Disposable Printers

I'm on my third Lexmark Z515 from Wal-Mart @$29 USD. I just buy a new
printer when the cartridges give out.

At Wal-Mart the black cartridge costs $18 and the color $27 this is more $
than a new printer that includes cartridges.

I have successfully re-filled the cartridges by drilling tiny holes in the
corners and injecting ink to the bottom with a hypo.

I get about 1 years use out of each printer. I don't store the cartridges in
the printer. I use the original tape to cover the print head and store them
in a tiny Tupperware container with a small moist sponge to keep them from
drying out.

Picture quality from this 4800dpi printer is as good as I have seen on any
inkjet but it is a bit slow.

When done with the printer I enjoy taking it apart and playing with the
internal components before disposal.

Has anyone compared the $34 Hp disposable with the Z515?

ER

I admire your ingenuity and scream at the marketing methodology
manufacturers purvey on the consumer. The lack of material morality that
they foist on the population leads to continuous waste, no conservation of
energy, and the attitude that rather than making a cost efficient machine
that will hold up and allow cartridge refilling will get by minimally for a
year or so, but just long enough for the company to make its killing profit
on the ridiculously overpriced replacement cartridges.
When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell something
that is a good value not only for what it does but also for what our moral
value system inculcates?

--
Jan Alter
bearpuf@verizon.net
or
jalter@phila.k12.pa.us
"ER" <evad@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
news:42c431ba_3@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>
> I'm on my third Lexmark Z515 from Wal-Mart @$29 USD. I just buy a new
> printer when the cartridges give out.
>
> At Wal-Mart the black cartridge costs $18 and the color $27 this is more $
> than a new printer that includes cartridges.
>
> I have successfully re-filled the cartridges by drilling tiny holes in the
> corners and injecting ink to the bottom with a hypo.
>
> I get about 1 years use out of each printer. I don't store the cartridges
> in the printer. I use the original tape to cover the print head and store
> them in a tiny Tupperware container with a small moist sponge to keep them
> from drying out.
>
> Picture quality from this 4800dpi printer is as good as I have seen on any
> inkjet but it is a bit slow.
>
> When done with the printer I enjoy taking it apart and playing with the
> internal components before disposal.
>
> Has anyone compared the $34 Hp disposable with the Z515?
>
> ER
>
>
>
>
>

[snip]
> When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell
> something that is a good value not only for what it does but also for what
> our moral value system inculcates?

Not until the general populous will pay for it

Mark

Mark <marklb@bogus.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> > When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell
> > something that is a good value not only for what it does but also for what
> > our moral value system inculcates?
>
> Not until the general populous will pay for it
>
.... or even populace.

--
Chris Green

<usenet@isbd.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ikuqtFl27qdU1@individual.net...
> Mark <marklb@bogus.net> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> > When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell
>> > something that is a good value not only for what it does but also for
>> > what
>> > our moral value system inculcates?
>>
>> Not until the general populous will pay for it
>>
> ... or even populace.
>
> --
> Chris Green

Funny how we rely on spell check in this day and age, and accept anything
that it throws at you.

Mark

www.fatwallet.com/c/18/ for more printer sale threads

Anyways, totally agree disposable printers is the way to go - saves you
headaches when they break/clog/jam, and you never have to worry about
babying the machines.

Add to that the typical 1 yr instant exchange warranty for free on these
printers, and you get a great bargain no matter what.

---

As for the HP disposables, they're fine. Typical RET IV generation
printers with super-tiny ink cartridges. Fine text and basic photo
printing overall. HP carts maybe harder to refill, so keep that in mind
as well.

----

Of course, in the end, it makes you wonder what's happening when the
printers are cheaper than the ink cartridges, yet ink is dirt-cheap at
<$1 per cartrdige wholesale?!?

Clearly, readers of Computer Reseller Magazine know that the makers are
really ripping everyone off when they can toot the 50%+ profit margins
to resellers on cartridges in their ads.

Also, it's no wonder they don't simply include big, fat bags of ink
that'll last years in the printers so you don't have to change the ink
at all (or at least for a year or two).

Mark wrote:
> <usenet@isbd.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ikuqtFl27qdU1@individual.net...
>
>>Mark <marklb@bogus.net> wrote:
>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell
>>>>something that is a good value not only for what it does but also for
>>>>what
>>>>our moral value system inculcates?
>>>
>>>Not until the general populous will pay for it
>>>
>>
>>... or even populace.
>>
>>--
>>Chris Green
>
>
> Funny how we rely on spell check in this day and age, and accept anything
> that it throws at you.
>
> Mark
>
>
Better define that "we." Accepting anything that
spellcheck throws at you indicates lack of
education or sense. I figure I know a lot more
than spellcheck does (doesn't take much critical
experience to figure that out). My fingers go
unintended places and occasionally I just get a
mental block, so I use spellcheck as a "check."
But I haven't deteriorated to mixing up populous
and populace and a thousand other substitutions
that spellcheck seems to thing are correct.

Jan Alter wrote:
> I admire your ingenuity and scream at the marketing methodology
> manufacturers purvey on the consumer. The lack of material morality that
> they foist on the population leads to continuous waste, no conservation of
> energy, and the attitude that rather than making a cost efficient machine
> that will hold up and allow cartridge refilling will get by minimally for a
> year or so, but just long enough for the company to make its killing profit
> on the ridiculously overpriced replacement cartridges.
> When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell something
> that is a good value not only for what it does but also for what our moral
> value system inculcates?


I think this is about time to have the legislators to make a law to
prevent this kinds of thing to happen. Otherwise, this will go on as
manufacturers cannot risk raising the price of their printers without
the help of the competitors and consumers always look for cheap printers
- shortsighted, but hardly anyone really calculates the cost of
consumables and many simply junk their working printers and buy a new
one. Manufacturers cannot just lower the ink cost without increasing the
price of the printer, all thanks to Lexmark's lead of giving away the
printer and selling over priced ink. It's like a disposable razor
business but printer consumes a lot more materials and labor resources
to produce.

I bought an Epson R200 (with inks) for $50 after rebate but a set of ink
costs $58. I will buy the ink cartridge alone if the printer's in
working order, merely because I hate creating more trash. If I am going
to protect my wallet, I'll simply buy a new low end printer again...

I was hoping someone else would respond to the posting. My fingers are
getting bloody and my voice is hoarse about this.

We need some legislation with some teeth, because if you are waiting for
the manufacturers in this industry to show some moral fortitude, you
will be buried by old printer sand toss away ink cartridges before
anything will change.



Jan Alter wrote:

> I admire your ingenuity and scream at the marketing methodology
> manufacturers purvey on the consumer. The lack of material morality that
> they foist on the population leads to continuous waste, no conservation of
> energy, and the attitude that rather than making a cost efficient machine
> that will hold up and allow cartridge refilling will get by minimally for a
> year or so, but just long enough for the company to make its killing profit
> on the ridiculously overpriced replacement cartridges.
> When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell something
> that is a good value not only for what it does but also for what our moral
> value system inculcates?
>

Gee,

Just think of how cheap they could make the printer if it didn't have
removable cartridges?

Maybe we will see them on the market soon. Hopefully with refillable ink
tanks...


ER


"Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote in message
newsgyxe.1853343$6l.1176311@pd7tw2no...
>I was hoping someone else would respond to the posting. My fingers are
>getting bloody and my voice is hoarse about this.
>
> We need some legislation with some teeth, because if you are waiting for
> the manufacturers in this industry to show some moral fortitude, you will
> be buried by old printer sand toss away ink cartridges before anything
> will change.
>
>
>
> Jan Alter wrote:
>
>> I admire your ingenuity and scream at the marketing methodology
>> manufacturers purvey on the consumer. The lack of material morality that
>> they foist on the population leads to continuous waste, no conservation
>> of energy, and the attitude that rather than making a cost efficient
>> machine that will hold up and allow cartridge refilling will get by
>> minimally for a year or so, but just long enough for the company to make
>> its killing profit on the ridiculously overpriced replacement cartridges.
>> When the H is this country going to turn itself around and sell
>> something that is a good value not only for what it does but also for
>> what our moral value system inculcates?
>>