Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin"
On 12/02/2016 04:14 PM, Jape Person wrote:
I have an HP Photosmart 6520 wihich is now almost three years old. I
run HPLip, but I can't say anything about the driver plugin, as that was
not an issue for me when I set this box up and got the printer. I can
say that I started out using only HP ink cartridges as HP made it clear
that other inks and cartridges would void the warranty. The last actual
HP cartridge that I bought, however, was in December of 2014. Since
then, I have been buying my inks from colortonerexpert.com, where I can
get a 4 pack of black and each of the three colors for only $21.99.
That's less than the cost of a single black cartridge from HP. When I
put a new cartridge in, as I just did a few hours ago, the printer
informs me that there are non HP cartridges in the printer, but it does
not prevent me from using them. Presumably, if I needed and wanted
service from HP they could see that non HP inks were used, but the
printer is three years old and out of any warranty, so, not really an
issue for me.
On 12/02/2016 06:25 PM, email@example.com wrote:
On Saturday, December 03, 2016 12:19:09 AM Doug wrote:
On 11/30/2016 09:57 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Beware of HP inkjets, HP recently had to change the code so that
could install ink cartridges that were not HP's and no, refilling
ones did not work. So everyone had to have a firmware update.
I heard something different lately, that HP changed the drivers (at
some), to, iirc, prevent people from using ink cartridges from other
manufacturers and to prevent people from refilling and reusing their
Understanding this, I've made a note to myself to carefully avoid
updating the drivers in my HP 4 in 1 printer. (I haven't yet emptied
cartridges, so I don't yet have first hand experience with trying to
Did I misunderstand?
I don't think you misunderstood.
This stuff in addition to the driver plugin decision makes me think
that policy wrt HP's attitude toward users of their products has
changed over recent years.
I'm hardly an expert, but the "DRM" retrofit strikes me as a pretty
dirty trick. And what I, at least, perceive as the slightly sneaky
introduction of the binary blob driver plugins while maintaining the
guise of fully open-sourced driver software could be more of the same.
In one of my more paranoid moments while considering these factors I
actually wondered if the driver plugins could also provide HP a means
of preventing the use of alternative inks / toner / etc. That would be
kind of nasty, wouldn't it? When I mentioned the idea to my
right-wing-nut conspiracy theorist friend he suggested that the driver
plugins might provide one of them there back doors" that the gov'ment
is always puttin' in our computers. I have to admit I'm a bit bothered
by the need to stick libraries and firmware for which we have no
source code on the system drive. I might not be able to figure out a
nasty hidden ploy in the source, but the fact that no one in the Open
Source community has access to do so gives me pause.
Yet, its certainly true that HP has provided a wider range of drivers
for its printers and scanners than practically any other common
provider. I'm just annoyed by what appears to me to be a slightly
"proprietary" (in the commercial and the more alarming social sense)
trend. Hey, HP, I bought the printer. It's mine now. Hai capito?
Eh, different strokes for different folks. But HP won't be getting
more business from me unless I see a change in the apparent policies
like the ones that resulted in the aforementioned behaviors.
I'm more than a little tired of corporate behavior that smacks of the
consumer being owned by corporations.