HP wants you to print things through its cloud service, wherein you pay a subscription fee for ink and your usage is routed through its servers. To encourage you to do this, it covers the USB port …

HP wants you to print things through its cloud service, wherein you pay a subscription fee for ink and your usage is routed through its servers. To encourage you to do this, it covers the USB port …

  • crashoverride@lemmy.worldEnglish
    11·
    1 年前

    Yes, but they usually last a few years before they completely dry out to where you can’t use them. I’ve been using the same ink cartridges in my printer for going on 3 years now and it still works

    • Dark Arc@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 年前

      True, but they require a lot of test prints until you get back to an acceptable print quality in my experience

      • veng@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 年前

        Think I’ve bought 4 cartridges since getting mine six years ago, so about £120. £20 a year isn’t bad… We don’t print much, but getting a laser mono is 5x the cost of our printer for the cheapest brother…

        • Dark Arc@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 年前

          The cheapest brother is $120 (USD) https://www.brother-usa.com/products/HLL2300D

          If you want color, sure that’s more ($250). Still not a long shot from what you paid for your HP, plus that ink (and I’d wager you’d still be going without a single follow up purchase of toner).

          For context (per their own product claims):

          • Brother Genuine TN227 High-yield replacement toner delivers rich, vivid professional laser print quality you can rely on for up to 3,000 pages (black) and up to 2,300 pages (color) (2)
          • Additional replacement toner option available for this model: TN223 Standard-yield (1,400 pages black/1,300 pages color) (2)
          • veng@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            1 年前

            That’s in the US, but to be fair I’m comparing the cheapest 3-in-1 mono brother to my 3-in-1 HP printer. So £178 vs £50, 3x more. That’s forgetting the fact that I’d no longer be able to print in colour. I do understand that if I printed more often a laser would absolutely be cheaper.