I am angry at the bait-and-switch Bambu is pulling. I bought one of their printers in the Black Friday sale on the understanding it was reasonably hackable and open. Now they're trying to lock it down so I can't print on my own printer without using their approved software and DRM chain. It's outrageous.
bait-and-switch? We, those who advocate for open source 3D printers, saw it coming from miles away. This has very very clearly been their plan all along, they themselves said as much (e.g. they are doing the "apple model"). They have been very transparent about this, yet people still fell for it.
I bought a printer. It had some stuff. I didn't want that stuff to be gone after I bought it. That's a bait-and-switch, because they didn't explicitly say "be aware, that stuff is going away on Jan 2025".
I don't know how I feel about this. I hear your frustration about this. OTOH, Bambu is a walled garden approach. I also know the Prusa Core 1 is going to be less open to keep the cheap aliexpress knock-offs at bay. This could be an issue with Bambu labs as well if cheap knockoffs start appearing using reverse engineered P1Ps with modified P1P firmware.
They never officially supported compatibility with Orca, or Home Assistant. Vendors break compatibility with unsupported stuff all the time. Don’t make purchase decisions on unsupported features if you’re gonna get all bent out of shape about it.
Sorry to potentially pour oil into fire here, but I'm curious: did they really?
"Officially support" printing without internet connection?
Was this explicitly documented as a feature or did this just "happen to work" as you expected?
A lawsuit may have some leverage to find that something could have been "reasonably expected" to work in a certain way, but that's quite uncertain territory.
i.e. I would expect an Apple Watch to also work with Android Devices, but this was never officially supported by Apple and it's arguable whether it was reasonable for me to even expect this.
My toilet doesn't officially support crapping without an internet connection either. I'd argue that in both cases it's implicit unless very explicitly disclaimed.
I mean, as a snarky hyperbole about how ridiculous consumer products have become, sure. In reality, I would be very surprised if Oral B decided I needed Internet access to use my toothbrush.
Yes, "lan mode" is an officially supported advertised feature, where you can happily print on an isolated network. (though as of this morning it now sounds like they're backing off after public backlash)
Yes, the default workflow on the product is that all prints go via their cloud service. For the first year or two of the X1C's existence this was the only way to print, but they later introduced lan mode.
Leading to obvious speculation as to why they have stuck themselves processing megabyte g-code streams between your desktop and the printer on the same network...
But since cloud use is optional anyone with the security/reliability/longevity concerns just don't have to use it.
Personally I don't see the cloud stuff as providing any value at all though I know people whose kids print stuff from their makerworld site via their phone app that consider it useful.
I have absolutely no insight into their operations or requirements, but when I see someone forcing traffic to their servers, I immediately think they’re looking for metadata, or training NN models on your data. NN generating 3D models is pretty valuable at the moment, and taking users data to train models without informing them is for some inexplicable reason considered ok even by many people that get foaming-at-the-mouth-mad over other privacy violations. Like I said, I’m just spitballing and have no knowledge of this operation, but it would give me pause before using it as a professional 3D artist.
Well yeah if you're not using LAN you're using WAN which means internet. But the option is there to use either one if you want, or even just put a physical SD card into the printer directly if you want, no network needed at all then, LAN or WAN.
This is the Google model then. Base everything on open source, even allow unofficial builds of your operating system (LineageOS, Graphene), but slowly introduce more and more device attestation and DRM so it becomes de facto impossible to actually use anything but the closed builds because everything from banking apps and electronic identification apps to streaming apps will refuse to run on your "unsafe" operating system.
Currently the only thing which won't run on a non-google blessed android build is google wallet, although a lot of applications rely on google's proprietary services exposed through google play.
I've not ran into any banking applications which won't run on a non-google build of android (as then they would only run on a pixel). That being said, I refuse to seriously bank with any bank which doesn't offer a functioning website. My main bank offers an app but you have to wholesale switch to it.
This is false. List of apps which refuse to run on my old OnePlus 6 which I revived with LineageOS:
- Danish national identity app (MitID). I had to get a hardware token that generates one-time passwords.
- My banking app (still works in the browser though).
- The de facto payment app used for peer-to-peer payments and as a credit card alternative all over Denmark (MobilePay).
- The app for controlling the heating system in my car.
- Revolut.
- The app for showing a digital version of my government issued health insurance card. It's literally just a barcode and a number, so I can get by using a photo of the card instead. This underlines the ridiculousness of requiring Play Integrity attestion.
- The app for showing a digital version of my driver's license. As a bonus this app also doesn't work if you have set your default browser to Firefox instead of Chrome, even on a non-rooted phone.
On top of this, one app for scanning goods in the supermarket stopped working, but without explicitly saying why. I suppose it just silently depends on some Google service, but I have not way of knowing that.
I also cannot get Chromecast to work, but that is perhaps to be expected when replacing the Google services with microg, and not strictly a result of DRM. It is a major inconvenience though.
Denmark is one of the most digitized countries, and in many ways that is good. However, it also means that you are increasingly coerced into the whole Google/Apple ecosystem and that it is very hard to get out. Luckily there are alternatives to all of the above apps, but it is a major inconvenience to have to use them.
I don't know much about LineageOS but GrapheneOS supports attestation (albeit with its own keys) and it works for all the banking apps I have had the displeasure of using here in the UK including revolut.
If LineageOS did support those APIs (which it can support if it wanted to, without any blessing from Google) then presumably most if not all of those should also work.
Try GOS and see if it's broken there. If it works on GOS then you can shout at google for ever exposing the attestation APIs but the apps you're complaining about aren't actually abusing attestation in the way you claim, LineageOS is simply choosing not to implement the features they rely on.
Pretty sure this also requires the banks to then accept those attestation keys. Graphene pushes for them to do this, so you can't simply run whatever open OS you want on your device (like on desktop where you can also do online banking), you need to specifically use some third party service that then tells the banking software it's really okay to run on your device. I do find this to be a bit crappy, but at the same time it's quite amazing that Graphene has enough traction to convince many app vendors they should support an open/secure OS!
They don't have the traction. In my experience almost nothing (except for google pay) uses a whitelist for the keys. They just request attestation. This is presumably because there are too many android phone vendors using too many versions of different keys to reliably check for this.
Do you have the sandboxed Play Services installed? It works fine for me on Graphene (just checked).
That said, the recommendation I always give, and personally follow: keep a spare phone in a drawer somewhere, with official Android installed, a Google account, and use it exclusively for business purposes - banking, government services, and the email account you use for those (separate from the one you use for everything else). Nothing else, no messaging, socials, browsing, or games.
Then you're free to keep your personal phone FOSS and as private as you like, without fear of getting locked out of important stuff due to a crappy Google® SafetyNet® upgrade.
> That said, the recommendation I always give, and personally follow: keep a spare phone in a drawer somewhere, with official Android installed, a Google account, and use it exclusively for business purposes - banking, government services, and the email account you use for those (separate from the one you use for everything else). Nothing else, no messaging, socials, browsing, or games.
Anything which doesn't support an alternative method (not involving a proprietary blessed google phone) of management should be illegal if it's government related and should be boycotted if it's not.
I certainly agree with the sentiment (I would trust-bust tech giants, and severely restrict advertising as a whole for being a negative-sum game).
Nevertheless, for living in this world while preserving your privacy, my advice stands. Separate the devices that you control, which you will use for personal and private purposes, from the devices that global corporations and institutions control, which you will use to access the services those institutions provide - services which, by definition, you would not control anyway.
It is far, far simpler than having to get proprietary, frequently-updated software to play nice inside a secure sandbox. If they do, great, but separate devices ensures it isn't a capital-P Problem for you if they stop.
(FWIW, I lived in three different European countries over the past decade and so far the governments all offered TOTP-based web alternatives to their apps. When it comes to private banking, only one (Lunar) was available only via app, but it was also the only one that ran without Play Services.)
> It is far, far simpler than having to get proprietary, frequently-updated software to play nice inside a secure sandbox. If they do, great, but separate devices ensures it isn't a capital-P Problem for you if they stop.
What I am saying (and what I do) is that it's far simpler still to just not rely on anything where this might be the case.
If my bank turned around tomorrow and said I can't use their website to manage my account, I would not attempt to get their app working on my phone, I would switch bank.
Anything that depends on the SafetyNet API will not run if your android build does not pass the checks, the list is much much bigger than "just google wallet". Whether a rom passes safetynet or not very much depends on what google considers blessed today, and what they will consider blessed in the future.
None of the unofficial Android builds allows me to access to the secure element in my SIM card to use my e-signature, which works with SIM menu prompts triggered OTA by the application I'm currently using, mostly governmental services.
If I'm on a custom ROM, the notification never pops up.
You have to have evidence that this is because of attestation, though - lots of open source software is missing lots of features because they are just missing features.
It's not an attestation problem, but a trusted pipeline problem. Yes, the required files are missing, but carrying them from official builds doesn't work either, because all pipeline from modem to kernel has to be signed, and the chain breaks somewhere, and you can't build it without the private keys Google/OEM has.
It's like Trusted HDCP pipeline. Every part has to be signed properly, and no open distribution of Android can do that, period.
SIM services is an integral part of the GSM stack, and all custom ROMs I used had SIM services menu, and I was able to see and utilize the functions in the menu, sans the ones requiring accessing the secure element.
There was one missing file (which I don't remember its name now, it's long gone), but I always carried over that one from the official ROM (same Android version, mind you), but while everything still worked, this was not enabling me to use the secure element based SIM services (namely e-signature).
The problem was not "not being able to access secure element", it was visible, but making it do (secure/verifiable) things, which require an "operator message" to trigger the right process on the phone. Even if the system which I'm trying to login said that the process should start, the phone just didn't respond/started the e-signature process. In my country, if your SIM is blocked for any reason from using these services (e.g. when you change your SIM and not-activate e-sig again), you SHALL and WILL (in RFC sense) get a message detailing what went wrong.
Again, the moment I flashed the original image, secure element based SIM services started working, I didn't need to do anything on the other side. Different ROM, it's working. Flash the custom one, reboot, it's gone. Add the required files back, no luck. That simple.
BTW, I was not mad that it was not working. It's a legally binding wet signature equivalent. I don't want that pipeline to be peek/poke enabled.
- Battery Management (iPhone 6, 6s, and SE): In 2017, Apple introduced a battery management feature in iOS 10.2.1 to prevent unexpected shutdowns by throttling the performance of iPhones with degraded batteries. This led to slower device performance without informing users, which is a removal of expected performance functionality.
- 32-bit App Support: With the release of iOS 11 in 2017, Apple dropped support for 32-bit apps. This meant users could no longer use older apps that had not been updated to 64-bit, effectively removing access to those apps on updated devices = You want the new OS? -> you have less functionality.
- Pulse oximetry features were recently removed from new Apple Watches due to Masimo's patent infringement claim.
> This led to slower device performance without informing users, which is a removal of expected performance functionality.
As opposed to the device unexpectedly shutting down due to a degraded battery not being able to push enough energy to support the CPU? They didn't remove expected performance, they prevented crashes which are by definition 0 performance. All Li-ion batteries degrade over time. That's not removing a feature...
Well, they DID remove expected performance by slowing CPU performance, disn't they? People who had bought these iPhones (and not the previous ones) did so also because of the promise of a more powerful CPU, a promise broken by Apple. It is removing a feature (a better CPU) and Apple knew it that's why they did it without informing users.
Just to add, they also got fined by the EU for doing so, so it was ruled to be illegal. Bambu's changes would fall into the same category of altering the product and degrading the experience after its been sold.
Just to let you know that InstaCam360 did the same on their cameras with the smartphone app.
Previously you could directly upload the 360 videos do youtube, now you need to download the film locally on the phone, then host a converted version and only after those loops you are permitted to upload.
Or you can now buy a monthly subscription and get back the feature that was already there before. Quite disappointed with this kind of behavior.
the problem is that user got no choice. Some might prefer degraded performance, others might prefer to charge their devices more often.
Also seller should have no business touching anything that they've already sold - they do might offer support, but it should be up to user to accept it or not.
Indeed; while I've not had this specific issue with the phones, I do still have a mid-2013 MacBook Air lying around (it's now too old to realistically sell), and the battery on that was so worn by the time I got an M-something to replace it that would go from "fine" to "emergency shutdown" during boot if I forgot to plug it in. And then report something like 20% if I plugged it in and immediately booted it again.
It's not like the battery is actually empty. The phone is still able to run at 40% if it limits CPU power draw. As long as the throttling curve is accurate to the battery quality, it's all upside. A slow device is better than a turned off device. And if you want to keep your phone above 40% charge so it runs faster, go for it.
The root problem was not the throttling, it was the phone's inability to run at expected speed after a couple years.
No, it was dynamic based on voltage. iPhones with worn batteries had higher performance at full battery and swapping the battery with a fresh replacement restored full performance even at low battery percentage. In fact this is how the slowdown was discovered: someone replaced their iPhone battery with a non-genuine replacement and it got noticeably faster.
Apple (IMO rationally) chose that people would prefer a working phone, one they can use to call emergecy services, for example, to a phone that just suddenly dies.
After the massive hissy fit the Internet threw (along with lawsuits), they added a switch. Now you can choose to have your phone suddenly die.
But the legend lives on that "Appple slowed down phones permanently!!" - even though the fix for that is a 40€ battery swap that takes 30 minutes in any mall phone repair shop.
If you left It hooked up to a charger, their fix would never have affected you. It only slowed down the cpu when the risk of catastrophic shutdown was imminent.
I like a toggle for features like this, but it was a pretty standard user experience / reliability choice imho.
what if you replace battery AFTER the fix was applied? you can't rollback.
again, it's about user's choice. it's not apple's device, but whoever bought it.
they shouldn't be even allowed to DECIDE which option is better. user should be able to pick whichever they want to go with.
With a new battery, the throttling goes away. The cpu throttling only kicks in if your battery condition is poor, and then only at lower charge levels where the risk of unplanned power loss is imminent.
I get it, but if you’re going to accept binary blob updates from a manufacturer at all, this one wasn’t bad.
If there was a toggle, Would you really run your phone in “reckless disregard for battery condition” mode?
Because that is what this fixed, a flaw in the firmware where the power management subsystem made incorrect assumptions about the battery condition. All new phones come with this baked in and working properly, so your phone doesn’t randomly die in the middle of calls when your battery gets old.
People pitchforked over this update without understanding what it was designed to do. If your phone has a good battery, it does not throttle the cpu. It just adjusts the power management profiles to reflect battery aging.
But the way they did it was far from malicious. It only affected users who were actually in danger of an emergency shutdown, during times when the shutdown was imminent. While I don’t want anybody diddling my firmware without giving me a choice, this particular issue was really a nothing burger in the end.
It was discovered when it became apparent that replacing a defective battery made the phone faster. Seems like a standard reliability / user experience fix to me. Not
Many people would choose the “don’t adjust system power consumption to prevent unplanned shutdowns when the battery is about to fail” toggle.
It was not overblown. Apple didn't disclose what they were doing or give the user the option to decide what was best for them. When a company chooses to behave that way, it should hurt them, and it did.
Apple's actions in this case were even worse than Bambu's. At least Bambu documented what the update did and offered the option of declining it.
No, it isn't. If the battery was broken and they knew the battery was broken, they should have informed the user the phone could be fixed with a new battery. They decided to gimp the device and not tell the user so they would be more likely to purchase a new device rather than simply fixing the old one.
Imagine Ford deciding their cars must drive at 50% their speed when the engine oil is older than 2 years and at the same time forbidding users from changing the oil.
Yet there are always people justifying these type of awful practices as better for users. These aren't, the measures are only good for business.
Ford actually does this. They have something called limp mode for when sensors detect degraded conditions. They won't honor the warranty if you clear the code manually and continue operating the vehicle.
Many cars enter limp mode for when the ECU senses a possibly damaging condition. This limits the performance and capabilities until someone with a diagnostic computer can plug it in. Many times these diagnostic computers are entirely proprietary.
I'm not saying it is justified, but to pretend that other businesses don't do this is silly.
Well, that still wouldn't reduce your car speed by 50%.
And even for that case there would be a warning on the console and a mechanic would be able to inform what is happening. On this iphone case, there was no warning at all on the device nor there was any disclosure that they would be doing this to the phones.
You know this. In either case, thank you for the ECU info.
> Well, that still wouldn't reduce your car speed by 50%.
It does actually. It limits your top speed, and your engines rev range to approximately half of redline or less. Typically you end up limited to under 45. Also, accessories and other options, like A/C are disabled. The only indication that you will get is the reduced performance and the check engine/service light (sort of how you might get a 'service battery' warning and reduced performance on a phone).
Again, not defending it, but pointing out that Apple hardly invented artificially limiting performance behind opaque warnings to prevent unwanted outcomes. Cars have had limp mode since before the iPhone was invented.
Forbidding them from changing the oil? I personally changed my battery, I did not feel like it was forbidden.
Not even that hard.
For me, the firmware fix helped me limp through the 2 months before I finally got around to replacing the battery.
It made my phone that was flaky and unreliable below 40percent battery into a phone that worked slightly slower once the battery got low, but didn’t just randomly shut off during calls anymore.
I’d have preferred a toggle, but to be honest I doubt I’d have ever used “reckless disregard for remaining battery capacity” mode.
Yes. I live in Germany, drive German cars and know the tech.
Regular service is indeed a bother. You know what I hate the most? In my oldish Mercedes it isn't even possible to change/update the hour without using a proprietary tool only available at official Mercedes mechanics. Since I refuse to pay premium cost for attending their mechanics, the clock on my car is always with wrong time.
And let's not even get into new business models like charging you a subscription to unlock the car to move faster or to unblock the heated seats. Indeed they also have quite "creative" ways to squeeze money and force to get new models.
The big difference is that none of these changes were part of a defined strategy to lock the user in to their products and ultimately generate more profit, as with the Bambu example:
- Battery management was to handle an issue that was encountered as batteries aged
- 32 bit support: Apple is well known for being one of the more aggressive companies when it comes to forcing users (and especially people coding apps for their platforms) to adopt required tech changes. But again, not directly profit-driven.
- Pulse oximetry: probably the closest to a profit-driven-decision, as this was driven by a patent issue, and presumably they calculated less of a hit from removing the feature than paying feed to the patent owner? Not great, but still not directly part of a user-unfriendly Apple-derived strategy, as with Bambu.
And they have plenty of experience building walls around a garden. Ask anyone using OSX for the past 15 years and you will see how difficult it has become to write or publish software for Apple.
Alternate description of the same information: “newer upgrades made older devices batteries’ last longer”
They did nerf speed. But they did it for a reason. I get being mad about your phone being slowed down, but i don’t get being mad about it once you understand why.
> They did nerf speed. But they did it for a reason.
That reason was to incentivize people to replace their old "slow" phones with faster new phones. If Apple actually cared about the problem of older phones having limited battery life they'd have made the batteries in their phones replaceable.
There are conflicting priorities in every product. Apple tends to optimize look and feel over practicality. So they’ve drawn a hard line at user-serviceable battery. I agree with you that’d a bad call, but I also understand that once you’ve made that call the next best option is what they did.
They are replaceable. I've replaced batteries in older iPhones plenty of times, had Apple replace the battery in a few, and I'm probably going to use the Self Service program to get the parts for my 14 Pro Max soon as it's getting a bit tired out.
I suppose that anything is "replaceable" if you're willing to involve things like soldering irons, heat guns, or specialized tools, but replacing a battery on an iphone is not something that the vast majority of the population would be equipped to do or be comfortable doing.
the keyword being _phone_, not smartphone. Bambulab too will let you print from SD card without logging in their infra, they are just locking the rest of the ecosystem. 1 to 1 analogy.
It's still a smartphone - with web browsing, mail and everything else what's available out-of-the-box. And Bambu will cut out even local network access and, as they stated in "Terms of Use", can lock print jobs until you update firmware. Far from 1:1 analogy...
They are actually adding in LAN modes (standard and developer) with these changes so I'm not sure what you're talking about with them cutting out local network access. Neither will require auth.
As the issue here came through software update, you should look at it under the same lens for Apple.
For instance did an OS update ever prevent you from doing something that you could before ?
Yes. Countless times. OS updates have breaking changes, older apps lose support etc.
And for iOS these updates are irreversible under supported ways, while the very nature of the "there's an app for this" paradigm means losing a third party app equals losing that functionality for your device when you upgrade (you won't get a translation layer or virtualization to help the transition)
You may like Apple more and feel they communicate better, but fundamentally it's the same situation.
Open source didn't compete on quality for price. I could pay 2k plus 40 hours of my time for a Voron or buy something that just works. I think Prusa only put out their CoreXY offering after they realized Bambu was eating their lunch. The Apple model works because people want to print rather than tinker.
But for 3D printers that worked out of the box under $1000, Prusa had no real competition itself.
The Mk3 came out in 2017 and I swear Prusa just sat on their laurels. I was a Mk3s+ owner (well, still am) and was pretty disappointed how little improved with the Mk4.
Bambu’s competition was Prusa and they clearly strived to improve over what Prusa had accomplished.
I wasn’t really sold on the 4/4S, but I recently upgraded a 3S+ to a 4S and am amazed how much improved. The new touchscreen LCD is a huge improvement over the old two line monochrome LCD. Remote access and wife printing is a nice plus — I don’t even run OctoPi anymore. Automatic bed leveling and no more Live Z tweaking for each sheet has been a major quality of life upgrade and eliminates one of the major pain points in swapping out nozzles. The nozzle is much easier to swap out and is now high flow. Add in Input Shaping and it prints significantly faster.
I hadn’t had any experience with the new platform prior to this upgrade and I skipped over the MK4, but the 4S upgrade is a significant step up over the 3S/3S+. I wouldn’t necessarily recommend the upgrade kit — that took much longer than expected to complete (about two days) and I regret not buying a new printer instead. But, I have a 3S I plan to upgrade to 3.5 just to get the new electronics; that upgrade is far less intensive.
If you haven’t tried out a 4S you might be pleasantly surprised by how much nicer it is than the 3S+.
Similar experience with PRUSA for me -- I had a MK3S+ (which I loved) and paid ~$250 for the upgrade to the MK3.5S. Very, very impressed, for a modest investment I now have the new color LCD, a good chunk of the MK4 features and the print speed is at least 2x improved (if not better, I haven't quantitatively measured it but it's noticeably faster).
I went for the 3.5 upgrade as the upgrade from 3S+ to 4 was almost as much as outright buying a new 4. I'm glad I did it this way because now I'm thinking of getting the CORE One and then I'll have 2 excellent printers.
Heh, whoops. Definitely a typo, but in all seriousness the printer is actually usable by wife now, so that is a huge plus. She could use it before, but hadn’t learned how to adjust Live Z and thus didn’t like changing the sheet. If you do it wrong you can drive the nozzle into the sheet.
The problem is even with Prusas recent efforts to catch up with the Core One, it's expensive, and they still dont have a viable answer to the AMS. The MMU is still a hot mess, requires tinkering, isn't stable and overall just doesnt come close to an out of the box experience.
They still seem to be thinking the primary audience of 3d printers is people who tinker. It's not been that way for a long time. People just want to be able to unbox, plug it in and print. The second you add in the "oh just spend 5 hours tweaking this spaghetti mess of an MMU" you've lost them.
"hot mess" is not a fair assessment. The MMU2 was terribly unreliable, but the MMU3 is OK. It's surely more complicated to set up and requires more space than the AMS, but on the other hand, I think AMS concept is just plain bad. It's incredibly slow and produces a ton of plastic waste.
Bambu Labs printers are not cheap. Even their entry level A1 printer is twice the price of an Ender3.
Sure, it is a better printer, but it is clear that they are going for scale, and most of what makes them better is in the software rather than in using premium hardware.
initially maybe but the way the printers are built makes for cheap mass production. Theres no special sauce in the hardware, it's all low cost off the shelf stuff, it's just optimised very well.
> Open source didn't compete on quality for price.
Well, Open Source did compete on one quality very well: being open, hackable and staying that way. With this being removed from Bambu lab printers it seems as if this is a very much valued aspect for many 3D printing enthusiasts, yet few people were willing to compromise for this aspect.
Apparently it is true, you don’t know how much you value something until you don’t have it anymore
I paid ~$750 for my 350mm Voron 2.4 kit (and, sure, 40 hours of my time. But look, you want to do 3D printing, 40 hours are just a small initial investment).
It really depends upon the target market. That's fine for hobbyists. But I use the Bambu X1 for small-scale prototyping in a company, and it has to be usable out of the box. We can't justify an entire week of labour for each printer we buy.
The Bambu has been ideal for that reason. Every material pretty much just works, and the quality is excellent. The cloud integration and janky LAN mode is the downside, and this current topic even moreso.
Yeah, I've got an A1 that I bought on sale. It's sitting next to a Prusa MK3S. I was doing prints for my nephews for Halloween and the A1 would do a print in 2h and PrusaSlicer estimated 9h for the MK3S. And I have, so far, not had a single failed print on the A1. They're rare on the MK3S too. But... the MK3S is "start the print and it'll be ready in the morning" and the A1 is "start the print and it'll be ready by lunch, and if you need to iterate you can have another one done by 3pm"
> But look, you want to do 3D printing, 40 hours are just a small initial investment
No. None of this crap. I want to 3D print. I don't want to service industrial machinery in my spare time. Why should 3D printing require spending weekends troubleshooting machines just to keep the thing working? I want to print models not play repair technician.
Vorons are fantastic printers and a fantastic kit if 3D printing itself is your hobby. 3D printing is a fantastic hobby. There's tons of fun to be had building up and dialing in a printer kit. A well tuned voron can be up with the best of the best 3D printers. If that's what you want to do go for it!
But for heaven's sake I want to print models, parts and other practical things. I have other things to do and problems to solve. My 3D printer is a tool. If I have to spend just as much time working on the machine as I do using to actually print things then I'm not interested.
Bambu is still the best game in town for a turn-key, just works printer. Prusa can deliver the same experience at double to triple the ticket price. A voron is not a replacement for a Bambu printer no matter how good the printers actually are.
>Why should 3D printing require spending weekends troubleshooting machines just to keep the thing working? I want to print models not play repair technician.
I’m sympathetic to your POV but the reason you should is that’s the price to keep things open.
Obviously many people don’t care about that. Fair enough. But then you should be prepared to deal with their shenanigans.
Prusa also does things like maintain and develop printables.com and PrusaSlicer (itself forked) which many of these closed printers fork with minimal changes.
People don’t care about this either. So again, get ready to deal with garbage when Prusa goes under.
I think it’s sad since the whole domestic 3D printer thing started as open source.
> I’m sympathetic to your POV but the reason you should is that’s the price to keep things open.
No, it's not, and the perception that it is hurts the cause of openness.
Open Source has every ability to be better, to Just Work, to not require constant debugging. Good Open Source systems manage this. The fact that 3D printers apparently have not is the fault of those printers, not any inherent quality of openness.
> Comparing Bambu to Voron is an absurd comparison
I politely disagree. I was in the market for a more modern printer, and it boiled down to either a BL or a Voron - in the end I decided against ease of use and in favor of an open ecosystem. I agree in that they are not universally interchangeable, but for some people either can be an option, each with distinctive advantages and disadvantages.
Both modern (pre assembled) Prusa and Bambu are very good at this. They guide you through the full setup process, automate first layer reliable, have decent stock profiles.
It's all just much less tinkering then 5 years ago.
It is. I have no interest in messing around with 3D printers and was annoyed by the fact that Bambu lab lied about the 15 minute setup time. It was more like 45 minutes, but after that I never touched the printer again and started printing instead.
Also, subtractive manufacturing is much harder than additive manufacturing, because you need to position the machine around an existing piece of stock and sequence your operations manually, instead of letting a generic slicing algorithm slice from bottom to top with an offset vs the intended printing location only being a problem if you accidentally print over the edge of the build plate, which is usually not possible mechanically.
it is not that. i mostly mean that for anything functional that needs to take a load you need at least petg or asa (abs is a bit old now), which require proper storage.
also there are so much stuff that are in open prs and issues for years that are not implemented for slicers.
There are countless firearm receivers that have been printed on pla plus, many with thousands of rounds on them. Sure they may turn into a puddle in a hot vehicle, but they are functional and definitely take a load. Pla + is actually preferred in that community over the others you mentioned, although asa is becoming more popular, along with filled nylon alloys.
"Take a load" = perform mechanically and or structurally at levels of force, temperatures, etc. at levels higher than the properties of PLA allow for.
Don't get me wrong here. PLA is a great polymer, However you can't really expect parts made with it to hold up when compared to other "engineering grade" polymers.
I don't think anyone expects PLA to be used for anything that requires structural stability. There's far better filaments for that application. Some of the carbon fiber infused PETG filaments for example are incredibly strong.
Not many people use 3d printing for applications that require extreme strength though, that's really not the goal many people are aiming for.
I do this for a living and people are always looking for more parts to run through the process and better filaments to see those parts end up performant.
CF-PETG is strong! For a bit more toughness and temp resistance, PA12CF35 is seeing a lot of use. Some companies out there have service departments to keep machinery running. They apply FDM more than you might expect. Alloy 910 for gears, Cf of various kinds for abrasive scenarios, like cardboard handling, in one scenario.
Well for example layer bonding is better compared to some other materials. It's just that load over time it will creep. And of course shite under temperature.
It can be a fantastic material for some functional parts.
But even if not, I don't see how it's invalidates that there are printers out there that are more or less set and forget.
Bambu printers, or at least the one in our shop runs ASA set and forget style.
It is a great machine though it does not always make the strongest parts, and single material builds is geometry limiting. Lack of chamber heat and one nozzle makes some things easy, but does not entirely avoid the trouble with higher performing polymers.
You're saying this yet anyone can buy a random Bambu and just print.
I've owned or used probably every major (and some minor) printer released in the last 8 years and for most people Bambu really will just be "plug and play" (and even if something goes wrong they'll hold hands as much as needed)
That does not match my experience. The printer I have has had parts break with light use, and a really poorly engineered z-axis homing which results in wildly inconsistent zero heights and a very high print failure rate.
> The Apple model works because people want to print rather than tinker.
Entirely this. I bought my A1 mini over the Christmas holidays and couldn't be happier with it, it's my first 3D printer. Searching for models on Makerworld, adjusting tiny bits here and there if needed and print. It just works and I don't really care about anything else, much like my Brother printer.
Curious if anyone has tried the Core XY printers from Creality? I think they use open source software and are generally in the same ballpark as the Bambu printers price-wise. Also saw they have a similar AMS style system as well.
"Fell for it" implies that everyone buying a Bambu printer expected some degree of openness. Maybe some customers actually want an "Apple model", where the device mostly looks after itself and "just works" as much as possible.
I got into 3d printing a few years ago and noticed the same, bambu made me nervous for exactly this.
But the fanboyism and shilling in the 3d printing community is intense. If you mentioned these misgivings you'd get flamed. If you bought or enjoyed another printer people would advise you to sell it and buy Bambu. Lots of people in various threads seemed to defer to that kind of expert advice.
I think there is/was a similar fanaticism for Prusa going on, but it seems a little less at the forefront since Bambu.
As someone who recently bought a bambu printer, I have to agree: I am not surprised. Still disappointed, but in no way surprised.
The "apple experience" is why I went for a bambu device (along with the price, and some excellent recommendations from friends). I was even surpised that the "LAN Mode" actually works somewhat good.
Should have got a prusa...
no, it hasn't been their clear plan all along, and blaming the victims is not advocating for open source 3d printers. Fully open source, DIY 3d printers that are available today suck compared to Bambu. The commercial offerings built on top of Orca (I have a magneto X) suck compared to bambu.
The 3d printing community just slapped down heygears for similar BS to what bambu is pulling right now. Once Bambu hire some better software devs and sort out their issues, open access will return, I bet.
I'm not saying I wouldn't love for an fully open source printer company to have the quality and velocity of development that the bambu has (AMS-compatible TPU, delicious), I'm saying people who are making "It's clearly X... You should have known Y" aren't providing useful perspective nor are they accurate. Looking at your post history shows this.
I don’t understand why you think it was hackable or open?
Since the launch of the X1, it’s been closed firmware and tightly controlled. That’s always been the compromise people make to get one.
I’d really like to understand what bait and switch you think has happened, and what you could do before with officially sanctioned methods that you can’t now?
You can print of an SD card without any special software or online services, the same as you can on Prusa printers. It's just the server/internet stuff that's locked down. Which I wish was open too, but it's still has fully unrestricted local printing functionality.
From that link if you continue reading, commenters in the thread point out that LAN mode didn't even exist when the printer came out, and that it's more flexible now than when they first came out on the market.
My other comment on this thread contains the rest of my thoughts. Overall, I think this outrage is overblown.
Yeah this looks to be the case. All of this change was prompted by the fact that malicious software was triggering prints over the network. So now they have locked it down so the printer can verify prints came from the actual account owner.
Printing directly from SD cards via the little touch screen is unchanged since networked computers can’t do that.
> So now they have locked it down so the printer can verify prints came from the actual account owner.
This is inaccurate, the printer already required authentication using an 8 digit code. What they're trying to do now is verify that the print has been started using official Bambu software, i.e. software-only DRM.
I really really hope people saying this is a nothingburger is actually right, because I do have a P1S, use orcaslicer, and would like it to continue to work. Hoping this is just a miscommunication.
Bambu Connect is explicitly about allowing you to continue to use your favorite slicer. They make it less convenient (instead of pressing print you now have to save, load the file in Bambu Connect and then press print), but they don't prevent you from doing it.
Once the update actually rolls out to the P1S obviously. Which may not even happen with the current backlash
> Bambu Connect is explicitly about allowing you to continue to use your favorite slicer.
For now. They're putting themselves in the middleman position where they get the final say over what we can print on the printers that we supposedly "own".
It's naive to think that they won't try to extract revenue from that privileged position, they wouldn't have spent R&D resources on it otherwise.
“Hackable” and “open” were never advertised or officially supported by Bambu. It is foolish to make a purchase decision based on an unsupported and unadvertised feature, and while you can be angry that seems silly.
> on the understanding it was reasonably hackable and open
Where did this understanding come from? I'm pretty happy with my Bambu printer, but I was never under any understanding that it was hackable, let alone open. Since the beginning I was slightly frustrated at the RFID fillament spools not being open-enough for others.
> on the understanding it was reasonably hackable and open
I, honestly, have no idea why you thought that. Bambulab has been under fire from the very beginning about not being open at all and not contributing back to the open source community they're build on.
I bought one of their printers during black friday too, it took me a long time to get over the fact that it isn't an open printer, and I never want to go back to tinkering for hours to get meh quality prints.
Not sure where you got this idea from. Despite the hacking, print from SD Card remains an option, and the device does not need an internet connection for initial setup. Version 01.08.02.00 is the first firmware version that supports offline updating, even if it is also the latest version.
They were selling at or sometimes below the price point of printers that you build yourself.
They're good products, and they are clearly selling at a low enough price point to push for market capture.
The pricing, special features tied into their own AMS + filaments, special features tied into their own slicer. These all indicate that they were building towards this sort of behaviour.
Sorry, but if you did research on Bambu's and came away with them being open and hackable, you didn't do enough research.
I dove into 3D printing a year ago. I settled on the P1S because its reputation for "just working" and good for beginners. I wasn't interested in attaching a Pi to it, run Klipper on it, I wasn't interested in steep learning curves and choosing from a myriad of slicers. I wasn't interested in "calibrating more than printing" with the Enders that one friend warned me about. I needed it for one simple, but big project and it worked great.
Since then I expanded to getting the enclosure, AMS, and messing around with Orca. The Bambu is very accomodating to learn and grow more and I don't regret the decision at all.
Bambu has never advertised their printers as hackable or open. Indeed, they advertise the exact opposite: that you won't need to do anything to it to get it to work.
That people can hack the Bambu printers is a bonus.
> on the understanding it was reasonably hackable and open
While this lock down doesn't seem right it is far from unexpected, I question the amount of research done prior to your Black Friday purchase (BF and well-thought-out-decisions often do not go hang-in-hand!)…
I bought one (an A1 with the multi-material add-on) some months before that in full knowledge that the company would prefer to funnel people into a walled garden because if you look anywhere you'll find proponents of other makes warning that exactly this is possible & likely, with the "must take many steps to print without talking to their servers" being the key evidence in those warnings.
Good reasons to buy a BBL machine (at least my reasoning when I did):
* They work out of the box more so than many of the competition (many will say "X is better or better value, if you spend Y amount of time tuning" which while often correct, I wasn't looking to spend that time tuning), certainly more so than others at similar prices.
* QoL features (good auto leveling, dynamic flow control) that weren't exactly ubiquitous on similarly priced or cheaper machines.
* Certainly in the case of the newest A1/A1-Mini line: a working MMU option cheaper than you find in other ranges (some manufacturers have started addressing this and the out-of-box experience, in their product lines, 2025 could be an interesting year), and very easy nozzle changes (useful if you want to both do detailed minis (without going resin) and mostly larger items).
* For me, the handling of the A1 issues early last year (quickly acknowledging a potential safety issue and publishing mitigation guidelines, full recall or fix-at-home options when it became clear the issue was more significant) was a point in their favour wrt after-sales giving-a-shit. Obviously not a point against others as we don't know how they'd react until it happens, of course. There are regular complaints of slow support response more generally, but there are for other printer manufacturers too and, well, pretty much all consumer facing industry these days.
* The official documentation & videos, maintenance & troubleshooting guides etc, seemed to me to be more coherent than some other offerings (though searching for "<my problem> reddit" is still a thing!).
Absolutely terrible reasons to buy into BBL, long before this storm:
* Openness (software). From the get go their offering has the trappings of a more controlled garden than the 3D printing community were used to.
* Openness (hardware). While there are some compatible 3rd party after-market parts, there isn't the able-to-build-your-own feel you see elsewhere with people using different extruder nozzles, cooling options, and so on.
--------
This isn't a great analogy, but: BBL is an Apple (though not quite on price) to the rest of the 3D printing industry's Linux and it only takes a small amount of information to see that before buying.
If I upgrade (or have to replace, or just decide to get a second) then maybe I'll go elsewhere. I'm more confident I could get other others working well, manufacturers are addressing the points that have allowed BBL to take so much of the market & mindshare in a short time, but the key thing against BBL (not being open like much of the rest of 3D printing) is something I was well aware of when buying (it did make me think twice) so I can't be too mad about it.
Now if they try stop people using 3rd party filament, like the traditional printing industry with ink & toner, which is far from impossible, then I'll feel they've conned me.
An extra point that it is too late to edit in, on openness wrt software: unlike some companies we could all mention, they are playing right with the slicer software. It is heavily based on earlier AGPL3 licensed software and their work is correctly licensed also: https://github.com/bambulab/BambuStudio/blob/master/LICENSE
There might be some question as to whether anything like the connectivity layer that sits between BS and the printer that currently isn't open, should also be AGPL. I'll leave discussion of how AGPL and losly linked components do/n't work together to people with more experience in the area…
More info on the hacking (the first in what may be a long stupid fight): https://hackaday.com/2025/01/19/bambu-connects-authenticatio...