this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
419 points (94.9% liked)

Technology

58135 readers
4435 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 143 points 8 months ago

Weirdly enough, everyone else thinks HP equipment is a bad investment.

[–] yuki2501@lemmy.world 59 points 8 months ago (2 children)

An HP Printer is a bad investment.

[–] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

I wouldn't even use the word investment

[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

My HP 1300n is a beautiful beast of a printer, but I also got it for free and have never put name brand toner in it.

An HP cart is over $200! Meanwhile TrueImage offers theirs for $15/pc.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 41 points 8 months ago

The first thing they teach you in CEO school is to churn out terrible products with DRM subscription refills where the DRM doesn’t survive more than an hour. That’s why we CEOs all have Juiceros, HP printers, and children who respect us.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 37 points 8 months ago

Exhibit B on CEOs not being worth the obscene money they make. This dude made $20 million in 2022.

[–] CodeName@infosec.pub 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

And consumers not being able to choose which ink they purchase makes HP printers a bad investment. It goes both ways. It was nice of them to admit what lengths they'll go to to force us to use their proprietary ink cartridges though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] restingboredface@sh.itjust.works 25 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I don't get why HP continues selling in the consumer market if they are struggling so much to make a profit.It seems like they are trying to force a business model on the wider market that doesn't work.

The subscription model makes more sense in the B2B world where companies just want fixed costs without doing too much shopping around (for things like printer cartridges anyway).

[–] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Maybe they think there's a large untapped market for home businesses, but I don't think there are a lot that need to print frequently

[–] GhostMatter@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Because this is the HP that's focused on consumers, that's their business. The enterprise segment was spun off in to Hewlett Packard Enterprise. They do have commercial printers, but it's not that much larger of a business for them than home printer, from what I can gather.

[–] ulterno@lemmy.kde.social 22 points 8 months ago

if the customer does not print enough

Meaning all home users are a bad investment for HP.

That explains the ink cartridges malfunctioning before giving enough prints. That's been engineered into them.

[–] mindlight@lemm.ee 22 points 8 months ago (1 children)

TIL Customers aren't customers. Customers are investments.

[–] abhibeckert@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

You say that like it's a bad thing?

When I buy a jar of peanut butter, if I have a good experience eating it I'm going to buy that brand again. "Investing" in your customers is business speak for making sure your customers have a good experience.

The disconnect here is HP doesn't seem themselves as being in the "printer" business. They see themselves as being in the ink/paper/repairs business... and they advertise their printers as costing 8.6 cents per page. If you're happy to pay that much, then I'd argue HP probably is a good choice.

Personally I use a basic Brother laser printer, with cheap paper and cheap toner it comes in at around 1 cent per page. When I need higher quality, I get it printed by a professional printer - those cost quite a bit more than HP's pricing but I don't do it often and it's much higher quality than any (affordable) HP printer.

[–] mindlight@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

Investing in customers is not necessarily the same as customers being investments.

I would argue that HP made bad investments in their customers and their customers not being bad investments.

[–] perviouslyiner@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

What investment are they making in customers? Are they selling something at a loss? Should the FTC BoC ask what exactly they mean here?

[–] prayer@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Yes, they sell the printer for a loss and the ink for a crazy markup.

[–] AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world 21 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Maybe take it as a sign that your product sucks?

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 8 months ago

Too much subsidized by accessories and usables*

[–] Pohl@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Investments? Do customers cost you money? That’s now how any of this is supposed to work. I’m not sure the CEO of HP knows anything about business. Dude, the customers are supposed to give YOU the money.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Yes. They are investments. It's a very common business model across several industries. To sell the initial machine for net cost or even at a loss, if it means customers will have to come back to you for additional supplies. Because that's where the money is.

I'm extremely confident that the CEO of the very profitable company HP. Knows more about business than you do.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 22 points 7 months ago (15 children)

Oh, okay.

So HPs shitty business practices are at fault here. Glad it isn't ignorance from the CEO. Phew.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Pohl@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

Nah I get it. Calling your customer an investment was just a little too naked for me, so I made a joke.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

Hp just trying to save the environment by making home printing as painful as possible. It really is a 4d chess move

[–] ohlaph@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

He's not wrong. They are bad for their product as a subscription model.

Just like anyone who still buys HP. If you buy HP, you deserve their absolute garbage products.

[–] st3ph3n@midwest.social 16 points 8 months ago

Boo fucking hoo, HP.

[–] sudo_tee@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

I have an HP BW laser printer with an offbrand cartridge that I paid a fraction of the price. The printer screams at me about critically low ink since about a year but prints are totally fine and as good as the first day.

I'm sorry for your loss HP.... You can suck it

[–] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

What do you do when you have the monopoly?

Turn the consumer into the commodity!

[–] tonyn@lemmy.ml 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I have a Canon Color LaserJet scanner/copier/printer for documents, and a large format Canon inkjet photo printer. Aftermarket toner, aftermarket ink, and they work flawlessly. I did a ton of research for both. I would never buy an HP printer.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Aftermarket toner, aftermarket ink, and they work flawlessly. I did a ton of research for both. I would never buy an HP printer.

I did the same when I purchased my Samsung color laser. I specifically excluded HP....then Samsung went and sold their entire damn printer division to HP. I refuse to use the Samsung drivers now because I suspect HP would push firmware into the unit blocked non-HP owned toner.

[–] bus_factor@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No regrets on my Brother laser printer! Didn't even consider HP, they've been trash for ages.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The "P" in HP stands for poop.

[–] RandomVideos@programming.dev 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

HP actually stands for (extremly)high profits. It refers to the how much money they make from ink

[–] Kushia@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Heap of Poop, because we can't say the S word to investors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 8 months ago

Executives lately are going full James Bond villain. They should evil laugh more.

[–] sfxrlz@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

Fucking Clowns. Being a shareholder means you aren’t buying their shitty printers or what ^^?

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

Kind of like their stock bud dum tssss

[–] white_shotgun@aussie.zone 9 points 8 months ago

Typical overreaching corporate dogs

[–] RedEyeFlightControl@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I was fortunate enough to get an older HP color laser MFD that can use 3rd party toner carts. I've never bought a first line HP cartridge for it and I never will. My next printer will be some other brand that plays nice with customers.

The only reason I even have this printer now is because I got it crazy cheap off of craigslist about 10 years ago, with extra supplies. When it dies, I'll get a brother or something better. I've bought 3 sets of toner carts for it in 10 years or so for a grand total of maybe 150$, and I use it a lot.

[–] Kushia@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago

I don't want you to invest in me HP.

[–] MySwellMojo@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I mean, doesn't this make sense? Why market and make products for people you don't know will buy, especially if you already have a market

[–] thejml@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

He said the quiet part out loud.

[–] Bearlydave@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

HP: why can't we be together? Me: It's not you, it's me.

load more comments
view more: next ›