Posts by hollowmarlin27

wiredotter14 said:Am I the only one here who doesn't expect tech gear costing $167 to actually last more than two years? Seriously. Back in the day, printers were basically tanks. I had a Xerox from the late 90s that probably printed enough paper to fuel an entire presidential election cycle, and a Lexmark C510 that I practically refilled by hand using toner powder from a bottle.
But nowadays? That's a rarity. When you're looking at a budget under $100, you really can't expect much—not that anyone ever could.

For a casual user, it makes sense to grab a printer in the $500-$200 range that has cheap ink and just survives for about 24 months. That works out to roughly $8.25/month. If you aren't printing at least 100 pages a month, you shouldn't even bother owning a printer, but if you do get one, it’s the same story... you just use it until it dies. Printers aren't like those old Volkswagens people kept for generations.

Yeah, because proven technology that cost $167 yesterday is being sold for
today.
5 - $10000

A lot of these devices end up using the exact same inkjet cartridges anyway. It's just the ink formula that differs slightly.

http://www.sinletai.com.tw/EN/product-detail.php?p=18

darkowl72 said:👍

Once again, you've proven you're technically savvy when it comes to printers—probably the most competent person on this forum. Based on your horoscope, you’re probably a Virgo, or at least have 😬 rising, because you chase perfection unconditionally and constantly. It’s fine, really, and actually commendable, it's just that not everyone works that way...

My Canon has been serving me great for over two years now. In that time, I’ve burned through roughly 150 ml of color ink and about 250 ml of black, plus some cartridges before I set up the CISS. I’m hoping I don't kill it too early. For an above-average user like me, it’s been perfectly fine; I'm happy with both the printer and the CISS setup. My wife is a teacher, so she prints a fair amount, and my son tends to mess around with color prints every now and then. The CISS is a solid move for me since I can grab cheap ink on eBay without a second thought. I've cycled through a lifetime of printers. My last two were HP models where finding replacement ink was a nightmare, so I ended up dropping a small fortune on originals. Then there was the Epson 205, which swallowed Epson super ink quite happily for a while at $3.25, but eventually, it just choked out on me.

From that perspective, the Canon is decent. I haven't had issues for over two years, and even though I’d love for it to last forever, I know modern tech isn't what it used to be. Everything is made of plastic these days, designed to fail the moment the warranty expires.

While dealing with all those complaints, I also ran a Brother laser printer. That thing was great—ridiculously cheap, picked up at Walmart, and the toner cost almost nothing (refilling $13 is easy, and one cartridge lasts nearly ten refills). And then what happened? As soon as that generous three-year warranty expired, the plastic gears just stripped and started spinning uselessly, and the springs meant to lift the paper weakened so much they couldn't even hold the tray up. It worked perfectly while under warranty, and then that was it. Back in the day, lasers and copiers had metal gears; you could use them for twenty years if you wanted...

So, I get it: there is no perfect solution, and stuff doesn't last. That's just reality. Once my Canon finishes its duty and heads to the scrap heap, I'm not going to waste my time messing around with print heads, nozzles, dampers, or sponges... I'm just not interested. 😬 That said, I respect your expertise, which is why I always try to pull info from your posts, even if you tend to ramble on with technicalities and details that the average user couldn't care less about. Not trying to be rude, but for you, the glass is always half empty because you're chasing perfection, so you always find something wrong with every solution. It ends up confusing people who just came here looking for simple advice like, "Which printer should I buy?"

And regarding the colors, I can confirm that observation—after about ten units, things start getting messy.

Cheer up, it won't be long. You might want to start thinking about a new head and new dampers.

Or, just to be lazy, try this:

Take the black cartridge out of the CISS inside the printer. Disconnect the tube from the CISS for the black ink. This means the air intake is open. Grab a stopwatch and count how many seconds pass before the first drop starts leaking from the old nozzle. Specifically, how many drops leak out within 10 seconds after that.
.

Let me know what you find so we can compare it to similar results.

If nothing drips? It's an INKJET STROKE, except it hasn't happened yet. Change the damper immediately.

If you’re looking at all those shiny new printer models, just ask yourself one thing: Who actually needs to be an absolute moron to go out and buy the latest tech just because it exists? I spend my time testing them to see if they offer any actual value to the user, or if it's just more overpriced junk.

Look, when you ask questions like that, don't be surprised when you get answers that match the quality of the inquiry.

Nothing in this world is free.

When this Canon finally gives up the ghost, don't think for a second that Canon isn't already planning how to squeeze more profit out of you with their next big release instead of actually fixing anything.

Basically, you're stuck in the middle of it.

If you want proof, just take a look at what Epson does with their L series.

They bundle in just enough ink to cover exactly what you've used up to that point. The whole package is designed for single-use. Once you run through that initial supply, you're forced back to Epson to buy a fresh set. It's a way to kill off the competition so they can become the only game in town while everyone else goes bust.

So yeah, based on how things work, your Canon isn't exactly living a long or happy life.

darkowl72 said:I don't know, personally I find CISS way easier than cartridges because I don't even have to pull anything out of the printer—I just top off the tanks when needed. So, what you said about needing a repair shop doesn't really hold up. Not trying to start a fight over specific brands or models here.

But yeah, the part about using different types of ink? That's spot on and totally valid.

Look, here's the deal.
How much ink have you actually burned through on your Canon?

Or better yet, check the service manual for your Canon under Print Head Yields.
You'll see the head is designed for maybe 3,000 to 5,000 full-color prints. On average, that’s about 100 to 200 ml per channel. Once you hit that, you're looking at a new head. But wait—you also have to replace the Dampere because they get clogged. By the time you add up a new head plus new dampers, you've basically spent as much as a whole new printer. And those dampers cost as much as a new CISS setup. Basically, the old Canon goes straight to the trash along with the CISS. With cartridges, you just toss the cartridge and the old printer.

On the other hand, if you go with something like a Canon IP 1800 plus a CISS, once you've used up roughly 30 to 50 ml per color (depending on how hard you push the color head), you only need to swap the color head. The black head lasts twice as long. You can pick up a new color head for peanuts $53 and just keep on trucking.

That's exactly why Canon built their G series on the IP 1800 platform instead of the IP 7250.

There's one more thing.
Have you ever tried running 10 or 20 full A4 prints back-to-back on your Canon? There's no way it can handle that. And that’s exactly what people doing high-volume printing for things like Cavere jewel cases were doing. It happens for a simple reason: the Canon IP 7250 and similar models rely on gravity to feed the ink. If you ramp up the usage, air just breaks through the seals on the cartridges. Air gets into the nozzles, and then the circus begins. With the IP 1800, that's almost impossible because the head is sealed tight. It's the same with Epson; you won't get air leaks because Epson has better damper sealing than Canon, and they don't rely on gravity. They use piezo crystals that create suction, working more like a piston pump. One other thing: if you push an Epson too hard on volume or speed, that vacuum can suck air through inactive nozzles, pulling in paper dust. That dust clumps up in the ink, and suddenly you're dealing with a mess again.

So, if you use cartridges with an Epson, keep them filled with high-quality ink and don't try to win any drag races with the print speed, the whole setup can run for years without a hitch.

The people having all the problems? They’re usually doing the exact opposite. And of course, in their minds, they're never the problem. It's always Epson's fault.

darkowl72 said:Look, please explain this "refillable cartridge" thing. What do you actually mean by that, and what kind of "technician" are you talking about? You mean just pouring ink into a tank? Give me a break. When you drive a car, you refill the gas, but nobody calls you a mechanic. 🤷

Refillable cartridges are basically cartridges you don't toss; they have a resettable chip that resets every time the printer claims it's out of ink. You just pop the cartridge out and put it back in. Since the cartridge holds 13 ml but the status monitor is calibrated for maybe 3.5 to 7.5 ml, you can easily refill these every two or three uses without any drama.

As for CISS versus CISS—it really only works reliably on Epson printers or high-end HP models.

With Canon, it only lasts long-term on the IP 1300 - 2200 series. In fact, that’s exactly why Canon released their own low-cost CISS line on that specific platform.

So, ask yourself why they didn't just do that for the IP xxxx series.

From my experience, out of about 10 to 15 Canon IP 4600 - 4900 units we used with a CISS for CD/DVD printing, only two survived longer than 12 months. One of them was constantly coming in every three months for adjustments. The other was at a local print shop where they treated it better than a vintage Mustang.

And when they finally died? They were toast.
Why?

Because all those Canon CISS setups use cartridges within the system that contain a sponge. Epsons don't have a SPONGE in their CISS setup. That sponge acts as a separator for the different components of the ink. Basically, gunk or ink breakdown accumulates in the sponge cells. We're talking resin or pigment crystals forming because the ink density changes. Those impurities in the sponge eventually block the ink flow entirely.

In high-volume CD production jobs, you wouldn't even notice the reduced flow until a heating element failed due to poor circulation and cooling.

That doesn't happen with Epson because there's no heating involved and no heaters to speak of. No sponge separation either. So, if the ink in the system is verified and good, and the user ensures their consumption matches the CISS flow rate, the whole thing is essentially Plug and Play, just like using REFILLABLE CARTRIDGES.

If the ink isn't up to par, then either the wire filter in the refillable cartridges clogs or the dampers in the CISS clog. And then you have to replace them.

With a Canon CISS, the user usually doesn't realize there's a problem with the wire pre-filters until the damage is already done. That's why you need to check the ink circulation in the cartridges periodically and swap them out preventatively.

When you add it all up, for someone who isn't printing massive volumes, refillable cartridges are the smartest move. The cost per print is the same as a CISS, but by swapping cartridges in the same machine, you can switch between:

Photo Dye ink
standard pigmented ink for decoupage
sublimation ink
DTG pigmented ink
Eco Solvent ink
or even UV ink.

With a CISS, that's an illusion. You'd have to flush the entire system just to try a different ink. Then you deal with drying issues, tubing dissolving, and so on.

wiredotter14 said:it really depends on what alternative you're looking at—basically, how much cash you're willing to drop upfront on the printer itself.

Basically, if you're willing to spend a little more initially, you can grab a solid printer paired with (really) cheap ink.

But let's look at the usual scenario; if third-party inks run you about $40-$17, then your cost per page ends up being roughly $0.03, which isn't exactly breaking the bank, but it's not dirt cheap either.
So, if using a Continuous Ink Supply System saves you practically 90% on ink, you're looking at saving $30 every 1,000 pages. If the price for the Continuous Ink Supply System plus installation and the initial ink setup is around $300-$167, you'll probably break even after maybe 5,000 pages compared to using mid-range replacement inks.

That said, I’d be a bit more cautious about letting a system like that sit idle. I'm not entirely sure how much of a headache it is to clean out if you don't use it regularly, whereas with standard cartridges, you kind of solve half that problem just by swapping them out.

When it comes to the actual cost per print, there's no real difference between a Continuous Ink Supply System and permanent cartridges.

The only real kicker is that a Continuous Ink Supply System basically requires a regular technician to keep things running, while permanent cartridges don't demand that kind of upkeep.

Robert Rodriguez2 said:Does anyone have an HP or a Canon or something in that ballpark? They’ve had a nightmare experience with Epsons—the one they're using right now has already been sent in for repairs twice...

Look, if you don't actually have a specific model recommendation or know where to get cheap ink, just stay quiet. So far, you haven't said anything useful on this thread; you're just acting like a know-it-all.

You clearly don't trust common sense.

Fine then. Be a beta tester every single time you buy a new printer model.

Because nobody actually knows how these things will hold up after 12 months. And once you finally figure out which ones are reliable, you won't be able to buy them anymore because the "latest and greatest" models will be out. Which, again, nobody knows how those will behave after 12 months either.

And if someone actually suggests something concrete and proven, you shoot it down because it isn't "new" and "untested."

So there's really no point in offering any actual advice.

Got it?

Robert Rodriguez2 said:I need some help finding an all-in-one device by $167 that uses cheap third-party ink. I'm located in New York City or maybe near Visa...
The printer is for school materials since the user is a teacher (mostly black and white stuff)...

Maybe Best Buy, Staples, or somewhere better 😁

Look

There’s this old saying we have here.

>> Testing the waters with the first few kittens

And I'm afraid that's exactly how it works with first printers.

Why?

Just ask anyone. Common sense usually doesn't bend itself to serve someone's corporate interests.

Chris Mitchell4 said:After reading all this, I’m even more lost. Or maybe I know more now, which just makes deciding harder. Cheaper printer $\rightarrow$ pricier ink that runs out faster. There are way too many variables at play; I’m about to lose my mind from information overload.
I bumped up my budget to $333 (for a full set of colors), and I’ve heard pretty good things about Epson printers. Plus, that three-year warranty they offer is tempting.
So, right now, I’m looking at the Epson L310 and the Epson L220.
The thing that's tripping me up with these two models is that I don't see any mention of Wi-Fi or Android connectivity anywhere. That’s kind of weird, because being able to connect like that is a total dealbreaker for me.

Let me recap everything once more.

The Epson L310 goes for about $333. It comes with 4 * 70 ml ink bottles. Out of those 4 * 70 ml, you can really only use 4 * 50 ml, because you have to leave 4 * 20 ml in the system to prevent air from getting in. Because if you forget that and air gets sucked in, you’re facing a massive cluster... Basically, for refills, you'll need to buy a new set of 4 * $23 = $93. Or, if we want to be fair in our comparison, you'd need another set of 4 * $23. That’s another $93. So, you've got the printer plus roughly 4 * 200 ml of ink that you'll actually consume over its lifespan, bringing the total to $520. Honestly, it's not a bad deal.

For comparison:
If you grab a similar device but without the CISS, like a PX 355 or something similar, it would be $200.

And if you go with compatible cartridges in the same capacity—say 4 * 200ml—you're looking at about 200 compatible cartridges. Since one compatible cartridge holds about 3.5 to 5.5 ml, which is basically the same as an original Epson cartridge. So, 200 * $6.75 == $1333. That's for the same number of prints. And of course, the lifespan using compatibles instead of a CISS unit would be $1533.

However, if you don't plan on burning through more than 4 * 5 = 20 * 20 = $133 = roughly 100 ml worth of cartridges during its intended lifespan—which is a pretty realistic scenario—then this option costs you $333. In that case, the L series is still the smarter move. Naturally, Epson engineered all of this specifically to kill off the competition from third-party ink companies.

Now for the third option: If you get a PX 355 paired with continuous ink cartridges, the cost for that printer plus 4 * 200ml (based on its verified lifespan) comes to 600 + 300 + $50. Which puts you at roughly $333. That’s about $167 cheaper than the first version.

Fourth option: If you pick up the same setup as a refurbished unit, you'll get a slightly slower printer, but mechanically it's identical in size, build quality, and lifespan. Combined with the 4 * 200 ml, it comes to about $183. Meaning it's $333 cheaper.

Just don't go thinking the Epson L310 is built better than the Epson SX 130 MF in any way other than having a superior print head.

Now, the Epson SX 4450 is miles ahead of the SX 130.

And the Epson DX 3850 is essentially the professional-grade version compared to the L 310.

James Rogers53 said:Every few weeks, we find ourselves needing to print something totally trivial—like a Black Friday coupon or a hotel reservation. It happens at least once a month, and then it's a frantic run to the local FedEx Office just to pay 1-$$0.67 per page to print from a USB drive.
I want to end this cycle by picking up a small printer, though space is tight. Given how little we'd actually use it, I'm thinking about buying something used. Is that even a smart move? Or am I better off spending $300 - $133 on one of the newer models from Canon, HP, or Xerox?

The requirements for this little home setup are simple: it needs to be compact, ideally have a scanner, and the ink shouldn't clog up if it sits idle for a while. Ink cost is also a factor; I'd definitely prefer using third-party replacements.

Look for an Epson with refillable tanks. You can usually find them for around $400 - $167
.
If you go the route of something similar but brand new, here’s how the math breaks down:

An HP ENVY 6055e or whatever == $200
Plus the extra ink bottles (4 * 100ml) == $100
But if you grab some third-party refills, you're looking at maybe $15 - $6.75 per 100ml == $667 for the same result.

Basically, for $167, you get what you would have paid for $867 brand new. The only catch is whether you'll ever actually finish those 100ml bottles. If you're using decent ink in a tank system, though, it's not really an issue.

Roger Clark4 said:Hey,

So, whenever I try to print photos—text is fine—I run into this same annoying issue.
It started happening recently.
The printer is a Canon Pixma
Everything inside is genuine... ink and all.
The problem pops up regardless of whether I'm using the manufacturer's software, Adobe apps, or just a standard Windows print job. It happens everywhere.
Doesn't matter if it's color or B&W.

Once the print finishes, that last strip—maybe about 4-5mm wide across the whole page—gets this weird purple tint.

Is the print head shot or something else? Because it only happens at the very end of the job... like, on the final pass.

The printer is pretty new, only a few months old. I filled it with 6x70ml of ink, and I've used up about 60-90% of each color.

It's used exclusively for printing photos on high-end professional photo paper.

Run a nozzle check.

If that looks fine and you still see the tint, then the electronics are probably fried.

But first, try plugging it into a different computer running a different OS. I once had an Epson do something similar where it would print an A4 image up to 180mm and then just aggressively crop the rest.

wiredotter14 said:I use printers with unbranded third-party inks and haven't run into a single issue, even though we're cranking out about 10k pages a month

Fair point. Honestly, I couldn't care less about that debate anyway.

Look, there really isn't an issue here. Like I said, being No. 1 on lobbying is a pretty interesting angle. As soon as you step outside the usual boundaries, people just lose interest in the discussion.

Same goes for anyone else who sees the connection—just start a new thread.

SPECIAL PRINTERS: Sublimation, Food-grade, and DTG printers.

That way, they can get info straight from the source on that specific topic. They can pick whatever fits their daily workflow.

wiredotter14 said:You've officially lost it. 🙂

Not even close.

If you want a real story, we can get specific—either about sublimation printers or those food-grade ink setups. Your call.

And honestly, it’s because those printers just aren't even in the running for being No. 1. In our market, the demand for that kind of application is so low that it wouldn't even come close to threatening anyone's top spot.

So, just do the math yourself. Add one plus one and draw your own conclusions about the state of consumer printers.

Honestly, if you’re just looking for a printer to run some cheap, branded replacement cartridges, you probably won't care about any of this.

boldfox372 said:P.S.

Point 4.
The printer should just be a printer.

(though I'm open to suggestions involving a scanner!)

Smart move.

Manufacturers take some basic printer worth a few hundred bucks, slap some useless gadgets on it, and sell it to consumers who feel the need to have every shiny new toy for double the price.

Honestly, it’s way smarter to spend that extra cash on a bare-bones printer. Once you start adding all those bells and whistles, you’re just inviting more headaches and more things to break. The actual printer itself usually stays reliable. If you buy the junk pile, you end up with nothing working anyway, and twelve months later, you're right back to buying the latest overpriced gadget mess.

As for whoever is No. 1 on lobbying, they're probably rubbing their hands together right now.

wiredotter14 said:Did they actually give you any real advice? Anything constructive? Because according to you, everyone should just
buy an HP and hand over their wallet for those overpriced original inks, right?

Not even close.

Nothing useful at all.

It’s all because of that No. 1 on lobbying law.

If you actually want to help someone long-term, you give them the tools to take care of themselves.
Otherwise, if you just want to help for the moment, you just hand out welfare.

wiredotter14 said:Why would you even need a new driver?

Besides, this could happen with any printer out there.
It’s totally unclear what you're actually suggesting (if you're even suggesting anything).

Clearly, you don't read forums.

The second someone runs into an issue with an MFP, Wi-Fi connectivity, or whatever, the standard advice is "go grab the latest drivers."

And how do you know the package doesn't include the latest firmware that works in tandem with those drivers? Just like in the case above.

wiredotter14 said:1) With an Epson, just buy the third-party ink right away—it's cheap.

2) You'll know immediately if the generics work. They either do or they don't. If they work, great, you've got low-cost printing. If they don't, you return the printer; worst case, you're out $17 for some generic ink.

You didn't give any actual suggestions, and honestly, I don't know why people claim bananas are healthy just because they're high in potassium—let's not get carried away.

But what happens when the Firmware automatically updates along with a new driver after six months, like it did with this Epson XP 225?

Then you've basically slipped on your own banana skin.

That's why before you buy any printer, you should actually use Google and do a quick search.

For instance: Google + Epson XP 225 + reviews.
Basically, check if anyone else had good or bad experiences with the device so you don't end up tripping over a banana peel and breaking your neck.

1. With Canon, you get those starter cartridges included. They also offer an XL version if you need more volume.

2. The Epson XP isn't a bad pick, honestly. But I just got a call from a guy earlier today who's having a rough time. He’s running an Epson XP225, just finished installing the latest Firmware, and now—surprise, surprise—it won't recognize any third-party cartridges. We're going to take a look at it tomorrow.

There is actually a much smarter way to handle this, but it touches on that whole "number 1 on lobbying" topic, so it’s probably better if I just keep my mouth shut. Unless, of course, you're looking for trouble.

Sorry, I can't help you much more than that. That's just how the world works.

wiredotter14 said:You basically just wrote an entire essay just to reach the same relevant conclusion: when you buy a printer, check if third-party ink is actually available. 🙏🙏🙏

All this conspiracy talk, even if it’s technically true, doesn't matter to the user. Canon, Epson, etc., are fine printers for the average person, and within 24 months, nobody really cares if the thing finally bites the dust anyway.

There’s no conspiracy here.
It’s just basic consumer economics.

HP builds durable printers that can handle 20,000 to 30,000 prints without breaking a sweat, because their real money is made selling cartridges.

Canon and Epson have the exact same incentive. With every new printer, they bundle a set of original cartridges—which they wouldn't bother selling otherwise—with a market value of 4 or 5 times $70. $30 Basically, every time you buy a new printer, you're already paying $350 $133 for ink you wouldn't dream of buying separately. And of course, both Canon and Epson know you'll probably try to use some cheap third-party stuff after that. So, their goal is to get you back into the loop of buying those same original ink sets through a new machine at $70 $30 a pop.

From there, it’s easy to rig the game so the hardware dies after maybe 3,000 to 5,000 prints. You’re happy enough, and you head right back to them to buy a new printer—or just a new set of ink at full price.

They just ran the numbers to see what's more profitable: selling someone a new printer and fresh ink every 12 to 24 months, or not selling anything at all. Everyone wins.
business as usual.

darkowl72 (No input provided to rewrite.)
Rembrandt is trying to say—even if he’s struggling to put it into words—that HP actually makes solid printers. And they do. It’s just that the whole business model relies on selling hardware at a loss. They price these machines way below what it actually costs to develop the printing tech and the ink, then they make their real money by bleeding you dry with overpriced refills later. The only thing saving us from those ridiculous markups is the third-party ink market. That competition keeps them from squeezing us too hard. Naturally, the manufacturers fight back by inventing all sorts of "compatibility issues" and running smear campaigns claiming that anything other than "original" ink will basically brick your machine. Some companies even go as far as telling retailers they can't carry their printers unless they stop selling third-party alternatives. I don't know if that's still the standard practice, but I definitely saw it happening over at Best Buy.

HP is basically a masterclass in trickery when it comes to forcing you to stick with their overpriced original inks. It’s pretty much their whole playbook: make it a nightmare to find any decent third-party alternatives that actually work. So, they sell you a solid, high-end printer at a decent price, then bleed you dry with the ink costs later. A total win-win. Real geniuses at work there. The thing is, since they’re industry pioneers with deep ties to massive corporations and government agencies—places that buy printers by the thousands, not just here in the States but all over the world—they can afford to play this game. For those big players, having a reliable, steady supply of quality ink is worth more than saving a few bucks, and they just set up standing orders to keep things running. Price isn't really their main concern. Meanwhile, the casual home user usually avoids HP altogether because the long-term cost of ownership is just ridiculous. But hey, it doesn't bother them. They can afford it. Like I said...

Exactly. There's one catch, though. You can't find any third-party ink for these newer HP printers. If we're assuming that "compatible" ink is just someone else's attempt at recreating the original HP cartridges, then we're stuck.

Sure, there are third-party options out there, but let’s be real—they aren't actually new ink. It's just nothing more than refilled cartridges.

So, here’s how the scam works: someone collects the latest HP cartridges, taking a cut along the way. Then, they ship those exact same cartridges off to China, Bulgaria, or Mexico to get them refilled, all while pocketing a commission. After that, they pay the shipping fees to import them back into the States, grabbing another slice of the pie. Finally, some local dealer takes those old, refilled cartridges and sells them to you as brand-new replacements—and wouldn't you know it, they take a commission on that, too.

Of course these kinds of cartridges would show up for the newer printers. Someone had to go and burn through all those latest disposable HP cartridges first. Just think about how many printers have to be sold before you even find enough of that junk in the trash to make it worth the shipping costs to send them all the way to China for recycling.

Of course. As soon as it becomes profitable, HP just tweaks the printer's internal counter. Suddenly, that same cartridge that used to yield 350 pages is "officially" only good for 361. And surprise, surprise—it’s designed to fit exclusively in their latest generation of printers. When you crunch the numbers, once all those big-box retailers get their cut over the next two years, the price difference is barely 20 or 30%. It’s a classic move. HP is basically killing off the third-party ink market before it even gets a chance to breathe.

Look, here’s how it goes: everyone who buys one of those shiny new HP machines eventually hits their breaking point. If they actually need to print a decent amount of work, they end up tossing a perfectly functional device straight into the recycling bin. They were sold this little fantasy that they could just run cheap third-party ink through these things and be fine. Honestly? They got played. Whether it was intentional or just plain stupidity, they were misled.

So, what's the move here? You basically need to dig through the archives and figure out which HP printers were actually being manufactured three, four, or even more years ago. If you actually wrapped your head around that recycling cycle mentioned above, then you'll know there should be plenty of cartridges sitting at collection points for those older models. Basically, there are third-party replacements out there everywhere—varying prices, varying capacities, whatever you're looking for.

And even when you spot those kinds of cassettes in someone's inventory, you just hop on Craigslist and find them for like 50 bucks. $33 You get an HP printer that actually lets you use those cheap third-party cartridges

But those lobbyists sitting at the top? They don't make a dime from that. In fact, they’ll do just about anything to kill that idea before it even starts, using every marketing trick or shady tactic in the book to shut it down.

So, when someone shows up pushing that kind of agenda, you already know exactly who's pulling the strings.

wiredotter14 said:you didn't actually give any useful advice here
about whether someone should buy an HP or not... according to you, buying an HP is like buying some luxury car—it works great, but it drains your bank account dry...

The real deal when buying a printer is ink availability. It doesn't matter how good that HP is if you can't find the cartridges anywhere.
Also, it's worth checking reviews for specific models. Every brand has its winners and its losers.

1. You aren't going to get straight answers here unless it serves the interests of some lobby.

2. Following up on point one: just ask yourself, does HP really want to sell you a high-quality, long-lasting printer if you're just going to go buy your ink somewhere else?

3. Which means HP has to roll out a new series every year, or maybe every six months, through those same lobbies mentioned in point one, just to satisfy the logic in point two.

And yet, you keep banging your head against the wall asking questions that don't serve points 1, 2, or 3.

Seriously, guys, get real for once.

It’s the exact same story with Epson and Canon. Eventually, those players in group one will miss a beat with a certain device. But they'll fix it pretty quickly to satisfy point one by leaning into cheap third-party cartridges—because someone else has already sourced those identical cartridges even cheaper. Everyone ends up playing the same game because those identical, cheap replacement cartridges offered by ten different resellers can't cover the overhead with their margins and volume.

And then "you" show up here to buy a brand new printer.