Sure wish I had a repair manual and a diagnostic chart for this 12 mth old HP Officejet L7590 that continusly says “paper jam”. this thing cost 159.00 and I am told if you can’t fix it in 10 min, throw it away, perfect printer with just some hard to find issue generating a ‘paper jam’ message. Ever try to take one of these apart?
Many years ago I had this fantastic rs232 Dot-Matrix printer that I didn’t want to get rid of. But my new IBM PC running DOS and Windows 3.1 wouldn’t support it. So I got ahold of Microsoft to see if I could get their driver information…I figured I’d just write my own driver for it. Well I could EASILY get the information IF I was willing to pay $1500. Needless to say I junked the printer and bought a brand new one that was already compatible with my new PC for less then $200.
You can get an obsolete printer fixed, if you can find someone willing to do it and if you are willing to spend the money. I have an HP DeskJet 612C printer I bought in 1998. I had it taken apart and cleaned in 2001 because I had a shedding dog at the time. I recently had to buy an adapter to plug a parallel printer cable into a USB port, but I still use this printer on a machine running Windows 7. One reason it lasts so long is that replacing the ink cartridge automatically means replacing the print head. Now that Office Depot sells generic recycled ink cartridges for this printer, there is even more financial incentive to keep this printer running.
I have a tank of a printer it is a HP LaserJet 4050, This printer is from 2001 but they are well know for durability. I bought it refurbished for 320.00, prints at 2cents a page, I would not hesitate to get this printer fixed.
On the other hand the HP L7590 only cost 159.00. Minimun just to take a look is 50.00, so with any kind of parts it quickly does not pay to get it fixed. now if I did the work myself, that’s a different story, but I have no repair documentation. These new printers are so fragile a paper jam can end their life. Two stores have already advised me to throw it away. It is a one year old, color ink printer with copy and fax, looks brand new, I have not given up but subletting the work is not an option.
I have not seen the Massachusetts legislation so I can’t comment on it specifically. I have gotten many petitions from after market suppliers asking for my support in stopping legislation proposed to restrict the after market’s access to technical information. The petitions all made references to specific parts of the proposed legislation which would most certainly interfere with garage owners, OBD testing equipment, and after market parts. I’m not a computer guru but it would seem that the ECM on automobiles could easily be made to limit access to communication with it. That would severely hamper our ability to diagnose problems. Regular customers bring in cars that are still in warranty when CEL lights are on for diagnosis and if warranty covers the repair I send them to the dealer but repair the problem if it is not a warranted repair. That seems to be the burr under the saddle of dealerships and the manufacturers. I am shooting from the hip though. Maybe the MA legislation is to give owners more freedom.
Can Onstar read your trouble codes?“I see the police are after you.I’m shutting your motor down.”-Kevin “Those who would trade freedom for security,deserve neither”
It long ago occured to me that the Onstar system could be used by police (or whoever) to shut down a car remotely. For several years I was laughed at for being paranoid of new technology. I’ll be one of the last to enjoy such a grand convenience.
You guys will like OBDIII. Main feature is that it reports to big brother when an issue is present. I would have liked to have seen enhanced diagnostic capability but that is not the direction taken.
This proposed legislation is a joke however as it goes completely in the opposite direction where the consumer basically owns the entire design just because they bought one of the products.
Access to information is not ownership of it - its just access. If I buy Shrek on DVD I can watch it. I’m not allowed to reproduce it and sell it. Access does not equal ownership.
Amen-Kevin
Noted-Kevin
Yes. It transmits directly to that chip they placed under your skin while you were sleeping last night, and from there to big brother…
Sorry. Couldn’t resist.
The issue is simple. The car and its computer are bought by me. I have a right to the info produced by the computer. It is my computer, I bought it. I do not have a right to understand the proprietary software and I do not want to know the software. I want the meaning of the ERROR CODE. In detail. There is NO proprietary interest in the ERROR CODE DESCRIPTION. It conveys no programming secrets or actual computer code. No intellectual property is risked by describing the ERROR code to the owner. The only benefit is that the dealer might get a few extra clients. It is a car and there are only a few things it really needs to do. A trained high school dropout with enough extra parts can find the problem most of the time by paying attention to the symptoms. So why hold back the description of the error code? That is all that is requested.
It is totally legal to put any car on an integrated diagnostic system and cause problems and read the codes produced and produce a book about these codes as discovered. So really what is being protected? The error code descriptions are not properly a copyrighted or patented item. Much like the error codes of all computers they are just a means of communication to the owner of the item.
I will have to agree,one dealer I used to frequent(no longer) told me crap you wouldnt believe(If you have any mechanical savy at all.)I stopped playing victim and being lazy,got back into DIY and found some honest mechanics.Lastly,I try to make the time for routine maintainence and get a reliable make that doesnt have expensive quirks-Kevin
It really isn’t that simple. The very reason the legislation has been proposed is because the courts have yet to decide whether the purchaser of the automobile has any rights to the error codes. The entire area is still being explored in the law. And whether the error codes are as protected as the software itself is.
Consider the issue of hardware. Nobody would argue that a manufacturer’s body design is protected. If I buy a car, does that mean I have rights to its design drawings? Or its manufacturing processes or specifications? Of course not. The manufacturer has a legitimate right to maintain those as proprietary. Why is software any different? Whay are its fault codes any different? That, my friends, is what the courts have yet to decide. That lack of clarity, that “gray area” is what the legislation is about.
Mercedes is sueing another manufacturer right now because a new electric car they’ve displayed at the auto shows looks too much like the Smart car. Even the overall design cues may be considered protected.
Whether one argues in favor of the manufacturer or the consumer, the issue is more philosophocal than legal right now. It truely isn’t that simple.
Yes, On Star can read trouble codes.
Again I don’t think the info that is in jeporady is “trouble code” info for the powertrain but more so complex body control and suspension and braking and traction control systems. These are the systems where if info is witheld you would have a hard time fixing.
No problem with that,just want to keep the dang thing running-Kevin