[HN Gopher] CT scan shows there's still lots of toner left in an...
___________________________________________________________________
CT scan shows there's still lots of toner left in an "empty"
cartridge
Author : jonbruner
Score : 208 points
Date : 2022-11-30 18:00 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.lumafield.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.lumafield.com)
| bombcar wrote:
| I would like to see cartridges designed ecologically - refillable
| perhaps, or at least designed to flow as much out as possible -
| and allowing you to override the "toner low" warning and keep
| printing even if it's almost dry.
| pifm_guy wrote:
| Most are refillable if you follow an unofficial online guide.
|
| Beware that toner dust is really nasty stuff and gets
| everywhere, so however careful you are you'll still have clouds
| of toner dust escape and stick to every surface of your house
| inside and out...
|
| Top tip:. Never clean toner dust with warm water. It will stick
| and become permanent.
| gnu8 wrote:
| In any situation where you can see toner you want to be
| wearing an N95 mask. Inhale any of it and it is in your lungs
| forever.
|
| The best thing for cleanup is a 3M electronics vacuum which
| has a filter that will trap that stuff securely.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| This makes these refill kits sound really dangerous.
| pifm_guy wrote:
| There isn't yet enough research on health hazards of
| toner to really give a good answer here... Black toner
| for example is mostly polyester plastic and carbon dust.
| Neither of those are particularly toxic, although they
| are in a much finer powder than you'd normally encounter
| them.
|
| Basically I'd still steer clear of them, but exposing
| yourself to them isn't a certain death sentence like say
| organic mercury.
| gnu8 wrote:
| I would say akin to smoking a cigarette. One time won't
| hurt you in a measurable way but if your job is refilling
| toners or dealing with broken laser printers you need
| some protection.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Be warned that mixing different formulations of toner could
| cause the toner to not stick tot he drum properly and start
| to pool up in your printer requiring expensive maintenance.
| zelon88 wrote:
| Make no mistake, they can be refilled. By the manufacturer.
|
| Most times a company will lease several multi-function printers
| from a manufacturer like Ricoh. These lease agreements come
| with a certain quantity of toner replacements included or
| discounted. Most also include service agreements, because they
| don't want you servicing a unit you do not own yourself.
|
| When you have one of these agreements, you are supposed to send
| the empty toner back to the manufacturer. I have no doubt at
| all that they refill these and sell them as brand new units.
| Honestly, it would be an absurd waste if they didn't.
|
| So think of it as a "Blue Rhino propane tank" which are
| notoriously not filled to capacity from the factory either.
| They don't give a crap how much product is in the container to
| begin with or when you return it. They only care that you
| return it as that increases their profit margins.
| nerpderp82 wrote:
| I have never used one, but I think it is interesting that Epson
| does sell a line of printers that have easily refillable ink
| reservoirs.
|
| https://epson.com/ecotank-ink-tank-printers
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Inkjets have to be used regularly or they will suffer from
| clogs and in the case of Epson you're SOL if a head clean
| doesn't work. You can leave a laser idle for years and it
| will print fine.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| I _think_ eco tanks (and some other modern inkjets) will
| purge the heads regularly if left on, so it should be fine
| if left on standby constantly.
| zaroth wrote:
| I have a Brother laser printer which is used for almost
| everything, and a Canon inkjet for the occasional color
| print.
|
| I'm pretty sure my Canon inkjet uses more ink when idle
| than when I occasionally use it to actually print
| something. Quite sad.
|
| I do wonder where it all physically goes tho. After years
| of seeing my cheapo cartridges just "evaporate" whatever
| reservoir the printer has for cleaning the heads and
| purging ink must be well and fully saturated at this
| point?!
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| huge sponges and felt blocks. not kidding.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Yes and the printer has an internal counter keeping track
| of how much it has dumped into the sponge. After a long
| time it will stop and require disassembly of the printer
| and a reset procedure to rectify this.
| someweirdperson wrote:
| Mine doesn't, some nozzles clogged every time I wanted to
| print (infrequently, sometimes months). Now I'm printing
| a test page every week to prevent that (maybe should add
| a cron job).
|
| A contributing factor could be that the best-before date
| on the bottles is in the past. Though I have no idea how
| that date would matter for filling up, and no idea how to
| observe it after the ink is in the printer and the
| bottles disposed of.
| jve wrote:
| I have a HP Smart tank I can refill with a bottle of cheap
| ink. Anyways, I don't print often, and it doesn't clog. But
| I have it always plugged into outlet - I _think_ that it
| manages print heads so they don't dry. I have this thought
| before Ink Tank printers. Printer specialist should chime
| in as I generally don't like dealing with printers.
| ghaff wrote:
| For a lot of people a laserprinter is probably better than
| an inkjet, especially given that a lot of people don't
| print much these days. And you can get even color lasers
| for a pretty good price these days. I've had a B&W laser at
| home forever. About a year ago, I just got rid of my inkjet
| rather than spending a bunch of money to get new ink. It
| was a large format photo printer and was sometimes nice to
| have but not worth it.
| bombcar wrote:
| I've found that Walmart is perfectly acceptable (and
| cheap) for printing normal photographs (pickup in an
| hour!) and if I want to go larger they offer that too.
|
| Of course you can order things printed online and
| shipped, but a black-and-white laser covers most of my
| needs there.
| ghaff wrote:
| Yeah, I don't need many photos printed and, when I do,
| there are lots of options that don't involve $100+ in ink
| cartridges. I did sometimes print color maps too but B&W
| is usually fine at the end of the day, I can print a map,
| or (usually) on a phone/tablet works.
| thebetatester wrote:
| They sound cool but apparently have a sponge that holds the
| ink between the tank and the jet and eventually that becomes
| saturated and it's basically game over for the printer
| because it doesn't sound like the sponge is user serviceable
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25047231
| Alupis wrote:
| You can refill them. They typically have a plastic plug on one
| side, and some companies will refill them for you, or you can
| buy a refill "kit".
|
| However, the internals of the cartridge will break down over
| time. Typically it's the "blade" that evens out the powdered
| toner that wears out, leaving too much toner stuck to the page
| and results in those gray-page prints and streaks/lines.
|
| If you buy refilled cartridges, the blade seems to be the most
| common failure point long before you run out of toner.
| chrisco255 wrote:
| Epson has a line of printers that has refillable tanks rather
| than cartridges. The bottles that the ink comes in are designed
| so that they do not spill out when held upside down. They must
| be inserted into the tank to dispense.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Toner cartridges are generally recyclable / refurbished. You
| don't throw them away, you take spent ones back to the place of
| purchase when you buy a new one.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| I remember when I was at school about 15 years ago there were
| printers that used wax(?) blocks, that were just put into it,
| not sure how it worked exactly.
| fractallyte wrote:
| Xerox Phaser printers
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Phaser) used wax ,,solid
| ink" blocks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_ink)
|
| Advantages: waterproof print; very clean; easy to change ink
| blocks; maintenance was mainly just emptying a tray
| containing small amounts of waste wax (biodegradable)
|
| Disadvantages: when offline, the printer still used power to
| keep the wax in a liquid state, otherwise a cold start could
| take a while; colors were occasionally not as vibrant as
| regular laser printers
| bombcar wrote:
| We had a tektronix with blocks - and that one had to be
| kept off except for very specific times, because if left on
| it would stay warm and over a week or two drain all the wax
| out of it into the waste tank.
| denton-scratch wrote:
| Tektronix did a range of printers that used wax. They used
| rolls of wax sheet. They produced _fantastic_ output, but the
| rolls of wax were really expensive. And if you put a coffee
| mug down on a printout, they got stuck together.
|
| I think they were meant for one-off proofs of image-heavy
| marketing material. The colours were intense and vibrant, in
| a way that no colour laser or ink-jet ever is. Also, the wax
| stood a bit proud of the paper, giving an embossed look. But
| they weren't very permanent - if you folded the printout
| you'd damage the image; you could even scratch the wax off
| with a fingernail.
|
| These were expensive printers.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| > refillable
|
| They used to be in some applications (like really big
| photocopiers). But toner is messy nasty stuff to deal with.
| Maybe refillable at a shop could work though.
| bityard wrote:
| I've been refilling the toner cartridges for my low-end
| Brother printer with generic toner off Amazon for years. It's
| not that bad and costs a fraction of the price of even a
| generic replacement cartridge. The toner comes in a bottle
| and you slowly pour it into the cartridge, perhaps with the
| assistance of a small funnel if necessary. I wear gloves and
| do it outside or in the garage. It only gets messy if you try
| to do it inside or have the dropsies. Obviously don't breathe
| it in.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| > I wear gloves and do it outside or in the garage.
|
| This is the protip my living room wished I knew.
| radicaldreamer wrote:
| Does Big Printer have lobbyists in Congress? This, along with
| coffee pod DRM, shouldn't be allowed.
| nuodag wrote:
| If you have a Samsung laserprinter with number pad and empty
| toner / imaging unit try menu # 1904 menu and reset the counter,
| then happily print thousands of pages more
| dexzod wrote:
| This is outrageous. Only a small percentage of owners know this
| kind of tricks. Imagine the environmental damage created by
| thousands of users throwing away perfectly usable cartridges. I
| always feel bad about throwing away laser printer cartridges,
| they have so many components that are working just fine, there
| should be a way to just refill the toner and reuse it.
| chaostheory wrote:
| If you think Samsung is bad, HP is much worse. Stay away from
| HP printers including laser
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| > Stay away from HP printers including laser
|
| Do you think that applies to the Neverstop models? They
| have an internal toner tank that refills with syringes, so
| this kind of nonsense isn't really possible.
| max-ibel wrote:
| Ye olde Deskjet 500 was pretty good, however.
| onemoresoop wrote:
| Is Brother any better? So far happy with my Laser Brother,
| way happier than the nightmares I've had with inkjet
| printers. But I have to admit we changed the tonner after
| less than 2000 pages. I assumed the cartrige had small
| capacity and didn't arise my suspicions. Should I worry?
| knaik94 wrote:
| Compared to others, I have had good experiences with
| Brother. The reset procedure is well known enough, for
| any model I have worked with, that compatible third party
| toners include a picture with the reset directions on the
| Amazon listing.
|
| I know that Brother includes a starter cartridge that
| usually includes less than even a standard size
| replacement. They have high yield cartridges and I have
| only ever seen the bigger size in third party
| replacements.
|
| The model I have is the 2270dw which was purchased years
| and years ago. The bigger replacements are rated at 2600
| pages and standard are 1200. The drum unit can do up to
| 12000 and I don't think we've replaced that yet. I did
| reset it a couple times to get past the toner warning, it
| continued printing well into faded pages without issue.
| All it took was holding a button on the front while
| turning it on and then pressing the same button a
| specific number of times after initialing. The third
| party replacements are priced reasonably well in my
| opinion.
| Syonyk wrote:
| No. They just run X pages and assume the cartridge is
| empty.
|
| You can reset it with some faintly annoying incantations,
| and I'd suggest doing so until you notice actual print
| quality issues. Especially on black.
|
| The logic is... reasonably sound from a print quality
| perspective. "We _know_ the cartridge can print XXXX
| pages of reasonable coverage without any fading
| /dropouts/etc. If the user replaces it at that point,
| they will never have any print issues." If your goal is
| "flawless printing," it's a reasonable enough path. It's
| just not particularly cost effective for the end user. It
| is, however, cheaper and more profitable than actual
| toner level sensor/mixing device/etc.
|
| But, yes, there's a hidden menu to reset the toner
| counter on Brother, and in my experience, there's at
| least another 50% of rated capacity pages lurking in the
| cartridges unless you print very toner-heavy pages.
| grishka wrote:
| TIL people actually throw laser printer cartridges away
| instead of having them refilled for pennies multiple times
| over.
| mc32 wrote:
| Brother lasers also have a funky reset procedure (depends on
| model, but searchable on internet). It's outrageous. You can
| get another 500 to 1000 pages out of it.
| martinflack wrote:
| At least with Brother you can mail in the old laser drums
| that you pull out. I hope to God they're doing something
| sensible to reuse ink/parts.
| ck45 wrote:
| I have an older Brother HL-2035. It can be convinced to keep
| on printing by covering two holes on the cartridge with some
| duct tape.
| xav0989 wrote:
| My brother laser printers have a setting on the web
| interface for what to do when the "replace toner" warning
| comes up: either continue printing or stop. They'll happily
| keep printing if configured to "continue".
| TurkishPoptart wrote:
| That's nuts. What's the rationale for that, aside from
| possibly selling more cartridges? So wasteful!
| simcop2387 wrote:
| For some of these it may be a quality issue. With less
| material to deposit in the cartridge it may not apply
| evenly. Lots of times this could be fine but it might not
| always be the case.
| mc32 wrote:
| That's possible and understandable for high volume
| printers. But for personal/desk printers they should have
| an option like. Cartridges are running low on toner,
| would you like to enable degraded printing? Rather than
| having labyrinthine steps to overcome out of toner the
| error (which are not in the manual mind you). My
| experience is that full color printouts do not suffer.
| When they do run out, it's noticeable and comes nearly at
| once --rather than slowly degrading.
| yamazakiwi wrote:
| I have an older Brother. I usually have to hit it a few
| times to get it to print any documents for me but you know
| how family is.
| kipchak wrote:
| I've done this for a few office Brother laser MFCs. In my
| experience while you can get a couple hundred more pages out,
| pages may start being speckled and the cartridge will dust
| toner into the printer, even if there's still plenty of toner
| in the cartridge.
|
| From what I can tell this is due to a rubber blade that
| cleans the toner cartridge's "drum" wearing out, which can
| sometimes (but not very easily) be replaceable. My guess is
| that while there's some encouragement of new cartridges going
| on, the print count is also at a lower number to prevent
| issues like it from cropping up.
|
| I've also heard that as the cartridge goes through toner,
| some printers will increase voltage on the drums
| proportionally, which can be thrown off by resetting the
| toner level.
|
| From a toner remanufacturing document: "When the printer
| senses a new toner cartridge, the bias voltage is set to a
| high voltage. As the cartridge is used, the bias voltage is
| reduced gradually down. This process is necessary because
| according to Brother, a new toner cartridge has a tendency to
| print light. As the cartridge is used, the density increases.
| To keep the density level even throughout its life, the
| density bias voltage is reduced accordingly. Each time a new
| cartridge is installed, the bias voltage is reset to the high
| voltage point, and the cartridge page count is reset to
| zero." [1]
|
| Here's a visual of the blades if you're curious.
| https://youtu.be/UlB832MOUtQ?t=7
|
| [1]http://www.uninetimaging.com/downloads/technical/TecArtWeb
| Ad...
| denton-scratch wrote:
| I bought a Samsung printer a few years ago. A couple of months
| later, I discovered that Samsung's printer arm had been
| acquired by Hewlett-Packard - the company I _least_ wanted to
| buy a printer from.
|
| My printer has no number pad. It has a horrible menu system you
| navigate with arrow-keys. The cartridge it came with was tiny -
| it lasted for less than a ream. But the replacement I bought is
| still going strong (I don't print more than a couple of pages a
| week, which is why I didn't want an ink-jet).
| mrighele wrote:
| Identical story here. The toner the printer came with lasted
| a few months. I refilled it in a local shop (the guy
| explained me that they had to replace the chip that counts
| the pages so refilling was expensive, but in fact it was a
| fraction of a new one). Still printing with that same toner
| after (I think) 6 years.
| bombcar wrote:
| Most printers now explicitly call out that they come with a
| "starter toner" - which has many fewer pages than a normal
| one.
| hgsgm wrote:
| max-ibel wrote:
| Just make sure you never do a firmware upgrade unless it's
| absolutely required, and, if possible, disable DNS lookups
| for FW upgrade with something like pihole.
|
| E.g., for Epson, that is epsonpfu.ebz.epson.net
| pndy wrote:
| My laser Samsung from 2013 has a just small display and
| simple function buttons. But I never got an original
| cartridge - the replacement I can get online are far cheaper
| and cost me about 8.50 EUR without the delivery cost.
|
| The printer works but paper feeder rollers seem to struggle
| now. I'm afraid that once it gets broken beyond any repair
| I'll have to get new which will chain me to official
| supplies.
|
| ghacks.net [1] has published a news about Epson ending the
| laser printers production while focusing more on inkjet
| segment from now on, which as they claim are more eco than
| laser ones. One of the users in the comments says HP already
| region-locks their cartridges
|
| [1] - https://www.ghacks.net/2022/11/29/epson-announces-end-
| of-las...
| mmcgaha wrote:
| That is why we shake it.
| euroderf wrote:
| Shake it like a Polaroid.
| kossTKR wrote:
| I'll always remember when our fairly expensive prosumer all-in-
| one-printer suddenly wouldn't let me scan pages because there was
| "no more ink" in the printer right before an important task. A
| straight up scam.
|
| I'm surprised no one has disrupted the sad state of affairs in
| the printer industry yet even though it's slowly dying.
| johannbok wrote:
| At the lower end of the market the printers are sold below-cost
| and the profit is in the ink. Above that, there's laser
| printers, which are far less prone to this.
|
| Are we looking for someone to sell an ink-based printer that
| will cost more up front than its competitors, and then
| willingly forego the revenue that comes from market ink prices?
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| Unfortunately, with ink-jet an out-of-ink can actually do
| damage, not merely produce a bad print. They have no incentive
| to make a reliable ink measuring system, though.
| davchana wrote:
| Long time ago, in around 2006, a computer shop guy wanted to
| charge me 3 times more for color scans jpegs than black & white
| scans, because "color ink" is expensive!! I was like, its a
| paper to pdf, you are not using any ink at all, but he was like
| no, how will your pdf get colors from?
| onemoresoop wrote:
| I think we should slap all these companies with class action
| lawsuits till they start behaving. This is outrageous behavior.
| How can these executives sleep at night?
| zelon88 wrote:
| I'm sure it gets easier if you're rolling in money.
| zwieback wrote:
| The whole stranded toner/ink issue is why subscription is
| becoming popular in this space, nobody wants to feal cheated and
| per-page pricing is pretty straightforward.
| gryf wrote:
| Yeah. My HP toner cartridge has been "empty" for about a year and
| is still printing fine! It has done more pages since it was empty
| than before it was empty.
| landswipe wrote:
| Same here, I'll only change it once I start seeing streaks, it
| must be a scam it has been like this for years.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| My HP LaserJet has been telling me that it is low for the
| better part of 10 years. Still prints fine.
| pugworthy wrote:
| It's hard to really judge what this means without knowing how
| often and much you print, as well as how much was printed
| before the warning was given.
|
| PS
|
| Blame/thank Canon. It's their mechanism and cartridge in the
| HP printers. Also some utilize Samsung print engines for A3
| paper.
|
| PPS
|
| It's a testament to ink vs toner that it can remain
| functional after 10 years.
| unglaublich wrote:
| Manufacturers want to provide a product that produces reliable
| high quality prints. That's why the toner low warning comes up
| very early, so that there's no chance that your important
| documents look unprofessional due to low toner levels.
|
| As a consumer, naturally, you can almost always ignore the
| warning and use the toner until you can't even read granny's
| apple pie recipe anymore.
| klodolph wrote:
| Agreed.
|
| I spent some time maintaining a fleet of printers, among other
| things. Toner cartridges streak when they are near empty, and
| can be restored by shaking them, for a time. Shaking them more
| and more as they near the end. I can understand why you'd want
| a cartridge to report "empty" before it starts streaking.
|
| I don't really care about a bit of wasted toner, though. What I
| really want are more durable mechanical parts (gears, etc) and
| a ready supply of replacement parts like fusers.
|
| I also wonder how the printer counts its toner "empty". If it's
| just a page count, surely it wouldn't be accurate. I know that
| you can measure page coverage, but I wonder if they actually do
| it.
|
| I'm also sure that they have no incentive to make the "empty"
| threshold more accurate.
| CivBase wrote:
| This is being a bit too generous. If that were the case, they
| could provide a warning about print quality instead of just
| saying that the toner is low. But then people wouldn't be as
| compelled to needlessly buy more overpriced printer supplies.
| daneel_w wrote:
| Same with ink cartridges from all inkjet manufacturers. It's a
| massive case of fraud and environmental crime in one.
| novaRom wrote:
| It's not different from what a well-known company does with
| their devices by installing low-grade batteries with leaking
| capacity. Intentionally, planned obsolescence.
| InCityDreams wrote:
| Name names, please?
| kittyn wrote:
| i'm not buying it. i've replaced enough toner cartridges to know
| there's significant weight difference between full and empty.
|
| it's a shill article for their industrial CT scanners
| burnished wrote:
| Wouldn't there also be a significant weight difference between
| full and 50%? Or full and 30%?
| jstanley wrote:
| Maybe they add increasing amounts of lead weights to the
| cartridges each year, so that whenever you put a new one in it
| weighs more than the old one.
| _jal wrote:
| I'm so glad I saw your post before rushing right out to buy my
| own CT scanner in order to save on toner.
|
| You saved me from Big Imaging's clutches.
| DataOverload wrote:
| davidw wrote:
| I've always loved this, from The Oatmeal:
| https://theoatmeal.com/comics/printers
| TimTheTinker wrote:
| Looks like they market CT scanners. Otherwise I'd ask - why not
| cut it open instead?
| abruzzi wrote:
| yeah,my first tought was--yeah, a hammer shows that as well.
| consumer451 wrote:
| Adam Savage just put out a neat video that featured this
| company's CT scanners and software. They scanned two vacuum
| tube-esque components.
|
| https://youtu.be/iTJvb-qibKQ
| greesil wrote:
| TIL what is a hydrogen thyratron
| danbruc wrote:
| You will get dirty if you cut it open, we are no longer living
| in the stone age.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| Somewhat related, I recently bought a Brita water filter jug
| which has a little led on the lid which glows red when the
| disposable filter cartridge has "expired" and needs replacing.
|
| Before I even started to use the thing I knew what to expect.
| Sure enough it starts to glow red after a ridiculously short
| period of time of using a brand new filter cartridge.
|
| I've been ignoring it for a few weeks now and checking for any
| difference in taste of the filtered water but haven't detected
| anything yet. I'd recently been wondering about how to verify the
| filter's effectiveness somehow as I'm sure this indicator is less
| than useless and essentially setup to "lie" for profit.
|
| There should be laws against this sort of thing. Any indicator
| that tells you when a consumable needs to be replaced should have
| to meet some level of accuracy in order to be legal.
| bombcar wrote:
| My fridge has something similar but at least it tells you what
| it does - it simply counts down 3 months.
|
| So I just reset it and tell it there is a new one and it stops
| beeping at me.
| zikduruqe wrote:
| My refrigerator recommends changing the filter every 6 months.
| Last filter change, I wrote the date on it with a Sharpie. Sure
| as shit, 6 months later, the light goes off to remind me to
| change the cartridge.
| shuntress wrote:
| Regulation regarding the truthfulness/accuracy of indicators
| probably wouldn't hurt.
|
| But, the _better_ solution is effective Right To Repair laws
| that coerce a minimum level of standards and open design.
|
| For example, if Brita were required to publish the parameters
| of that part, you would be able to more easily make an informed
| decision regarding replacing that part (either by repairing it,
| cleaning it, refurbishing it, or replacing it with one from
| another maker) without the tedious guesswork and reverse
| engineering.
| lazide wrote:
| Good luck with that! Even the EU hasn't broached that
| subject.
|
| Most of those folks make their money on consumables anyway,
| so then the manufacturers would Jack up the price on the main
| product and blame the legislators.
| shuntress wrote:
| I'm OK with sleazy companies pricing themselves out of the
| market if that's what it takes to prevent rent-seeking
| "ecosystems" imposing vendor-lock-in by making their "too
| cheap to be true" loss-leader products require esoteric
| consumables.
| lazide wrote:
| Sure, but clearly it isn't on legislators priority list.
| shuntress wrote:
| Plenty of states have active Right to Repair legislation
| happening right now. It's definitely on some people's
| priority list and good legislators make time for
| important issues.
| bikezen wrote:
| Can't say I've experienced the same thing, ours lasts pretty
| long and with our water you can start to taste the filter
| needing to be replaced shortly before the light goes red.
|
| iirc Brita advertises the tracker monitors how long the pitcher
| is being tilted for, so there's some verbiage about avoiding
| doing certain things with it etc in the installation
| guide/manual.
| root_axis wrote:
| Just FYI, those brita jug indicators are based on a counter
| that increments every time the lid pops open from a pour, after
| a certain threshold the light changes color.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| It depends on the model. Mine has the light on the dispenser
| (at the bottom) and the lid (at the top) has nothing
| connecting it to the light. I know there's nothing connecting
| them because it came unassembled and I put it together. I
| believe it is simply a timer on my model.
| hgsgm wrote:
| chucksta wrote:
| I'm fairly certain its disclosed somewhere that light is just
| on a timer, there is no realistic way to monitor something like
| that otherwise.
|
| Depends on your tank, see "how do I read and reset"
| https://www.brita.com/support/faqs/replacement-filters/
| ogn3rd wrote:
| get a cheap TDS meter.
| dharma1 wrote:
| Those filters (usually coconut shell carbon) can start having
| bacterial biofilm grow on them over time, and generally get
| saturated with gunk, that's why you're meant to change them
| frequently. I guess when they do depends on a lot of factors
| and the recommendation is an average length - ideally would
| have some better sensors on when to change them but gets more
| costly
| lazide wrote:
| And (defensibly, somewhat) they'll of course set the
| indicator to be for the worst case possible, even if not
| probable, so they 1) get more money, and 2) won't lose money
| in lawsuits from someone saying 'It still said it was fine!'
| who gets sick, even if there were other really obvious signs
| something was wrong.
|
| So for a filter, either 24/7 use or one time use then letting
| it sit (whichever is worse).
| alistairSH wrote:
| And yet water filters for use when camping last WAY longer
| and don't cost that much more. A simple Katydid BeFree lasts
| 1000L. I'm betting the Brita indicator came on WAY before
| that.
| [deleted]
| ska wrote:
| > Any indicator that tells you when a consumable needs
|
| I'm not a fan of the blinking reminders either, but it's not a
| monitor it's just a flashing version of the "remind me in the
| months" wheel or whatever.
|
| The problem they face is a hard one. There are really two
| timelines you care about, one is how long it stays effective,
| the second is how long it is safe.
|
| The first one especially is highly affected by both usage
| patterns and the water quality you are starting with. With an
| inline system I'd sort of hope to have reasonable monitoring,
| but Brita filters are fundamentally passive devices, to do this
| "properly" your going to 10x-100x your costs, maybe worse.
|
| A less cynical (than pure profit motive) take on the timing
| would be that the lifteimes are all based on some sort of
| average case for usage and (bad?) test case for hardness and
| water quality. I suspect they have to be careful in what they
| say about how best to adjust this without opening themselves up
| to liability, so they don't.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| Yes in fairness you make some good points.
|
| But given what we see the printer industry blatantly doing -
| I'm still cynical!
| ComodoHacker wrote:
| Ironically, the printer industry is getting off with less
| scrutiny from regulators because safety isn't involved.
| lancesells wrote:
| Instead of a timer you could have a counter. The Brita filter
| looks to last 40 gallons. My Brita pitcher holds 10 cups. 10
| cups equals 0.625 gallons. Which means my filter lasts for
| ~64 fills of the pitcher.
|
| So using a counter until 64 would tell me to refill. All you
| need is a plus sign and some way to reset.
|
| Now that I've done the math I might start writing this on a
| pad next to my refrigerator because I never have any idea
| when to switch the filter. Paper is preferable to electronics
| in my life.
| bewaretheirs wrote:
| At one point Brita distributed a spring-driven mechanical
| ratchet counter that would sit on top of the filter
| cartridge; it had some sort of diaphragm arrangement that
| would sense the water level and "tick" once per refill
| cycle and tell you when it was time to swap in a new
| filter.
| ska wrote:
| I wonder why they go rid of it. Was this shipped with
| every filter or was it a think you reset and put on
| again? Do you recall if it could tell the difference
| between a partial fill and full fill?
|
| What you really want is to measure the volume through the
| filter, but I can't think of a way to do that cheaply and
| mechanical only.
| bewaretheirs wrote:
| It was reusable. You would turn it back to the start to
| reset it when you'd pull it off the top of the old filter
| and stick it on top of the new one.
|
| I don't recall whether it came with the pitcher or as a
| bonus item included in a filter-multipack. It just
| counted one "tick" on a ratchet per fill/empty cycle, no
| attempt to measure volume or fractional fills.
| ska wrote:
| That definitely works better than a timer, but still has to
| be adjusted for the water quality in your house.
|
| But it also assumes you go fill-to-empty. In my limited
| experience they are often refilled from partially empty,
| whenever convenient. If you are doing this on paper, maybe
| you should count output instead of input? More work though.
| ocean2 wrote:
| One may attempt to sterilize the used filter. For example by
| using a microwave. This could prolong the lifetime of the
| filter cartridge.
| ska wrote:
| That could help on the biofilm/mold front, but won't do
| anything about particulates in the filter.
| pndy wrote:
| I'd say the unfiltered water quality still might matter in your
| case. I had to swap to the "stronger" orange marked Maxtra
| cartridges for harder water because the standard ones weren't
| actually helping. And I can tell the difference because our
| kettle gets less limescale now - that's also still the marker
| for me when filter is about to wear off. For our family one
| cartridge lasts for about a month now.
|
| I'm using these jugs for 10 years already and the quality of
| these dropped significantly. The older Elemaris line (with
| "probes") had more durable plastic while the newer Style (with
| silicone lid handle) already broke twice during washing. At
| leas the rounded sensor is more waterproof than the "probe" -
| that one I had to replace twice and luckily the local
| distributor send these for free.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| So Brita filters are just activated Carbon that improve the
| taste and filter some of the worst pollutants but nothing else.
|
| One way to test is using a TDS meter to see if over time the
| amount of dissolved solids increase. This is not a bulletproof
| test but it may give some indication of when the filter is
| saturated. Again, the Brite/PUR filters do not do much to begin
| with.
|
| This video shows how the Brita filters perform compared to
| others. THey use a TDS meter. I do want to also point out that
| TDS is not the only metric for how good water is filtered but
| thats another conversation.
|
| [1]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja0ioX6GSz0
| darkteflon wrote:
| We use Brita at home. Fwiw, it seems to be pretty successful
| at filtering chlorine - I did a little before/after
| experiment with a chlorine test kit purchased off Amazon.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Yes Chlorine can affect taste so it is one of the things it
| does filter although I have had friends tell me that it
| does not do a good enough job and they still taste it. I
| guess it depends on the person.
| lettergram wrote:
| You can use a TDSmeter to see how many particulates are in the
| water. Brita (as do many charcoal based filter) adds some
| particulates though. If your water naturally has a lot of stuff
| in it though, Brita will reduce it overall
| jp_nc wrote:
| Have had good luck with ZeroWater which comes with a TDS
| meter on the pitcher. Unlike Brita indicators which are time-
| based, this allows you to just measure the solids have
| actually been removed (if it's too high, it's time to replace
| it)
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Zerowater is great but man their expensive filters do not
| seem to come near the advertised amount. The expense and
| lack of good third party alternatives for their filters
| just adds salt to the wound(since it didn't get filtered
| out HA!).
| loufe wrote:
| I can't stand forced product refills from the OEM. I refilled my
| Sodastream maybe a half dozen times before buying a 5lb tank, an
| adapter hose off Ebay. It paid for itself in 2 refills of the 5lb
| tank at a nearby homebrew store.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| It's a very old business model. Often cited in introductory
| businesss classes as the "Kodak model" (give away the camera,
| sell the film) or the "Gillette model" (give away the handle,
| sell the blades).
|
| Generically you use the initial equipment purchase as a loss
| leader and then profit by marking up the required supplies.
| duffyjp wrote:
| I ordered a replacement toner cartridge for our HP laser printer
| in 2019 when it reported it was low. We print a few pages a day
| on average and the new one is still in the box... I haven't even
| had to take it out and shake it.
| jmyeet wrote:
| Never, ever, ever buy a printer that takes cartridges. They're
| discounted to at or below cost where they make the money back on
| cartridges.
|
| They use ink to clean the heads. They say empty when they're not.
| The cartridges that come with the printer aren't full. There is a
| constant firmware update war to defeat third party cartridges for
| obvious reasons.
|
| Buy a tank printer that you fill with ink bottles.
| 1123581321 wrote:
| Better to buy a laser and send the occasional photo quality ink
| job out to a print shop, unless you're running a creative
| studio.
|
| Even the starter Brother laser toner prints for ages.
| aspectmin wrote:
| Any recommendations on a good tank printer?
| bityard wrote:
| Sounds like you're talking about ink printers, TFA is about
| laser printers.
|
| Laser printers are far more cost-effective than ink printers,
| and there are even color laser printers with very decent color
| quality for everything except photos. (Ink printers are better
| for photos but even I think those look terrible compared to
| professionally-developed photos.)
| hathawsh wrote:
| Agreed. I've had the same HP color laser printer for over a
| decade and it's still working well. I've only had to replace
| the toner cartridges once or twice. Before that, I went
| through at least 3 inkjet printers that all failed because
| the ink dried out.
|
| BTW, a cool modern hack is converting a document to high-res
| image files and then submitting the images to the Walmart
| photo printing service or similar. The document will look
| incredible.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| Well - buy the printer and once it runs out of ink toss it and
| buy another printer :)
|
| I did that with an HP inkjet - got me out of trouble until it
| ran out, then I replaced with a Brother laser that was half of
| what the ink refills for the HP would have been. Toner for the
| Brother is like 20 bucks and lasts for a couple of years given
| my level of usage.
| jerry1979 wrote:
| Regarding the brother printer, what do you do with your
| replacement ink things?
| jmyeet wrote:
| Years ago I used to do this when I rarely but occasionally
| needed a printer. Less than $100 for a printer that'd last me
| 2-3 years then just buy a new one. I fully support this
| strategy if your usage is really, really low.
| ilyt wrote:
| I'd say they would put DRM on paper if they could
|
| Except fucking Dymo did:
| https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/02/worst-timeline-printer...
|
| On plus side choosing which brand label printer to buy was very
| simple...
| thebetatester wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25047231
| processing wrote:
| I don't own a printer for this very reason. As of late though
| I've had to question if this is viable anymore - UPS price gouged
| me for 2 A4 sheets of black/white paper prints for $6.40.
| kyruzic wrote:
| Check if your library let's you print. Mine let's me print
| something like 50 pages a month for free then you pay for any
| additional pages.
| duffyjp wrote:
| We print out worksheets for the kids almost daily so we need a
| printer. I bought the cheapest HP laserjet that had an internal
| paper tray and it's been fine. I'm pretty sure I bought it in
| 2018 and we're still on the starter toner despite it having the
| low toner warning light on since 2019.
| MetaWhirledPeas wrote:
| The horror stories are a bit overblown. I've had good luck with
| a regular old inkjet printer. Been using a Brother inkjet for
| years. It was $50 brand new (!!!), prints beautiful photos (use
| glossy paper), has a built-in scanner and photocopier, and even
| prints double sided. The last time I bought generic ink it cost
| me $22 for 3 full sets of cartridges. Aside from having a wonky
| UI it works flawlessly.
| davchana wrote:
| I got few prints from UPS, black & white long ago. Now I use
| staples, color one side letter prints are 70 cents or
| something, black white around 14 cents. Assuming your files are
| as pdf, on a fat32 usb.
| processing wrote:
| appreciate the tip.
| blululu wrote:
| FWIW, this exploration does not require a CT scanner. A simple 2d
| x-ray would suffice.
| stvnwd wrote:
| Or just a screwdriver.
| jonbruner wrote:
| Also, the difference between a full cartridge and an empty
| cartridge is minimal; about 20% of the toner reservoir is filled
| in a new cartridge, dropping to 15% when the printer says the
| cartridge is empty.
| daneel_w wrote:
| So effectively you only get to use 25% of what has been
| manufactured and what you pay for? What a terrible waste.
| colechristensen wrote:
| At least for my laser printer you can buy two kinds of
| cartridge: the one that's kind of full and the one that's
| actually full.
| loyukfai wrote:
| Sounds like a lot of space wasted?
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Many laser cartridges are legacy designs from before they
| started cheating on the amount of toner. That "extra" space
| was used to provide 10,000+ sheet capacity standard
| cartridges.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| This does not pass the sniff test given if you look at a
| new printer cartridge it is quite compact from the old
| school HP Laserjet behemoths.
| novaRom wrote:
| Ask yourself before buying anything: cost per year times its
| lifetime. Kilowatt hours, disposal costs, quality degradation
| (battery, software slowdown), etc.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| There is a benefit to the convenience of printing something at
| home instead of going to Staples to get it printed. That is a
| subjective cost that cannot easily be measured.
| brundolf wrote:
| Very glad I only need to print something about once a year these
| days. Everything about the industry feels like a race to the
| bottom
| fitzroy wrote:
| Empty Ink Cartridge has Better Medical Access Than Most Americans
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| upvote both for such a cool application
|
| but also to say that typically when my toner cartridges start to
| say "empty" or get a few streaks, all i have to do is pull it
| out, give it a few firm taps all around (think tapping a nail
| into drywall) and then give it a few horizontal shakes to
| redistribute the material across the drum. I get 100s of more
| pages this way doing it multiple times.
| bingaling wrote:
| My Brother laser printer counts toner consumption (i.e. page
| count) with a keyed gear on the toner cartridge, different
| cartridge capacities have different shaped gears, resetting the
| gear orientation resets the counter.
| jdsully wrote:
| Unlike ink jets most laser printers will let you disable the low
| toner "lock outs" although by default it may refuse to print.
|
| Then you just wait for the streaks to appear to know when you're
| out. You can shake it to extend the life once that occurs. I've
| printed hundreds of pages after the printer said I was out of
| toner.
|
| There's probably some small quality loss but for text you don't
| really notice if it's not streaking.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Yep; we went eighteen months between the first "no toner" and
| visible impact on print quality, despite two kids in school
| needing stuff printed daily.
| dlmiller wrote:
| That's not necessarily toner left in the cartridge. It could be
| developer. Laser printers have 2 separate forms of powder inside
| of them. One being toner, and the other being developer.
|
| The developer has fine metal particulates inside that "charge"
| the toner, enabling the toner to be pulled off of the drum, and
| onto the page.
|
| Larger copiers have the Developer, and toner separate. However,
| the cartridge pictured is the full process unit.
| pifm_guy wrote:
| Developer is, in all modern machines, a roller. It lasts almost
| forever - far longer than any home user will use their machine
| at least.
|
| When it does run out, I don't think it's due to wear or the
| metal particles being 'used up' in any way, but instead because
| a layer of dirt has stuck to the surface of the roller, so it
| is no longer any good at transferring toner.
| dlmiller wrote:
| Developer loses its charge over time. You have to replace it.
|
| Every laser copier/printer still uses developer. If you can
| show me a model of laser printer that does not, I'm all ears.
|
| There is also a transfer roller in each copier, maybe that's
| what you're talking about?
|
| I could be mistaken, but as recently as 2020, every
| commercial copier I worked on, still uses developer. I have
| never worked on, or heard of a laser copier without
| developer.
| eis3nheim wrote:
| The printer industry needs a revolution.
| rohan_ wrote:
| Does it? It's a dying industry. When was the last time you
| printed anything?
| squarefoot wrote:
| 3 hours ago, and yesterday, and the other day, etc. etc. Some
| activities still need documents to be presented and signed in
| dead tree form.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| Manuscripts. My spouse runs multi-hundred page manuscripts
| off anywhere from once to a few times a year.
|
| Sheet music.
|
| Patterns.
|
| Legal documents. There are still places that won't do esign.
| salawat wrote:
| I print standard library docs all the time to read.
|
| That includes building Table of contents/indexes.
|
| I print out pages of source code to do physical cross ref of
| when I get in some really gnarly code to help me physically
| reckon through the abstraction spaghetti.
|
| I print invoices, letters, diagrams, books, pamphlets.
|
| I mean, just because you don't do documents or have anything
| you want on paper, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't.
| jemmyw wrote:
| That's crazy. You know the text is just as real if you read
| it from the screen?
|
| I've never owned a printer, they're Satan's own gift to the
| consumer electronics market.
|
| Paper is also annoying to deal with. I've had an e-reader
| for 10 years but the odd older book isn't available. You'd
| think based on comments online that a real book is some
| magical wonderful thing, but they're an ass to use, heavy,
| large to store. Their only virtue is that they look nice on
| a shelf. But the other thing that looks nice is something
| other than a shelf.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| > You know the text is just as real if you read it from
| the screen?
|
| It's not about the text being "real", it's about the UI
| of printed pages versus screens. You can use the space
| around you, and leverage spatial reasoning, better with
| paper. You'd need multiple really big, digital-pen-input-
| ready, high-res screens, plus some very nice specialized
| software, to come close to the same experience with
| computers--and still only kinda, for some situations but
| not others. Or you can just print a few sheets of paper
| at pennies per sheet and have a couple pens and
| highlighters around.
|
| Physical paper is just another UI, and remains better for
| some things than screens are. Screens do have some
| advantages--you can't full-text-search the sheets of
| paper you have splayed over your desk or pinned up on the
| whiteboard or tackboard, of course, though given how good
| & fast OCR is getting, we might be able to do exactly
| that when AR eventually takes off. You can't have
| animations on a piece of paper. You can't back your paper
| up in the cloud. But you can also have ten pages visible
| all at once, with paper, and recall "I think that one
| part was somewhere to the top-left...". You can fold it.
| You can doodle on it. You can stuff it between relevant
| pages in a book. You can bundle related pages together
| with consistent ordering in a UI I that's quite nice for
| many purposes (AKA a binder). Put all those together and
| there are plenty of times printed pages beat screens
| (though, to emphasize again just to make this entirely
| clear, not always).
|
| > Paper is also annoying to deal with. I've had an
| e-reader for 10 years but the odd older book isn't
| available. You'd think based on comments online that a
| real book is some magical wonderful thing, but they're an
| ass to use, heavy, large to store. Their only virtue is
| that they look nice on a shelf. But the other thing that
| looks nice is something other than a shelf.
|
| From my perspective e-readers have exactly two killer
| features: space/weight savings (this one is, to be fair,
| a _huge_ advantage, and is the only reason I have one),
| and not needing separate "large print" editions for
| readers with poor eyesight. The UI of paper books is, in
| practically every other way, better. Two pages visible at
| a time is great. Being able to easily hold open a couple
| different parts of the book at once is great. Full-text
| search is occasionally nice but a good index is, overall,
| better (to be fair, being an ebook doesn't rule out
| having a good index, but I find them far more awkward to
| use than in physical books). Commentary and notes and
| annotations and _anything_ that leverages the fixed,
| physical space of the page, including things like
| thoughtful typesetting (especially noticeable with
| poetry) are all better in a real book. Endless
| customization is obviously nice in a lot of ways, but the
| flexibility of ebooks _harm_ some use cases--it 's no
| coincidence that a lot of non-fiction struggles with
| representation in e-book form, without resorting to
| fixed-size PDF.
|
| IMO ebooks aren't a book replacement, they're a totally
| new format, and creating content that best suits them
| won't be identical to creating content that best suits
| books, and books that are simply format-shifted to ebooks
| are bound (ha, ha) to suffer in some ways for it. The
| most apt comparison I can think of is the transition from
| scrolls to bound volumes. It's not hard to think of ways
| that scrolls would have been superior to codices, and
| while ultimately the latter may have been overall-better
| and certainly did win out, they weren't _universally and
| in all ways_ better. Ultimately, the space-savings thing
| may win the day for ebooks (again, it is a _huge_
| advantage) and print books may largely vanish, but it won
| 't be because ebooks are _strictly_ superior formats for
| reading.
| jemmyw wrote:
| I understand your points, but, for all except "including
| things like thoughtful typesetting (especially noticeable
| with poetry)," I don't find them very compelling. For
| fiction an e-reader has been a great improvement, easier
| to handle, never lose your place, able to jump around the
| book and then back again, search, and probably most
| importantly ergonomics - larger text when I'm tired etc.
|
| For non-fiction I do find it hard to understand how paper
| is better for you than on a monitor. Open 2 pages at
| once, yep, side by side is no problem, plus as many other
| pages as you like open at once with windows or tabs. Full
| text search AND the index, with clickable links to the
| places you want to go.
|
| Jotting down notes in the margin - yes, I can see that
| would be an issue. But if its important I think I'd want
| to keep it separate anyway. I have one of those e-paper
| notepad things with a digital pen which I use for note
| taking or drawing freehand diagrams or music notation
| (and its nice because it has the templates so I don't
| have to go and search for the sheet music paper). The
| only feature I miss from real pens and paper is colour.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| a few days ago?
| Arrath wrote:
| Haven't done much government contracting where documents are
| required to be submitted on paper in triplicate, eh?
|
| Sometimes I think I've singlehandedly kept one paper mill
| open with my current project.
|
| E: With the submittals I'm preparing this morning, I expect
| to print just north of a thousand pages of documentation by
| the end of the day.
| trynewideas wrote:
| _nervously looks at the tabletop RPG and CCG shelves next to
| my printer_
| hu3 wrote:
| Yesterday, unfortunately. Had to print some contracts.
| alar44 wrote:
| I'm in manufacturing. We print probably 10k pages a day. Not
| everyone is a work from home app developer.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Got kids? All the damn time.
|
| Have craft-related hobbies? All the damn time. Patterns,
| instructions, et c. Despite having a shitload of iPads and
| extra laptops and such around. Paper's far nicer in many
| cases, and sometimes _cannot_ be replaced by a screen of any
| kind.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| > Despite having a shitload of iPads and extra laptops and
| such around.
|
| My SO likes to bake decorated cakes. When decorating she
| prints out the design, so she can put the cut-out paper
| pieces on the cake to finalize sizing and composition of
| the decoration. Be it text, a symbol or something more
| elaborate.
|
| Just so much easier than trying to imagine what that thing
| on the tablet would look like draped over the side of the
| cake.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Right, there are tons of cases in various crafts,
| including things like cake decorating, where you need to
| destroy or deform a template or guide or placeholder, or
| at least for which it'd be very convenient, if not
| strictly necessary, to do so. You obviously can't and/or
| don't want to do that with a screen.
| mirekrusin wrote:
| "Daddy, can you print me something" daily here as well,
| most time wasted on finding the bloody print-and-cut
| cartoon best in the world character of the week.
| aequitas wrote:
| A while back I taught my oldest how to turn the printer
| on (and get the paper coming out, so I don't have to walk
| and get it myself) and she also wanted to "learn" how to
| print, so I explained the 2 mouse clicks needed for that.
| There is just something special about a kid that has
| unlocked a new magic ability and excitingly walking out
| of the room to return gleefully with a piece of paper in
| their hands. So far she printed recipes for cookies
| (which she somehow learned how to search for), drawings
| for her little sister and pictures of cats.
| zwieback wrote:
| It is dying but very slowly, still very profitable and pretty
| big business. hp's 4th quarter printing business was 4.5
| billion with a 20% profit margin.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| Gee, we're talking about printers not fax machines :)
| SapporoChris wrote:
| https://www.sakura-house.com/sakura_tips/printing-and-copyin...
|
| The revolution has already occurred in some places. If I need a
| print job there's a printer within five minutes walk from me, I
| actually have a couple of places I could walk to. It's less
| than 10 yen for black and white, 50 to 80 yen for color.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Japan is still very paper based, makes sense that they can
| make this a viable business there but elsewhere? It seems
| like a stretch.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-30 23:00 UTC)