If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Kickstarter)   Brilliant: Copy makerbot part for part and call it something new. Start kickstarter to raise capital. Take capital and pay Chinese firm to build your knock-off so you can sell it for two-thirds the price. Isn't open source awesome?   (kickstarter.com) divider line 59
    More: Interesting, makerbot, TangiBot, CAD, P L A, open source, plywood, professional engineer  
•       •       •

5021 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 Aug 2012 at 10:54 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-13 08:39:40 AM
Hell, subby, it doesn't sound like he's doing anything wrong. Makerbot can be a DIY project, too. I didn't watch the video so I'm not sure how he thinks he's shaving that much off the cost, but if he's got a better parts supplier, he can probably cut down on the manufacturing costs a bit.

However, if I were the Makerbot people I'd add something to my firmware to prevent the updates from running on his machine, unless that violates the Open Source licensing.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-08-13 09:44:32 AM
Sounds like that's the way it's supposed to work. He isn't claiming that it is an original design.
 
2012-08-13 10:57:54 AM
It's almost as if this person were motivated by something else, something beyond the pure realm of creativity and art...
 
2012-08-13 10:59:00 AM
Agreed, with the first two.
As long as he's not patenting it, and the open source files work. I might pay a little more for a starter maker-bot. Then again I haven't built one on my own either.
 
2012-08-13 11:05:51 AM
Every day a learn a new step 2. If only I could put them into practice.
 
2012-08-13 11:07:45 AM

Lsherm: However, if I were the Makerbot people I'd add something to my firmware to prevent the updates from running on his machine, unless that violates the Open Source licensing.


It's open source. Sure you can add a line of code that says "if (!makerbot) shiatTheBed();" but these folks will just delete the line before they compile their own binaries. And that's assuming the MakerBot folks would even have a problem with this company.
 
2012-08-13 11:22:30 AM

TheGogmagog: As long as he's not patenting it


He couldn't, since the pre-existing Makerbot would anticipate his patent.
But he can patent any improvements he comes up with, including improvements that reduce costs.
 
2012-08-13 11:36:09 AM
What's a makerbot?
 
2012-08-13 11:41:45 AM

Lsherm: However, if I were the Makerbot people I'd add something to my firmware to prevent the updates from running on his machine, unless that violates the Open Source licensing.


Why? The entire idea of the MakerBot project is that anybody can go and build one, if they want. MakerBot attempts to compete on service and being first-to-market with their solutions.

There are more interesting 3D printer designs on Kickstarter. Some of them even move away from TPE, although resin has its own trade-offs.
 
2012-08-13 11:43:58 AM

Theaetetus: TheGogmagog: As long as he's not patenting it

He couldn't, since the pre-existing Makerbot would anticipate his patent.


That only means he shouldn't get the patent. Unfortunately, patent examiners have not proven too terribly reliable in ensuring that such cases actually don't get the patent.
 
2012-08-13 11:48:26 AM
Get one of these instead, cheap and original:

Link $499

store.solidoodle.com
 
2012-08-13 11:50:08 AM

Millennium: Theaetetus: TheGogmagog: As long as he's not patenting it

He couldn't, since the pre-existing Makerbot would anticipate his patent.

That only means he shouldn't get the patent. Unfortunately, patent examiners have not proven too terribly reliable in ensuring that such cases actually don't get the patent.


[Citation needed]

Arguable complaints about obviousness aside, there hasn't been a situation where a product exists, a clone product is made that is exactly and explicitly identical to the original, and the clone gets patented over the product. That's just FUD.
 
2012-08-13 12:14:14 PM
Just to be clear...

i46.tinypic.com

I would need a *very* large garage.

/ but, come to think of it, I really don't d/l any movies or anything... huh...
 
2012-08-13 12:21:51 PM

maniacbastard: Get one of these instead, cheap and original:

Link $499

[store.solidoodle.com image 500x500]


Am I the only one that finds it weird they call it SOLIDoodle but prints out things hollow?
 
2012-08-13 12:22:38 PM
From the kickstarter:

How is 3DTangible able to make a Replicator Clone?

The MakerBot Replicator is open source. In other words, Makerbot makes its design publically available on the internet. Why do they do this? Well, it may surprise some of you that Makerbot is required to do this. You see, MakerBot used other open source designs when designing and producing their 3DPrinters. When someone uses an open source design in their product they are required to share any improvements in the design with the world. In other words, if you use open source and then improve on the design you have to share that improvement so that the rest of the world can benefit from it. 3DTangible will also be bound by these same laws and all the improvements we make to the design will also be shared with the public.

Just to be clear, there is nothing illegal, sneaky or underhanded going on here. Everything is legal and fair. Makerbot also used other people's open source designs when they created their business. This is simply the way open source designs work. Welcome to the world of open source.
 
2012-08-13 12:27:11 PM

Ned Stark: What's a makerbot?


It's a 3D printer. You put in the medium (the "ink") you want to make an object in, load up the design into memory, and begin printing.

One goal of the MakerBot project is to enable one MakerBot to produce the parts for other MakerBots. This means that it's self-replicating. In other words, we're now on the cusp of infinitely-reproducing robot organisms that will farkING KILL US ALL.

/my hackerspace wants to build one
 
2012-08-13 12:30:43 PM

Marine1: You put in the medium (the "ink") you want to make an object in, load up the design into memory, and begin printing.


Except you arguably aren't making an object, you're making a shape, poorly, out of one material. Just because you print out a shape of a cell phone, doesn't make it a cell phone.

It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.
 
2012-08-13 12:31:42 PM

t3knomanser: Lsherm: However, if I were the Makerbot people I'd add something to my firmware to prevent the updates from running on his machine, unless that violates the Open Source licensing.

Why? The entire idea of the MakerBot reprap project is that anybody can go and build one, if they want. MakerBot attempts to compete on service and being first-to-market with their solutions.


FTFY. Makerbot built itself on RepRap, and they are by no means "first to market" (since 3D printing has been around for decades already). At best they're the first to focus on pushing the machines towards laypeople, which is a shame 'cause their machines are not the best performers and aren't entirely out-of-the-box yet.

That said, this asswipe is perfectly within bounds to do this kind of thing, but it completely undermines Makerbot who actually do make attempts to add quality and innovation to the technology (even if they fail in the eyes of the rest of the DIY crowd). This guy doesn't plan to do any such thing.

Please support the people who actually contribute whenever possible.
=Smidge=
 
2012-08-13 12:33:28 PM

maniacbastard: Get one of these instead, cheap and original:

Link $499


I've got my money in for one of these. Hopefully it'll come out by the end of the year.
 
2012-08-13 12:33:49 PM

Nurglitch: It's almost as if this person were motivated by something else, something beyond the pure realm of creativity and art...


Right.. like the hipster coonts that run 'make' are motivated purely by art.
 
2012-08-13 12:35:50 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.


It's really only limited to trinkets if that's all you can come up with. I intend to use mine for making casings and other parts that would be a huge pain in the ass to fabricate by other means.
 
2012-08-13 12:39:15 PM

Smidge204: Makerbot built itself on RepRap, and they are by no means "first to market"


They're first to market with the hobbyist market. RepRap is not a marketed product. Most of the other products when MakerBot came into play were $10K+ devices for rapid prototyping in shop environments. After the MakerBot, you've got a whole family of cheap RepRap-based devices that have a range of quality. Stuff like Utilimaker.
 
2012-08-13 12:40:58 PM

IrateShadow: Quantum Apostrophe: It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.

It's really only limited to trinkets if that's all you can come up with. I intend to use mine for making casings and other parts that would be a huge pain in the ass to fabricate by other means.


Fine, but again, it's not the 3D printer doing that. So unless you have the tools, knowledge and time, trinkets is all you get.
 
2012-08-13 12:44:30 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Marine1: You put in the medium (the "ink") you want to make an object in, load up the design into memory, and begin printing.

Except you arguably aren't making an object, you're making a shape, poorly, out of one material. Just because you print out a shape of a cell phone, doesn't make it a cell phone.

It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.


There are lots of things that it could be useful for: replacement parts for broken appliances or whatnot, replacement parts for a broken toy (that old, original 80s Starscream you have that lost his wing), miniatures (these are insanely expensive to buy pewter but from a 3D printer, they'd be super cheap), art, simple tools (could be much easier to transport a 3D printer and the resin then print out exactly the tool you need for the job instead of trying to bring along a bunch of tools), etc.
 
2012-08-13 12:45:50 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Except you arguably aren't making an object, you're making a shape, poorly, out of one material. Just because you print out a shape of a cell phone, doesn't make it a cell phone.

It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.


It's also useful for making positive parts for sand-casting in various molten metals using the lost-media process. The resolution of the printing is more than good enough that you can cast some fairly sophisticated (but not overly small) metal parts.
 
2012-08-13 12:46:24 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: IrateShadow: Quantum Apostrophe: It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.

It's really only limited to trinkets if that's all you can come up with. I intend to use mine for making casings and other parts that would be a huge pain in the ass to fabricate by other means.

Fine, but again, it's not the 3D printer doing that. So unless you have the tools, knowledge and time, trinkets is all you get.


Eventually, you're going to have a robust market in designs.
 
2012-08-13 12:51:09 PM

meanmutton: There are lots of things that it could be useful for


Like making dusty rooms. Now, that's certainly a much higher-end printer than the MakerBot, but the gap between them is closing.
 
2012-08-13 12:53:07 PM
If there's enough of a profit margin built into the the "original" product's retail price to even make this feasible, then the manufacturer deserved to be ripped off.
 
2012-08-13 12:54:31 PM

wmoonfox: If there's enough of a profit margin built into the the "original" product's retail price to even make this feasible, then the manufacturer deserved to be ripped off.


While I'm sure the MakerBot has a very good margin, they're also not the most optimized supply chain. And there's that little aspect of using American labor vs. Chinese labor.
 
2012-08-13 12:58:03 PM

wmoonfox: If there's enough of a profit margin built into the the "original" product's retail price to even make this feasible, then the manufacturer deserved to be ripped off.


Without having everyone's financials in-hand, it's really hard to make that determination. If makerbot has the overhead of an office, employees, and R&D team, it really wouldn't be that hard for a lone drop-shipper to massively undercut their prices.
 
2012-08-13 01:06:55 PM

Lsherm: Hell, subby, it doesn't sound like he's doing anything wrong. Makerbot can be a DIY project, too. I didn't watch the video so I'm not sure how he thinks he's shaving that much off the cost, but if he's got a better parts supplier, he can probably cut down on the manufacturing costs a bit.

However, if I were the Makerbot people I'd add something to my firmware to prevent the updates from running on his machine, unless that violates the Open Source licensing.


I thought the whole point of Open Source is that anybody can use it, even commercially, so long as they fulfill certain duties that come with the license.
 
2012-08-13 01:08:51 PM

meanmutton: Quantum Apostrophe: IrateShadow: Quantum Apostrophe: It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.

It's really only limited to trinkets if that's all you can come up with. I intend to use mine for making casings and other parts that would be a huge pain in the ass to fabricate by other means.

Fine, but again, it's not the 3D printer doing that. So unless you have the tools, knowledge and time, trinkets is all you get.

Eventually, you're going to have a robust market in designs.


Also in online prototype shops.

Seems to me this 3D printing fad is like when people make PCBs at home. You can do it, but it's so much easier to get them made, and there's no way you can make PCBs as good as those at home. You can't make plated through holes, soldermask or silkscreen at home. And if you can, well, you're exceptional and not many other people will be able to do so.

You can't get the resolution or accuracy unless you are constantly making PCBs to keep your experience level up... At that point, it's a job. Unpaid.

So it's like people look at expert craftsmen and think that's the result they'll get at home merely by pressing a button. Nope. It's like DIY magazines from the '50 and '60s. They had these ridiculous 3-4 page plans for coffee tables and what not, but unless you had an entire woodworking shop and years of experience, you weren't getting the pictured result.

On the other hand, more people back then did have DIY skills since the massive oil-powered cheap-transport made-in-China particle-board-furniture system didn't exist back then. So there are fewer people with these manual skills these days.

Another thing I hear a lot is how we'll print out replacement parts... The thing I learned while repairing vintage oscilloscopes is that there's such an oversupply of parts that it's often far simpler to wait for a parts unit.

And in the rare case of rare parts, there's still usually an intact part somewhere you can use to make the mold, no need to go through the painful 3D model/printing phase. And in any case, finding the correct material to make the part out of is the hard part.

Like I said, you can get a *shape*, you won't get an *object*, unless you have the tools and materials like the above posters mentioned.

I just don't like the hype around 3D printers. I've been reading about "Santa Claus" machines for two decades thanks to Don Lancaster, and I know that it's a perfectly legitimate industrial process. But the hype for home use bothers me. As some Farker pointed out, I'm jaded.

I prefer "experienced realist with an engineering background"...
 
2012-08-13 01:12:45 PM

Smidge204:
That said, this asswipe is perfectly within bounds to do this kind of thing, but it completely undermines Makerbot who actually do make attempts to add quality and innovation to the technology (even if they fail in the eyes of the rest of the DIY crowd). This guy doesn't plan to do any such thing.


While agreeing on the douchiness of this fellow, this may actually be what Makerbot wants. Bre Pettis has made it pretty clear that he wants to kickstart a new ecosystem. And you need copycats in that process too. Not that I am going to buy this thing, Makerbot's braindead engineering choices in their initial Cupcake design has made me very wary of anything designed by Makerbot. I'll try to get a RepRap instead and after that maybe a Rostock.
 
2012-08-13 01:47:22 PM

The wonderful travels of a turd: Smidge204:
That said, this asswipe is perfectly within bounds to do this kind of thing, but it completely undermines Makerbot who actually do make attempts to add quality and innovation to the technology (even if they fail in the eyes of the rest of the DIY crowd). This guy doesn't plan to do any such thing.


While agreeing on the douchiness of this fellow, this may actually be what Makerbot wants. Bre Pettis has made it pretty clear that he wants to kickstart a new ecosystem. And you need copycats in that process too. Not that I am going to buy this thing, Makerbot's braindead engineering choices in their initial Cupcake design has made me very wary of anything designed by Makerbot. I'll try to get a RepRap instead and after that maybe a Rostock.


This. If this kickstarter guy does this and people people buy his machine... then immediately use it to make their own clones of/parts for this very machine, Bre will be seen smiling smugly to himself. I always got the sense he was in it for the idealism, not to turn a profit.

Quantum Apostrophe: Seems to me this 3D printing fad is like when people make PCBs at home. You can do it, but it's so much easier to get them made, and there's no way you can make PCBs as good as those at home. You can't make plated through holes, soldermask or silkscreen at home.


Silkscreening isn't hard at all. There's huge numbers of people who do it at home . Mostly for t-shirts and such, but silkscreening is silkscreening. The other two I'll give you; they're possible, but the chemicals can be a pain in the ass.
 
2012-08-13 01:48:13 PM

IrateShadow: I've got my money in for one of these. Hopefully it'll come out by the end of the year.


That is pretty cool, I would rather get the one you posted since , it looks like you can extend the axes to what ever you want. I couldn't open the link you posted since it is blocked at work. I would like to get one but modify it to print parts in a cubic meter.
 
2012-08-13 01:52:26 PM

ProfessorOhki: Silkscreening isn't hard at all. There's huge numbers of people who do it at home . Mostly for t-shirts and such, but silkscreening is silkscreening. The other two I'll give you; they're possible, but the chemicals can be a pain in the ass.


It's still an extra step, extra materials, extra space. It's still easier, better and faster to get them made. You can get lines down to 4-5 mils now, can you do that at home?
 
2012-08-13 02:12:03 PM

t3knomanser: meanmutton: There are lots of things that it could be useful for

Like making dusty rooms. Now, that's certainly a much higher-end printer than the MakerBot, but the gap between them is closing.


GDI Burn in hell!!! Now my cubicle is all dusty....
 
2012-08-13 02:12:52 PM

t3knomanser: They're first to market with the hobbyist market. RepRap is not a marketed product. Most of the other products when MakerBot came into play were $10K+ devices for rapid prototyping in shop environments. After the MakerBot, you've got a whole family of cheap RepRap-based devices that have a range of quality. Stuff like Utilimaker.


Reprap isn't a company or a product, so maybe that's where the confusion comes in.

Makerbot started out using 3rd generation RepRap electronics... so could get plans, parts and kits for a RepRap Darwin machine (in 2008, and for less money) before Makerbot was even founded. The original Makerbot Cupcake was essentially a Darwin with the threaded rod scaffolding replaced with a laser cut plywood box.

Now maybe your definition of "market" is different from mine, and that's cool. I would consider the "main line" RepRap machines to be far more hobbyist since you generally assemble them yourself and products like Makerbot to be a more consumer driven "download and print" business model. The way I look at it they are really only first in advertising budget - they are several generations behind in terms of machine design and electronics, but that's the price you pay for mass-marketing something that is evolving all the time.


wmoonfox: If there's enough of a profit margin built into the the "original" product's retail price to even make this feasible, then the manufacturer deserved to be ripped off.


Makerbots are made in Brooklyn, New York. They use domestically sourced materials and parts. They have technical support and R&D budgets, and spend resources to make some attempt to add and refine features. This guy is aiming to create the quintessential Chinese knock-off with literally zero attempt at improvement and probably will not even offer product support... so screw him.


ProfessorOhki: This. If this kickstarter guy does this and people people buy his machine... then immediately use it to make their own clones of/parts for this very machine, Bre will be seen smiling smugly to himself. I always got the sense he was in it for the idealism, not to turn a profit.


The Makerbot is not designed to be replicated, though. It uses mostly lasercut plywood parts instead of the mostly plastic (and printable) parts. Very little of a Makerbot is producible on a Makerbot.

Also, I'm pretty sure the "ecosystem" he had in mind was regarding the designs, not the machines. Pretty sure they want to actually sell the machines since that's their only revenue stream. Adrian Bowyer probably has a more favorable opinion, though...


maniacbastard: I would like to get one but modify it to print parts in a cubic meter.


Not only would any print job using that kind of volume take weeks to complete, but you will have terrible quality/tolerance/warping problems.


Quantum Apostrophe: It's still an extra step, extra materials, extra space. It's still easier, better and faster to get them made. You can get lines down to 4-5 mils now, can you do that at home?


"Cheaper" and "Faster" may not apply for prototyping with high design turnover rates. Granted, for circuits you'd do the vast majority of that on a breadboard before laying traces, but for mechanical parts not so much.

For example, I've been experimenting with printing reeds for a musical instrument. There is no established way to mathematically design a free reed - it's all trial and error. I *COULD* design the reed (which is about the size of my thumbnail), send it to a company to produce, pay a few bucks and wait a few days - maybe a week or more - to get the part in the mail. I could then spend all of ten minutes testing it before redesigning and starting over again.

OR I could just use my own printer, of which I have gone through four or five design iterations per hour, at what I estimate is 1/5th of a cent each. I could probably speed that up a bit if I used the same computer for both design and printing though.
=Smidge=
 
2012-08-13 02:39:32 PM
From the Kickstarter page: "My printer regularly runs 10-12 hours a day printing all kinds of things. In the past few weeks my TangiBot has saved me about $300-350 because I have made things instead of having to buy them."

Somehow, I don't think they're factoring in the cost of the plastic used and the higher electric bill when they claim a $300-$350 savings.
 
2012-08-13 02:44:39 PM

Teufelaffe: From the Kickstarter page: "My printer regularly runs 10-12 hours a day printing all kinds of things. In the past few weeks my TangiBot has saved me about $300-350 because I have made things instead of having to buy them."

Somehow, I don't think they're factoring in the cost of the plastic used and the higher electric bill when they claim a $300-$350 savings.


Who the hell "needs" that many things? It reads like typical infomercial garbage.
 
2012-08-13 03:18:29 PM

maniacbastard: Get one of these instead, cheap and original:

Link $499

[store.solidoodle.com image 500x500]


Mines on a UPS truck on the way right now. I'm giddy.

Teufelaffe: From the Kickstarter page: "My printer regularly runs 10-12 hours a day printing all kinds of things. In the past few weeks my TangiBot has saved me about $300-350 because I have made things instead of having to buy them."

Somehow, I don't think they're factoring in the cost of the plastic used and the higher electric bill when they claim a $300-$350 savings.


As far as the cost, the plastic is pretty darn cheap. At around 22 per pound if you buy it in filament format. If you buy ABS pellets there is a DIY filament maker that will make whatever filament you need, and if bought in bulk can be as low as ~$5 per pound. The power supply, in the pictures, looks like a laptop power supply, so the electricity usage would be low. The beds typically heat to 100, and the heating element in the extruder to around 200 degrees, all the electronics are Arduino or Sanguinololu and use next to no power, most can be run off of a 9v battery for quite some time.

For people making things that need specific parts, it can be helpful. Example if you have a specific part you need to make 1-5 of, Shapeways isn't a bad solution. If you mass manufacture telescopes (random example) and need a plethora of knobs, handles, etc. that need to be specific in size this would be the way to go.
 
2012-08-13 03:24:48 PM

Caucasian: need a plethora of knobs, handles, etc. that need to be specific in size this would be the way to go.


There have never been supplier of knobs and handles. In the history of humanity. How many knobs can you buy at Digi-key for 500$? Answer: A whole farkload. With colors too.
 
2012-08-13 03:25:41 PM

Smidge204: Makerbots are made blah blah blah...


Made in the USA, rah rah! Yeah, after twenty years of this "buy domestic" crap, our factory jobs still haven't come back. Every company has had to streamline and cut corners to remain profitable in this economy. These folks aren't special, and if one guy, outsourcing everything except his own salary, can so dramatically undercut them, then they deserve to get ripped off.
 
2012-08-13 03:42:03 PM

Smidge204: t3knomanser: ***snip***


So, building off of your reed example, if I wanted to design something else small that would take several tries to perfect in design, but did not need to meet exceedingly high material quality or precision marks, a home 3D printer would be a good option? Would it still be a good idea if I had no engineering or other mechanical background? Or is the learning curve/base knowledge required too much for someone to pick it up without a huge time investment?

///Thanks to anyone who responds for any help provided
 
2012-08-13 03:45:18 PM
It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.

So were the first stamping mills, Jacquard looms, and printing presses.
 
2012-08-13 03:50:32 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Caucasian: need a plethora of knobs, handles, etc. that need to be specific in size this would be the way to go.

There have never been supplier of knobs and handles. In the history of humanity. How many knobs can you buy at Digi-key for 500$? Answer: A whole farkload. With colors too.


I'm sure plenty are being bought for novelty, don't get me wrong, and if they had *exactly* what you needed, then yes anyone would go that route.

However.

Side-stepping the specifications that some people have doesn't make these things any less useful. There isn't always exactly the part/piece/panel/whatever that you need down at Home Depot. Example being, a scope I designed and sell requires a bracket, one that was designed solely for use this scope because there was nothing else out there like it I could buy. Now, instead of shelling out 8.36 a piece, I can print the the thing off for about 1/5 of that cost, that's roughly estimating in the cost of electricity. Print four at a time, and have it run while I'm in the shop already so I lose no real amount of time.

Hobbyists, R/C Modelers and Artists even can remove a lot of the cost of having someone else manufacture whatever it is they're needing.

Either way, the technology is new, and some people will see it as less than useful. I see quite a bit that can be done with it myself, and fully intend to take advantage of it. And if I get to screw around and print off some random stuff on the side, bonus.
 
2012-08-13 04:55:35 PM

Smidge204: Reprap isn't a company or a product, so maybe that's where the confusion comes in.


Well, that's kinda my point. RepRap isn't in a market- it's nothing more than a collection of plans and parts lists. MakerBot is a thing on the market. When I say "hobbyist", I say that because the parts printed on a MakerBot are not high enough quality for very many real-world applications.

roc6783: Would it still be a good idea if I had no engineering or other mechanical background?


Operating a 3D printer isn't like running something off of a real printer, but a lot of the hard decisions are automated for you. Downloading an existing design and printing it off could be done by anybody who's technical enough to follow directions.

Building a 3D model in a CAD or modeling program, even something as user-friendly as Google Sketchup, definitely requires a serious time investment. It's hard, and even when you know how to do it, it takes time. Converting it into a format that's printable will also take some failed attempts.
 
2012-08-13 05:20:35 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Marine1: You put in the medium (the "ink") you want to make an object in, load up the design into memory, and begin printing.

Except you arguably aren't making an object, you're making a shape, poorly, out of one material. Just because you print out a shape of a cell phone, doesn't make it a cell phone.

It's a way to make very expensive trinkets, slowly and poorly.


Yep, too expensive, too slow, and quality is not great...this year. But just look at recent history:
1977: I buy my first computer, a TRS-80. Not a single person I meet outside of the computer club has any clue what it does or why I'd want one.
1984: The Personal Computer is Time Magazine's "Person of the year". They're everywhere in offices, and already in maybe 20% of homes.

1985: Apple releases the first personal laser printer, at $6995.
1989: I buy my first laser printer, twice as fast and with better specs, at $995.

Things change fast at this stage of the new-technology curve. Look for the same sort of explosive growth this decade in other robot-related fields, too. (3D printers are just a specialized type of robot).
 
2012-08-13 05:49:37 PM

Smidge204:
Please support the people who actually contribute whenever possible.
=Smidge=


Because bringing a highly-desired product to market at 2/3rds of the going price isn't contributing at all. Actually putting MakerBots into users' hands so they can be used isn't contributing. No, it's all about the developers. If you can't develop, you just shouldn't have a 3D printer I guess.

Henry Ford would be turning in his grave, if his corpse wasn't exhausted from all your predecessors.

I'm an old man, so I've seen this same performance over and over. Did you know many of the early personal computing pioneers felt the same way you do? I've honestly heard it publicly suggested that anyone who can't bootstrap with the binary front-panel switches has no business owning a computer because, how would they possibly maintain it?

I've heard that same argument about music synthesizers, light sport aircraft, CB radio and even satellite TV: "If you can't build one yourself you shouldn't have one", they shout from the hilltops. Oddly it always seems to happen just when the first real manufacturers come into competition with the established hobbyist groups.

Metcalfe's law states that the value of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system. I suspect a similar relationship will apply to 3D printing, as more users means more freely-shared models means more innovations means more industry buzz and so on.

But I can understand why the MakerBot people aren't thrilled. The original innovators don't tend to last long once they see what real market competition is like. It was sad when it happened to George Morrow and Alan Shugart, and it'll be sad again when it happens to the 3D printing pioneers.
 
2012-08-13 06:07:39 PM

t3knomanser: Smidge204:***snip***


Well, there goes my plan for developing a snowboard for mice. :(

//Doubt I will try it for the time being. I spent 5 hours trying to figure out how to create a custom bar graph in Excel (no, not a pictograph) that would scale the size of a picture with the values in the table. Hit a snag at the need for Photoshop and/or being able to write your own code.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report