this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
40 points (100.0% liked)

3DPrinting

15525 readers
189 users here now

3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.

The r/functionalprint community is now located at: [email protected] or [email protected]

There are CAD communities available at: [email protected] or [email protected]

Rules

If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is ![](URL)

Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
40
Prusa MK4 vs Bambu P1S (self.3dprinting)
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by root to c/3dprinting
 

I'm looking to buy an intermediate level printer to upgrade from a MK2, and I'm deciding between a P1S vs a MK4.

I have never considered getting anything other than a Prusa, since I've had such good experiences using mine, however I heard that recently they've switched away from their open source model(?)

That and being made in the EU was the main differentiating factor for me, however I do hear really good things about Bambu printers.

Does anyone have experience with either?

Edit: Found a lot of the information I was looking for here: https://lemmy.world/post/9500502

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Prusa firmware is all still on github. They are using a few more machined or injection moulded parts where it makes sense for stiffness or things like the spool holder. Most of the printer and especially anything that might get revisions later is 3d printed

[–] root 8 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Gotcha. I remember seeing that they are switching to injection molding in a recent YT video of their labs. I'm not sure what everyone is talking bout when they mention Prusa is less open source than before. Seems like just some misinformation I guess. Thank you for the reply.

[–] CosmoNova 10 points 10 months ago

The injection mold comment in the Prusa tour video was sarcasm that might‘ve went over some people‘s heads. Prusa being less open source seems completely made up to me. No idea why someone would say that other than making closed source printers like Bambulab‘s look less problematic.

Ultimately it‘s up to you to decide how much you‘re willing to spend and how much you value convenience vs. actually owning your printer and contributing to 3D printing staying open source.

I for one see enough parallels between the new generation of closed source 3D printers and seemingly cheap HP inkjet printers that became increasingly more hostile towards costumers as they gained market share to not touch them with a stick.

[–] PlasticExistence 7 points 10 months ago

I think that perception comes from a post from Josef Prusa where he expressed disdain for companies that are taking the Prusa design and software and wholesale copying it (while doing a really bad job of removing the Prusa branding in the software/firmware). He said that he wasn't sure how viable continuing to publish everything openly would be given this. I think that was aimed at Anycubic, but don't quote me on that.

I would say you're probably going to have a better time with the MK4 in the long run vs. the Bambu Labs, but Prusa should probably take notice that other companies are starting to sell really competitive machines that are reliable (and not just ripoffs of their designs). Sure the XL is unparalleled, but if you just want to unbox a midsize printer and go, Prusa's machines are very expensive preassembled. Yeah you can get it cheaper if you assemble it yourself, but that doesn't cover every potential customer's desires.

I get the sense that Prusa is getting comfortable with his success, and with that he's getting more protective of his cash cow. Him complaining about how much value he sees in open source is - in my opinion, anyway - a symptom of that. The entire RepRap community upon which he built his business is thanks to open source.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He made a post about some future printers not being fully open source anymore. The post is here: https://blog.prusa3d.com/the-state-of-open-source-in-3d-printing-in-2023_76659/

These are the working points for their future license (not fully fleshed out):

  • If you’re using some code or blueprints to bring software or hardware to market, the original code’s authorship must be clearly stated on the product or in the software. Additionally, deleting copyright information from headers and history from repositories is prohibited.
  • The production of nearly exact 1:1 clones for commercial purposes is not allowed.
  • License for manufacturing spare parts is valid for service, modification, or educational purposes.
  • Upgrades and additional modifications based on original parts are allowed and welcome.
  • Parts that can be considered consumables (e.g., thermistors, heater blocks, fans, printing plates, etc.) can be manufactured and sold commercially after the verification by the licensor based on the presentation of samples.
  • If a product is labeled by the manufacturer as obsolete (or cannot be purchased or ordered for longer than 3 months), the non-commercial clause is automatically terminated if identical parts are no longer produced within the successor of the product or cannot be purchased separately.
  • If the licensor ceases its activity, the non-commercial clause is terminated.

These terms are incompatible with open source.

[–] root 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Do they? Well, that's up to everyone, I guess. They don't seem reasonable to me, but that's beside the point - this is not an open source license anymore.

[–] root 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah, I guess I should say it's not as bad as I initially thought. It's not great, but I do see why they want some of those rules for companies that are using their firmware for profit without even changing the headers. Must be frustrating, but at the same time, Prusa just invested a ton into injection molding, and the MK4 is > $1000, so.. I think a lot of these bad decisions are trickling down to the end user.