[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Re: Toner refill

On 10/28/2010 03:22 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
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:
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

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


This is free market capitalism at its finest.  Competition benefiting
the consumer, even in the face of patents which attempt to discourage
such competition.

That's a completely different (and valid) issue, which you did *not* mention in your "01:57 AM" email.

And you call me a Socialist?

That part about "ZERO of the profit goes to the printer manufacturer" was pretty darned... weird. Definitely not capitalist.

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?

I'm old enough and experienced enough to know that not everything that says "cheap but just as good as the name brand" is actually just as good as the name brand.

Yes, yes, I know: sometimes it is, and sometimes it's even better

But sometimes it just plain sucks.

You totally misread my statements, twice.  They were totally clear.  How
did that happen?

Poor writing skills.

Seek truth from facts.

Reply to: