MakerBot Gets $10 Million Investment

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MakerBot Gets $10 Million Investment

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wednesday August 24, 2011 @02:24AM from the thats-a-lotta-money dept.

First time accepted submitter chrisl456 writes "MakerBot Industries, makers (hah!) of 3D printers / personal fabrication devices, just got a big boost in the form of $10 million from an 'all-star lineup.' Replicators, here we come!"

160 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Raising funds by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:25 · Score: 0

Could they have not printed money or gold bars?
1. Re:Raising funds by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:28 · Score: 0
  
  Could they have not printed money or gold bars?
  Nintendo already secured patents for that.
2. Re:Raising funds by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  Those aren't gold bars! They're Gold-Pressed Latinum! You can't print that...
3. Re:Raising funds by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:35 · Score: -1
  With the aging Baby Boomers there are now more elderly people in America than ever before. It becomes more apparent that a segment of them do not know how to age gracefully. Traditionally, this way of life was learned from extensive contact with and careful observation of the previous generation of elders. In today's fast-paced world this is less and less viable. While not intended to be 100% comprehensive, this document is a quick HOWTO reference to at least help today's old people get started. The following are the most important points, the time-tested things you really MUST do in order to be an old person in the modern world.
  
  Fuck the younger generations as much and as hard as you possibly can. This point is critical and cannot be overemphasized. Most other points are related to this one. That's how key it really is. There is one great way to do that, better than all other ways combined:
  
  Vote as a single homogeneous bloc. This is politically very powerful. Use that power to run up massive debts that you have absolutely no intention of paying. That way, future generations can inherit them. You need to do this even though collectively, you are the single wealthiest demographic group in existence.
  
  Your retirement from Social Security is the best way to arrange this. Sure, you could have taken personal responsibility for your life and started saving for your own retirement from a young age, but where's the fun in that? It's vital that you let Social Security remain the Ponzi scheme that it is so that no young person today has a hope of collecting a dime from it BUT they still have to pay into it (hah-hah! I guess the joke's on them!). BE CERTAIN that any politician who even suggests changing Social Security towards long-term viability is ending his or her career in politics.
  
  Sure, they are your children and your grandchildren, but so what? Now that they've grown past early childhood they aren't so cute anymore anyway. That makes it easy to treat them like you hate their guts even if you don't know you hate them. If you faithfully practice the points outlined in this document, then soon any guilt you might feel over what you've left for them to inherit will melt away and be replaced by an insatiable sense of entitlement. In the event this should fail, the constant coverage of the current pointless foreign war that the flower of our youth is going off to fight will serve as an excellent distraction.
  Run a homeowner's association. As a retiree, it's not like you have to work for a living anymore. You've got some time on your hands. What better way to use it than to take your neighbors to court over such worthy matters as the difference between white paint and off-white paint? Those bastards should have read and memorized their 100-page homeowner's covenant before daring to modify their own property. As an added bonus, any time they spend in court and not at work means even less opportunity to pay off the debts you've left for them to inherit. Any monies they pay as a result of losing the lawsuits serves the same goal, so it's a two-for-one!
  Drive very slowly, particularly on one-lane roads where it's difficult or impossible to safely pass you. Every time you do this means one more chance to make it hard for someone to get to work on time. That way, not only is a significant chunk of their paycheck taken from them to pay for your retirement and your medical care, but as an added bonus you add insult to this injury by hindering them from getting to work in the first place so they can make the money that pays for your expenses! That'll teach 'em. Whatever you do, don't ever pull over and allow the ten cars stuck behind you to pass, especially not when they have a clock to beat and you don't.
  When you are a customer at a restaurant, grocery store, technical support line, or the like, be as helpless as possible. Your goal is to be a really high-maintainence customer. Sure, you could demonstrate that with your age has come wisdom
4. Re:Raising funds by FoolishBluntman · 2011-08-24 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  Troll
a gnat is better hung than rob malta by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:28 · Score: -1

Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
your heart is true you're a pal and a cosmonaut
I'm not ashamed to say
I hope it always will stay this way
My hat is off, won't you stand up and take a bow
And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you knew
You would see, the biggest gift would be from me
and the card attached would say,
Thank you for being a friend
Thank you for being a friend
Thank you for being a friend
Thank you for being a friend
If it's a car you lack
I'd surely buy you a cadillac
Whatever you need, anytime of the day or night
I'm not ashamed to say
I hope it always will stay this way
My hat is off, won't you stand up and take a bow
And when we both get older
With walking canes and hair of gray
Have no fear, even though it's hard to hear
I will stand real close and say,
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
[ From: http://www.elyrics.net/read/a/andrew-gold-lyrics/thank-you-for-being-a-friend-lyrics.html ]
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Let me tell you bout a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
And when we die and float away
Into the night, the Milky Way
You'll hear me call, as we ascend
I'll see you there, then once again
Thank you for being a friend
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
(I want to thank you)
Thank you for being a friend
Whoa, tell you about a friend
(Thank you right now, for being a friend)
Thank you for being a friend
(I wanna tell you right now, and tell you again)
Thank you for being a friend
(I wanna thank you, thank you, for being a friend)
Thank you for being a friend
Sweet... by Marble68 · 2011-08-24 02:37 · Score: 1

Anything that could potentially drive the cost of 3D printing down is a win, IMHO!

--
/me sips his coffee and ponders a new sig...
1. Re:Sweet... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:48 · Score: -1
  
  Anything that could potentially drive the cost of 3D printing down is a win, IMHO!
  Thank you for that insightful comment. I'm looking to hear more from you like "the water, it is wet", "a nice warm sunny day makes a trip to the beach more enjoyable", and "lower working standards in China makes things cheaper at Wal-Mart. FTW!".
2. Re:Sweet... by SomePgmr · 2011-08-24 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Wow... who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?
3. Re:Sweet... by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · 2011-08-24 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  Makes me kinda wish I had gone with MakerBot rather than my Prusa Mendel (expecting the last bit of parts in early next week). For me, price was the selling point but an investment like this could easily push MakerBot in front in terms of the community.
  
  --
  "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
4. Re:Sweet... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:56 · Score: 0
  
  I know, I'd love some of that stuff but the price is painful.
5. Re:Sweet... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:03 · Score: 0
  
  He's fine with the completely unrelated rant on social security. There's no comment on the seemingly random Andrew Gold lyrics. Don't you DARE express a relevant opinion on the matter though, that's just uncalled for!
6. Re:Sweet... by Applekid · 2011-08-24 04:04 · Score: 1
  
  Wow... who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?
  Probably because the low-hanging fruit in making things cheaper usually involves slave wages in developing countries as opposed to a fair wage in industrialized nations.
  
  --
  More Twoson than Cupertino
7. Re:Sweet... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:04 · Score: 0
  
  Your mom?
8. Re:Sweet... by Osgeld · 2011-08-24 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  lol yea like a little startup money is going to drive cost down, if nothing else its going to drive them up for a while cause now they have money for "features" that increase price
9. Re:Sweet... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  Anything that could potentially drive the cost of 3D printing down is a win, IMHO!
  Yessss. yessss... I too want the landfills and the ocean microplastic sargossos to grow to proportions beyond even the most wild of imaginations. Let the plastic flow like water in every household. Let the fools generate billions of 3D printer "coasters" while they play with their little toys. Death! Death to the environment!! Muah HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!
10. Re:Sweet... by X0563511 · 2011-08-24 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  You're entirely welcome to not include such features in your build.
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
11. Re:Sweet... by Marble68 · 2011-08-24 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  Slashdot sucks during election years because everything becomes a political attack, incredible demonstrations of stupidity, or ad hominem accusations of trying to kill us all because of perceived badspeak. :(
  
  --
  /me sips his coffee and ponders a new sig...
Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:38 · Score: -1

This is not a Star Trek replicator. It's a personal CNC machine to make fragile tchotchkes with geek cred. If you're lucky and have months of time to waste on Dollar-store level of crap. Or you can just make vaguely-shaped blobs of fragile, expensive gunk.
The real breakthrough here is how to turn decades-old hobbies into money. THAT's the thing that's really interesting here.
Prediction: In two years, this will have been a fad like Robo Sapiens. Big hype, every store by Christmas, then a quick death.
1. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:45 · Score: 1
  
  Uhuh, it's the same kind of plastic as legos; anything but fragile. Something makes me think you've got serious sour grapes.
2. Re:Oh god, more delusions by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 02:46 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Hahaha idiot. You can print ABS plastic with these things, for starters. You can make real stuff with them. These will become the next common home appliance. The age of fragile prototypes is long gone.
  And corporations will be up in arms. Want Lego? Why pay $30 for $1 worth of blocks when you can print them for a couple dollar's worth of material. Want a body kit or some lightweight/cheap replacement body panels (although even common cars now have plastic body panels) for your car but don't want to pay so much? A printer with a big enough build volume can do that too, and you can get an exact copy of a commercial product. Want a custom computer case or a copy of an expensive commercial model? Knock yourself out. Want some cheap/custom furniture? Plastic built into the right structures can be very strong. See: milk crates. Except it won't look ghetto because that will just be the under-structure of your custom furniture.
  This will do for many physical objects what computers did for movies and music - including making it easy and cheap for anyone to produce it.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
3. Re:Oh god, more delusions by BitZtream · 2011-08-24 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  Funny that you're modded down, your reaction pretty much matches mine.
  MakerBot is cool, but pointless and not actually useful yet for anything that matters. The technology just isn't there yet at the hobbiest level. Its certainly out there, just not at the hobbiest level. Everything produced out of the RepRap is too big and blocky and most importantly, weak to be used in anything of value other than some art deco kind of crap around a geeks house.
  Oh well, modded down for disagreeing with a factual statement. Welcome to the new slashdot, where 15 year old fanboys and spa accounts like DrBob rule the roost.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
4. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Darth+Snowshoe · 2011-08-24 02:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Uhm, lack imagination much? It's distressing the anti-nerd, anti-tech, anti-imagination tone of a lot of comments I see on /. these days.
  Yes the current incarnation is not much in terms of utility - but you wouldn't want to be commuting to work today in the first automobiles either. The notion here is to get the technology out into the hands of a bunch of self-motivated tinkerers and some of them will come up with useful, unforseen ideas. If you're an advocate for the free market, or American ingenuity, then you really shoudn't be taking issue with personal stereolithography.
5. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Xest · 2011-08-24 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  What makes you think it's fragile? the example I saw recently was a fully working spanner. That's not something frangile because it must face a lot of forces when tightening and losening nuts and bolts.
  I'm not sure why you think it'll be a fad. It's already seeing a lot of use in companies that can afford the kit as is right now. That implies it's already past the fad stage.
  Of course, these things only ever get better with time too. So when it's consumer affordable it should be quite impressive technology.
  Even if it doesn't improve and the current tech just comes down in price then it's already good enough to produce every day objects people might want to produce from drink cups/mugs, to plant pots, to hole punches, to key racks, to storage boxes, to lego pieces. There's just so many things it can already do that people will find useful.
6. Re:Oh god, more delusions by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 02:52 · Score: 2
  
  ABS, while a fine plastic, does depend a bit on how it is formed: Injection molding into a tight-tolerance mold, as with lego, is going to produce better results than thread deposition, though the latter is hardly useless...
7. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:57 · Score: 0
  
  There are 3D printers that can print metal, and some even food.
  Your argument is basically, "oh that wooden plane is crap, come back when you can build a space shuttle"
  3D printers like this have only just recently came in to the consumer market, it is extremely early days.
  Come back when you have an imagination and sense of time.
8. Re:Oh god, more delusions by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 02:57 · Score: 1
  
  Lego will actually do OK(as some of their imitators have demonstrated over the years, sub-mm tolerances make all the difference in the world between lego that works and 'construction brick toys' that can barely support themselves; but there are going to be some Very Litigious Sad Pandas in looser-tolerance industries.
9. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Baloroth · 2011-08-24 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  The current problem is mainly the cost of the raw material, plus the initial investment. From Maker-bot's website it's around $20 USD per pound, which is pretty hefty (although nowhere near where I thought it would be.) You are right: this will revolutionize the way we think of physical designs of objects.
  The device itself is still pretty pricey. It'd be really cool if someone bought a nicer one and opened a store where you could send custom print jobs for the cost of materials + profit. Thats probably the first way they will become widespread. But you're quite right: not a fad, unless companies like Lego get involved in stopping it. AFAIK you can prevent they could prevent the widespread distribution of designs that copy Lego exactly, but they couldn't currently stop you from rolling your own. Watch them lobby to change that in the upcoming years. If you thought patent and copyright battles were bad, wait until companies are threatened by people able to build their own physical hardware copies of their products.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
10. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous+Psychopath · 2011-08-24 02:59 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Funny that you're modded down, your reaction pretty much matches mine.
  MakerBot is cool, but pointless and not actually useful yet for anything that matters. The technology just isn't there yet at the hobbiest level. Its certainly out there, just not at the hobbiest level.
  Right around 1980 or so you could have said the exact same thing about personal computers, and it would have been true.
  
  --
  Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
11. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:00 · Score: 0
  
  You are horribly misinformed and bitter
12. Re:Oh god, more delusions by DrXym · 2011-08-24 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  Uhuh, it's the same kind of plastic as legos; anything but fragile. Something makes me think you've got serious sour grapes.
  It's not fragile but it looks pretty ugly. Objects are formed by extruding molten plastic from a nozzle and snaking it around to form one slice of the shape. So objects look like a congealed series of coils and loops. Whether that matter or not really depends on what you intend the object for. I think the powder bed replicators produce a much nicer finish (in colour too) and support more complex shapes but then again they cost a lot more.
13. Re:Oh god, more delusions by h4rr4r · 2011-08-24 03:02 · Score: 1
  
  Either way it is not what anyone would be calling brittle, unless you are making some very thin sheets.
14. Re:Oh god, more delusions by h4rr4r · 2011-08-24 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  And just like in 1980 hobbiests were doing it. The GP apparently thinks anything harder than a coloring book or more expensive than a meal at McDonalds can't be a hobby.
15. Re:Oh god, more delusions by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 03:09 · Score: 1
  
  The intertubes, at your service!
  
  Not inexpensive; but you pretty much upload mesh+money and get fedexed an object...
  
  Cheaper and better for a number of applications; but somewhat less versatile, are the online machine shop services, which use conventional feedstock materials and machining techniques. You can't do some of the really fancy geometry; but paying $10/cc to have a part laser-sintered when it could be milled, tapped, and finished to your spec in the same time and probably for less money doesn't make a whole lot of sense...
16. Re:Oh god, more delusions by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  True that lego will have to be an exact copy to fit properly unlike the awful lego knockoffs, but eventually it will be possible.
  Anyways I think PirateLegos would become the new standard. Who cares if they fit properly with the expensive official Legos when you can have tons of PirateLegos for cheap? :D
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
17. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:13 · Score: 0
  
  Are Gothic Cathedrals ugly? How about golden chalices?
18. Re:Oh god, more delusions by NotQuiteReal · 2011-08-24 03:15 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  This will do for many physical objects what computers did for movies and music - make non-entertainment companies assume you have stolen from them?
  
  --
  This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
19. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:17 · Score: 0
  
  The cathedral is pretty. The chalice is awful.
20. Re:Oh god, more delusions by SomePgmr · 2011-08-24 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  Jesus, man... xanax. /. is precisely as it's always been (no, this isn't my first uid). Everyone is a contrarian, or else they'd have little to say.
  
  And for my part, I'll add that I've seen very useful things come out of these printers (not just the silly low-res busts we see too many of) and there are better, cheaper designs all the time.
  
  So yeah, we're not exactly ending scarcity in manufactured goods any time this decade, but they're useful tools.
21. Re:Oh god, more delusions by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  Yes :-(
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
22. Re:Oh god, more delusions by WillAdams · 2011-08-24 03:23 · Score: 1
  
  Until the technology gets much better and tolerances much tighter you will find that PirateBricks (Lego is a trademark) won't fit, stack or hold together well enough to justify the effort to make them.
  
  --
  Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
23. Re:Oh god, more delusions by DrXym · 2011-08-24 03:23 · Score: 1
  
  Are Gothic Cathedrals [thingiverse.com] ugly? How about golden chalices [makerbot.com]?
  The first picture doesn't show what I am referring to (because the light cream doesn't reflect the light too well). The second picture amply shows it. It's fugly. Here is another pic which shows the typical surface you can expect from your manufactured objects.
  There's no doubt it's cool tech but the results are pretty primitive. I'd see it more useful for replacement parts than producing something you'd want gracing your mantelpiece.
24. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:25 · Score: 0
  
  That's the delusion: You will NOT get an exact copy.
  Have you never heard of materials research? Or crystal structures?
  The alignment of the atoms in the material is crucial for many parts. E.g. for the stability in metal (that's why the steel often is rolled/punched and not cast) or the transparency / light response of other materials.
  Also, something that is made of a lot of voxels is going to have aliasing, which means itâ(TM)s not smooth. A problem for many cases. E.g. when it has to be slippery.
  Also, most things are made out of many materials, combined. Or foils glued together, etc. You can't simply print those.
  And I didnâ(TM)t even mention things that are foamy... or woven... like the stuff that makes furniture soft and pretty.
  Perhaps you should check your own cowardice, before calling others idiots, you idiot.
25. Re:Oh god, more delusions by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not talking about building crankshafts and helicopter blades with this. Does it really matter if your computer case/peripherals or motorcycle body panels aren't quite as structurally sound as injection-molded pieces? Does it matter what your furniture's frame looks like, and do you think the cheapo wood with pressed-on spike plates that is currently used is really that strong?
  I'm not saying it's anything like a Star Trek replicator by any means, but these aren't the flimsy prototype builders of the '90s either.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
26. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:31 · Score: 0
  
  Please, the word is not a comparative (hobby, hobbier, hobbiest). It's hobbyist. Like lobbyist, only better.
27. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:39 · Score: 0
  
  Hahaha idiot. You can print ABS plastic with these things, for starters. You can make real stuff with them. These will become the next common home appliance. The age of fragile prototypes is long gone.
  And corporations will be up in arms. Want Lego? Why pay $30 for $1 worth of blocks when you can print them for a couple dollar's worth of material.
  How about the cost of material on tuning and practice prints? The cost of electricity? The cost in terms of hours spent on designing, printing, and refining? Perhaps a bag of legos isn't something to be dismissed when you need them *now* and not maybe in an hour and hope it's of consistent quality like legos?
28. Re:Oh god, more delusions by h4rr4r · 2011-08-24 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  There seems to have been no finishing work done either on those. Again that would not make it suitable for mantelpiece decorations, but with some minor heating to smooth out the surface it could be a fine replacement to a broken car door handle.
29. Re:Oh god, more delusions by theManInTheYellowHat · 2011-08-24 03:49 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  To say that these things can not make anything useful is very far from correct. Checkout RepRap which is a very similar device to makerbot. Its firmware has the code built in to print the parts it is made from and is one of the tenants of the project. The video on the RepRap home page explaining the project is brilliant. These projects are indeed very worthy of getting funded.
30. Re:Oh god, more delusions by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  Yes I admit printing legos is far off. As for the cost of electricity and materials, those are low. Practice prints will only be an issue for people developing an object (and are becoming a non-issue entirely at a rapid rate as these printers become more precise). Most people will just download a design and send it to their printer so design time would be no more of a consideration in printing objects than it is in running Linux.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
31. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:49 · Score: 0
  
  If you thought patent and copyright battles were bad, wait until companies are threatened by people able to build their own physical hardware copies of their products.
  Ha! DRM this, suckas!
32. Re:Oh god, more delusions by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  Certainly, it is quite tough(vaguely biomimetic 'web-of-threads/beams' structures can actually be fairly seriously load bearing...)
  
  I was thinking more in terms of dimensional tolerances, homogenous density, surface finish, and the like. Anything where the bulk properties of ABS will do you can get away with extrusion printing(possibly with some clean-up work/drilling/etc. on critical surfaces); but most of what makes something like lego work depends on factors that extruders can't touch.
33. Re:Oh god, more delusions by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 03:57 · Score: 1
  
  That isn't quite true, if you trawl the, er, value-priced, toy stores, flea markets, and shady ebay auctions for models that lego never created you can find a number of "interoperable" plastic construction block toys of varying degrees of interoperability(in the very cheap seats, interoperability with bricks that came in the same bag is a problem, with the incrementally nicer ones interoperability with lego is rather dodgy) for rather small sums of money. All of that is injection moulded, though. Extrusion deposited lego-esque bricks wouldn't be worth the material you melted to make them.
34. Re:Oh god, more delusions by DNS-and-BIND · 2011-08-24 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  And in 1980, you would have been correct. "Not actually useful yet for anything that matters" is an accurate statement in 2011.
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
35. Re:Oh god, more delusions by compro01 · 2011-08-24 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure they can find some way to disrupt 3D scanners. Just shiny paint would do the job fairly well at present.
  
  --
  upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
36. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Osgeld · 2011-08-24 04:27 · Score: 1
  
  the material is not brittle, but with my experience with these things is it doesnt take much to peel apart the layers, unless you start adding heat tables and precision thermal control
37. Re:Oh god, more delusions by GooberToo · 2011-08-24 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  CNC machines are infinitely practical. Not so with Robo Sapiens. The fact you don't understand such a basic concept speaks wonders for your entire theory and line of thinking.
  Everything from games, equipment panels,jewelry, to cases, to glasses, to boxes, hobbyist equipment and components (car, plane, heli; including portions of airframes), to you name it, can be created with this category of equipment. Whereas with a Robo Sapiens, all you can do it make a costly puppet move.
  To say they are comparable in the least is to espouse stupidity. But I suspect you already knew that given you posted anonymously.
38. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:13 · Score: 0
  
  Wow. And all this slower and more expensive and less reliable than just ordering parts from a catalog!
  "And corporations will be up in arms."
  No they won't. Physical reality guarantees it. No way in hell can you hope to come close to mass-produced injection molded parts in accuracy, price and reliability. Keep fucking that chicken though.
  "This will do for many physical objects what computers did for movies and music - including making it easy and cheap for anyone to produce it.
  Baahahahahahaha!!!! *I*'m the idiot?!? Hoo boy. In two years or twenty years... Nothing will have changed. You're a live one, RMH. I wonder what is you do for a living. I'm sure it has nothing to do with reality.
39. Re:Oh god, more delusions by X0563511 · 2011-08-24 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  I think you are all missing the point. Why bother with blocks when you can print the whole shape or section? Craft some interlocks if you want to build components instead of the whole thing :P
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
40. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:46 · Score: 0
  
  For fuck's sake, it's HOBBYIST. HOBBY, HOBBYIST.
  "Oh well, modded down for disagreeing with a factual statement. "
  This is the heart of Slashdot. /. is were a bunch of misinformed, naive, clueless immature children (RMH!) come to yank each off over delusions, fantasies and ridiculous sci-fi notions. If you come in here with your reality and your facts... Watch out! (Especially in space threads... Hoo boy, the mental instability of most the fervent believers is quite something to watch!)
  But I strongly suspect most of the raging fanboys here don't realize that the objects shown as samples probably came out of months of trial and error. But they think they can just turn it on and plop out big, complex products overnight.
  They also think that other people will share their fascination for expensive hobbies when you can just buy whatever you want already. It's a hobby, and that's all it'll ever be. I mean we live in a disposable culture where keeping anything longer than a year is suspect, but somehow people will want to print out spare knobs? No, that's not it.
  People will have fun, then realize how utterly pointless and trivial this toy is. The industrial processes already exist, and are industrial for a reason... They're complex! This is a toy. Congrats to them for scoring a cool 10 milskies, but you'll never hear from this again.
  Would you lend 10$ to this guy?
41. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous+Psychopath · 2011-08-24 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  And in 1980, you would have been correct. "Not actually useful yet for anything that matters" is an accurate statement in 2011.
  I think you're talking about Slashdot comments, right? :P
  
  --
  Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
42. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 06:26 · Score: 0
  
  The thing is, I have enough imagination to imagine how useless this will be. It's distressing to see the so-called nerd tech crowd be so utterly clueless about the physical reality underlying things.
  "you really shoudn't be taking issue with personal stereolithography."
  I'm not, since this story is not about that process.... I can see by the website though that they're really trying to create an Apple-like cult around the stupid thing.... For 1300$, do you know how many LEGO I can buy? Or stupid rings?
  This is fucking ridiculous.
  For 1300$, I can hire a *designer* with a REAL lithography machine to make the part I want. This is nerd fanboy stupidity at its worst.
43. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 07:51 · Score: 0
  
  Except that in 1980 they were already mass-manufactured engineered items, and the obstacles were SOCIAL. In this case, the obstacles are PHYSICAL. Good luck to you!
44. Re:Oh god, more delusions by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 15:19 · Score: 0
  
  So you're backing off from the fantastic claims, eh? Suddenly this 1300$ piece of shit can't even make decent LEGO. Go spend 1300$ on a real Sherline milling machine. The Makerbot is a JOKE. It looks like a rickety high-school science project. I'd have a hard time spending 130$ for that piece of crap. Sorry. And that douchetastic pedobear-lookalike running that scam... uuughh... heebeejeebees...
45. Re:Oh god, more delusions by vasago17 · 2011-08-25 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  MakerBot is cool, but pointless and not actually useful yet for anything that matters.
  
  You'd be surprised at how many useful things you can make with a Makerbot. I own one and have printed things like radio controlled motor mounts, a GoPro camera mount for my scuba diving mask, and a bunch of other practical and useful items. I'm also in the process of designing and printing out parts for a quad rotor helicopter. I was also a machinist for 10 years in my previous life. When it comes to time from initial idea to finished product, the Makerbot almost always wins.
Need a wrench? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:39 · Score: 0

Someone please seed a BT link of this wrench. I'll improve the design and re-upload along with a change log. Thanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZboxMsSz5Aw
Replicators? by Quadzi · 2011-08-24 02:43 · Score: 3, Funny

Would this be referring to the Star Trek Replicators (SWEET!) or the Stargate Replications (RUUUUUUUUUUUUUN!!!!!)?
1. Re:Replicators? by chrisl456 · 2011-08-24 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  As the submitter, I have to say: Yes. :P
  
  --
  -chris
2. Re:Replicators? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 06:35 · Score: 0
  
  Star Trek Replicators that can make Stargate Replicators, so both!
dvd case by StripedCow · 2011-08-24 02:44 · Score: 1

As long as these printers can't produce a real-looking dvd/blueray case, including insert, I'm not impressed.

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
1. Re:dvd case by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  You could definitlely make a DVD/blu-ray case, although you might have to go with snap-in hinges instead of the flexible plastic spine, and a good printer with good quality paper will make a real-looking insert.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
2. Re:dvd case by StripedCow · 2011-08-24 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  How about the transparent plastic "window" in which you could put the insert?
  
  --
  If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
3. Re:dvd case by Gunstick · 2011-08-24 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  I think a non transparent one with the title picture in some crappy looking relief would be possible. The inlet you print on your newspaper replicator.
  All cases would look the same, like those lightscribe CDs also look the same.
  
  --
  Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
4. Re:dvd case by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  Well it's at least possible to print transparent material:
  http://www.objet.com/3D-Printing-Materials/Overview/Transparent/
  Don't know of any DIY kits that can do this right now though.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
5. Re:dvd case by AmberBlackCat · 2011-08-24 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe they could print ink directly on the cover, like those printable compact discs...
6. Re:dvd case by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:32 · Score: 0
  
  That requirement doesn't make any damned sense. Additive manufacturing is never going to be the way we make certain things. The cost of printing a DVD case would be thousands of times the cost of injection molding one. The process can do cool stuff (I'd use one to make patterns for thermoforming and casting stuff), but it's not really a production mode. Sorry Diamond Age fans, that's a loooong way off.
  What is really cool though is if you need a plastic widget that won't take much load, or you need a pattern for another net shape process this is a good way to get them cheaply and with less skill than is traditionally required.
Can't Wait... by AngryDeuce · 2011-08-24 02:49 · Score: 1

Until the "You wouldn't steal a car..." warnings come true and I can download myself a brand new Ferrari LOL
1. Re:Can't Wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:00 · Score: 0
  
  Wrong! You won't be downloading any cars.
  Ferrari owns the unique pattern of 1's and 0's that drive this machine to produce a design that is a ferrari!
  Send in the PIAA! (physical item association of assholes)
  You owe us money! trillions and trillions for infringing our content and downloading a car!
  You scoff... But you KNOW it's going to end up that stupid. Bet. :(
2. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 03:21 · Score: 2
  
  I am not shitting you, I am seriously looking into building a custom car with 3D printed body panels and interior framework.
  I'd have to scale-up an open source printer (like an Ultimaker or Makerbot) to AT LEAST 6'x6'x3' build volume (although a monstrous 10'x10'x5' would be ideal to avoid unnecessary seams) and then I would design and print the ABS panels to go on a chromoly or stainless tube-framed car. The panels would be only for aerodynamic and weatherproofing purposes.
  Forming the body out of fiberglass is traditionally the most laborious part of building a custom/kit car, and then the fiberglass needs gelcoat, an awful paint that fades and cracks and looks like a kid's toy from the '50s, and then the fiberglass sags with age on top of all that. And if you damage it you gotta start all over again! And if you're on a small budget you're basically restricted to using the car itself as a mould so that is a real bitch.
  ABS panels are far more durable and if you damage one, you just print a replacement, and the color can be in the material itself - even if you want to paint it, you can make the material the same color to make scratches less visible.
  Interiors on custom cars often use some wood or fiberglass framework which is also a bitch and fiberglass looks tacky as hell on an interior. My plan is to use some printed framework and make a fabric-covered dash that zips open to be easy to work on.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
3. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm, but the resolution on the Ultimaker/Makerbot is very low (As previously mentioned in this thread). How will you get a smooth, presentable finish?
  I too am in the planning phases of a build. My first build will use standard premade fg panels, but I have pondered a second build (if I like building) and was considering a large 3d router to construct bucks to make cf moulds from. Again, the bucks would likely need a lot of preparation before making the moulds from them.
  If your idea pans out then it may also be worth considering...
4. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 04:00 · Score: 1
  
  I'll just slightly overbuild and sand the panels if they can't be made smooth enough (as is almost certain to be the case). Then I'll paint over them (I wasn't planning to go unpainted, but that would certainly be a good option for an offroad vehicle - look at ATVs with this kind of body). I'm planning metallic black on black plastic. The Lotus Elise already has ABS panels so you can look at how bodywork is done on those. Many newer cars have some ABS panels as well.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
5. Re:Can't Wait... by drinkypoo · 2011-08-24 04:10 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  My understanding is that the most agonizing part of fiberglassing is making molds. If my jackass brothers could make surfboards, I'll bet you can glass into a mold. So... print molds, then smooth them out for actual use, and then lay fiberglass, or vacuform some lexan... I like Lexan because you can paint the inside and it looks awesome. You could even fade the paint to transparency and/or mask off sections to leave transparent windows to the understructure where it looks cool. But fiberglass doesn't require a big oven...
  I'd also settle for nothing but vacuforming the interior pieces if they're not made of metal. That's how the big boys do it. You can do it with a shop-vac. In my acrylics class way back in junior high we had a locally made oven constructed from sheet metal, insulated with fiberglass, and filled with heat lamps. Any jackhole ought to be able to build one of those. I've priced a hand roll/break and you can get one for $200 that will handle the sheet metal you'd need to conveniently build one big enough to handle a whole dashboard.
  My dream toy car is a tube-frame Lancer with a TDI+Quattro drivetrain...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
6. Re:Can't Wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:21 · Score: 0
  
  Car parts use a different method than these machines. Makerbot is an Fused Deposition Modeling system, car parts/fancy looking smooth finishes use stereolithography which is a laser that cures a resin on layer at a time, slowly sliding the part down as it makes each layer. Both use a layering process where you cut the 3d object into a finite number of layers each being the thickness of the minimum layer size.
  So with SLS systems you get .05mm thickness layers, whereas FDM gets around .3mm thickness. SLS still has those layer lines, they are just .05mm apart instead of .3mm
7. Re:Can't Wait... by compro01 · 2011-08-24 04:34 · Score: 1
  
  How will you get a smooth, presentable finish?
  Sand it smooth? ABS sands just fine. If needed, print it slightly oversize to allow for losses.
  Alternative suggestions I hear are heating (heat it up with a heat gun to soften, then smooth it) or acetone (acetone dissolves ABS, so use a little bit to soften it and then smooth it).
  
  --
  upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
8. Re:Can't Wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  Remember the cube-square law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square-cube_law) when printing large objects. The amount of time and material it takes to print objects goes up quickly when you start scaling. Although I am an avid 3D printer enthusiast (I even teach a course on it at my hackerspace http://university.c3kc.org/course/view.php?id=11), I am unsure that 3D printing will be your best bet as a fabrication technique. You may want to look into vacuum forming. Your end products will be smoother, and your time spent making the parts will go down.
9. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  The S1 Elise front clamshell that I have is most definately FG, not ABS...
  Are the newer ones ABS then?
10. Re:Can't Wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:02 · Score: 0
  
  For good quality molds you are better off with a CNC mill. Which is how professional molds are made. I've seen DIY fiberglass molds being used, and making/preparing the molds is indeed most of the work. For simple molds you can cut a strong foam with a hot wire (it's what we use for model aircraft wings)
11. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  I think the problem with printing a mold is that the finished product typically has convex curves. This means that the mold would have concave curves which would be very hard to do surface finishing on.
  I think the best way is still to CNC the buck (a replica of the finished shape) from foam, finish that and make your mold from that.
  Also, you don't need an autoclave to do CF work. You can use the fibre and room-temp resin. The problem is that you get too much resin for the amount of fibre. Vacuum bagging helps with this, but the ultimate in weight vs strength is to use the pre-impregnated cloth. This is the stuff that has to be heated to cure, but the ratio of resin to fibre is perfect. Layup is also easier as you do it dry before bagging. It also has to be stored at a stable temperature before use or it goes off.
12. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 05:07 · Score: 1
  
  Oh and mine is a Caterham R500 replica :) That's the first build, 2nd (if I go there) will be some mid engined 3 seater with some kind of body.
13. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 05:16 · Score: 2
  
  I considered a 3-seat layout, keep in mind that the McLaren F1-style layout makes the car wider and makes overtaking difficult, especially on the street.
  I'm planning a 2-seater that be easily changed between RHD and LHD. The only parts you'd actually need 2 of are the steering rack itself and some hydraulic hard lines (even then, you could probably get away with using soft lines to allow the master cylinders to be relocated, but I'd rather not).
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
14. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 05:37 · Score: 1
  
  The S2 Elise manual says the "main outer panels" are plastic.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
15. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  Cool, locost? something else?
16. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Custom Elise-like mid-engined thing. It'll probably cost almost as much as an Elise when it's done, but at least this way I'll get exactly what I want, and if I need to stop spending on it I can put the build on hold, and won't have a ruined credit rating and repo men at my door :-P
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
17. Re:Can't Wait... by drinkypoo · 2011-08-24 06:04 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe you should use electric power steering so you can get away from the hydraulics entirely.
  Another option is to leave the rack alone and use a chain drive to connect the wheel to the rack... Or a belt I guess, but to my mind, a chain is superior.
  Going to duplicate all the master cylinders, too? Or are you going to use linkages to carry the pedals across?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
18. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  My idea is to basically have the holes and fittings for the master cylinders and steering rack duplicated on both sides, and to have a section of hydraulic hard line that's removable between the left or right sides and the lines going to the brakes and clutch in the center. So one side has blanks covering the holes in the firewall and the controls are installed in the other side. To swap them, you move the steering rack and gauge cluster (remember I planned an easy to work on modular dash), move the pedals and master cylinders across, installing different lines shaped for the other side, bleed the brakes and you're done. It would be a day-long job but not a massive amount of work, I don't plan to be swapping it back and forth regularly.
  I really don't like the idea of chains or belts in the steering column if they aren't necessary...I plan to try a depowered rack first and go with an electro-hydraulic setup if it's too heavy (direct-drive electric assistance sounds great in theory but usually ends up feeling terrible). The Elise gets away with a manual rack, and I'm looking at equal or lower weight but slightly larger wheels.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
19. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  s/move the steering rack and gauge cluster/swap the steering rack and move the guage cluster/g
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
20. Re:Can't Wait... by hackertourist · 2011-08-24 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  tube-frame Lancer with a TDI+Quattro drivetrain
  I'm curious, why that combination? If you're going to start with a Lancer, why not take the Evo version and have a more performance-biased drivetrain than any (Audi, I presume) quattro? And the 4G63 can be tuned to astronomical levels, so why replace it with a TDI?
21. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  Good job! You going for an Elise type chassis or a more conventional tube-frame? What donor?
22. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  Conventional tube frame, RSX powertrain, although I keep thinking about electric powertrains (I'll be kicking myself if they surpass ICE performance shortly after the car's done) or some TT LS1/LS6 monster (might be doable if there was an affordable transaxle that could handle that power in a mid-longitudinal layout...)
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
23. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-24 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  The same layout I was idolising for my 3-seater idea, although with some euro screamer V6/8 (BMW S65 anyone? :) ).
  I haven't done any hard research on it yet, but so far the most common transaxle seems to be an inverted Porsche jobbie. I always wondered if a formula (FF etc) transaxle would be an option too.
  I hear you on the electric, I went to see someones almost-finished electric build recently and i'd say, for now at least, stick to ICE. Hey if you are building a middy anyway it shouldn't be toooo hard to convert it later.
  Sounds like we ultimately want a similar car, with exception of me wanting 3 seats :). Interesting about the F1 being wide, I figured it as no wider than any road car so 'assumed' it's a non issue. Will have to check that out.
  But alas, before all that, I must build a miata based Locost. Walk before I run & all that :)
24. Re:Can't Wait... by drinkypoo · 2011-08-24 10:18 · Score: 1
  
  I meant an Evo, but it's just a layout. The only parts I would be using from the original would be suspension parts, and even then, I imagine I'd want to just get all adjustable racing parts anyway. So the only Evo parts I would use would be cosmetic (reproductions of same anyway) and the measurements. :)
  I don't need astronomical power, because I like to do the super-twisty stuff that happens at lower speeds. I've had more power and it only gets me into trouble. Maybe that's a character flaw, but so be it. I had an '84 300ZX Turbo (in '84 both it and the Corvette had 205 HP!) and I had an '86 IROC swapped to a 350 — supposedly the original 305 died hard. I got tickets in both and ditched the IROC one time, gently thank goodness.
  I want the dinky (for USDM anyway) TDI that gets the super fantastic mileage, with a five speed, and AWD. Tuner parts and programs are available to stretch both mileage and power, although not at once. I think I can get more than enough juice out of it to have fun. I had a 2750 lb '93 Impreza LS with 100 hp and 150 ft-lb, about the same as the output of the stock TDI, and both make it down low... but the TDI has the edge there, the Subaru EJ18 motor just makes it down low for being a tiny gasser.
  Big power is big fun, but I would like to have more range. And in a small car, for range, you need mileage. Shaving five hundred pounds off the weight ought to be fairly trivial if moving to such a design. But in reality, I'm not spending the money to do any of this stuff, unless I fall head-first into a big pile of free cro-moly... mixed with money.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
25. Re:Can't Wait... by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-25 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  Hey are you on GRM forums? I'm on there with the same username. If you aren't on there you should join up, it's one of the best car forums.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
26. Re:Can't Wait... by tom17 · 2011-08-25 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  Yep, I've done a lot of poking around on there but never signed up. Time I did I guess!
Not really.. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:50 · Score: 0

Just 3-D printers.. not auto-replicating nanites hellbent on ridding the world of human imperfection.
1. Re:Not really.. by Quadzi · 2011-08-24 03:20 · Score: 2
  
  My inner nerd always did want to see the two franchises do something like the Jason vs Freddy movie and setup a Borg vs Replicators Battle Royale!
2. Re:Not really.. by X0563511 · 2011-08-24 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  Whoever wins, we all lose!
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Fifth Element? by Flipstylee · 2011-08-24 02:51 · Score: 1

Throw in some meat and it'll be "perfect".
A useful breakthrough for 3D printing will be by WillAdams · 2011-08-24 02:55 · Score: 1

when a car company puts such devices in all of their service departments, and simply FTPs the CAD files to make replacement trim parts on demand --- my truck has a broken seat adjustment handle --- I haven't even considered asking the dealer what a replacement part, w/ shipping would cost, but in a couple of years, I predict that I'll be able to just drop in and they'll be able to make such on-demand.

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
1. Re:A useful breakthrough for 3D printing will be by h4rr4r · 2011-08-24 03:16 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you do that?
  Glue yours together, scan it, then print its replacement yourself.
Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 02:56 · Score: 4, Interesting

I don't see why everyone's so fascinated with those extruding printers. They're extremely complex, extremely slow and their output is very low resolution. They have to fill solid parts with extruded material in a zig-zag pattern... takes forever and the output is a joke.
This, on the other hand, almost looks like magic. This thing makes one whole layer at a time with extreme precision. It's also extremely simple in design: a single motor on one axis, one projector and a container for liquid resin.
Compare the output of the two types of machines. If you still prefer the MakerBot-type machines after seeing the video and the photos, please explain because I can't see any reason for the MakerBot to even exist. It's like wanting Windows 3.11 instead of Linux or Mac OS X.
1. Re:Seriously? by h4rr4r · 2011-08-24 03:07 · Score: 1
  
  Because a liter of that resin costs hundreds of dollars, that is why. Also it is UV fixed, meaning storage is an issue and that stuff tends to go bad with time as well.
2. Re:Seriously? by paskie · 2011-08-24 03:10 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Couple of random reasons: The material seems to be very expensive, AFAICS $200 per kg of resin vs ~$20 per kg of ABS. The hardware, software *and* the resin seems to be proprietary. And it didn't materialize yet, you can't get one so far.
  (Also, I'm not sure about the resin properties, i.e. if they are as good as the plastic.)
  The fact is, for many simple items the current resolution is doing just fine. And if you don't need to produce large quantities or aren't in a big hurry, taking time may not be an issue since you can just let it print and go do something else.
  
  --
  It's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end. -Douglas Adams
3. Re:Seriously? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-08-24 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  While that project is indeed extremely cool, and the fact that it is a DIY extremely impressive, I suspect that the $200/liter feedstock material has something to do with it...
  
  With the hobbyist printing systems, once you get too far up in price, you start to bump uncomfortably close to the services that rent out time on big serious pro gear, with the advanced capabilities that offers, on a per-piece basis.
  
  The extruders are substantially limited; but they can also knock out comparatively high-volume parts for peanuts.
4. Re:Seriously? by oodaloop · 2011-08-24 03:31 · Score: 2
  
  Exactly. Same problem with new born babies. Completely useless and always will be.
  
  --
  Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
5. Re:Seriously? by maxwell+demon · 2011-08-24 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  Also they say that the starter edition(!) of the control software will cost $300. Yes, that's for the software only. In addition to the cost of the actual printer (which seems not yet to be decided).
  
  --
  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
6. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:54 · Score: 0
  
  That's one ugly makerbot print. Look at some stuff ultimaker is printing: http://blog.ultimaker.com/ it's much better quality.
7. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 06:05 · Score: 0
  
  This machine is a DIY version of an EnvsionTEC machine. It's output is on par with any SLA or Objet machine costing $20 - $50k. And trust me, the resin costs will come down.
8. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 06:13 · Score: 0
  
  I see what the grandparent is saying. You can knock out high volume parts...but wtf are you going to do with something that horrendously low quality?
9. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 10:18 · Score: 0
  
  I have a RepRap and how long it takes is frustrating. I've been watching this project for a while and I can't wait for pre-orders to be announced (if nothing else but to see just how much it will cost). However, I wanted to point out that it does still take quite a long time to print....
10. Re:Seriously? by MattskEE · 2011-08-24 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  The video you link appears to be a DIY stereolithography machine. These machines are very nice and create 3D parts with extremely high resolution. I have seen the output from one of these machines at a company I have worked out, the resolution is better than 100um and the parts that it produced needed no additional machining (in fact they were producing parts that could not have been produced in a single piece by machine). However the machine itself cost over $100k, and the resin costs $100's per liter. It makes a lot of sense for high end prototyping which needs extremely high resolution and where price is no object, but there is still a strong market for deposition style printers because the material cost is much lower. Resolution can still be quite high with the deposition style printers, the MakerBot is an entry level printer and professional users with more money to spend can get much better ones.
11. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 15:41 · Score: 0
  
  $200/kg for proprietary resin is precisely the type of problem $10MM of cash can likely solve. Doing something actually useful with a machine that builds objects in the same way that I put toothpaste on my toothbrush seems a lot less likely. Oh but wait; they also have a really shitty plotter attachment for it now!
  I agree wholeheartedly with the poster above. I think the makerbot is a heap of junk. I know a few people who have them and nearly all of their use of the machine involves fiddling, tweaking, and upgrading to get the goddamn thing to even finish a print without it looking like a spaghetti truck accident. Even in top form the output parts are complete and total shit. I have a 15-year old FDM sample from a Stratasys printer and the makerbot cant even touch it.
12. Re:Seriously? by vasago17 · 2011-08-25 17:33 · Score: 1
  
  I was a CNC machinist (mills, lathes, laser cutter, waterjet, press break, and turret punch) for 10 years and am a current Makerbot owner. For a 1 or 2 off item it takes far less time to print it on a Makerbot than it does to mill it on a CNC. I can design a fairly complicated part and print it on the Makerbot in less than half the time it takes to program the G-Code, set up the mill with the different tooling necessary, set the heights and radial offsets for each milling/drilling tool, and set the home position on a CNC mill. If you have to flip the part and machine multiple sides, rinse and repeat for each operation. Makerbot parts are in fact very strong. I have designed radio controlled airplane engine mounts (gas engines) that are plenty strong enough to tow a plane around at 100 MPH. I also made a GoPro camera mount for my scuba diving mask. To say that 3D printers are slow and can't make anything worth while is simply and completely false. Check out thingiverse.com sometime. While there are a lot of items on there that don't serve any purpose, look deeper and you'll find a plethora of practical and very useful items.
Tea, Early Grey, Hot. by lymond01 · 2011-08-24 03:04 · Score: 1

And I'd like that in my 3D printed coffee mug please.
What do they need $10M for? by hawkeyeMI · 2011-08-24 03:06 · Score: 1

I am a fan of the whole RepRap thing -- built one myself (not a MakerBot model) -- but I can't see what they need $10M for. With the prices they are charging, compared to the costs of other kits out there and what you get for them, they should be rolling in dough given their current sales.

--
Error 404 - Sig Not Found
1. Re:What do they need $10M for? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:29 · Score: 0
  
  What would any profitable little PC manufacturer do with 10 million dollars in the 70s? Research and make better ones?
2. Re:What do they need $10M for? by TooMuchToDo · 2011-08-24 03:51 · Score: 2
  
  R&D. Their margins probably anywhere near sufficient to support staff to sit around all day working on better versions or techniques.
  Sometimes, you're lucky like Tesla and you fund your R&D with expensive cars. Sometimes, you need outside money.
3. Re:What do they need $10M for? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:13 · Score: 0
  
  How much does a warehouse in Manhattan cost per year? How much for a couple employees (with wages to live in NYC)? What about material? You've got warehouse people, tech support people, website people, management. That is a couple hundred thousand right there. I wouldn't doubt they have expenses of at least a million a year.
  
  With the prices they are charging, compared to the costs of other kits out there and what you get for them, they should be rolling in dough given their current sales.
  Because being beat by competition at price point is a surefire way to get ahead in sales. They may cost more, but they provide service that no other group could handle. How is a company consisting of one guy selling kits going to support 5000+ machines a year? Poorly.
4. Re:What do they need $10M for? by Anrego · 2011-08-24 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  Hopefully to fund research.
  That's kind of the problem in tech.. you have to have a selling product to fund research.. but keeping that selling product current requires resources itself.
  A huge cash boost (should) let them do some R&D for a while .. and we might get something more practical.
  As an aside, I realize the current generation of makerbot isn't all that useful or practical.. but I still really want one! :(
5. Re:What do they need $10M for? by hawkeyeMI · 2011-08-24 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, frankly, there are much better kits out there from one- and two-person operations, that are supporting themselves full-time on shipping kits and hardware and doing a great job. They're also innovating, producing new, better designs for both components and bots. Again, without all this seed money. Maybe they'll do great things with $10M, who knows, but I'm not anywhere near convinced it's necessary for what they're doing.
  
  --
  Error 404 - Sig Not Found
6. Re:What do they need $10M for? by HereIAmJH · 2011-08-24 04:45 · Score: 2
  
  That is what makes them a good investment. They have a business model that is working but could be more successful if they had more capacity. Not something that will work if you throw enough money at it. Once upon a time investors also used to care about book value vs market cap too.
  
  --
  Another day, another update to a Google android app.
7. Re:What do they need $10M for? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 06:42 · Score: 0
  
  Probably paying the R&D and technical support, rather than relying on the community.
8. Re:What do they need $10M for? by hawkeyeMI · 2011-08-24 06:47 · Score: 1
  
  That is a really large amount of money for either of those. The National Science Foundation, for example, gives small businesses grants of $500k for up to 2 years to get started with much more complicated products. Maybe they just had a lot of excited investors and so instead of turning them away they took it all?
  
  --
  Error 404 - Sig Not Found
Agree w/ all but the Lego bricks by WillAdams · 2011-08-24 03:08 · Score: 4, Interesting

The problem is you can't make bricks of the same quality as Lego bricks using any 3D printer currently in existence or on the drawing board --- the tolerances simply aren't tight enough --- Lego uses _tons_ of pressure in their molding equipment, moreover, Lego is constantly doing QA on their production and will pull a mold and grind it up to re-use it at the slightest deviation --- the new Lego bricks I purchase for my kids still work fine w/ four decade old bricks from my childhood. Lego's precision for brick parts is something on the order of 2 micrometers.
By way of contrast, the printer which Shapeways ( http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=tree&goto=1339&#page_top ) uses as a tolerance of, ``... about .1mm, but the material can change it slightly. Overall, .5 should be fine, just make sure that they are not any sort of support walls or they may get broken during shipping or printing.'' .1 mm == 100 micrometers
If you want to know what its like when the tolerances are sloppy, buy a set of Mega Blok bricks, but even those have tighter tolerance than the tenth of a millimeter which Shapeways quotes.

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
1. Re:Agree w/ all but the Lego bricks by GameboyRMH · 2011-08-24 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  True, it'll be a long time before it will be possible to print blocks that will fit properly with official legos. But like I said in this post, if "PirateLegos" that are Good Enough can be built, they'll become the new standard.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
2. Re:Agree w/ all but the Lego bricks by WillAdams · 2011-08-24 03:27 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is, .1mm of tolerance means that one can have:
  - a piece which is on-spec in all dimensions
  - a piece which is off-spec in one or more axes by the tolerance at one end or the other
  - a piece which is off-spec in _all_ dimensions at each end, doubling the error
  It's when one has multiple pieces off in multiple ways that combinatorial mathematics kicks in and one sees that such won't work for large structures (cf. transmissions built w/ on-spec parts where all the parts are slightly too large or too small).
  
  --
  Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Maybe they'll improve by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:17 · Score: 0

Maybe now they'll produce better products that (actually) work faster.
Perhaps something like this:
http://hackaday.com/2011/08/02/incredibly-fast-3d-printing-with-the-ultimaker/
Having used the makerBot at the local hackerspace- or perhaps I should say tried to.
Thing is so tempermental it really only makes crude toys.
Yes, people have used them to make seriously impressive things. With lots of babysitting
and tuning, and I'm sure a few dents in the wall where they beat their head.
1. Re:Maybe they'll improve by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 15:09 · Score: 0
  
  "More like where PC based printing was 20 yrs ago."
  So you mean like plugging in the printer and hitting print? What, exactly, do you think printers where like in 1991? We had to assemble them ourselves? Write printer drivers? Even on my C64, which was well obsolete by then, I could print anything I wanted including in-game screen dumps...
gg! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:18 · Score: 0

Ding +10M
Gratz Makerbot. . .
It'll be cool to see things bigger than a muffin, get to work!
next up, a machine that poops houses by Thud457 · 2011-08-24 03:21 · Score: 1

Zombie Nader Khalili thinks they're beautiful.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
West Coast by Megalodactyl · 2011-08-24 03:27 · Score: 1

Needs some Maker Bot Love, I would love it if they would open up a facility on the west coast!
up on blocks in the basement by Thud457 · 2011-08-24 03:34 · Score: 1

And the openPhurARRARRRi project is stalled at 77% complete due to loss of interest by the originator.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:up on blocks in the basement by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  It's pretty easy to build if you are proficient in assembly, and if it really bothers you then send in a patch. But in any case, if they made an idiot-proof package that gives you a ready-made car right out of the 3D printer, they'd just get lots of idiots asking about oil and gas on the forums.
SkyPrint? by pasv · 2011-08-24 03:37 · Score: 1

When 3d printers are capable of creating 3d printers the first steps of many paths will begin... LOL!
1. Re:SkyPrint? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 04:16 · Score: 0
  
  That's what RepRaps do (the parent project of MakerBot). Makerbots are sweet for being able to buy a kit or complete system, but the cupcake (their first system) was originally meant to be a "repstrap" which is to say a system designed for the sole purpose of making parts for a RepRap. The prusa reprap is gaining popularity, but it is far from the level of your average hobbyist. Though that is slowly changing. I have helped several people build their own RepRaps and my old mendel is happily turning out parts for new systems.
  At any rate the announcement is good news for everyone as it signals the start of 3d printing going mainstream
Maybe they'll improve by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 03:39 · Score: 0

Google for the hackaday article on the ultimaker- a bot that smokes the MakerBot. Then read the comments below the article.
From my experience with the makerbot at the local hackerspace, they're slow and very tempermental. It is possible to make stuff with them, but nowhere as simple as hitting "PRINT". More like where PC based printing was 20 yrs ago.
Re:Tea, Early Grey, Hot. by maxwell+demon · 2011-08-24 03:40 · Score: 1

Sorry, but you'll get something which is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
yo dog, I heard you lieked memes... by Thud457 · 2011-08-24 03:45 · Score: 2

West Coast Needs some Maker Bot Love
I checked Thingiverse, and the only fleshlight-like models are all variations of goatse.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Re:Tea, Early Grey, Hot. by tom17 · 2011-08-24 03:54 · Score: 2

Attempting to calculate answer to your question: why you want dried leaves in boiling water.
It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by Animats · 2011-08-24 04:29 · Score: 3, Informative

Additive machining is cute, but not a miracle. It's a slow process. Building up objects one layer at a time takes forever. The consumables are rather expensive. Injection molding and casting are probably 100x cheaper in quantity.
High-end additive machining system are getting to be quite good. The low-end machines, though, are not yet very useful. The precision is too low, the surface quality is poor, and the material options are too limited. TechShop has both a high-end commercial machine, which is usually busy, and a machine at the MakerBot level, which is almost never used. If you're making tiny parts, you need high precision.
The big advantage of many of the additive processes is that they don't have work-holding problems. The big limitation of CNC machining is that you have to clamp down the workpiece, and the clamps get in the way of what you're doing. Some part of the workpiece will be inaccessible. So most work requires multiple setups, each of which has to be aligned with the previous setup to 0.001in or better. Designs have to be planned to be clampable.
The more interesting processes can work metals. But they need 500W to 6KW lasers. If you're going to work in steel, you need enough power to melt steel.
For comparison, here's a high speed stamping press. This is how most of the small metal parts in the world are made. Once you get the tooling set up, parts come out at machine-gun speeds.
1. Re:It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by hackertourist · 2011-08-24 05:27 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Additive machining is cute, but not a miracle. It's a slow process.
  Sure, but that's not the point. If you need 100,000 greeblies, you can probably afford to have a $100k mould cut for your high-speed injection moulding process. The exciting property of 3D printers is that it's now possible to create plastic (or metal) parts in small numbers.
  Printing also has some advantages over the usual machining techniques; clamping is one. The absence of tools means you can create structures that are too fragile to achieve with a milling machine. You can print objects inside one another.
  For some industries, the 3D printer is a revolution. I build scale models. Until now, the model kit cottage industry created kits by hand-building a master (a process in which it is basically impossible to get curved surfaces exactly right) and then casting resin copies of it. The 3D printer means that we can create sub-mm accurate masters, or even sell the 3D parts directly (though they still are more expensive than resin cast parts).
2. Re:It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 05:55 · Score: 0
  
  Which Techshop? San Jose doesn't have any additive manufacturing equipment at the moment.
3. Re:It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 06:31 · Score: 0
  
  What is the point of your comment?
  It seems like you are trying to imply that anyone has suggested these systems for mass production of parts. No one has.
  You might as well tell people that ASICs are better than FPGAs for mass production. +1 No Shit Sherlock.
4. Re:It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by Animats · 2011-08-24 16:46 · Score: 1
  
  It seems like you are trying to imply that anyone has suggested these systems for mass production of parts. No one has.
  Yes, people have. Look up "personal fabrication revolution" for some of the looser talk on the subject.
5. Re:It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by Animats · 2011-08-24 17:02 · Score: 1
  
  Which Techshop? San Jose doesn't have any additive manufacturing equipment at the moment.
  Menlo Park has a pro machine, and San Francisco has something slightly above the MakerBot level.
6. Re:It's not a miracle. It's just a CNC machine. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-27 19:03 · Score: 0
  
  Have to disagree with this comment - 3D printing machines have a number of benefits over CNC milling. From a technical standpoint, 3D printing is not restrained by the limitations of a cutting tool, so you can build 'impossible' geometries including blind holes, complex internal supports and truly amazing: finished assemblies containing moving parts that come out of the printer whole and ready to use. From the business angle the advantages are even greater. With a 3D printer in-house you can shave weeks off of product prototyping cycles - and turn what used to be a slow, tedious, and often manual process into a fast, automated, and highly accurate procedure.
  To read more about 3D printing, try the Objet blog - http://blog.objet.com/
On one condition by Yamioni · 2011-08-24 04:33 · Score: 1

I'm cool with this as long as it doesn't lead to Reploids too. My designs for Megaman aren't quite complete yet.

--
Cool post bro, highfive \o
Lowering the bar by ajlitt · 2011-08-24 06:57 · Score: 1

Hopefully this means bringing the kit price down to under $500 and cheaper feedstock. I had just saved up enough money for the Cupcake kit when they were discontinued in favor of the new version at twice the price.
Same old InkJet story... by MindPrison · 2011-08-24 06:57 · Score: 1

...it's not the printer that will tear your budget apart, it the consumables.
Imagine if someone could invent a 3D printer or InkJet printer that could work on recycled goods (powdered or not), now THAT would take care of that ever growing garbage pile problem of ours, but noooooo... it wouldn't bring any money on in...well...not enough billions anyway, besides - the car running on water was invented over 60 years ago, but you wouldn't depend on gazoline then...and money Money MOOOONEY!

--
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
1. Re:Same old InkJet story... by willy_me · 2011-08-24 09:54 · Score: 1
  
  There are projects to make extruded ABS filament from recycled ABS parts for the reprap printer. They are crude projects but it doesn't look that hard to do. Just need to be able to shred the plastic into small enough parts and then push those parts with an auger through a heated 3mm hole.
Patent-encumbered by Anonymous Coward · 2011-08-24 10:58 · Score: 0

The reason why there is no interest in the technology you linked is simple, and can be found in that developer's FAQ:

What is the current status?
A: I am currently working on the technical material for patent deposit. The machine looks like the existing in the market but it is very different. You canâ(TM)t see the difference because I can not disclose it before depositing the patent.
The world needs yet another patent-encumbered manufacturing technology like it needs a hole in the head. The whole point of RepRap is to take manufacturing out of the control of corporations and their lawyers and into everyone's homes.
It's easy to see why there is total lack of interest in what you linked among a community dedicated to open source hardware and software.
Very Cool by Ferretman · 2011-08-25 12:14 · Score: 1

Ain't technology sweet?

--
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc