Re: [OT] Re: Toner refill
Ron Johnson put forth on 10/28/2010 2:14 AM:
> On 10/28/2010 01:57 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Camaleón put forth on 10/27/2010 1:05 PM:
>>> There
>>> are also "compatible" toner cartridges at lower prices, which I would
>>> also avoid :-)
>>
>> There is no reason to avoid these Camaleón. They work just fine. The
>> only difference is that ZERO of the profit goes to the printer
>> manufacturer.
>
> Are you a Utopian Socialist?
The cartridge market is basically currently a 3 tier system (if you
ignore the toner refill kit folks):
1. OEM - Cartridge manufactured/branded for the printer
manufacturer--most expensive option for consumer
2. Licensed manufacture--same cartridge sold by actual producer under
its own brand with "OEM certification". Pays a patent tax to printer
manufacturer--2nd most expensive option for consumer
3. Unrelated 3rd party manufacturer independently designs a cartridge
to work with OEM manufacturer's printer. Cartridge design is
sufficiently different to avoid patent thread. Accepts much lower
profit margin in order to sell at a drastically reduced price, drawing
customers--least expensive option, usually less than half the cost of
the OEM cartridge (#1)
This is free market capitalism at its finest. Competition benefiting
the consumer, even in the face of patents which attempt to discourage
such competition.
And you call me a Socialist?
>> One of the tenets of FOSS is a free or low cost alternative to
>> commercial software. Why then, as a FOSS advocate, would you tell
>> people to avoid products made by companies who are trying to save
>> consumers money while at the same time providing a quality product?
>>
>
> What makes Joe's Toner Company so much purer of heart, mind and body
> than HP, Canon, etc?
How did you completely misread what I stated here Ron? I was LARTing
Camaleón, not putting a third party toner cartridge company on a pedestal.
People pick FOSS not only because it's usually better, but because it is
a lower cost solution, i.e. CHEAPER. Why then would such a person pay
full retail through the nose for a consumable instead of purchasing the
cheaper alternative that functions identically?
You totally misread my statements, twice. They were totally clear. How
did that happen?
--
Stan
Reply to: