What are your thoughts about HP Instant Ink?
-
@Dashrender said:
I think the savings of $600 per destroyed printer could be a lot lower if you're one of those rarely print guys and the ink dries out. Now you could have a destroyed printer on the original included ink cartridge, or perhaps the second one. But the point still stands that using third party ink on for the second cartridge would still save you money.
If the issue is ink drying out and ruining the printer then you have the risk with either type of cartridge and that doesn't really count. That's a different problem. So you might raise your overall cost of printing, but the calculation between which is better, OEM or third party, remains the same.
-
@Dashrender said:
I think the savings of $600 per destroyed printer could be a lot lower if you're one of those rarely print guys and the ink dries out. Now you could have a destroyed printer on the original included ink cartridge, or perhaps the second one. But the point still stands that using third party ink on for the second cartridge would still save you money.
3rd party cartridges also raise your cost per page though. You spend less on the ink, but you get much lower yield as a rule. Also, if you're doing general document printing, sure, 3rd party ink works. However, if you're doing anything that needs to be quality, such as photos, you NEVER buy 3rd party. Always OEM. I don't deny the cost savings can be huge, but many 3rd party cartridges don't work every time, they don't last as long, and quality is always lower. It's not just how much you're printing, but what you're printing.
-
@thanksaj said:
However, if you're doing anything that needs to be quality, such as photos, you NEVER buy 3rd party. Always OEM. I don't deny the cost savings can be huge, but many 3rd party cartridges don't work every time, they don't last as long, and quality is always lower. It's not just how much you're printing, but what you're printing.
How can printing images at home compare to sending it to Walgreen or something?
-
@JaredBusch said:
How can printing images at home compare to sending it to Walgreen or something?
There was a time when printing images at home often made sense but mostly today I agree, if you really want to print photos you normally use a service.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
How can printing images at home compare to sending it to Walgreen or something?
There was a time when printing images at home often made sense but mostly today I agree, if you really want to print photos you normally use a service.
Depends on what you're printing. For 4x6 and 5x7, MUCH cheaper to send them out. However, you doing something like A3+, or 13x19 like I used to do, and it's cheaper to do them home...
-
Then again, most people don't print that size...or have the equipment to print that size...however, ask @NetworkNerdWifey about printing that size...it's addicting..
-
@thanksaj said:
Depends on what you're printing. For 4x6 and 5x7, MUCH cheaper to send them out. However, you doing something like A3+, or 13x19 like I used to do, and it's cheaper to do them home...
Really? But then you need really expensive printers, right?
-
@dominica used to support Fuji printers used commercially.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
Depends on what you're printing. For 4x6 and 5x7, MUCH cheaper to send them out. However, you doing something like A3+, or 13x19 like I used to do, and it's cheaper to do them home...
Really? But then you need really expensive printers, right?
Generally. The cheapest printer I've ever seen that does A3+ is between $200 and 300. A good one is $500+. That's full retail of course...
-
@thanksaj said:
Generally. The cheapest printer I've ever seen that does A3+ is between $200 and 300. A good one is $500+. That's full retail of course...
General business and home use does not print anything other than Letter or Legal (US sizing). So right off the bat here you are discussing a non-standard fringe case. That is an exception unto itself and is by no means what you should use to make general printer/ink decisions.
You are using very flawed logic to support your arguments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_size#mediaviewer/File:A_size_illustration2_with_letter_and_legal.svg -
@JaredBusch said:
@thanksaj said:
Generally. The cheapest printer I've ever seen that does A3+ is between $200 and 300. A good one is $500+. That's full retail of course...
General business and home use does not print anything other than Letter or Legal (US sizing). So right off the bat here you are discussing a non-standard fringe case. That is an exception unto itself and is by no means what you should use to make general printer/ink decisions.
You are using very flawed logic to support your arguments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_size#mediaviewer/File:A_size_illustration2_with_letter_and_legal.svgI never claimed the average user is printing A3+...
@thanksaj said:
Then again, most people don't print that size...or have the equipment to print that size...however, ask @NetworkNerdWifey about printing that size...it's addicting..
See??
-
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
-
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For the average home user, I won't deny that third-party is cheaper and can reflect serious cost savings. Personally, I'd still buy OEM. I've seen too many issues from 3rd party cartridges in my time in retail. It's a decision each person much make but I'd still buy OEM. But that's me.
-
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For the average home user, I won't deny that third-party is cheaper and can reflect serious cost savings. Personally, I'd still buy OEM. I've seen too many issues from 3rd party cartridges in my time in retail. It's a decision each person much make but I'd still buy OEM. But that's me.
I can understand one's desire to stick by what they've seen, but when you can clearly see a substantial savings... but at least we're all on the same page now, I think
-
@Dashrender said:
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For the average home user, I won't deny that third-party is cheaper and can reflect serious cost savings. Personally, I'd still buy OEM. I've seen too many issues from 3rd party cartridges in my time in retail. It's a decision each person much make but I'd still buy OEM. But that's me.
I can understand one's desire to stick by what they've seen, but when you can clearly see a substantial savings... but at least we're all on the same page now, I think
I won't deny that if you have 1 bad batch of ink that ruins a printer and it happens to be after 9 good batches that saved you a ton of money, that's fine. But what if that bad batch is on the first or second round? It can happen. OEM will always work. Is it possible to get a leaky cartridge or something with an OEM? Yes. But it's FAR more rare than remans or 3rd party cartridges. Most 3rd party cartridges are remans anyways, which is also why I won't use them.
For basic documents, etc, it's fine. But never use 3rd party in a photo printer being used for photos, or anything high quality...
-
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For basic documents, etc, it's fine. But never use 3rd party in a photo printer being used for photos, or anything high quality...
Why do they use cheaper ink?
-
@IRJ said:
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For basic documents, etc, it's fine. But never use 3rd party in a photo printer being used for photos, or anything high quality...
Why do they use cheaper ink?
The ink isn't typically up to snuff, but it also has to do with the cartridge itself. Most 3rd party cartridges are remans. They buy used up <insert brand here> cartridges and rework the chip on them and refill them with their own ink. Some ink is pretty close, other ink is not even in the parking lot of the rival's ballpark...it depends and it's completely luck of the draw figuring out which is good and which is bad...
The cartridges you buy for inkjets have a life built-in...after they use up the ink in them, the cartridge itself is generally pretty well shot too, not just out of ink. That's how they're designed. 3rd party basically takes something used up and broken and tries to make it work again. This is why 3rd party cartridges, as a rule, have so many issues and are so unreliable. OEM works because they are always new and always use what is best for that given make and model of machine.
The only exception to using 3rd party vs OEM is when you do things like print with edible ink, for cakes, etc. OEM doesn't make that, so 3rd party is the only way to go. That being said, most people know what they're getting into with that and are prepared for it...
-
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For the average home user, I won't deny that third-party is cheaper and can reflect serious cost savings. Personally, I'd still buy OEM. I've seen too many issues from 3rd party cartridges in my time in retail. It's a decision each person much make but I'd still buy OEM. But that's me.
If you accept that it is cheaper, what's the reason that you would throw away money on the OEM? It feels like you are emotionally tied to the OEM vendors. You've figure out that third party is better in nearly all cases, but aren't willing to let go of the OEMs getting your money. You state that you've seen too many issues, but what does "too many" mean when in the sentence before you stated that third party was cheaper which means that the issues weren't too many since they were not enough to make it more expensive. I feel like there is a conflict in your thinking here.
-
@thanksaj said:
I won't deny that if you have 1 bad batch of ink that ruins a printer and it happens to be after 9 good batches that saved you a ton of money, that's fine. But what if that bad batch is on the first or second round? It can happen.
Wearing a seatbelt can kill you by trapping you in a burning car, it happens. It's rare. But, on average, wearing a seatbelt saves lives, a lot of them. You don't put your life at risk 99% of the time in the fear of surviving the one rare case where the seatbelt is what endangers you. Same here. You take the path that, on average, saves you money.
It's like Best Buy insurance. Everyone knows that it is a rip off. Sure, your equipment might die and it might have saved you, but on average it costs you an arm and a leg. You have to look at the average, not the fear factor.
Both crappy insurance and OEM ink rely on emotion and irrational thinking to make sales by scaring people into not doing the math. It doesn't matter if you get hit with your "bad ink" on the first or tenth time, it's the average over all ink that you ever buy that saves you the money. If you buy OEM ink, you are guaranteeing that you will lose, just not necessarily on day one.
-
@thanksaj said:
@IRJ said:
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
@thanksaj said:
@Dashrender said:
But do you still support the purchasing of OEM only ink for normal home users considering the current paradigm?
For basic documents, etc, it's fine. But never use 3rd party in a photo printer being used for photos, or anything high quality...
Why do they use cheaper ink?
The ink isn't typically up to snuff, but it also has to do with the cartridge itself. Most 3rd party cartridges are remans. They buy used up <insert brand here> cartridges and rework the chip on them and refill them with their own ink. Some ink is pretty close, other ink is not even in the parking lot of the rival's ballpark...it depends and it's completely luck of the draw figuring out which is good and which is bad...
The cartridges you buy for inkjets have a life built-in...after they use up the ink in them, the cartridge itself is generally pretty well shot too, not just out of ink. That's how they're designed. 3rd party basically takes something used up and broken and tries to make it work again. This is why 3rd party cartridges, as a rule, have so many issues and are so unreliable. OEM works because they are always new and always use what is best for that given make and model of machine.
The only exception to using 3rd party vs OEM is when you do things like print with edible ink, for cakes, etc. OEM doesn't make that, so 3rd party is the only way to go. That being said, most people know what they're getting into with that and are prepared for it...
The reasons why third party are bad aren't actually relevant and I think dwelling on them is what misleads you. At the end of the day it is the cost calculation and nothing else that matters. And that calculation appears to show that third party ink is the huge winner, no real room for error as it appears to win by a landslide financially. At least with the printers and ink in the examples. Looking into why third party ink fails is getting into details that are already included in the cost calculation so while it is a point of interest, it doesn't change the actual decision which showed that third party ink was cheaper - even when it fails more than usual.
