This is why you shouldn’t get your news from clickbait YouTubers. Especially when their source is a three-year-old reddit post that doesn’t even support their claim.
This is disappointing for Rossman. I like his content a lot and he’s on the right page, but I think he’s big enough that he needs to start adopting some journalistic standards. For example, if he reads that some company is doing something stupid, at least bothered to call them and ask for a comment before he drags them through the mud on his channel.
It will be interesting if he follows his own statements and issues a public apology video titled appropriately.
Yeah, I generally trust him but he can be quick to accusations. I can understand why, especially when a company behaves badly. It’s almost expected that companies are going to make their shit worse. But definitely needs to follow up and recant.
He usually apologises when he’s discovered to be wrong. I know he’s quick to accusations and stuff but he does seem level-headed (to me) overall.
Being level-headed would involve investigating before making accusations.
Yeah, I do appreciate that he generally does apologize when he’s wrong.
Apologies don’t make up for being wrong in the first place. Usually they don’t have the same reach, so the mis/disinformation spreads and many people never see the correction.
It’s the same bullshit “news” companies do to sway opinion. They’ll say something wrong, then a few days later put out a correction that a small fraction of people who saw the first part see. This let’s them spread any lie they want while maintaining an image of being actual journalists to those not paying attention.
I used to like and trust him, but he has gone way off the deepend of jumping to accusations for clickbait, exactly as this shows. It is sad because of how much he has fought for our rights, but sometimes I wonder if it is all getting to him.
Rossman is a modern day Ralph Nader; he lives on outrage and the money it generates. He’s generally correct but when he swings and misses, like he did in this case, it hurts his reputation.
Company’s PR dept saying “we didn’t do it” is not proof of anything.
If they’re not blocking 3rd party cartridges, why even implement DRM?
Do they have so much extra money that they’re developing features they’re not planning to use just because they’re bored?So when someone uses random sludge instead of ink and breaks the printer they can point at that as the cause.
It’s basic CYA. They’ll let you do whatever you want, but if something goes wrong and it breaks then you’re on your own.
That’s a very charitable way of looking at DRM.
I’m using a Brother laser with third-party cartridges, and everything still works after the recent firmware update. So I’m inclined to believe them.
deleted by creator
I notice it talks about not blocking 3rd party inks, but not (that I saw) about deliberately degrading quality. I hope they’re not doing that either!- but that was the recent accusation.
I read a bit on that though, and what I think happened, is someone got lower quality while using 3rd party ink, after an OTA firmware update, and called customer service. The customer service rep couldn’t answer how to fix it, except using genuine Brother ink, and the user asked a careful question about whether that was the only way. Rep answers yes, which is probably not true but seems like the ‘right’ answer to give; user interprets it as the Rep knowing that there’s a secret and deliberate degradation of quality with 3rd party ink.
If your printer is working fine, and is not on the network, leave the firmware alone.
Really because it happened to me until I was able to force a software roll back which required obtaining their closed proprietary service software.
Problem of course, is that 100 people see the lie (most believe the first thing they hear even if false), then 15 see the truth, and 10 believe it.
And those ten who believe it will be the most virulent and arduous propagators of that lie.
But is it a lie?
Here’s what I’ve seen so far:
- Rossmann reports on claims about Brother blocking third party cartridges on auto-updating firmware, and not providing older firmware
- Brother denies intentionally blocking third party cartridges
There’s still the claim about the older firmware. If it was available, it would be pretty easy for customers to prove that a change in the firmware caused issues w/ third-party cartridges:
- cartridge works fine
- upgrade
- cartridge doesn’t work
- downgrade
- cartridge works fine
That doesn’t prove it was intentional, it just proves it was the firmware update that caused the problem. If users want to stick w/ an older firmware, they should be allowed to, because Brother shouldn’t be able to decide what firmware they use.
The broader point here is certainly valid though, I’m just unconvinced that it’s applicable. Why should we trust Brother on this when they make the way to prove the issue nigh impossible?
Incidents like this are a perfect excuse for the bean counters and marketing experts to chime in and recommend that the firmware be updated specifically to block third party ink or toner.
There’s no downside, the world is already trash talking your company, even if you didn’t do anything wrong, but while it’s happening, you get to sell a shitload more ink and toner.
If they’re smart they won’t do that as they know people are buying their products specifically for that reason.
If they’re smart…
