lemmy - Link to source

Open Source Printer coming before 2027

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 :/

OpenTools / OpenPrinter

Open printer is a reparable, durable and open source printer.
Open Tools
#opensource
in reply to Carlos Solís
lemmy - Link to source

BeatL

Well you are right !
Still i see it as a massive positive win in this particular sector, but sure, lets see what happen and be greedy with licensing! May the next one/release/update be more open.

I thank you a lot

They do have a survey that includes the kit question.

Here is the link if you are interested: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc0MLIj1Mfv81vaiOIQG1yMEilruRfNgx7h36l5a0qC-G9TZw/viewform

From this update :
crowdsupply.com/open-tools/openprinter/updates/on-the-road-to-launch

Open printer : Shape your future printer

Almost there ! We’re working hard to get things just right, mind answering a few questions about your dream printer? Your feedback will directly shape the final product.
Google Docs
in reply to adarza
lemmy - Link to source

SwooshBakery624 [they/them]

Creative Commons does not have any guidelines about using their licenses for hardware. It would still be a better idea to use CERN-OHL for hardware though.

Licenses

OSI Approved Licenses Open source licenses are licenses that comply with the Open Source Definition – in brief, they allow software to be freely used, modified, and shared. To be approved by the Op…
open-source-initiative-production (Open Source Initiative)
in reply to BeatL
lemmy - Link to source

Telorand

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.

in reply to Telorand
friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Carlos Solís

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.

Open Source reshared this.

in reply to BeatL
lemmy - Link to source

doubtingtammy

I think the criticism is that it's less likely to build an ecosystem like a Gnu Public License would (see 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

RepRap - Wikipedia

Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)
in reply to doubtingtammy
lemmy - Link to source

confuser

Finally a real answer haha, had to scroll awhile.

So the licensing thing is just mostly people complaining that it isnt the most truiest of openness since people tend to conflate floss with accessibility when people call it open and they mean accessibility.

Still getting a reliable printer that I can fix that I'm not vendor locked by that does all the things I could want a printer to do, since this was their goal I'm glad its happening.

Esta entrada fue editada (viernes, 18 de septiembre de 2026, 15:30)
in reply to confuser
lemmy - Link to source

warmaster

The limits imposed by the license will harm adoption, I hope I'm wrong but there will be no community around this. It will most likely be DOA. Which is a shame... The AGPL would better protect his interests.
in reply to confuser
piefed - Link to source

IanTwenty

The 'non-commercial' license means no one other than the creator can profit from these designs.

This means no one else can sell products or services so the ecosystem around the product will be limited to just the original company.

It does not stop you buying the printer and using it. It means there will never be anywhere else to get spares or service so you are relying on their continuing good behaviour, effort and existence (with no one else is allowed to compete), a monopoly. As I understand it will be refillable with third-party ink though.

This approach annoys some as the company seeks to profit from the claims of being 'open' whilst not being truly open as (in this case) no one else is open to offer commercial services for the printer. It is slightly better than a truly proprietary printer as at least we can see the designs.

You could decide this is ok for you as it stands. They could also change the license in future to drop the non-commercial restriction.

in reply to warmaster
lemmy - Link to source

adarza

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.
in reply to BeatL
lemmy - Link to source

als

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 🫠
in reply to als
lemmy - Link to source

naught101

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.

Open Source reshared this.

in reply to naught101
lemmy - Link to source

JustEnoughDucks

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.

in reply to naught101
lemmy - Link to source

Starkon

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

Esta entrada fue editada (viernes, 18 de septiembre de 2026, 8:25)
in reply to Diplomjodler
lemmy - Link to source

justme

ok, as i said I'm unfamiliar with this topic, so I'm happy about some inside.

how do you proof that you open sourced something before somebody patented it? i mean a parent is registered at some authority. is it sufficient to refer to your, e.g., GitHub history?

in reply to Buhbyelittlegumshoe
lemmy - Link to source

CardboardDecoy

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.

Open Source reshared this.

in reply to Buhbyelittlegumshoe
lemmy - Link to source

CardboardDecoy

Yeah I was thinking about that. Like, these companies probably have some number of government contracts and those contracts give latitude to make some interesting demands.

Open Source reshared this.

in reply to elucubra
lemmy - Link to source

muusemuuse

All I want is one laid-off and bitter engineer to get drunk one night and say “fuck this” and open source solve everyone’s problems with the abusable
HP shit.

I don’t even care if it’s dot matrix all over again.

in reply to muusemuuse
lemmy - Link to source

GTG3000

Problem is that those cartridge nozzles that deposit tiny droplets of ink precisely when and where you want them are pretty close to magic.

They're about as easy to manufacture as microchips, and they're also the one part of the inkjet printer that you absolutely need to be on point if you want it to print right.

I'm surprised we don't have open source laser printers though, that's still hard but should be doable, if you can source the material for the rollers and figure out the led strip that charges it?

in reply to crashfrog
lemmy - Link to source

confuser

I'm not saying it is new technology I am saying new to you, who now says you have used it before.

What is actually bad about this? From my experience the curl is at worst a barely noticeable affect on the paper and is less of an issue if you go through paper quick, for the people that don't care you can use flat sheets for this printer as well.

in reply to confuser
lemmy - Link to source

zarathustrad

Have you ever used roll paper? In what use cases did you find it equivalent or superior to flat? Any problems with curling paper, see any paper waste from the core as it runs low?

Have you ever wrapped presents with rolled paper? Notice any issues with it? Think it would work well for a pile of documents?

Sounds like you're the one arguing from ignorance here

Open Source reshared this.

in reply to zarathustrad
lemmy - Link to source

confuser

Yes, I never found it superior except in the case of space saving protective conveinance, just not an issue in my experience, plus it sounds like the printer offers sheets as an option anyways. I've seen curled paper with and without coming from rolls, obviously from rolls more but its never been an issue to me. As for core waste, hopefully we are recycling our paper stack coverings and rolls.

In my experience the curling has not been an issue with wrapping paper, I just wrap it in a way where its not an inconvenience, smaller sheet would be even easier to keep flat when its sitting on something flat and with stapled together in a corner anyways.

No

in reply to confuser
lemmy - Link to source

rumba

Roll paper isn't ideal, proprietary cartridges are not great. I applaud the effort, but it's all the easiest parts of the printer opened while the hard parts are left to capitalism.
in reply to rumba
lemmy - Link to source

confuser

Roll paper in my experience hasn't been that bad, I think wanting non proprietary cartridges is not feasible at the moment and we can use ink bottles in them anyways so it doesn't seem like a big deal. Its a much better very reasonable attempt that so far nobody else has really done so its worth supporting by reason to being much better than what is available at the moment.
in reply to confuser
lemmy - Link to source

rumba

You can use ink bottles for a number of refills before they foul or fail; refilling is fine, but those piezo heads don't last forever. Wanting nonproprietary inkjet heads will never be feasible, which is honestly why I had discounted the whole project. An inkjet is a wrapper of barely complex tech around a super complex printead.

It's like saying you're going to make an open source car, they going well, except the motor, you're going to need an engine out of a 1997 honda-civic to make it work.

As long as the heads are availalbe from HP, and they don't go nuts on pricing or some soul in china is willing to sell copies it'll work. That's just not the normal far for and open device.

in reply to crashfrog
lemmy - Link to source

Khanzarate

I would, when I'm printing out a D&D map. Taping pages together isn't the worst, but only needing to line up prints in one direction would be great.

But it's optional, either way. Odds are I'd have sheets in most of the time and switch to roll for that, specifically, but having the option is nice, it also lets me print smaller without wasting a whole sheet.

Open Source reshared this.

in reply to moldy_rice
lemmy - Link to source

ragebutt

Ease really. Once the patents expired it was fairly simply to make a 3d printer, which is essentially a hot nozzle squirting plastic. It’s more akin to a pen plotter

An inkjet printer is significantly more complex. Even if you know how it works you essentially need a semiconductor level fab to make the printhead. That’s why all these projects just reverse engineer hp cartridges. Literally every inkjet printer patent could’ve expired 10 years ago and it wouldn’t change the engineering and manufacturing challenges

Esta entrada fue editada (viernes, 18 de septiembre de 2026, 15:08)
in reply to cmhe
lemmy - Link to source

Augmented1207

I disagree.
Open source can mean many things, this license permits you to do anything with it, just not selling it.

Only thing is, you have to use the same license when publishing changes, which is normal for almost all open source.

I dont See anything wrong with it and calling it non open source is a bit misleading i think

in reply to Augmented1207
lemmy - Link to source

AnimalsDream

The Open Source Definition

Introduction Open source doesn’t just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open source software must comply with the following criteria: 1. Free Redistribution The licens…
Ken Coar (Open Source Initiative)
Esta entrada fue editada (sábado, 19 de septiembre de 2026, 13:58)
in reply to AnimalsDream
lemmy - Link to source

Augmented1207

I agree that its weird to use a content license.

But in what way do your listed requirements not apply to this project and license?

You can do whatever you want, besides makind money with it or sharing/changing it without attribution.

As far as i know hardware licenses are a bit strange still?

But i just dont unterstand your point and would like to

in reply to BeatL
lemmy - Link to source

rekabis

Esta entrada fue editada (sábado, 19 de septiembre de 2026, 15:21)
in reply to rekabis
lemmy - Link to source

BeatL

Thanks a lot ! I learned so much things. Thanks for the precise references.

It is a solution but i am not sure the supply will last. It can only dwindle.

Your arguments are sounds and valids.
I have another solution to a problem, thanks again !

in reply to renormalizer
lemmy - Link to source

rekabis

Yes but JetDirect is still cheaper and better integrated. There is the issue with outdated certificates and max. TLS 1.2 with the print server, but in a home/SOHO environment this should not be a critical security shortfall.
in reply to BeatL
lemmy - Link to source

stinkytofuisgood