6 ms·

The author starts out discussing licenses and by the fourth paragraph has jumped to the standard "I've never used a prusa, but here's why they suck" talking poi

The author starts out discussing licenses and by the fourth paragraph has jumped to the standard "I've never used a prusa, but here's why they suck" talking points and then at the end of the article even points out that the license talk has nothing to do with their assertions. > Prusa responded to this certainty by not diversifying their business model whatsoever. There has only ever been one Prusa product: their latest 3D printer model. https://blog.prusa3d.com/prusa-pro-our-industrial-product-line-at-formnext-2023_85533/ https://blog.prusa3d.com/prusa-pro-our-industrial-product-li... https://blog.prusa3d.com/printables-store_87810/ https://blog.prusa3d.com/printables-store_87810/ https://blog.prusa3d.com/printables-clubs-are-live-you-can-now-support-the-creators-you-love-on-printables_81063/ https://blog.prusa3d.com/printables-clubs-are-live-you-can-n... https://blog.prusa3d.com/trilabs-industrial-3d-printers-one-year-later-moving-expansion-and-prusa-e-shop_72326/ https://blog.prusa3d.com/trilabs-industrial-3d-printers-one-... These are just the first few pages of their blog, I could go on. > Or, you can buy an Ender 3 off Amazon right now for $180 and you’ll get better than half of the value of an Mk4 at an 85% discount. It's difficult to assume that the author is communicating in good faith when one reads something as obviously wrong as this. If you can't spot the difference between a Ender 3 and an MK4, you shouldn't be writing about 3d printers. > Prusa’s naive strategy is causing their position to fall like a rock. Are Prusa's financials available somewhere that I'm not aware of? They seem to be doing fine considering they can't make printers fast enough to keep up with demand.

drewdevault 3y ago
Author here. I have used Prusas, as well as many other 3D printers. I know how they are distinguished from the rest. The thing is, there really isn't much of a difference between an Ender 3 and a Mk4 that a typical consumer (that is, not an enthusiast) would understand as justifying the bigger price tag. The Mk4 is a better printer, by a long shot, but not by the same factor as the price tag. The Mk4 price completely eliminates Prusa from the entry- to mid-level market which is a big lost opportunity when new enthusiasts are learning on other brands -- and by the time they want to upgrade to a Mk4 price-point, they have much, much better options than Prusa and brand loyalty to someone else. Prusa is not the right choice at any price point anymore and has little to no market relevance left, except maybe among a certain niche of enthusiasts.
- riddley 3y ago
  > The thing is, there really isn't much of a difference between an Ender 3 and a Mk4 that a typical consumer (that is, not an enthusiast) would understand as justifying the bigger price tag. I'm not sure what makes you feel so comfortable deciding that for everyone? Having vastly better components that are much less likely to fail is something I think anyone would find valuable. If you give an absolute beginner an MK4 and an Ender 3, they're going to use the MK4 every time. It's vastly less effort to get started and the QC of one vs the other isn't even a competition. > The Mk4 price completely eliminates Prusa from the entry- to mid-level market which is a big lost opportunity when new enthusiasts are learning on other brands I mean, this is the trick of your faulty logic, right? Prusa makes flex-plates popular and the Chinese printers all jump on board. Prusa makes auto-leveling popular and the Chinese companies (eventually... why aren't you talking about how long it took them to do this?) jump on board. And on and on it goes. And it's not just Prusa, it's the whole 3d community that's been looted by these Chinese companies. They're happy to steal from Voron and really anyone and then you act like it's innovation and decry Prusa for not innovating recently enough for you and praise the looters for selling you something cheaper because it's made by slaves. You seem great at spotting these lost opportunities, but you act like just because a company isn't doing the things you want, they're dying. It's poorly conceived at best and astro turfing/stanning at worst. > and by the time they want to upgrade to a Mk4 price-point, they have much, much better options than Prusa You could really help your position by backing up these claims. What makes them "much, much better" ? Initial cost of ownership and what else? Cloud slicing is not something I would want -- ever, so please don't list that as some objective "better." > Prusa is not the right choice at any price point anymore and has little to no market relevance left, except maybe among a certain niche of enthusiasts. And yet, they can't make printers fast enough.
  - MegaDeKay 3y ago
    > And yet, they can't make printers fast enough. I generally agree with your comments but I think you've accidentally brought up a really good point. Prusa would do well do improve on getting their new models out the door faster. The Mk3S was getting fairly long in the tooth before the Mk4 came out. The printer they introduced before that also suffered from a very long development cycle. This leads to lost sales in a competitive market.
aqfamnzc 3y ago
> If you can't spot the difference between a Ender 3 and an MK4 The author isn't saying that, they said it's "better than half the value". Something that's let's say 2/3 as good will definitely be obvious.
- riddley 3y ago
  The initial cost of ownership is the only thing that matters?
  - em-bee 3y ago
    for entry level, eg someone buying a 3D printer for the first time, absolutely
    - riddley 3y ago
      But the author isn't saying (only) "Prusa is losing the ultra-beginner market." That's moving the goal posts. The author is making sweeping claims beyond just that market, right? When you're in the market for a new TV or phone or whatever, do you buy the absolute cheapest one you can find and then decry the other players in the market because their stuff is clearly low value because the ICO is higher? Maybe you do, that's your choice of course, but there are plenty of people who buy, for example, Apple because they see beyond the ICO.
      - em-bee 3y ago
        ok, fair. i wasn't adressing the whole range, but merely pointing out that there is a subset of consumers who will only consider the initial price. myself i do that for any product that i am not familiar with unless the running costs are evident. (so i'd buy a more expensive car that uses less gas, if i were in the market for a car) for someone new to 3D printers, running costs are not evident because i don't even know how much i'll use that thing. TVs are an odd example because they don't have any running costs beyond how long they live before they break down, but even the cheapest lives long enough to make a more expensive one not worth it unless it has better specs that i care about.

drewdevault 3y ago

Author here. I have used Prusas, as well as many other 3D printers. I know how they are distinguished from the rest. The thing is, there really isn't much of a difference between an Ender 3 and a Mk4 that a typical consumer (that is, not an enthusiast) would understand as justifying the bigger price tag. The Mk4 is a better printer, by a long shot, but not by the same factor as the price tag. The Mk4 price completely eliminates Prusa from the entry- to mid-level market which is a big lost opportunity when new enthusiasts are learning on other brands -- and by the time they want to upgrade to a Mk4 price-point, they have much, much better options than Prusa and brand loyalty to someone else. Prusa is not the right choice at any price point anymore and has little to no market relevance left, except maybe among a certain niche of enthusiasts.

riddley 3y ago
> The thing is, there really isn't much of a difference between an Ender 3 and a Mk4 that a typical consumer (that is, not an enthusiast) would understand as justifying the bigger price tag. I'm not sure what makes you feel so comfortable deciding that for everyone? Having vastly better components that are much less likely to fail is something I think anyone would find valuable. If you give an absolute beginner an MK4 and an Ender 3, they're going to use the MK4 every time. It's vastly less effort to get started and the QC of one vs the other isn't even a competition. > The Mk4 price completely eliminates Prusa from the entry- to mid-level market which is a big lost opportunity when new enthusiasts are learning on other brands I mean, this is the trick of your faulty logic, right? Prusa makes flex-plates popular and the Chinese printers all jump on board. Prusa makes auto-leveling popular and the Chinese companies (eventually... why aren't you talking about how long it took them to do this?) jump on board. And on and on it goes. And it's not just Prusa, it's the whole 3d community that's been looted by these Chinese companies. They're happy to steal from Voron and really anyone and then you act like it's innovation and decry Prusa for not innovating recently enough for you and praise the looters for selling you something cheaper because it's made by slaves. You seem great at spotting these lost opportunities, but you act like just because a company isn't doing the things you want, they're dying. It's poorly conceived at best and astro turfing/stanning at worst. > and by the time they want to upgrade to a Mk4 price-point, they have much, much better options than Prusa You could really help your position by backing up these claims. What makes them "much, much better" ? Initial cost of ownership and what else? Cloud slicing is not something I would want -- ever, so please don't list that as some objective "better." > Prusa is not the right choice at any price point anymore and has little to no market relevance left, except maybe among a certain niche of enthusiasts. And yet, they can't make printers fast enough.
- MegaDeKay 3y ago
  > And yet, they can't make printers fast enough. I generally agree with your comments but I think you've accidentally brought up a really good point. Prusa would do well do improve on getting their new models out the door faster. The Mk3S was getting fairly long in the tooth before the Mk4 came out. The printer they introduced before that also suffered from a very long development cycle. This leads to lost sales in a competitive market.

aqfamnzc 3y ago

> If you can't spot the difference between a Ender 3 and an MK4 The author isn't saying that, they said it's "better than half the value". Something that's let's say 2/3 as good will definitely be obvious.

riddley 3y ago
The initial cost of ownership is the only thing that matters?
- em-bee 3y ago
  for entry level, eg someone buying a 3D printer for the first time, absolutely
  - riddley 3y ago
    But the author isn't saying (only) "Prusa is losing the ultra-beginner market." That's moving the goal posts. The author is making sweeping claims beyond just that market, right? When you're in the market for a new TV or phone or whatever, do you buy the absolute cheapest one you can find and then decry the other players in the market because their stuff is clearly low value because the ICO is higher? Maybe you do, that's your choice of course, but there are plenty of people who buy, for example, Apple because they see beyond the ICO.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      ok, fair. i wasn't adressing the whole range, but merely pointing out that there is a subset of consumers who will only consider the initial price. myself i do that for any product that i am not familiar with unless the running costs are evident. (so i'd buy a more expensive car that uses less gas, if i were in the market for a car) for someone new to 3D printers, running costs are not evident because i don't even know how much i'll use that thing. TVs are an odd example because they don't have any running costs beyond how long they live before they break down, but even the cheapest lives long enough to make a more expensive one not worth it unless it has better specs that i care about.