With my old brother inkjet, it would say it was out of ink in like 2 weeks because it used an optical sensor on the printer looking through a window on the ink cartridge at aimed at a floating piece of black plastic in the tank that would drop when the ink level went down.
The thing is, the sponge in the cartridge would soak up the ink and cause the floater to drop when there was still like 90% of the ink left.
So the key was to just put some black electrical tape over the window on the cartridge and keep using it until it actually stopped printing that color.
This is exactly what my Brother MFC did and I also put some tape on the window to extend the cartridge life. The problem is that it still went through “cleaning cycles” every few days, in which it will dump a bunch of ink into a big sponge hidden inside the printer (I took it apart after it broke). It will eventually run out ink even if you don’t use it because of that. And if you keep it unplugged to stop it from doing that it will eventually dry up and clog up. Even worse, if you leave it plugged in with tape on the cartridges and it tries to print with an actually empty cartridge, it will burn the printer head.
The absolute worst part is that you have zero control over when it did those cycles in which it would make all sorts of loud clunking and whirring noises and if it detected that an ink cartridge was low it would also beep loudly. It was in my bedroom at that time and it would wake me up in the middle of the night every time. I don’t care what people say about this company, I will never buy anything from it again.
The problem is that it still went through “cleaning cycles” every few days, in which it will dump a bunch of ink into a big sponge hidden inside the printer (I took it apart after it broke). It will eventually run out ink even if you don’t use it because of that. And if you keep it unplugged to stop it from doing that it will eventually dry up and clog up.
In other words, inkjet printers are inherently unsuitable for anybody who doesn’t need to print on a regular and consistent basis, but the initial purchase price of the hardware is cheaper so that’s what a lot of people who only need to print occasionally end up buying.
Here’s the catch: They’re not suitable for people who print frequently either because the cost per page is higher than laser. The only upside is the lower upfront cost but you very quickly make that difference in running costs no matter what your use is.
They’re only suitable for people who want high-quality color prints almost all the time, for things like photos and posters and banners, not just normal documents. The only inkjets that have a good reason to exist are the high-end ones mostly found at print shops and sign shops and the like; the cheap consumer ones are just e-waste from the moment they’re manufactured.
Sure, but the health impact of a modern laser printer is on par with other daily health hazards at worst. Modern toner shouldn’t contain anything dangerous, nanoparticles could be a problem depending on amount of printing and the printer model, but if you live in a city you will breathe in more by opening a window. Ozone is emmited during printing but in small enough amounts that it will be problematic only in a small room with shit ventilation and tons of printing, and I mean tons, atleast a couple of books worth.
I mean we know that it is harmful because we observe harm being done to people. It’s not some kind of theoretical risk, or even a statistical risk like getting hit by a car. It’s not risk, it’s harm.
If you have information that technology has changed in the last few years to address the harm, I’d be interested if you shared it.
Are you suggesting there are people who die each year as a direct result of having a laser printer in their homes? If so, is there a source?
I’m curious because the person you’re responding to seems to be aware that the risk (harm) is real, but negligible. You seem to suggest the harm is so bad and unavoidable that it’s not worth buying a laser printer.
![[System32] No but like for real](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/7ac069c7-788b-4b40-ae8f-078b95a1c4a3.jpeg){kind=link}
With my old brother inkjet, it would say it was out of ink in like 2 weeks because it used an optical sensor on the printer looking through a window on the ink cartridge at aimed at a floating piece of black plastic in the tank that would drop when the ink level went down.
The thing is, the sponge in the cartridge would soak up the ink and cause the floater to drop when there was still like 90% of the ink left.
So the key was to just put some black electrical tape over the window on the cartridge and keep using it until it actually stopped printing that color.
This is exactly what my Brother MFC did and I also put some tape on the window to extend the cartridge life. The problem is that it still went through “cleaning cycles” every few days, in which it will dump a bunch of ink into a big sponge hidden inside the printer (I took it apart after it broke). It will eventually run out ink even if you don’t use it because of that. And if you keep it unplugged to stop it from doing that it will eventually dry up and clog up. Even worse, if you leave it plugged in with tape on the cartridges and it tries to print with an actually empty cartridge, it will burn the printer head.
The absolute worst part is that you have zero control over when it did those cycles in which it would make all sorts of loud clunking and whirring noises and if it detected that an ink cartridge was low it would also beep loudly. It was in my bedroom at that time and it would wake me up in the middle of the night every time. I don’t care what people say about this company, I will never buy anything from it again.
In other words, inkjet printers are inherently unsuitable for anybody who doesn’t need to print on a regular and consistent basis, but the initial purchase price of the hardware is cheaper so that’s what a lot of people who only need to print occasionally end up buying.
Here’s the catch: They’re not suitable for people who print frequently either because the cost per page is higher than laser. The only upside is the lower upfront cost but you very quickly make that difference in running costs no matter what your use is.
They’re only suitable for people who want high-quality color prints almost all the time, for things like photos and posters and banners, not just normal documents. The only inkjets that have a good reason to exist are the high-end ones mostly found at print shops and sign shops and the like; the cheap consumer ones are just e-waste from the moment they’re manufactured.
Using a laser printer in your home comes with negative health consequences.
Sure, but the health impact of a modern laser printer is on par with other daily health hazards at worst. Modern toner shouldn’t contain anything dangerous, nanoparticles could be a problem depending on amount of printing and the printer model, but if you live in a city you will breathe in more by opening a window. Ozone is emmited during printing but in small enough amounts that it will be problematic only in a small room with shit ventilation and tons of printing, and I mean tons, atleast a couple of books worth.
I mean we know that it is harmful because we observe harm being done to people. It’s not some kind of theoretical risk, or even a statistical risk like getting hit by a car. It’s not risk, it’s harm.
If you have information that technology has changed in the last few years to address the harm, I’d be interested if you shared it.
Are you suggesting there are people who die each year as a direct result of having a laser printer in their homes? If so, is there a source?
I’m curious because the person you’re responding to seems to be aware that the risk (harm) is real, but negligible. You seem to suggest the harm is so bad and unavoidable that it’s not worth buying a laser printer.
Just so we are on the same page, could you share an example of this harm being observed?
HP has lower profits!
TIL I should get a vent hood for my printer.