Hacker News Reader

Comment by cmsj | Hacker News Reader

I have a lot of respect for Armin, but it's pretty clear he doesn't really understand the specifics of what he's talking about here.

> people are complaining (The MK4 firmware is not Open Source)

the link here is to a reddit post (https://www.reddit.com/r/prusa3d/comments/10g6fgv/prusa_givi...) in which the complaint is not only not about the MK4's firmware, it's also not even about something not being open source.

Specifically, that complaint is that PrusaSlicer (the software which turns a 3D model file into GCode instructions for the printer to follow - think PostScript, but for a 3D printer) is not developed as an open project. PrusaSlicer is open source, but most of the development happens internally at Prusa. It's a legitimate complaint, but not at all the complaint Armin claims it to be.

For the record, the Mk4 firmware is also open source, it lives here: https://github.com/prusa3d/Prusa-Firmware-Buddy

View on HN

To provide some more commentary here. Prusa has not changed it's behaviour towards either PrusaSlicer or its printer firmwares in the time since Bambu has existed as a force in the 3D printing community, so Armin's claim that Bambu is making companies reconsider open source, is not at all substantiated.

Furthermore, the Bambu A1 is clearly positioned against the Prusa Mini - they're priced the same, have the same gantry style, but the A1 comes with a multi-material system.

Bambu's higher end printers (X1 Carbon, P1P, etc) are positioned against the Prusa Mk3/Mk4 in the ~$1000-1500 range.

Again, Armin doesn't know the specifics of what he's talking about, so the conclusions are nonsense.

> Armin's claim that Bambu is making companies reconsider open source, is not at all substantiated

I cannot say what is or is not making companies reconsider, but Prusa is on the record about their struggles: https://blog.prusa3d.com/the-state-of-open-source-in-3d-prin...

In which they clearly articulate that they are not reconsidering open source:

  * We stand by our roots in open-source and will continue to do so.
  * Our desktop 3D printers will always be open source. We intend to continue publishing plastic parts, along with firmware source codes.
  * We will stay open to third-party component manufacturers, accessories, add-ons, and unofficial upgrades.
  * PrusaSlicer will always be open source.
  * Our investment in PrusaSlicer and firmware development will continue at the same or higher level.

Did you read the section about a new license they are considering? The second bullet point is in violation of the OSI open source definition.

I did, and I agree. I was commenting about the software/firmware because that's what seemed to be under discussion in OP's and your post. Now it seems like actually maybe the whole thing was about the controller board designs?

It’s about the challenges of open source companies and that some (us included) are rattling on some of the OSI foundations.

I think what he's actually misinterpreted are complaints that the Mk4 controller board isn't open source.

Prusa has long bragged about their hardware being open source and they've made an about face on that over the last couple of years.

And that is a fair complaint to make, since that is a change for Prusa, but that is not what was claimed by OP, Armin or the Reddit post linked to.

Are you talking about the xBuddy board? I haven't been able to find the repository on their github page. I took a look and found Adafruit reporting on it.

If they're worried about cloning, I don't see how making it proprietary will prevent Prusa from being cloned.

Jo wrote an entire blogpost about it:

https://blog.prusa3d.com/the-state-of-open-source-in-3d-prin...

One of the big takeaways from this for me is that Jo doesn't really understand IP law. He talks about wanting a new license for open source hardware; the trouble with that is that a copyright license does not and cannot protect a hardware design. That's what patents do.

That's not a defense of current IP law, just a statement on the reality of what it is.

Yeah. I read that blogpost. I don't think the hardware license protects him from Chinese cloners, scrupulous or unscrupulous. They're just very good at cloning and I don't think he has the funding or the legal resource to sue them into oblivion.

Going non-free is going to lose him a lot of goodwill, just as what happened to makerbot.

The stated goals for that license also would not be open source any more.

Yeah. I checked to see if MK4 firmware is open source. It is indeed, aside from designs and graphics being CC-NC-SA, which seems to be an attempt to protect their trademarks?

Now, the complaint about development is not being open is a weakness that should be fixed. I have not read evidence that Prusa does this. It does incorporates code from other projects from time to time.

I would like to see Prusa lean more strongly on open development.

Thanks for the heads up, I have corrected the incorrect statement that the MK4 firmware is not open source. My post is primarily about the tensions of running an open source business and Prusa is on the record of expressing similar challenges. What the present state of firmware is, is not really all that relevant to what I wrote.

> but it's pretty clear he doesn't really understand the specifics of what he's talking about here

I think this goes without saying, my exposure to 3d printing is as mentioned measured in days.

I think it does need saying though, because you're laying out foundations that don't support the arguments above them.

(e.g. the Bambu A1 is not positioned against the Mk4 like your post says - it's positioned against the identically priced Prusa Mini)

> the Bambu A1 is not positioned against the Mk4 like your post says - it's positioned against the identically priced Prusa Mini

Is it? Why would the A1 be positioned against the mini? It has the same bed size as the MK4. If anything the internet suggests it’s very much competing against the MK3 and MK4. So do YouTube videos reviewing it.

Ok that part is my mistake, I mixed the A1 with the A1 Mini in my head.

> It's a legitimate complaint

I disagree 100%

Deleting the attention required to maintain a community has enabled Prusa to deliver a superior slicer to, say, Cura and its derivatives.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com