1 (edited by adrian 2013-07-02 11:10:49)

Topic: Interesting comments from Sam at CNETs 3D Printer Panel

http://www.solidoodle.com/2013/06/solid … g-support/

(bold added for emphasis)

A major theme was the idea of innovation pushing the industry forward, and how making 3D printing easier and more affordable has taken it so far and will continue to play a major factor in bringing it to even more consumers.

Sloan also inquired about differences between machines and use of filaments. When asked about using industry-standard filaments vs. closed cartridges, Sam pointed to innovation as a reason why an open design is good:

“We recommend our own filaments because we know they’re the best quality and have fewer issues with clogging than others…we like having the open design with filaments because it encourages innovation with printing materials.

So open design elements when it comes to the filament, is a good thing - in fact its apparently important to drive innovation and push the industry forward.... But one can only assume its not a good thing when it comes to the printer itself.... given that all components on a Solidoodle are considered 'closed source' even when they are rebadged open-source elements.

I'm confused that 'open source is good' when it comes to filament (but not as good as Solidoodles own Filament unsurprisingly...)... but apparently not so good when it comes to the printer itself....

2

Re: Interesting comments from Sam at CNETs 3D Printer Panel

I think overall the whole commercial side of personal 3d printing is in the same boat. They will use the OS community to save money/time, blow wind up everyone's backsides, only to keep improvements and modifications to themselves. From a management point of view it makes sense, you want to protect your IP so you have a product customers want that no one else has, but at the same time they slip a bit of a dagger in there as well by not helping you help yourself.

Sorry, bit of a rant, but wanted to put my thoughts out there. Take it or leave it smile

3

Re: Interesting comments from Sam at CNETs 3D Printer Panel

Adrian, I can understand the point Sam is trying to make about the filament although I might characterize it better as open and proprietary standards.

However, I'm not quite understanding what you mean by "closed source" components.

SD2, glass bed, MK5 setup with E3D lite extruder
NX and Solid Edge CAD user
PI, Galileo, and arduino hacker
Code Monkey and Twitter user @burhop

4

Re: Interesting comments from Sam at CNETs 3D Printer Panel

mark.burhop wrote:

However, I'm not quite understanding what you mean by "closed source" components.

There have been many times where Solidoodle have released an upgrade part, members of the community request the STL so they can print it and keep their printer as the latest spec and Solidoodle refuse.

Or the times when they refuse to let us know a thermistor or resistor part number when we want to replace it ourselves.

Luckily the community designs for replacement parts have trumped their parts.

5

Re: Interesting comments from Sam at CNETs 3D Printer Panel

Ah.  Gotcha.

Still, seems hard to understand and I wonder if there is more too it.  The first person that gets one with the new parts will be able to tell everyone else.  Its not like software.

SD2, glass bed, MK5 setup with E3D lite extruder
NX and Solid Edge CAD user
PI, Galileo, and arduino hacker
Code Monkey and Twitter user @burhop

6 (edited by dubbsd 2013-07-03 00:18:10)

Re: Interesting comments from Sam at CNETs 3D Printer Panel

if a newbie gets a printer and their are updates a lot of them will not know what the updates are.

Ultimaker S3.