• sanpo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    Company’s PR dept saying “we didn’t do it” is not proof of anything.

    If they’re not blocking 3rd party cartridges, why even implement DRM?
    Do they have so much extra money that they’re developing features they’re not planning to use just because they’re bored?

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      So when someone uses random sludge instead of ink and breaks the printer they can point at that as the cause.

      It’s basic CYA. They’ll let you do whatever you want, but if something goes wrong and it breaks then you’re on your own.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          24 hours ago

          In this case, I kind of don’t blame them in terms of warranty work. Like yeah, if the machine faults out within the warranty period, they should replace it. But if the machine breaks because someone uses $3 ink from a bodega that’s made from busted open bic pens, then no manufacturer should be on the hook for replacement when caused by user negligence, and I don’t blame a company for using some measure to determine that.

          • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            $3 ink from a bodega

            That’s actually a fair price for 3rd party replacement.
            I used to work at a computer shop, and people only ever bought the cheapest available cartridges.
            We also used to do printer repair, do you know how many printers had to come in because of shitty ink?
            The answer is zero.

            And anyway, in your example the printer manufacturer has no business tracking your ink usage, whether it’s by spying on you and phoning home, or recording this info in the printer’s memory.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            22 hours ago

            My main concern here is that they (allegedly, I haven’t confirmed) remove old firmware. If customers want to try out older firmware to see if that fixes their problem, they should be able to. It doesn’t cost much, so why not?

            Yeah, voiding a warranty because the customer used something that could cause irreversible damage makes sense. Removing access to older firmware does not.

            • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              21 hours ago

              Ah, that’s fair on the old firmware bit, I hadn’t heard about that. I have a Brother laser printer, but it’s locked down on my network for phoning home.

                • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  14 hours ago

                  I didn’t block a domain, I restricted the printer’s MAC from WAN access in my router’s firewall. I can still access it from any device on my network, but it just can’t phone home or search for firmware updates.