4 ms·

Reprap seems like a neat idea, but it's not yet capable of making stuff that I'd want. It's low-res, and doesn't print metal. If and when it does these things,

Reprap seems like a neat idea, but it's not yet capable of making stuff that I'd want. It's low-res, and doesn't print metal. If and when it does these things, I think it'll be worth talking about. So maybe it's like the Apple I was back in 1976. The Shapeways printer the article talks about does cost something on the order of a 1970s minicomputer... The reason I'm skeptical about Reprap is that it's not a business, but they're trying to make hardware. So I'm not sure that they'll ever achieve their goals before a startup does it first and better. Apple had a lot of money, and they used plenty of it to create the Mac, which was the first desktop computer that had the interface and capabilities that most people really wanted (easy desktop publishing, for example.)

evangineer 16y ago
The big deal about RepRap isn't so much what it can do but the fact that it is: 1) Low cost 2) Open source 3) Self-replicating These attributes make it a lot more economically accessible to people who wouldn't otherwise be in a position to learn about and use this technology. It could allow a bootstrapping hardware startup to produce their first product prototype. The economic value that could result is immense. Just because RepRap doesn't meet your needs doesn't mean it's not worth talking about.
- Retric 16y ago
  It's only Self-replicating in the least useful way possible. The components it can create that are used to make more copy's of it's self could be vary cheap to buy in other ways. AKA if you used injection molding and sold it as a kit the overall costs would decrease (assuming a reasonable market existed for them). I am not saying it needs to be able to use dirt, sunlight, and water to make another copy. Just that the components need to be a little simpler before the cost really drops.
  - evangineer 16y ago
    I could be wrong but I do believe that RepRap was the first working self-replicating device after decades of theorizing on the topic. Sure it can be improved on massively, but you must acknowledge that it is at least a step in the right direction.
    - maxharris 16y ago
      It's a step, alright, but how do you know that it's a step in the right direction? RepRap has not set very much of world on fire yet. When I can do more than print out more than a low-res plastic coathook, I'll get excited. How many years will it be before I can replace my car's crappy plastic door panel with a high-quality printed one? Will it ever happen? It doesn't seem like this will happen soon enough for me to hold out on buying a new car.
    - Retric 16y ago
      No, it's just a marketing gimmick. Most automated fabrication device can make parts for a copy of that same device, if given the spec's. The reality is the fact it's open source is what allows people to make copy's of them, not any capability of the device it's self.
evangineer 16y ago
I take your point about RepRap not being a business. Do you still think it's not worth talking about regardless of being a business or not? Last time I looked projects like Firefox and Wikipedia weren't businesses and they are still doing a sterling job competing with large enterprises like Microsoft and Britannica.
- maxharris 16y ago
  I only meant that it's not worth talking about in an economic context. At the rate it's progressing, it's not going to impact global economic stuff anytime soon (say the next five years). I'm way more excited about lower-cost selective laser sintering (SLS) machines. This process yields high-quality (and high resolution) metal parts that most people would want to use in their daily lives. It's also something that we're not going to see out of the RepRap project in its current incarnation. SLS is startup territory. Current machines run something like $100,000, and anyone that figures out how to make this much cheaper without losing quality will do very well!
  - theBobMcCormick 16y ago
    IMHO, you're missing the point. The RepRap project might not be economically interesting, but it might put technologies and capabilities into the hands of companies and entrepreneurs who will do economically (and socially, culturally, etc.) interesting things. As a comparison, Linux distributions, Linux kernel development, etc. aren't economically interesting or significant, but nobody in their right mind would claim that Linux hasn't had a huge effect on startups and on the entire tech industry.
    - maxharris 16y ago
      Well, FreeBSD would have fit into the spot Linux took up if the legal matters (USL vs BSDi) involved were just a little different. So I agree with the larger point, which is that something like RepRap (self-replicating, etc.) is interesting. But I'm not convinced that RepRap is that project.

evangineer 16y ago

The big deal about RepRap isn't so much what it can do but the fact that it is: 1) Low cost 2) Open source 3) Self-replicating These attributes make it a lot more economically accessible to people who wouldn't otherwise be in a position to learn about and use this technology. It could allow a bootstrapping hardware startup to produce their first product prototype. The economic value that could result is immense. Just because RepRap doesn't meet your needs doesn't mean it's not worth talking about.

Retric 16y ago
It's only Self-replicating in the least useful way possible. The components it can create that are used to make more copy's of it's self could be vary cheap to buy in other ways. AKA if you used injection molding and sold it as a kit the overall costs would decrease (assuming a reasonable market existed for them). I am not saying it needs to be able to use dirt, sunlight, and water to make another copy. Just that the components need to be a little simpler before the cost really drops.
- evangineer 16y ago
  I could be wrong but I do believe that RepRap was the first working self-replicating device after decades of theorizing on the topic. Sure it can be improved on massively, but you must acknowledge that it is at least a step in the right direction.
  - maxharris 16y ago
    It's a step, alright, but how do you know that it's a step in the right direction? RepRap has not set very much of world on fire yet. When I can do more than print out more than a low-res plastic coathook, I'll get excited. How many years will it be before I can replace my car's crappy plastic door panel with a high-quality printed one? Will it ever happen? It doesn't seem like this will happen soon enough for me to hold out on buying a new car.
  - Retric 16y ago
    No, it's just a marketing gimmick. Most automated fabrication device can make parts for a copy of that same device, if given the spec's. The reality is the fact it's open source is what allows people to make copy's of them, not any capability of the device it's self.

evangineer 16y ago

I take your point about RepRap not being a business. Do you still think it's not worth talking about regardless of being a business or not? Last time I looked projects like Firefox and Wikipedia weren't businesses and they are still doing a sterling job competing with large enterprises like Microsoft and Britannica.

maxharris 16y ago
I only meant that it's not worth talking about in an economic context. At the rate it's progressing, it's not going to impact global economic stuff anytime soon (say the next five years). I'm way more excited about lower-cost selective laser sintering (SLS) machines. This process yields high-quality (and high resolution) metal parts that most people would want to use in their daily lives. It's also something that we're not going to see out of the RepRap project in its current incarnation. SLS is startup territory. Current machines run something like $100,000, and anyone that figures out how to make this much cheaper without losing quality will do very well!
- theBobMcCormick 16y ago
  IMHO, you're missing the point. The RepRap project might not be economically interesting, but it might put technologies and capabilities into the hands of companies and entrepreneurs who will do economically (and socially, culturally, etc.) interesting things. As a comparison, Linux distributions, Linux kernel development, etc. aren't economically interesting or significant, but nobody in their right mind would claim that Linux hasn't had a huge effect on startups and on the entire tech industry.
  - maxharris 16y ago
    Well, FreeBSD would have fit into the spot Linux took up if the legal matters (USL vs BSDi) involved were just a little different. So I agree with the larger point, which is that something like RepRap (self-replicating, etc.) is interesting. But I'm not convinced that RepRap is that project.