<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Jeffrey Watts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jeffrey.w.watts@gmail.com">jeffrey.w.watts@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr">I get what you're saying, but there's _always_ a cost. Big businesses have a vested interest in forcibly obsoleting old equipment - after all, HP doesn't make a dime on resold equipment of that kind.</div>
</blockquote></div><br>That is an incredibly short-sighted view, but far too common these days. Once upon a time, HP had a reputation for making better-quality, durable hardware, that worked as advertised for years. That reputation translated into a premium they could charge for their products, like Zippo, Craftsman, or Toyota . (The latter even mentions the superior resale value of their products in advertising new vehicles.)<br>
<br>But when they pull a stunt like this, they tell the intelligent buyer that it's not worth it to spend a few more shekels on good quality; they'll just EOL the thing before the hardware physically wears out. It's almost like you aren't really buying a printer any more; you're leasing it.<br>
</div>