Open source printer with refillable ink, no bullshit, accept rolls of papers.

Finally an open source printer ! I dealt with so much stupidity with printers. it warm my heart.

I do have too much joy to practice mandatory critical thinking about the release of a new project. Lets talk about it? i am not the only one to be happy about it, i have no info about the price though :/

  • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 hour ago

    The hardware is pretty trivial. The cartridges, which are the most problematic part are HP. This is so underwhelming.

  • ramenshaman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 hours ago

    No more frustrating blockages like: “Cannot print in black because the yellow is empty.”

    I think they’re trying to seduce me

  • MisterBen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I’m waiting for a machine to appear with an operating system with an source code, it would be funny

  • als@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    10 hours ago

    In the linked survey they’re talking about selling an ink kit. With that, the non-commerical license meaning nobody but them can sell spares, and them filing a patent, it’s almost like they’re just trying to start another printer company and just using the open source community to do advertising 🫠

    • justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’m not an expert in those legal fingerprints, but i can imagine that you might need a parent even if you want to open source it, simply so nobody else can patent it. on the other hand, in right now to lazy/sleepy to read the article, so don’t mind me :)

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 minutes ago

        That’s not how patents work. If you open source something, it will count as prior art if someone else tries to patent the same thing.

    • naught101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I think you’re misinterpreting - the thing needs ink one way or another, and the kit suggested in the image is just a standard ink refill kit. They’re just asking if people want them to provide that, or if they want to get it elsewhere - I selected elsewhere.

      • Starkon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        HP 63 et HP 63 XL (US)

        HP 302 et HP 302 XL (Europe)

        HP 803 et HP 803 XL (Asie)

        And the ink they use is cheap/available internationally.

        I also think that one can refill these with regular ink bottles from amazon/aliexpress

      • JustEnoughDucks@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 hours ago

        What it means though is that nobody in the community can sell upgrades to the printer, sell spare parts, or, and by far most importantly, nobody can develop a fully open source printhead for this printer to sell.

        Right now they are using a proprietary print head from a normal printer (understandably because it is by far the most complex engineering piece and is very complicated). However, an external team that wants to make an open hardware project taking on that engineering challenge with more expertise than this team will not be able to be compensated for their work if they make it specifically for this open source printer. According to my understanding of the license.

  • csolisr@hub.azkware.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Slight open-washing involved though - the license is CC-By-NC-SA, which sadly makes it incompatible with open hardware projects, and restricted from being available as a pre-assembled kit.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Certainly a cool idea, and I hope it succeeds and turns out to be what it seems.

    No price listed on their crowd fund page, so who can say what this might cost? Uses a Raspberry Pi Zero W for the brains and a STM32 for the cartridge board.

    • csolisr@hub.azkware.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 hours ago

      While I understand why are they unwilling to allow commercial usage of the final product, it also makes it difficult to actually put in the hands of people. I agree, hopefully they can reconsider for a later iteration.

      • warmaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        If it’s not really FOSS, It’s just an attention grabbing, open washing failure in progress, sponsored by people who don’t understand the licensing implications.

        • adarza@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 hours ago

          i do enjoy the fact they’re repurposing hp cartridges. but if this printer thing actually grabs some traction, i can totally see hp EOLing every printer that uses them and ending new production of those cartridges.

          • Starkon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            55 minutes ago

            Maybe by then openprinter would have migrated to their ink standard and started producing it. Old models’ ink cartridges can still be refilled but not changed.

        • BeatL@pawb.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 hours ago

          I do understand your passion and i respect your disappointment.

          While i understand the explicit implications of cc-by-nc-sa, (attribution, non-commercial,share alike) i fail to understand the implicits implications. Could i trouble you to explain it ?

          • doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            8 hours ago

            I think the criticism is that it’s less likely to build an ecosystem like a Gnu Public License would (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RepRap for an example of a 3d printer that very successfully used the GPL). The CC license prevents large corporations from stealing the design. But it also prevents someone from 3D-printing parts and selling them on a small ebay store.

            Seeing the dissembled printer makes me want it regardless of license tbh

  • Buhbyelittlegumshoe@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Aren’t printers pretty restricted due to needing to have surveillance and anti-counterfeit features? Is this legal at scale?

    • B0rax@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      The counterfeit features from my understanding are just matching one simple dot pattern. That could be included in the firmware here as well.

    • CardboardDecoy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I don’t actually know but I imagine it’s all voluntary. It seems like kind of an endless tail chase to constantly limit anything that could feasible be used to commit a crime. Actual counterfeiting with any success requires some pretty specialized shit. Honestly if this printer could be configured to meet those specifics them more power to them. End of the day though I wouldn’t imagine this being the gateway to massive expansions in the counterfeit market.