Comment on Prusa Mk4 or Mk4s first layer issues

• ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Isn’t their entire FW closed and using proprietary boards? AFAIK replacement parts are also only available as STLs?

  source

  • spitfire@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    I believe you’ve confused them with Bambu

    source

    • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      No, I believe you hold Prusa to a higher standard than they actually deliver. It’s true their roots are in open source, but these days they are only partially open source.

      source

      • IceFoxX@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Reason is as example bambu. Prusa and the other open source player’s doing the development and off has the development cost. So now there the closed source manufacturer which picking their printer from the open source work. Has no development cost… its not sharing anything for the open source community and ofc can sell their printers for so much lower. This destroys the open source community

        source
  • mholiv@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    It’s true it could be better. They used to be more open source. Like they used to just publish their firmware source as they released it. Now days they hold back the current generation till the next gen is out. They mentioned this was so they could be more competitive with companies that do less R&D and more cloning.

    Like even their slicer was just reskinned etc. it’s in peoples rights to reskin an open source slicer but I see why they did it.

    Maybe “was” is the better word. Still better than things like Bamboo though.

    github.com/prusa3d

    source