Can we PLEASE stay friendly for the sake of the forum?

I think Stratasys bought Makerbot to have something they can pitch against their concurrent 3Dsystems (who have the CubeX in this price range).

What really is a pity is that Makerbot set out to build machines everyone could afford in order to spread 3D printing. With each iteration, they got more and more expensive and as Dark Alchemist already pointed out, finally pulled a shifty corporate move in taking away ABS printing from their standard printer (what is so "experimental" about ABS anyway?).

When saying that "the community" developed things, I of course mean what we currently have as hardware for home/hobby 3D printers. I am aware that Stratasys originally invented the technology.

vegasloki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> High end RP is much,much larger than Reprap. SSTS
> has a market cap of us$3.5 billion. In the big
> picture the Makerbot investment is a pittance and
> likely to hedge a bet that consumer based printers
> will take off. We'll see. On the consumer side I
> see printing services to be the consumer hook and
> not owning a machine.
I suspect you are right since most people lack the patience, time, and brain power that is demanded from a these printers.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

I think that people that would like to use the 3d printers are quite intelligent. just the economy has people use to instant purchase, and getting something now. people are quite interested until they learn that an object takes 2-8hrs to print. even more so what they require is tailored specifically for them. I would think that the main issues are with patience, and simplification of the process to copy an item (scanning, availability, for example), again dealing with patience.

jamesdanielv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think that people that would like to use the 3d
> printers are quite intelligent. just the economy
> has people use to instant purchase, and getting
> something now. people are quite interested until
> they learn that an object takes 2-8hrs to print.
> even more so what they require is tailored
> specifically for them. I would think that the main
> issues are with patience, and simplification of
> the process to copy an item (scanning,
> availability, for example), again dealing with
> patience.

I have seen the face of the people who would buy, you know the ones demanding 200 dollar printers that are ready to go, and they are not intelligent. I am not talking about the RepRap community of hackers I am talking about the average Jane and Joe sixpack who buy the worst pieces of dung personal computers from WalMart because they don't know any better then gripe all the time because they didn't do their homework before buying it. Those are the ones who want plug and play and instant gratification that I do not see an FDM ever fulfilling.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

vegasloki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think you make a fair point Tom. There are some
> pros in the community here. Most don't wade into
> these threads and some never post. There are
> several small business that do have good customer
> satisfaction.

No doubt.

Not only that, some of the vendors who have lower customer satisfaction levels are really good people who will evolve to become great businessmen, as well as the brilliant innovators they are already.

Tom Brown Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As best I can tell, the RepRap community is a
> pretty distributed and mostly un-professional
> group of people.

Yes, but we all contribute to the project in our own way. Do not underestimate the power of networks.

> Fantastic as these individuals
> are, an argument could be made suggesting that
> bringing a professional and somewhat corporate
> approach to 3d printing is the best thing that
> could happen to the community.

Not really. :/ We are 'breeding' machines, and freely sharing the results. Corporate interests are not too interested in sharing their IP.

> How many people ordered a printer kit from a web
> site or kick starter and got their materials, in a
> reasonable time, and found they were as promised?
> I don't hear a whole lot of positive stories,
> whereas there are a whole lot of happy Makerbot
> owners out there.

You should read the MakerBot Operators Group. It's not all peaches and cream.

> If I were doing it again, I
> would own a Replicator 2x right now. As it is, I
> expect I will own a Replicator 2x before the year
> is out. That is, unless they come out with a
> newer, better model.

What machine do you have? What kind of quality increase are you expecting to achieve? If you do get a replicator I'd like to hear what you think of the difference.

> Bre Pettis and his team created and defined an
> affordable niche in the industry. Kudos to them.

Well, I guess so, if $2000 is affordable. Unfortunately, he's stepped on a lot of people to get where he is. But don't take my word for it.

Some background:

[www.makerbot.com]

[www.youtube.com]

[www.hoektronics.com]

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

You know I never once thought to look at glassdoor because the people we see at MBI seemed happy. I suppose it was all a facade judging by those numbers.

Well, he shat on the OS community then shat on his employees too? Man oh man is all I can say because he seems lower than I thought he was.

You summed Bre, and MBI, up pretty well Akhlut but he does have his idolizing fans as well and no matter what anyone says his prestine, albeit fake, image remains with them.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

akhlut, you cite one of Zach's blog posts as supporting your argument. Now, just to be clear here, I do not think Bre Pettis deserves the crap you guys dump on him. Not at all.

But, as long you insist on dumping, you should reserve equal measures for Zach. The Zach/RepRap relationship isn't all peaches and cream either. As Jon Stewart says, one should be consistent with their outrage.

Imagine what reprap.org would be like today, had Zach stuck with the RRRF and built Thingiverse for RepRap, instead of leaving the RRRF to rot and building TV for Makerbot instead? It would have been great for RepRap and probably terrible for Zach, so his actions are understandable. Understandable, but also very similar to Bre's. So please, next time you go after Bre, save some for Zach.

But why are people always getting outraged about this anyway? MBI isn't holding anyone back here. They're not preventing you or me or anyone else on this forum from working on their projects, so what's the problem? Has anyone here personally lost out because of Bre's success? Or is this all just sour grapes?

Rabble-rousing threads like this one do more to harm RepRap than any source-poaching business spin-offs ever could.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/30/2013 06:09PM by MattMoses.

MattMoses Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But why are people always getting outraged about
> this anyway?
I will tell you why because the SOB preached a very good game as some sort of messiah for the OS community all the while knowing he was only using it to get to where he wanted to go then turning his back on it. We call that a hypocrit and a user or basically scum.

> Rabble-rousing threads like this one do more to
> harm RepRap than any source-poaching business
> spin-offs ever could.

Only to those who would do the same thing as Bre did. Maybe, just maybe, another scum sucking pig will see these threads and give a second thought about it as we don't need another user/abuser/hypocrit as one Bre is enough.

edit: Now to summerize most are only mad at Bre for professing his love and passion for the OS community and gathering us all under his tent to preach about OS but he was a false prophet. That is why people are mad at him to start with. Had he simply said what his intentions were from the outset most would not have become so mad at him. Be truthful with the public or face the wrath, and hate, he rightfully deserves.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/21/2013 02:31AM by Dark Alchemist.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

DarkAlchemist, it is strange to see your strong support for open source when you yourself have said you would never share the source files for your own work.

In this post you said

Quote
DarkAlchemist
I just know you would never get the original file from me if I had worked on something for thousands of hours.

and in this one you said

Quote
DarkAlchemist
Look buddy I am not here to design something so you can take it and print up a bunch of copies and make money off of me without giving me some.

but this is exactly what open source allows! Every time someone sells a Wade's extruder on ebay do you think Wade gets money? Does Prusa get paid every time someone on ebay sells a set of Prusa parts? Did Prusa pay Adrian and Ed and everyone else who made the original Mendel design?

How is the attitude that you express in your two posts above any different from Bre's attitude over at Makerbot?

Look, I don't want this post to come across as a personal attack, because it's not. I really actually do enjoy reading your posts because it's clear that you're really passionate about this stuff. But why do you always have to be so angry? There are other emotions! Aren't there more constructive things you can post about?

MattMoses;

venting is fine, just don't attack each other here. we all are patrons here.

jamesdanielv, I took pains to be polite in my post and pointed out explicitly that it was not intended to be a personal attack. With all the other hostile rhetoric being bandied about here, why do I get the pleasure of the "just don't attack each other" directive?

MattMoses Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DarkAlchemist, it is strange to see your strong
> support for open source when you yourself have
> said you would never share the source files for
> your own work.
>
> [url=http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?1,149017,14
> 9739#msg-149739]In this post[/url] you said
>
> [quote=DarkAlchemist]
> I just know you would never get the original file
> from me if I had worked on something for thousands
> of hours.
> [/quote]
>
> [url=http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?1,149017,15
> 6185#msg-156185]and in this one[/url] you said
>
> [quote=DarkAlchemist]
> Look buddy I am not here to design something so
> you can take it and print up a bunch of copies and
> make money off of me without giving me some.
> [/quote]
>
> but this is exactly what open source allows! Every
> time someone sells a Wade's extruder on ebay do
> you think Wade gets money? Does Prusa get paid
> every time someone on ebay sells a set of Prusa
> parts? Did Prusa pay Adrian and Ed and everyone
> else who made the original Mendel design?
>
> How is the attitude that you express in your two
> posts above [i]any different[/i] from Bre's
> attitude over at Makerbot?
>
> Look, I don't want this post to come across as a
> personal attack, because it's not. I really
> actually do enjoy reading your posts because it's
> clear that you're really passionate about this
> stuff. But why do you always have to be so angry?
> There are other emotions! Aren't there more
> constructive things you can post about?

You just proved my point because I said upfront what I would do with what I work on not like Bre did hiding behind OS only long enough to fool everyone while he used it to eventually get rich, and/or famous. That is my point as I would not be near as angry at him had he simply said he was against OS when it comes to his personal gain but he didn't.

edit: I guess it all boils down to scrupples because he passionately sat there on Vimeo, Youtube, and in articles telling everyone how passionate he was about OS but it all was a guise/ruse. Had it simply stated the truth I don't see how anyone could be mad at what he did. Like a snake oil salesman telling the townsfolk his medicine will cure cancer and half the town dies from it. Well, they tarred, feathered, and hung those types back then.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/21/2013 04:37AM by Dark Alchemist.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

If there isnt a plan to have & support an alternative to thingiverse that is effective in the general public, we're just a bunch of malcontents. It looks to me like a critical piece of infrastructure, what use are designs if we can get people to look at them?

The good news, of course there are alternatives; the thingtracker network, which bld3r at least supports, fabfabbers, and another one i forgot.

The bad news is that i dont see a support structure for these, some features are missing(at least in fabfabbers i dont see the link to the git repo, nor a 'download all' functionality) and there seems little activity in promoting use. (That is also the order these need to be fixed)

Dark Alchemist, you have a point in that a big part of the discontent is being fueled by Bre's (and Makerbot's) "sudden" change in mind and policy. There are a lot of closed source businesses and products around that we generally enjoy, fully knowing that the company behind that was never open to begin with.

That Bre betrayed what he was so enthusiastic (?) about is of course sad, but he has to come clear with it himself.
What I am upset about is more the violation of the GPL and disregard towards the original user base and developers the current Makerbot is exhibiting.

By the way, closing the sources didn't help against copies - I have seen a Replicator 2X copy somewhere in the net for about 1000$ less already, so Bre's point about having to protect his business as a reason why they went closed source is rather moot, but that was foreseeable to begin with.
Guess VC funding really messed Makerbot up in a company philosophy way. What a pity.

VC has done more harm than good overall because it is at the root of the problem since they only care about profit. Once a VC has you it is like signing a contract with the Devil because your ass, and soul, belongs to them and the dream dies.

As far as it protecting him and MBI I laughed at that excuse because I know China.

Your point about the GPL is that because he stradles the fence or is there another reason? About the original user base and developers you are spot on in my opinion.

As I said I would not care what Bre had done if he remained true. Either all $$$$ or all OS but to use the people and the very idea of OS, while touting and praising OS, to feather your own nest for your future gain away from the very thing you were supposedly so passionate about (OS) is the root of most hate.

I still remember watching Bre before I knew what a 3d printer was and saying to myself that that dude was a bit sleazy, my departed wife would look at him and say he looked shifty. Then a few years later the same guy would do what he did only helped to prove us right.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

@MattMoses

I never said anyone (even Zach) was an angel. People tend toward self-interest when an opportunity presents itself. I think that we're very lucky that the vast majority of people involved in reprap seem to be more altruistic than opportunistic.

I think the reason people get so pissed off about MBI is that to the general public Bre is the face of 3D printing. Add to that the perception that a 3D printer is a Makerbot. Just rubs people the wrong way.

Honestly, I really wish that Pettis had thrown the cupcake out the window and started doing what he does best - promoting. I wish he had the vision to leverage existing printers designs and brought the designers on-board to distribute the various models under the Makerbot banner. Bring them into the loop by licensing their designs, and paying them a royalty for each machine sold. Everyone would have won.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

Very well said akhlut

---

[mike-mack.blogspot.com]

@Dark Alchemist: Not exactly. The earlier Makerbots are released under GPL IIRC, including the first Replicator. The Rep2/2X is an incremental upgrade and thus should also fall under GPL (in case I am wrong here, please correct me; my understanding of the GPL is - truth be told - a little bit flaky).
OK, this is their product; I don't really care that much about this particular printer, so this doesn't annoy me that much.

But using GPL licensed software by someone else (Skeinforge) and repackaging it in a closed source application (Makerware) is clearly not allowed under GPL. When I checked to make sure I don't baselessly accuse them of something, I couldn't find them providing at least a link to the original skeinforge site, nor did they openly and clearly advertise what they use in their Makerware front end. Well at least they are saying they use Skeinforge (but only hidden in the documentation and manual about how to use their software). If someone knows the Makerbot documentation better, please chime in (maybe some bits of information are hidden among the download files, but I don't particularly feel the need to add the Makerbot repositories to my system).

uGen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @Dark Alchemist: Not exactly. The earlier
> Makerbots are released under GPL IIRC, including
> the first Replicator. The Rep2/2X is an
> incremental upgrade and thus should also fall
> under GPL (in case I am wrong here, please correct
> me; my understanding of the GPL is - truth be told
> - a little bit flaky).
> OK, this is their product; I don't really care
> that much about this particular printer, so this
> doesn't annoy me that much.
Fair enough.
>
> But using GPL licensed software by someone else
> (Skeinforge) and repackaging it in a closed source
> application (Makerware) is clearly not allowed
> under GPL. When I checked to make sure I don't
> baselessly accuse them of something, I couldn't
> find them providing at least a link to the
> original skeinforge site, nor did they openly and
> clearly advertise what they use in their Makerware
> front end. Well at least they are saying they use
> Skeinforge (but only hidden in the documentation
> and manual about how to use their software). If
> someone knows the Makerbot documentation better,
> please chime in (maybe some bits of information
> are hidden among the download files, but I don't
> particularly feel the need to add the Makerbot
> repositories to my system).

Alright, Software I know and understand and if this were not GPL they could have been sued for theft and piracy among other things but because it is GPL they can get away with it? Man, this just gets better and better.

Truth be told I played with the MBI software but I couldn't get it to do anything because I don't have one of their locked into printers but I did notice the similarities. With what you say Bre should be tarred and feathered for real and his only 'save your ass' deals is due to Open Source having no teeth.. So, do people understand why I said what I said about stuff I work on and not giving it out? I don't want a Bre to come along and make millions off of my hard work and there is nothing I could do about it and frankly this is what is keeping the entire open source down if you ask me. Give legal recourse for breaking an OS license and maybe more would sign on to OS? I mean, if you read what I said about the license I give for my models, I don't give permission for commercial usage of my stuff but that never stopped a Bre before but with the ability to sue when someone does what he did I think the VC would slither off and OS would have a chance.

Basically I am very much for open source, and have been, but I am not for giving my work to the masses so some scum sucking pig can become wealthy, and famous, while I live in squalor. Eventually this world will become a Star-Trek type universe where money on Earth is no longer needed and what you do with your life will only be to enrich yourself, your family, and the universe but for now people have to have money just not off the backs of those who try to give to the world for its betterment not so some scum can become rich with it.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

uGen: Author can licence his work under multiple licences, this is being routinely done. So its no problem for original author to later close once GPLed software, as long as his work isn't itself GPL derived.

Packaging together GPL and closed source software shouldn't be problem either, as long as source code and license for GPL part is provided.

miso Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> uGen: Author can licence his work under multiple
> licences,
> this
> is being routinely done. So its no problem
> for original author to later close once GPLed
> software, as long as his work isn't itself GPL
> derived.
>
> Packaging together GPL and closed source software
> shouldn't be problem either, as long as source
> code and license for GPL part is provided.

Not right as straddling the fence is just BS but you are saying it was alright, under the GPL license, to steal and republish?

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

Dark Alchemist: I am not personally familiar with Makerbot case, I was merely stating, that the facts named in uGen's post, alone, AFAIK are not proof of GPL violation. So its possible, again I am not familiar with specifics, that, what you call theft is in fact fair course action, in accordance with authors (Enrique Perez) free will (hopefully he read, understood, and chosen AGPL voluntarily), otherwise he could chose more restrictive license. However it is, I believe, its a case that concerns Makerbot and respective authors and is none of my business.

Dark Alchemist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Not right as straddling the fence is just BS but
> you are saying it was alright, under the GPL
> license, to steal and republish?

As long as you don't modify the source and distribute the software the restrictions on use are not limited. The restrictions apply when there is modification and distribution of the modified source. For example many PC makers sell units with some flavor of Linux installed. No problem with them using the original work and not providing the source as long as they don't modify it and distribute it. If the author intends to not allow the software to be bundled in a finished product a Sharealike license would be more appropriate.

The software I tried from MBI wouldn't do anything without a Makerbot attached would that not be a modification? I am simply asking as I do not know, nor understand, all of the OS licenses (far too many imo) but in a closed source world what Bre did would have ended him up with a cease and desist order with a possible civil action coming his way.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

Finally had a look at the GPL terms.

From how I understand the GPL, distributing closed source and free software together is acceptable, but enclosing - i.e. making it impossible to distinguish the free from the closed part - the free software is not, but that's not entirely clear cut in the license itself. Luckily, the FAQ helps out:
aggregation vs. modification
GPL software in proprietary system (note that the FSF definition of the term system also includes software)
GPL library in proprietary software
GPL parts and subsequent license of end product
proprietary software with GPL plugins
proprietary software with GPL bits in a wrapper

so, the last question for me is: how is Makerware structured? From the installer for Mac OS X, they reference some open source parts they used (found in the license agreement), but I couldn't find skeinforge among them at all. The installation aborted soon after since I am still using OS X 10.58.
Added their repositories to my Linux system is something I don't really want to do just for the sake of this thread and booting into Windows was too frustrating and stressing for me some days ago. Don't want to experience that anytime soon again.
Can anyone with Makerware already installed shed some light on this issue?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2013 05:23PM by uGen.

"booting into Windows was too frustrating and stressing for me some days ago" - If that was Windows 8 then you were saved by your frustration because it really is horrible for the desktop (I will stay on Windows 7 until they wise up and start thinking about desktops again not just touch screens, tablets, and cell/mobile phones).

"Can anyone with Makerware already installed shed some light on this issue?" - As would I.

I am sure someone around here has that installed but I know when I last installed it about a year ago I couldn't do anything without a Makerbot installed so even if you had a 3d printer that software was hard locked into the Makerbot scene only. Things could have changed since then but I wouldn't know.

edit: Consider this situation: 1) X releases V1 of a project under the GPL. 2) Y contributes to the development of V2 with changes and new code based on V1. 3) X wants to convert V2 to a non-GPL license. Does X need Y's permission?

Yes. Y was required to release its version under the GNU GPL, as a consequence of basing it on X's version V1. Nothing required Y to agree to any other license for its code. Therefore, X must get Y's permission before releasing that code under another license.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2013 05:47PM by Dark Alchemist.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

Quote
uGen
so, the last question for me is: how is Makerware structured?

Attaching filelist. Its just 7zip extracted, so expect slightly different structure when properly installed. Skeinforge version used is 12.03.14 (version.txt) respectively 12.03.15 (http://fabmetheus.crsndoo.com/).

OK, seems like I was wrong. Where did I get the idea that skeinforge was closely bundled into Makerware again...?

Sorry about the confusion.

I am very surprised that no one has thought of taking the 3D model of Bre Pettis's head and grafting a large male member on the forehead. We could then all re post it back on Thingiverse. It just seems the logical next progression to me and much more creative than posting cubes on there.

.....I welcome other suggestions of how to show our disapproval.

---

Helium Frog Website