Posts by Frank Barnes

loneotter29 said:getting this specific ink for an HP Deskjet Ink Advantage 1515. is actually a smart move. but how do you even explain to someone who’s never owned a printer that those older models were built better? nowadays, you buy one, use it for a year, and then just toss it in the trash because it's broken.
if I were picking something out for myself, I'd go with something exactly like this.
thanks.

If you're looking for a way to save some cash, here's your chance.

The people who don't want to listen? They just wander around hitting their heads against walls, knocking on doors, and sending messages like this:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To whom it may concern,

do you happen to carry compatible toner cartridges?
1. HP CH562EE tri-colour 1 unit

2. HP CH561EE black ink 1 unit

for the HP Deskjet Ink Advantage 1515.

Please send over a quote.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><
Reply
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sorry 0 Points

We aren't aware of any third-party replacements that work with this device.

Best regards,

Atlantic

loneotter29 said:Which model are we even talking about? And why on earth would you say I shouldn't use black? How does it interfere with anything else?

Is there maybe a specific printer listed on this site that you guys would recommend?
https://www.bestbuy.com/printers/...t=0&pg=1&pn=1z

Or maybe something else entirely?

Usage-wise, I’m looking at maybe one or two pages a day, occasionally. Just something to have on hand if the need arises. But it absolutely has to have a scanner—nothing without a scanner.

There are enough options on page 8 to fill a stadium.
http://www.hp.com/sbso/special/hp-su...ity-matrix.pdf

Basically, you could grab any functional printer like that for $17 and for $67 you can pick up an Adriatix + HP 28 bundle that comes with three 50ml ink refills and just go for it. When a cartridge runs dry, you just buy another compatible one and suddenly you've got a "new" printer again.

If you can't track one down somewhere, just check back here. We'll definitely find a package that fits what you're looking for.

As for the black ink, it works perfectly fine using the color cartridges. Plus, if you went with a compatible black cartridge in this scenario, the price would jump way past what you're aiming for.

Here are a couple of examples of how that looks in practice:

Google > Adriatix + HP 28
or
http://adriatix.com/A_HOT/PICT_2/HP-28-_1_LL.jpg

loneotter29 said:Hey, quick question—I’m looking to pick up a printer, but I need to keep it under $300. Any recommendations?$133I’ll definitely need a scanner included in the mix. Honestly, the most important thing for me is that replacement ink doesn't break the bank. As long as the print speed and all those other minor specs aren't a dealbreaker, I should be good to go.
What’s everyone’s take on this? I’m trying to figure out the best way to handle payment here. Should I stick with cash, go the credit card route, or just use PayPal? Any recommendations?

You’d basically have to find an HP model that actually takes those color replacements—you know, the HP 22 or the 28. Since you aren't even using black, what's the point? And honestly, by the time you shell out for a brand new set of compatibles, you're looking at a $70 hit. Is it even worth it? $33You could also grab one of those micro refill kits for... $6.75 Give it two or three charges and you’re right back within the specs. It fits the criteria perfectly, doesn't it?

It seems like none of the current models actually live up to your standards, does it?

Jack Sullivan56 said:So, whenever I try to print something in color, everything ends up looking way too red. But if I just run the exact same image through the copier, the colors look perfectly fine.
I tried reinstalling the drivers and now I have three different printer languages showing up in my properties—PostScript, PCL, and some other one. If I select PostScript, the redness isn't quite as bad, but the colors still aren't right.
I’m guessing this is a computer issue, because if it were the hardware, the colors would be messed up during copying, too.
Should I take it to a repair shop or what?

Just search Google >> Bloomberg test

Print out a test page, scan it back in, and then we can all see something standardized.

Look, regardless of how you feel about the whole situation, if you haven't completely lost your mind, there’s one thing you need to grasp. If someone is trying to talk you into buying a new MFP, demand they give you a breakdown of what 10 ml of ink actually costs you
. Whether you’re using genuine cartridges or cheap third-party refills, it doesn't matter.

Treat that 10 ml as your baseline for comparison. It keeps things simple so you aren't comparing apples to oranges, and more importantly, it stops people from sweet-talking you out of making a smart financial decision.

So, if someone tells you that for $233 a certain price plus tax, you can get a refurbished MFP with a CISS system featuring four 70 ml tanks,
you should be able to spot the catch immediately. Use that 280 ml total and run it against the math from the example provided.
And of course, some people are going to hate being told to do the math.

Just a heads up: we aren't pushing any specific vendors here. We’re just giving you the logic to figure out what’s actually optimal for your own wallet.

That’s all there is to it.

Some psychoanalyst might look at this thread and conclude there’s some deep-seated resentment bubbling under the surface here. She’s probably just fixated on those sponsored Revu posts.

Everyone has those subconscious triggers, don't they? You nudge the topic just a little bit, and suddenly, those repressed reactions come flying out without a second thought.

That Mochan guy... he really was a genius, much like Freud.

graniteeagle25 said:Let's go.

See, that’s exactly what we told him from the jump. Not to mention he could just refill all those toner cartridges for about $17 plus tax. He wouldn't touch that with a ten-foot pole. Why would he? It’s much easier for him to just grab some third-party replacement toner for roughly $50 and let at least 50% of that money fly straight overseas, contributing to the trade deficit.

It's never a good thing when someone actually takes a moment to analyze the market and present a logical option. Why? Because most people are just interested in complaining about how broken the system is, while simultaneously doing their part to make sure the dysfunction stays exactly this big.

Anything that challenges that status quo is immediately labeled as a "bad deal" or an undesirable offer. You see the exact same pattern with refurbished printers.

Taylor Campbell4 said:Are you actually being this malicious?

That’s just how life works, isn't it?

You go to a doctor to get advice based on years of experience. Then you head over to the pharmacist just to hand them your cash.

So, what's the catch?

A doctor can't possibly know everything sitting on a pharmacist's shelves. Why? Because quite simply, a human lifespan is too short to gain hands-on experience with every single product available for any given ailment. All they can really do is read through various reviews on medical forums or browse the web. And let's be honest—most of those are just paid advertisements from Big Pharma. So, they end up focusing on the one thing their practice has shown to be most effective, or what seems like the "optimal" solution for the patient.

And naturally, a person wouldn't even be considered a "patient" if they didn't buy the product—assuming they don't need a prescription, which the pharmacist will conveniently push on them to protect their margins. You know, the "highly effective" alternative.

As you can see from the text above and the reaction to it, there isn't much of a difference here.

You shouldn't confuse an answer given from a position of experience with an answer given from a position of marketing. But that’s exactly what you’re doing. You're looking for marketing advice for a product that hasn't actually been field-tested. Of course you're frustrated; the answer doesn't fit the narrative you've built in your head. You want something new, something proven by practice. But that doesn't exist anymore because "Big Pharma" primarily looks out for its own interests and profits, constantly launching new, "better," and more lucrative products.

And now, you've decided to vent all that frustration at the wrong person.

Taylor Campbell4 said:That was me.

I’m talking about big-box retailers and shopping malls—they operate on the thinnest margins, which is exactly what you're looking for. Most people who claim to be experts on everything? They just parrot something they read online. And in 99% of cases, it's just paid advertising disguised as an opinion.

Taylor Campbell4 said:But here’s the thing...

It would be easy enough to just use the copy function. You could take everything you wrote above, copy it, paste it, and blast it out to five different electronics stores in five different major US cities.

Then you wait for the invoices to roll in. Pick the cheapest one. Pay up. Drive over to grab the gear.
Problem solved, right?

copperranger6 said:my HP OfficeJet Pro won't recognize third-party ink
Hey everyone...
Last year I picked up an HP OfficeJet Pro. I started out using official cartridges, followed the manual to a T, and everything was great—scans look sharp, prints look sharp.
When I bought it, the guy at the store gave me the whole pitch about how much better and cheaper the generic inks are. Being naive, I figured why not? I grabbed three black ones and a full color set just to have them on hand.
Everything worked fine until I ran out of black. I thought I was being smart by having a spare generic cartridge ready to go, but no luck. The printer refuses to accept it and keeps telling me I need to replace the entire set of colors. So, I call the manufacturer of the refill kit, and he tells me, "Look, buddy, I've sold hundreds of these; you just have to swap out all the generics." So I did. Still nothing.
Has anyone else run into this? Is there any way to actually get these third-party inks to work? I've called a few local shops and they all claim with 90% certainty that it can be done
but that remaining 10%... well, they aren't so sure.
It looks like I'm stuck in that unlucky 10%.
If anyone has some advice or a suggestion, I'm all ears.
My own advice? If you don't know exactly what you're buying, ask the guys on the forum first.
Best regards,
lampaš

Where were you when you still had the cash in your wallet? It's a bit late to be complaining now. You should probably track down whoever tried to give you advice back then and demand they pay the bill. Because right now, your money is sitting in their pocket.

Sorry, but that's just how the system works in a free-market capitalist society.

Melissa Rivera62 said:Does anyone have a recommendation on which specific toner I should grab? I noticed the issue with the magenta, but there isn't one listed for orange, for example. Is there any way I can just clean it out myself?

Magenta toner

When you're dealing with a low toner situation, you might as well just take a picture of the error message and call it a day. That’s just how it goes when you're using those cheap third-party replacements.

Melissa Rivera62 said:I’m having an issue with my printer. It started printing this line right through the middle of the page, but only in certain spots. I tried running the Cleaning mode, but it didn't change anything. Does anyone have any advice on how to fix this? I’m not sure if it’s just the toner or if the printer itself is dying.
Attachment 14701
The photo is a bit blurry, but you can see the line cutting through the pink section—it just skips over the beak part.
Sorry about the quality of the shot; I haven't quite figured out how to upload a better one yet.

Honestly, 90% of the time, this is what happens when you use a cheap third-party toner. The waste bin gets backed up, and now the toner is slowly leaking out of that compartment.

It usually comes down to a bad toner formula that doesn't play nice with the electrostatic charge. Instead of landing on the paper where it belongs, it all ends up clogging the waste tank.

Just swap out the toner.

coppertiger7 said:Hey there, Reddit!
I’m not trying to sound like I’m lecturing anyone here. This isn't some theoretical debate; I’m speaking from my own experience and from what I've gathered through conversations with an authorized Brother service center. Honestly, there was never any rule against using third-party ink in these machines—not even when the distributors themselves were selling those exact replacements. Since you get that standard two-year warranty plus an extra year just by registering the device, there really isn't much to worry about regarding service coverage. Of course, that assumes you actually take it to an authorized Brother service center.
Now I’m turning the question back on you: Are you actually an authorized service center for Brother? It makes you wonder, doesn't it?

We can go back and forth on this all day if we really want to, but honestly? Let's just take this offline.
The guy asked a genuine question and was looking for advice, so I figured I had every right to weigh in with my own experience and take a stand—all without feeling the need to go on the attack against anyone else hanging out in this thread.
It’s been you and me against the world, I guess. But hey, I’m still willing to lend a hand to others whenever I can. Goodbye, ADRIATIX.

If anyone’s actually interested in this specific headache, we could easily pull five Brother printers off the shelf right now, and I bet you only one would have working channels while the rest are completely clogged. That particular unit has been sitting on a storage rack for over a year. Honestly, I don't even know what kind of state it's in today. What’s funny is that on that exact same rack, we have dozens of Epson printers—all serviced and filled with Colibri ink. Every single one of them fires up perfectly, regardless of how long they've been gathering dust. We even keep the dates marked on them to track how long they've been sitting there. We keep them around because, frankly, they turned out to be the perfect solution for sublimation and other niche specialty jobs. To make sure, we’ve tested those same specialty uses on old, decommissioned Brother units that still have functional channels. The bottom line? If a channel is working, it'll stay working for a little while. But once the problems start? There's nothing left to do but cry and maybe leave some flowers at the funeral.

I think that’s plenty of food for thought for anyone actually planning on keeping a printer around longer than its warranty period.

Here’s the kicker: Brother actually uses Epson's inkjet heads for their high-end models. But of course, you'll always have some salesperson—whether they're doing it on purpose or just don't know any better—trying to muddy the waters and lump everything together with these sweeping generalizations.

People would be throwing ash in each other's faces if someone actually tried to contribute to this thread just by pointing out that they’ve dropped over 100 posts on this forum in the last year. Imagine the drama.

So, I’ve got this Brother printer, and honestly, I’ve been running nothing but third-party ink in it. When the inkjet head started acting up while I was still under warranty, they actually stepped up. They didn't swap out the whole machine or anything—just replaced the inkjet head itself, free of charge. It was a pretty smooth fix.

Is there actually anyone left out there who isn't crooked?

Naima, seriously, just take a second and read two steps ahead in that attachment. If that exact thing isn't being suggested right there in the text, then I’m a complete idiot. Or maybe everyone else who's missing it is an idiot too?

So, what's actually causing this?

The core of the issue is that all Brother printers come with a factory-integrated CISS. Unlike what you see with Epson, these Brother models have built-in dampers within that system to regulate pressure and include pre-filters for the ink. Now, here’s where it gets messy: if you decide to load up that system with pigment ink or anything with a higher concentration of particulates, those filters are going to clog. And since the dampers are an integral part of the entire setup, you don't really stand a chance at cleaning out those blocked filters. Every time you try to run a cleaning cycle on the CISS, the dampers just work to compensate, essentially fighting your efforts. At that point, your only real move is to swap out the problematic printhead for a brand-new one. But let’s be realistic—since these Brother machines are assembled by robots, once you factor in the labor time plus the cost of a new head, you’re looking at a bill that's nearly as high as just buying a whole new printer. Unless, of course, you're dealing with a basic home setup that's still covered under warranty.

With an Epson, the damper is actually built right into the cartridge along with the pre-filter. Since you're tossing those cartridges anyway, you can get away with using lower-quality ink without really noticing any difference in performance. But here’s the catch: if someone decides to go the cheap route with non-genuine ink, those Brother printers are going to end up in a landfill pretty fast. Why? Because that off-brand ink ends up flushing out the original pigment ink, creating this massive snowball effect that eventually clogs and seals off the pre-filter on the printhead.

Honestly, the only move that actually makes sense here is to just grab a brand-new Brother. You’d be better off ditching those original cartridges immediately so they don't contaminate the HP Ink Tank system or the pre-filters. Instead, just go straight for those refillable cartridges that come pre-loaded with ink specifically tested for Brother printers and HP Ink Tank setups.

Does anyone happen to know someone who could handle that kind of maintenance for you?

coppertiger7 said:Check out the Brother models over at Best Buy; they offer a two-year warranty plus an extra year if you register online. They’ve got third-party inks that are supposedly reliable—apparently, they don't cause any issues even when things go wrong with the printer, and the repair shops don't complain because the distributors themselves push those third-party inks in stores 🙂.

Who actually tested those inks? Maybe the manufacturer? Because we just had three of those Brother units come into our service center with >>original
Zero chance of fixing them. A total 100% disaster. Interestingly enough, we managed to clear the Cyan Yellow and Magenta channels on all three machines.

So, either the original black ink is junk, or the design of the black channel isn't built to handle the quality of ink being supplied in the US market. If you're skeptical, feel free to take one of those three Brother printers off my hands for free. It would be a shame to toss them since the scanners still work perfectly fine—since you mentioned they aren't chipped

Let me restate the question: What exactly are you basing this claim on? That the inks are "proven"? Is it just hearsay?

Drew Castillo5 said:You keep bringing up the price including sales tax. Is there actually a way to get these without the tax added? Maybe from your guy?

All I know is where you can pick up those reliable, field-tested Epson models equipped with continuous ink systems. And, of course, using ink that’s actually been vetted for quality.

I'm sure there's a way to find the same setup without the sales tax somewhere out there. It's just not on my radar. Why don't you try reaching out to Linić? He might be able to point you in the right direction.

Linda Ward312 said:Can anyone recommend a decent printer-scanner-copier combo? Mostly just for text.

I’m currently struggling with an HP OfficeJet 6310... honestly, I can't quite make sense of it. Is it actually normal for the ink to dry up this quickly? And now it won't even accept third-party cartridges—just keeps throwing error messages at me. On top of that, the little access door where you swap out the ink has basically snapped off. I'm not even sure if it's worth trying to fix it at this point.

The smartest move is probably grabbing a multi-function Epson with those continuous ink tank systems. It's a proven setup. They don't break down easily. Usually, the older models were built much more solidly; I mean, if they weren't reliable, they wouldn't still be working perfectly today. But you won't find those hand-picked, high-quality older models for less than $167 plus tax.

Everything else hitting the shelves right now for the same price is essentially designed to fall apart and fail as soon as you try using anything other than the most expensive original inks. At the end of the day, you'll feel it in your wallet. You'll know exactly how much money you just threw straight into the trash.

Peter Young5 said:So, basically, you're telling me I shouldn't even bother trying to refill my current cartridges with random inks, and that this printer strictly demands original toner if I want anything to work?

Is there really no way to cut costs without sacrificing quality on a machine like this?

I already mentioned that once you empty a cartridge, you can swap it for an empty one that isn't locked out $3.25. Once we collect four of those, we could potentially experiment with an inkjet ink other than the KMP HP Premium Black. That kind of ink might be noticeably cheaper than what we just tested. But you have to consider the math. If someone has to go out and buy a brand-new, latest-model inkjet printer and then sink at least five hours of labor just into testing, that price gap between the verified KMP HP Premium Black we used on your printer and some unverified alternative disappears pretty fast. It’s simple logic: someone has to cover the cost of the printer, plus the hourly rate for the labor, plus the cost of ruined printheads if the untested ink turns out to be incompatible with the device for whatever reason.

Honestly, everything is expensive these days. And if anyone claims their ink is a perfect match for your specific printer, just politely ask them to send you a sample printout made on your actual machine.

How do you pull that off and make sure you aren't getting ripped off?

Print your template to a file. And that file can only be printed accurately on an identical printer.

So, if that makes sense to you, then you understand why we're looking for those empty cartridges. We're just reiterating that it's better to stick with original full cartridges rather than wasting them just to experiment with some unknown, unverified ink.

In other words, it's much smarter to grab a refurbished, proven unit instead of chasing the newest, most expensive models.

Peter Young5 said:I really hope you're joking here... 😁

?

We’ve actually run tests on this printer using KMP HP Premium Black ink. Yeah, it’s pricey, but we know it works.
We had one customer who thought he was being clever by opting for some budget black ink—since that’s what runs out most often, he figured the premium stuff was overkill. Big mistake. A month later, he was looking at $50 + tax just for a printhead cleaning service. Then came the part where he had to toss his contaminated original cartridges. Then buy new originals. And then, finally, go back and buy a fresh pack of KMP HP Premium Black.

The thing is, this printer has an integrated printhead. When you mess up like that, you have to replace the entire head even if it's just a single color that's acting up. It's different from those older HP models in the same class where you could just swap out one of the two or four individual heads.

So, I’m curious—anyone else want to weigh in on why the old, reliable inkjets aren't actually a smarter choice than these latest models?

It’s for that exact reason that we need these empty Original cartridges; we use them to verify other, cheaper inks. You honestly think we’d waste brand-new ones? Use up all the original ink just to contaminate the cartridges with some unverified substitute and then throw them away? No chance.

If you follow my logic, it should be pretty obvious why a verified ink for your specific printer costs significantly more than those "universal" options being peddled for pennies on various online shops.

Joshua Cook62 said:Math.

Look, you’ve got the order a bit mixed up here: it's the classic chicken or the egg dilemma.
Why?

Because everything operates on cause and effect. When you act in a way that ensures the most favorable outcome for the end user, someone who hasn't looked at the underlying logic won't see the expert analysis behind it. They won't see how management selected one specific path while discarding others that would have been even worse for the customer.

Now, for a move like that to actually work, both sides involved need to come out ahead. But usually, when an option like this is chosen, there's a third party losing out—and that's exactly why things play out the way they do.

So, always ask yourself "why" when someone suggests an "optimal" choice. Why isn't that third party arguing their own interests or explaining their own logic?

The user should be able to weigh the arguments provided and decide what's truly in their best interest. We're looking for a reasoned discussion here, not just sweeping generalizations.

Of course, a real discussion rarely happens because that third party either lacks the expertise or simply doesn't have the arguments to back themselves up.

Let me reiterate: if Adriatix decided to add refurbished printers to their lineup, it’s because those units offer the absolute best value for the money. Not everyone sees it that way, though. Out of sheer ignorance—or perhaps just because it looks a certain way—some people assume it's just a subjective promotion or a way to clear out old stock. They fail to realize these are objectively the smartest solutions for the consumer, born from years of hands-on experience and servicing in this industry.

And let's be honest, this whole analysis ignores that typical impulse-buying reflex. Everyone has to decide for themselves: are they buying for functionality, for cost-effectiveness, or just as a little way to soothe daily frustrations? Sometimes, you just need to treat yourself to something expensive or a little adult toy to get by.