Inteligent Printer

[Wizzo]

SWYP (See What You Print) – a radically simple concept for printing.

[Scott]

    Very cool.  If this is what is next, I want in.

[cosworth151]

Very cool use of technology! 

If it has a reasonable price, it should be big.

[F1fanaticBD]

Wow that looks simple awesome 

[Jericoke]

A good idea with a couple downsides:

1)  How often do you print photos?  Even if the printer is $100, including ink, you need to print 1,000 to break even with a 10 cent printing place.

2) I've tried photoediting on a tablet, and still find it much easier with a mouse.

[vintly]

I'll eat my hat if that printer costs less than $500

[Scott]

I'll eat my hat if that printer costs less than $500

More likely double that.

[Jericoke]

I'll eat my hat if that printer costs less than $500

More likely double that.

I dunno.  You can get a decent printer for $50, and a passable tablet for $100.

Once you cut out the cost of battery, expansive memory, quad core processor, and stick in a low fidelity touch screen, it can't cost more than $80 to make the printer.

Although a %500 markup doesn't seem unreasonable.

[vintly]

You can get a decent printer for $50, and a passable tablet for $100.

You're not a Mac user are you

[cosworth151]

That's the way it works now. The printer cost $50. The ink refills are $200 each. 

[Scott]

Really annoying, isn't it.  I would much rather they get their profit out of me for the printer and then sell the cartridges for the $2 each they are worth.  It makes the printers disposable, instead of the ink cartridges.   

[Jericoke]

Really annoying, isn't it.  I would much rather they get their profit out of me for the printer and then sell the cartridges for the $2 each they are worth.  It makes the printers disposable, instead of the ink cartridges.   

Like how hotels charge full price for the room and then fair prices for the minibar, room service and pay per view?

(Or is this hitting below the belt?    )

[Wizzo]

Printers are my business and I save my customers money every day by cutting their printing costs. Printer ink is considered to be liquid gold to the manufacturers.

Hewlett Packard (HP) cartridges. A decade ago, the best-selling HP cartridge had 42ml of ink and sold for about £20. Today, the standard printer cartridges made by HP contain as little as 5ml of ink but sell for about £13. All inkjet manufacturers are the same regardless of the marketing they use.

Name another liquid you would pay £13 for 5ml? Petrol, Perfume, Champagne? Nope! All of them, even the most expensive, are far far cheaper than that. Watch the video below and you will see that potentially 50% of the ink you buy is wasted inside the printer - crazy!

Add the fact that most cartridges are now fitted with a microchip which indicates the level of ink in the cartridge. These microchips are set to display the message ‘low on ink’ prematurely inducing unknowing customers to replace their cartridges before they are fully used. Some microchips shut down the cartridge on undisclosed expiry dates. In both cases the customer loses out on the ink remaining unused in the cartridge.

Inkjet printers, (which admittedly have their uses), are a complete rip off to the normal user.

[Ian]

Glad I don't use a printer, I print off so little that it's dirt cheap for me to do it up the library, good info though Wiz. 

[Jericoke]

Add the fact that most cartridges are now fitted with a microchip which indicates the level of ink in the cartridge. These microchips are set to display the message ‘low on ink’ prematurely inducing unknowing customers to replace their cartridges before they are fully used. Some microchips shut down the cartridge on undisclosed expiry dates. In both cases the customer loses out on the ink remaining unused in the cartridge.

Now there's an idea for F1 tires.  Let the 'smart tire' tell the pit wall when the tires are getting 'low', so they don't have to waste half the season guessing how the tire is going to perform.

Drivers and teams will still take gambles on the tires, but they will be informed gambles that are fair.  (At least fairer than letting one team get a secret test at any rate)