Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #153978 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-04 23:25 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-11-11 12:50 -0500 |
| Articles | 4 on this page of 44 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
HP split into two jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2015-11-04 23:25 +0000
Re: HP split into two Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-04 18:36 -0500
Re: HP split into two Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 22:58 -0500
Re: HP split into two philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-11-05 05:16 -0600
Re: HP split into two David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-05 11:28 +0000
Re: HP split into two Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-11-05 11:44 +0000
Re: HP split into two David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-05 11:52 +0000
Re: HP split into two Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-06 09:40 -0800
Re: HP split into two scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-05 14:15 +0000
Re: HP split into two Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 07:48 -0500
Re: HP split into two "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 07:37 -0600
Re: HP split into two "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-05 13:50 +0000
Re: HP split into two Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2015-11-05 20:47 -0500
Re: HP split into two Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 14:08 +0000
Re: HP split into two Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-05 13:00 -0500
Re: HP split into two "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-05 18:44 +0000
Re: HP split into two hankvc@blackhole.lostwells.org (Hank) - 2015-11-08 18:03 +0000
Re: HP split into two Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-05 21:16 +0000
Re: HP split into two Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-06 08:02 +0000
Re: HP split into two Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-06 09:20 +0000
Re: HP split into two Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-11-06 09:53 +0000
Re: HP split into two Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-06 11:58 +0000
Re: HP split into two Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-06 15:19 +0000
Re: HP split into two Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-06 19:30 +0000
Re: HP split into two Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-06 15:54 -0500
Re: HP split into two Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-06 23:02 +0000
Re: HP split into two Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-07 10:35 +0000
Re: HP split into two jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-07 13:45 +0000
Re: HP split into two Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-07 13:59 +0000
Re: HP split into two jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-08 13:46 +0000
Re: HP split into two Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-05 21:19 +0000
Re: HP split into two Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-06 10:16 +0000
Re: HP split into two Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-06 17:22 +0000
Re: HP split into two Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 13:01 -0500
Re: HP split into two Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:58 -0500
Re: HP split into two Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:57 -0500
Re: HP split into two Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-12 00:57 +0000
Re: HP split into two Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-11 23:33 -0500
Re: HP split into two Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-12 13:49 +0000
Re: HP split into two Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-11-12 10:55 -0700
Re: HP split into two hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-13 09:45 -0800
Re: HP split into two Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-13 12:58 -0500
Re: HP split into two Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-14 06:20 +0000
Re: HP split into two Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:50 -0500
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 09:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <302df278-7a66-4e9a-8aec-fa65654069bb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #154406 |
On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 at 11:30:42 PM UTC-5, Michael Black wrote: > I thought in the days of cloth ribbons for typewriters, they were either > all the same, or just a few types. There were actually quite a few types of ribbons for regular typewriters and not compatible, but it wasn't as crazy as it got for computer printers. Talk about forced obsolescence-- by discontinuing an ink cartridge, they make a printer worthless and one needs to buy a new printer. Forle, some people were buying bottled ink and using a syringe to inject the ink into a printer cartridge, thus getting twice or triple the life out of it at a much cheaper cost. If someone did a lot of printing, I could see the savings in doing that; even though it does seem like a messy pain. (I tried using bottled ink with a fountain pen. It was a lot cheaper than cartridges, but messy and a nuisance. There were some good reasons fountain pens fell from grace.) > But other electronic devices do it too. Lots of cordless phones have a > battery pack, and they all seem different from others. It comes as a > surprise to find some that use regular rechargeable batteries. I found a > nice 6mp camera with enough zoom, but the battery is dead and it's not > standard. So I can't even try the camera without spending money on it. I got a new simple cordless phone, same brand as my old unit. My old one had a headset jack in which I plugged in a cheap headset so I could drive and talk legally handsfree. but on the new phone the jack for the headset is slightly too big and won't work. Fortunately, I rarely drive and talk, but it would be nice to have the feature at times.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 12:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1511131257010.32489@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #154459 |
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 at 11:30:42 PM UTC-5, Michael Black wrote: > >> I thought in the days of cloth ribbons for typewriters, they were either >> all the same, or just a few types. > > There were actually quite a few types of ribbons for regular > typewriters and not compatible, but it wasn't as crazy as it > got for computer printers. Talk about forced obsolescence-- > by discontinuing an ink cartridge, they make a printer worthless > and one needs to buy a new printer. > > Forle, some people were buying bottled ink and using a syringe > to inject the ink into a printer cartridge, thus getting twice > or triple the life out of it at a much cheaper cost. If someone > did a lot of printing, I could see the savings in doing that; > even though it does seem like a messy pain. > > (I tried using bottled ink with a fountain pen. It was a lot > cheaper than cartridges, but messy and a nuisance. There were > some good reasons fountain pens fell from grace.) > The old trick, at least with Teletype ribbons, was to apply a few drops of WD-40, and that rejuvenated the ribbon. I never knew about this while I had a typewriter, but I did do it when I used dot-matrix printers. It worked reasonably well. Take one out, spray in some WD-40, put it in a plastic bag and let it sit, while I used the other ribbon that I'd already rejuvenated. Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-14 06:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20151114062039.ee5da87e1c2a7d01dfd6a44b@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #154459 |
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 09:45:58 -0800 (PST) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Forle, some people were buying bottled ink and using a syringe > to inject the ink into a printer cartridge, thus getting twice > or triple the life out of it at a much cheaper cost. If someone > did a lot of printing, I could see the savings in doing that; > even though it does seem like a messy pain. My inkjet has stationary cartridges which I replaced with oversized refillable cartridges (they take just under 100ml) which are easily topped up from bottles. It works a treat, they'll last as long as the printer and printing costs are like an old laser. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-11 12:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <proto-D6964B.12504811112015@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #153994 |
In article <n1fdmj$rj2$1@dont-email.me>, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote: > On 11/04/2015 09:58 PM, Dan Espen wrote: > > Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> writes: > > > >> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Joe keane wrote: > >> > >>> OK > >>> > >>> > >> Isn't it now into four? > >> > >> In 1999, they got rid of the test equipment, creating Agilent. Seemed > >> sad that they didn't keep the name with the test equipment, but I > >> guess by then most people knew the name because of consumer equipment. > >> > >> HP is now splitting again, the "home computers" and printers in one, and > >> the rest in another. Though this time both kept the name, sort of. > > > > They went through a bunch of stuff after that: > > > > merger with Compaq in 2002 > > acquisition of EDS in 2008 > > acquisition of 3Com in 2009 > > buyout of Palm in 2010 > > buyout of 3PAR in 2010 > > > > A sign of no new ideas inside the company. > > > > They're still profitable, but revenue is declining. > > So, the ship has a leak. > > They're moving the deck chairs. > > > > > Can't say much good about HP. > > I recall when they were known for their excellent test equipment. > > > One of my friends worked there for many years...he wrote their printer > drivers. > > When he hit 60 though they got rid of him. > > > He told me that HP once made products that no one else could make...and > now they just make products that no one else wants to bother with. HP used to stand for "High Prices" and they justified them with really good products. This has not been the case lately. -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web