ink is among the, if not most expensive retail substance per ml/oz.
Happens with their toner cartridges on laser printers too. I bought an HP laser, used some toner carts off Amazon, then got a software update and it wouldn’t recognize the toner carts. Had to replace them with HP cartridges from Staples at much higher cost to get back up and running, which I guess was their goal. Wouldn’t buy another one.
This is one of the reasons I’ve been meaning to switch to a Brother printer for a while - just waiting for my current HP all-in-one to die (I need a scanner, and until a few years ago also needed a fax).<p>Fortunately we don’t print that much stuff anymore, even with kids’ assignments.
Can't you just return it? It worked until the upgrade, then it didn't, the update took away a functionality you bought it for, so you can either request a downgrade to a working firmware or a refund?<p>It would be an interesting case for courts indeed and solve a lot of future problems for consumers.
If people stop buying these printers, then you're voting with your wallet. But people won't. They continue to buy these printers and HP will continue to do this as their sales are telling them it's good.<p>I accept there is more to this than that, but it's the first step.
Kyocera seems to make decent laser jets. I bought a kyocera P2235dw a while back, and it was easy to get CUPS on linux and MacOS to recognize it and use it. Kyocera makes a PPD file for linux available. My P2235dw is a bit noisier than some, but it's not bad.
> <i>the company also blocks the use of rival cartridges in order to “maintain the integrity of our printing systems, and protect our intellectual property”.</i><p>One might have thought that the basic IP on ink expired somewhen in the 12th century.
Doesn't this classify as spyware/malware? Who would think a company would go that far to lock-in customers in such a miserable way? I'm being naive but let's hope others do not get creative and follow these outrageous practices.
You could just not buy an HP printer.<p>I use older Brother laserjet printers that I bought secondhand. A pack of 2 off-brand toner cartridges are about $20 on ebay.<p>Enough people are dumb enough to overpay for ink that HP stays in business. Jailing a CEO won't cure stupidity.
I stopped buying HP anything. And startups and others I work with I encourage to purchase Brother laser printers. HP is dead to me. Not only this crap, but Brother makes more reliable and better priced/cost of ownership printers.
Do you actually own a printer? Since 10+ years I print stuff either at work or in hotel. If it's pictures, I print them in some printing company with some nice ICC profile I got from them.<p>Owning a printer in XXI century is waste of time.
Serious question, would re-filling an original HP cartridge do the trick? I am considering buying a printer myself and the two most popular ones seem to be Brother and HP. I have however read Brother is doing similar tactics.
My suggestion is to announce a hackathon with sweat amount and brainstorm ideas on how to make money with the current state. Disabling printers is not a smart move, this will force people to look for workarounds.
Why is there CODE running inside of an ink cartridge in the first place?!?! Let alone code that's sophisticated enough that "cheaper rivals" can't just copy it. What is going on in this world?
I believe this is explicitly illegal in France under the country’s environment and e-waste law. Apple got in trouble because batterygate was interpreted as planned obsolescence, which is forbidden.
If you're going to use corporate fines, they'll need to be per instance and massive or large corporations like HP will just pay the fine and keep doing it.
I know this has been asked a million times but when are we going to get a great printer company? Right now we have to settle for the least bad manufacturer.
I thought all brands used this eco system now with little tanks you can just pour ink in? That's all I see in the shops now.<p>But I just have an old b/w laser