this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
902 points (98.8% liked)

Comic Strips

17178 readers
823 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (24 children)

It is important to point out that it isn't the brand that makes it good, it is the fact that it is laser.

I used to have a Brother "multi function center" printer/scanner/photocopier/fax that used inkjet and it was pure asshole design. Wasting expensive ink just by remaining plugged in and refusing to do anything if one cartridge was low on ink (but was actually still half full)

But if I had to single out a brand that should absolutely be avoided for printers it is HP. They do asshole DRM to a whole new level. They bricked a brand new ink cartridge because I didn't put it in properly at first.

Now I have a laser printer and the nightmare is finally over.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago (11 children)

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.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca -3 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Using a laser printer in your home comes with negative health consequences.

[–] Fifrok@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] saigot@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Just so we are on the same page, could you share an example of this harm being observed?

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

HP has lower profits!

[–] k0e3@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)