Enough choice in the market to not give a crap.

They are only biting their own tongue.

Lol! I said it the last time and I will say it again. I work in the printing industry and I can honestly tell you that buying a HP printer is by a mile the worst mistake that you can make from a value for money perspective and just to make it clear even out of a print quality perspective. If you want good value and good quality, go EPSON. HP can learn a whole lot from those chaps.

I will forward that information to friends and family.

RooiKreef:

Lol! I said it the last time and I will say it again. I work in the printing industry and I can honestly tell you that buying a HP printer is by a mile the worst mistake that you can make from a value for money perspective and just to make it clear even out of a print quality perspective. If you want good value and good quality, go EPSON. HP can learn a whole lot from those chaps.

My second inkjet a long time ago was some HP model. It had huge (relatively speaking) ink cartridges that seemed to last forever yet didn't cost that much more than the tiny ones that most printers had especially some years later. Because of the reasonable cost efficiency, I bought genuine cartridges. The printer lasted for a long time. I replaced it with my current Canon, which is basically a scam. This Canon has separate cartridges for different colours and it wasn't the cheapest model, so I thought it would be decent. However, for some reason only a madman or Canon execs would understand, every time I turn on the printer, some ~15% of the ink in the cartridges disappears into thin air. This basically means that if I printed only a single page each time, I could only print less than ten pages before the printer is asking for new cartridges. And I'm not talking about pages full of colour, just normal office stuff. Needless to say, I quickly switched to 3rd party ink cartridges as the genuine ones were an insufferable expense. I'm actually disappointed the 3rd party ink didn't break this printer as that would have given me an excuse to throw this shameless deception away and buy an Epson. I can't see myself buying a Canon printer again after this criminal thing.

I have an Epson printer laying around. I didn't print too much and even the 3rd party ink was too much for me. I bough a Brother Laser printer: never had an issue again, I can't remember when it was the last time I needed to refill the toner (I did it once).

something odd happened this week, i threw out a canon MFC. (MP 270). It would not let me scan cos the cartridge was empty. Well, i literally kicked it, threw it in the trash, and got an old hp MFC that lets me scan without print cartridges.

HP = High Price

Got the dreaded u052 error on my canon 885 printer, so now it's useless.. http://wirthconsulting.org/2015/06/25/canon-settles-pixma-print-head-class-action-lawsuit-customers-eligible-for-extended-warranty/ Glad I don't have a HP printer now I must say. Always buy 3rd party ink.. So now I bought an Epson 🙂

My next printer will be an EPSON with the ink tank. So much more economical.

Stopped using HP when they didnt want to replace cartridges that started to have printing problems after about 20% used (5 in row) and that was $700 printer and $120 cartridges. Now using Colour Laser Brother MFC and never going back to Ink and especially HP.

The only exposure I ever had to HP printers was in the workplace as a network administrator. These were big horkin' machines that had enormous printer cartridges paid for by the company. At home I've been thru Canon. Epson, Dell and now Brother. Of all of those Dell was the worst for ink cost. Actually Dell was more like a scam. Only place you could get cartridges for Dell printers was Dell and it didn't last very long either. I did a moderate amount of printing and I swear I spent over $300 per year in ink. My current Brother MFC-J870DW is a fine machine with separate cartridges for each primary colour and they last a long time. I probably use less than $100 of ink per year. I would recommend Brother to any one.

HP barley makes anything off the sale of a printer so they expect to make revenue off the sale of the cartridge. So they are only protecting themselves here and I see no issue with it. This is no different than Microsoft or Sony not allowing 3rd Party Bootleg disks from working in their systems

Epson isn't the same at all, got a 24pack of cartridges for my BX525WD for £11 off amazon and they have been working great. Know a lot of Epson's that work fine with compatible cartridges. I swear by my Epson for inkjet, Ricoh for laser rule.

Guys I'm about to head out to work but I'm employed by a major printer player. I wont say who but I know a bunch about printers. Mostly laser but some Ink Jet. Let me know what questions you have and I'll do my best to answer at some point. PS: HP printers are just re-branded Canons with custom firmware and design tweaks.

Unless you print photos often, I just don't understand why anyone buys ink printers. Black-only laser printers are modestly cheap and accurate nowadays, especially when you consider how much more you get out of them. Lasers are getting smaller, faster, and quieter, and depending on the model, you can do toner refills for very cheap. There's also the obvious benefit of never needing to worry about ink drying up due to infrequent use. The only things lasers are bad at is energy efficiency and shaded color images, at least if you want one that won't cost $500+.

Silva:

I have an Epson printer laying around. I didn't print too much and even the 3rd party ink was too much for me. I bough a Brother Laser printer: never had an issue again, I can't remember when it was the last time I needed to refill the toner (I did it once).

^ this. Recently switched an HP inkjet out for a brother laser printer, idk why I didn't do that years ago. No more minute long pre-print process. The toner is way way way less expensive. I'd never buy another HP product, especially if they're gonna lock you into their ink.

just stupid, this why when did have peronsal pinter and the ink ran out i just buy new printer that general cost less, better question is why do people updating there firmware?, disable the function, dont connect it to the interent just give access to local network only and no issues and it will work till the die it dies, contrary to what alot people think and what manfuactures want you to think, not everything need to be connected to the internet or should be

tsunami231:

just stupid, this why when did have peronsal pinter and the ink ran out i just buy new printer that general cost less, better question is why do people updating there firmware?, disable the function, dont connect it to the interent just give access to local network only and no issues and it will work till the die it dies, contrary to what alot people think and what manfuactures want you to think, not everything need to be connected to the internet or should be

Investors and stockholders are kept happy when they see printer sales are steady (or increase). When a new printer costs as much as the ink, people are more likely to "upgrade", thereby maintaining sales numbers. I also think you are greatly over-estimating the quality of the average corporate developer. So many products are released very incomplete. Companies can get products out the door much quicker if they just make it merely "functional" rather than actually good. Then, by having what basically becomes a mandatory update system, they can use that as an excuse to cripple the firmware. Most people just install whatever their printers come with and don't pay attention to all the unnecessary bloat involved.

99% of HP products are just rebranded products.