Reprap on The Register

[www.reghardware.co.uk]

...which is nice. It's certainly my favourite online tech-tabloid.

Not a very detailed article, and I await the flood of 'OMG it can't print metal, its not replicating at all' comments. But still, more publicity and all that

I did notice that reprap.org is very slow today.

They were predictably critical. Very stupid. I commented on the article to correct a few misconceptions and blatent stupidity. Not that it will do any good. People should try and build one...idiots.

Demented

Here's some more press coverage:

[bluelinecity.com]
[www.blog.speculist.com]
[www.gearfuse.com]
[www.telegraph.co.uk]
[www.news-medical.net]
[ukpress.google.com]
[www.electricpig.co.uk]

I see the Telegraph helpfully provided a picture of a Terminator.

Also made boing boing, another top blog: [www.boingboing.net]

As the daughter of Adrian Bowyer I felt that I had to search the internet for my dad's little project! I found these articles yesterday.....

[www.dailymail.co.uk]
Someone also commented after reading this that the machine can't print metal....


[www.channel4.com]

[news.scotsman.com]

[tech.uk.msn.com]

[nz.news.yahoo.com]

[www.alphagalileo.org]

[www.nanowerk.com]

[www.innovations-report.de]

[www.scientificblogging.com]


Sally

... isn't it a bit to much publicity for the actual status of the project?

Some of the reports rouse expectations, that reprap can make anything (beside himself) in no time!

Then its obvious, that this expectations will collapse and give a serious backdraft.

Better give the development a bit more time, so we can sometimes meet the accuracy of common 3D-printers ...

Viktor

Viktor I've seen Nopheads work in the flesh/ABS and it is every bit at commercial standard possibly slower but definitely at the standard and i could be mistaken on the speed Actually on reflection and closer examination it might even be a bit better

---

Ian
[www.bitsfrombytes.com]

Ian Adkins Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Viktor I've seen Nopheads work in the flesh/ABS
> and it is every bit at commercial standard
> possibly slower but definitely at the standard and
> i could be mistaken on the speed Actually on
> reflection and closer examination it might even be
> a bit better

Ian,

It's great to hear that those pics that Nop has been taking of his prints are as good as they look.

Ian Adkins Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Viktor I've seen Nopheads work in the flesh/ABS
> and it is every bit at commercial standard
> possibly slower but definitely at the standard and
> i could be mistaken on the speed Actually on
> reflection and closer examination it might even be
> a bit better


That's wonderful, but it has yet to be demonstrated that this level of accuracy can be achieved with the stock RepRap design... in fact atm it has almost been disproven, really.

I agree with viktor... the project could benefit from a few more months of development before it is emphasized to the press. It will soon come to the point where a moderately skilled adult with some hand tools and a weekend or two can build and use a machine with an accuracy comparable to nophead's, but we're not there yet. Jumping the gun on this one may have serious adverse repercussions, as it will make it more likely for the project to be taken as a gimmick.

Kyle Corbitt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree with viktor... the project could benefit
> from a few more months of development before it is
> emphasized to the press. It will soon come to the
> point where a moderately skilled adult with some
> hand tools and a weekend or two can build and use
> a machine with an accuracy comparable to
> nophead's, but we're not there yet. Jumping the
> gun on this one may have serious adverse
> repercussions, as it will make it more likely for
> the project to be taken as a gimmick.

Too late. Toothpaste is already out of the tube. Just about every media mention of Darwin that has a comments section on the web is getting flamed by fab@home and candyfab partisans.

Flame away. Meanwhile we just keep improving and getting better...unlike them fab people...

Demented

... i get stuck to reprap and fab@home in last year and had some talks with Zach and Evan from f@h.

It's obvious that the f@h-system is more mature and 'user-friendly' then reprap, but i bet on reprap, as here is much more 'live-evolving' and seemly endless potential, whereas f@h seems to be 'freezed' in its actual status.

But beside, there is no need to flame or blame each other - why not participate from the other?

We could adopt the stepper-driven syringe-dispenser and f@h can easily embed the reprap-head ...

The philosophy behind reprap is the most interesting thing, so i'll looking with much optimism in the future of "basement-fabbing in every home"

Viktor

I think the risk of "backdraft" is pretty limited. Unlike OSS projects where it's just a software download, the barrier for an interested person to try fabbing is very high. You have to either spend a lot of money (F@H) or a moderate amount and have a lot of tools and skill. The people who take a look and leave were never going to build a system anyway.

Slightly less sensationalist coverage here: [blog.ponoko.com]

Links broken Steve.

Demented

Another one: [www.engineerlive.com]