upvote

points

by ramblurr8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby ChuckMcM8 hours ago|
next
[-]
It was really depressing when I realized that people will buy a sketchy product which is hurting the community and makers of non-sketchy products because "its cheaper and its not like my purchase is gonna change things one way or another."

It is selfish and short sighted, and it leaves their future impoverished, but in the moment they "got a good deal."

reply
upvoteby throwaway2194507 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
It's not worth engaging in the debate. People have complained that Prusa printers are expensive since forever, even when the MK3 was objectively superior to the alternative models. They would rather buy a $200 Ender and spend a lifetime tinkering with it.
reply
upvoteby RobotToaster4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Prusa have their own ongoing GPL violation https://consumerrights.wiki/w/Prusa_Research
reply
upvoteby qiqitori3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I think it's a bit iffy to argue that the bootloader code is covered by the GPLv3. In programs for standard computers running a big OS, the distinction lies in whether you are linking a library into your program. If the GPL code isn't a library but an external program, it isn't linking, and OK by the GPL. Now on to the bootloader code: in order to flash your device you have to put everything into a single image file. I guess the claim is that this process constitutes linking. But I don't think that is how most people think. Some possible arguments:

When linking, symbols pointing to addresses are involved. The main program calls functions in the library, and you end up with a whole program. On the other hand, a bootloader just does its thing and then jumps to a fixed address in the main program. The main program doesn't call anything in the bootloader. (Note, the Linux kernel has a special clause that explicitly allows the userland to programmatically interface with the kernel.)

I realize this sort of depends on the microcontroller toolchain. I'm familiar with a few, but not much with STM32 stuff. If the toolchain is dumb and implements the bootloader in a way that resembles linking, i.e. making it possible to resolve all the symbols in the bootloader from the main program then it could very well make the bootloader subject to the GPL.

reply
upvoteby Dylan168072 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Even as far as linking goes... If you're not actually deriving from the code in a copyright sense then the GPL is limited in what it can demand. The advice from the FSF on linking is not exactly unbiased. The part about the intimacy of the communication between pieces of code seems a lot more solidly based in copyright law.
reply
upvoteby 5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby trinsic25 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
This is exactly what people engaged in surveillance capitalism is trying to achieve. Sell hardware/software at a loss, push out the competition that does things legitimately and then continue there engagement in profiling everyone for profit.

I did a presentation[0] on this about a month back. If we want these situations to stop we need to work to inform the public and work towards getting people that care in positions of power.

[0]: https://www.scottrlarson.com/presentations/overcoming-survei...

reply
upvoteby ChickeNES7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
What community? It's a tool.
reply
upvoteby NegativeK2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You can't really spit in the hobby 3d printing world without hitting the community. I have coworkers who talk about their printers, filament choice, what they've printed recently, etc etc. I've been around hackerspaces with that behavior for over a decade, but it spontaneously showed up at work from a shared interest.

That community is where open source tech tends to come from.

reply
upvoteby ChickeNES1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I know the community well, I was challenging the assertion this hurts the community. On the contrary, better and cheaper printers help the community way more than the worries over software licensing. The average person doesn't care, they want a printer that works and doesn't cost much.
reply
upvoteby 6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby snapcaster8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Is the product sketchy or just their practices from your point of view?

I think a valid view (not saying it's right) of this is: "some dorks in a country I don't inhabit gave away valuable code. I'm going to use it and I don't particularly care about what they think about it"

How much do you care about Chinese law? does that make you sketchy?

reply
upvoteby ChuckMcM7 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Inevitably the situation is the "sketch" here is that the vendor avoids a cost by creatively interpreting the requirements. It became famously difficult to buy a reliable PC power supply at one point because PSU vendors were all trying to cut costs and undercut each other. When there isn't a lot of market differentiation features, people differentiate on price. At NetApp we got more and more prescriptive in our contracts with motherboard OEMs because they would do silly things like "leave off 1/2 the bypass capacitors" which would then cause the filer to fail in some environments. And I get that "its just business"

It's an easy thing to avoid the costs associated with complying with FOSS licenses because they FOSS people don't come after you. So instead of having a person on staff who is making sure the company is compliant and updating the web site with source as it changes etc etc. You just don't do any of that and not only do you save money not paying that person you don't have to bother the web site people every time you do a software update. So from a manufacturer's perspective it's a win.

That said, Chinese vendors selling to Chinese customers following Chinese law. All good. Chinese vendors selling to US customers and not following US law, that's bad. I don't see how Chinese law would be part of that discussion.

reply
upvoteby dspillett7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yes openly breaking Chinese law in a manner that is in breach of international convention or otherwise has wider consequences (breaking rules about keeping information from the party doesn't count unless I'm there: our privacy laws override) would make us sketchy. Can you name a company that has done that, or are you pulling an idea out of your hat because your argument otherwise lacks supporting facts/evidence?

What makes them particularly sketchy is the hypocracy: they fully understand the concept of IP and they are using/abusing it to try defend their semi-walled garden.

reply
upvoteby mrheosuper1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I blame the other 3d printer makers: Anycubic, Ender, Creality, etc.

Bambulab is far from the first player enter the market, or even the "budget" segment, but they still somehow captured it. Only till recently the others begin offering something that can compete with bambu's machine.

Turn out the demand for a good 3d printer, that you only need to do very basic tuning, and does not break your bank account, is very high. Who could've guessed ?

reply
upvoteby nomel8 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Some people like to use tools to make something possible/easy. Others like the tools themselves.

The Bambu printers, at the time of their release, were an incredibly superior pieces of hardware and software that was priced very very well and, this was a really big deal, worked fully right out of the box.

It was a pretty clear choice in either dicking around with the tools, or actually using the tool to make things. They caused a huge shift in the industry because it was silly to NOT buy a Bambu, if you wanted to actually make things.

I love open source software, but I also know that a team of focused, dedicated, high skill, engineers, who are financially motivated with big paychecks, to do well, will often do a better job making something proprietary than a bunch of volunteers doing it for fun, on the weekends. Ffs, we didn't get a half ass implementation (thanks to shite 8 bit boards everyone was using) of motion/vibration compensation in all the open source firmwares, a tech from the 1960's, until right before Bambu's release. It's still not available in most. Pressure compensation was still relatively new.

reply
upvoteby Symbiote7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Prusa's printers also worked out of the box. They cost slightly more, and their staff aren't volunteers.
reply
upvoteby nomel6 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
No they did not. Calibrating flow and pressure advance was entirely manual. Vibration compensation/input shaping did not exist until 2023 [1], and was also entirely manual. The Pursa XL (only thing remotely comparable) was over double the price [2], with the Core One (Bambu competitor) not coming out until 2024 [2]. Their MMU was a clusterfuck of tinkering [4], so when Bambu released the AMS, people were trying to figure out ways to get it to work on the Prusa! Even now, the new Prusa MMU alone is almost as much as a Bambu + AMS!.

Bambu shook the industry because it was better in all ways that mattered if you actually wanted to make something.

[1] https://www.fabbaloo.com/news/prusa-research-unveils-mk4-inp...

[2] https://www.3docity.com.au/blogs/3dprinting/corexy-printers-...

[3] https://toms3d.org/2025/02/11/finally-prusa-takes-on-bambu-c...

[4] https://www.reddit.com/r/prusa3d/comments/x3m76q/did_you_reg...

reply
upvoteby Palomides4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
if you absolutely needed a huge multi color/material printer, sure, but a prusa i3 mkwhatever was entirely adequate for normal 3d printing out of the box
reply
upvoteby zlsa1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I have a Prusa i3 Mk3 and a Bambu P1S and I have to disagree. They are in entirely different leagues. The Prusa was a step change improvement from an Ender 3, and the Bambu is a step change from the Prusa i3 Mk3. It definitely depends on what you're printing, but I personally saw all my print failures on the Prusa pretty much go away overnight with Bambu.
reply
upvoteby 2muchcoffeeman3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
So is a bambuu for far less money.

I have a Prusa btw.

reply
upvoteby nomel3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Nope. You will get absolute shite prints if you skip the manual, eyeballed, first layer cals [1]. Bambu manual effort is a few seconds [2] of navigating a menu, then print. But, these cal's are NOT equivalent, with Bambu doing linear advance cal and input shaping (completely manual on i3).

Prusa being "adequate" (and expensive) is partly why Bambu now has 41% of the market, while Prusa has < 3% [3].

[1] https://youtu.be/GE-lrRbU124&t=245 and https://youtu.be/GE-lrRbU124&t=524

[2] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XruRPpODE6Q.

[3] https://www.3dprintingjournal.com/p/consolidation-has-become...

reply
upvoteby mrheosuper1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
>slightly more

I wouldn't say "50%" is slightly more.

reply
upvoteby dspillett7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
More than slightly more, certainly when comparing like-for-like, particularly when considering multi-material features.
reply
upvoteby ChickeNES7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's a worse printer too. Not to mention overpriced since it's built in the EU
reply
upvoteby gilfaethwy6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> overpriced since it's built in the EU

Externalized costs are real. "Overpriced because it's built in the EU" implicitly argues that there are no fundamental differences between the labor conditions, environmental controls, and societal impact of the production process.

reply
upvoteby ChickeNES6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yes, those do not concern me. I already buy plenty of stuff from China, so a 3D printer is no different, why would I make an exception?
reply
upvoteby fn-mote3 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I am confident that my job cannot be outsourced to China, but I still worry a lot about outsourcing everything else in my life.

I recognize that my neighbors could easily lose their jobs to the same forces that are causing me to buy a Bambu printer.

reply