6 ms·

I do not know why makerbots keep getting more expensive than the next. I thought with advances in tech, they would get cheaper and eventually I would be able to

by kiba 14y ago

I do not know why makerbots keep getting more expensive than the next. I thought with advances in tech, they would get cheaper and eventually I would be able to afford one. What the heck are they thinking?

mtgx 14y ago
Much more detailed printing, more efficient, faster, I would assume.
- kiba 14y ago
  All of which doesn't necessary mean that their 3D printer they're selling have to be expensive. They could have keep the spec of their first generation and try to figure out how to make it cheaper over time without losing quality.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 14y ago
    Ask yourself what their incentive is to make it cheaper. The market probably won't increase by much with a slightly lower cost, but it increases considerably when you improve the capability. For many people, a e.g., 30% larger work envelope along with a smaller feature size can be worth 200% higher cost. Then again, I'm comparing it to milling machines and lathes; perhaps the market for low end 3D printing is sufficiently different that what I know doesn't apply.
fotbr 14y ago
I'm just happy to see they've moved away from a hacked-together plywood and screws case and have switched to metal. They've finally discovered that some things are better made if you get away from the limitations of low-end laser cutters. That said, I think it was stupid of them to drop the kit versions of their printers, which more people could actually afford, although this is coming from someone in a "fly-over" state, where a mortgage payment on a nice house in the 'burbs is less than half the replicator2 cost. I suppose if you live someplace where the cost of living is much higher (New York City, for example), then spending $2k+ on a toy isn't really a big deal.
- stcredzero 14y ago
  Take a look at a "Type A" - $1200 fully assembled. http://typeamachines.com/details http://typeamachines.com/details Disclosure - don't work for them, but I've met them at Noisebridge and perused the design. I've also built my own 3D printer, so I know a little about these things. The Type A design is a very good design! It's built for low moving head mass, thus high printing speed, but without the disadvantages of a Bowden cable.
  - jedahan 14y ago
    +1 for specs, price, design, originality -1 for closed source
    - stcredzero 14y ago
      Actually, when I met him at Noisebridge, Andrew gave me permission to do a knock-off machine designed to be cut on smaller bed laser cutters. I think the design is open, but not on the website.
  - fotbr 14y ago
    Not a bad machine, still uses the laser-cut-plywood and screws approach that I don't particularly like. I also went the build-my-own route because about the time my "buy silly toys" fund was up to where I could buy one, anything with a useable build envelope had a price increase pushing it beyond what I wanted to spend, and I wasn't really happy with the designs -- I really don't like that plywood & screw style construction. Using my own design allowed me to get away from those issues.
- speednoise 14y ago
  I saw Adam Mayer speak at a meetup and he said they dropped the kit versions because they were a huge customer support burden. A lot of things can go wrong putting one of these together.
libraryatnight 14y ago
When I saw this announcement my instant hope was, "Maybe it's one in my price range!" My excitement was sapped fairly quickly. I think it's neat they're offering more advanced machines, but I'd also like to see them release a budget model.
- tisme 14y ago
  This is a budget model. Think about it: you're getting absolutely amazing machinery, the stuff of science fiction not all that long ago for a little more than $2000. It is incredible. I understand that your price range is lower than this but this is a tool not a toy, and as a tool with this kind of capability it is absolutely dirt cheap.
  - bduerst 14y ago
    From what other people have said in this thread, there are more affordable options for hobbyists. This comes of as being more of a semi-professional grade.
  - libraryatnight 14y ago
    I actually agree. While I wish it was more accessible to someone like me, I do feel like - for those who can afford it - it's an amazing purchase and well worth it. It's like when I was much younger and CD burners were released. I didn't have a job then, I was a kid, but had I had that kind of money I would have gladly purchased the CD burner and felt like I was paying a fair price for an amazing piece of technology. But, I still hoped they would make affordable models sooner than later. I think after reading about the Kickstarter, where the gentleman was being praised by some and chastised by others for deliberately trying to undercut makerbots, and reading about some of the other less expensive options, that maybe Makerbot would be trying to start lowering costs with new models. It's great that instead they've scaled up quality and performance, but still disappointing to the kid in me waiting for a CD burner. So maybe "budget model," is poor terminology? Perhaps what I'm hoping and waiting for is it to reach the diffusion point in technological change? It seems to have already begun, as there are less expensive options, but eventually I'd like to a reputable name like Makerbot putting out sturdy models most people can afford.
ajross 14y ago
With Cupcake -> Replicator -> Replicator 2 the devices are getting physically larger and more capable. Larger machines are more expensive to manufacture and assemble, and this is still a small-volume, mostly hand-assembled (in Manhattan! {edit: sorry, Brooklyn. I misremembered.}) industry. If you want a 3D printer and cash is an issue, look to building your own Reprap. Assuming you get it right the first time and don't need to buy tools, a total cost of under $500 for a Prusa Mendel is achievable. Obviously you have to build it, but given the target market that's often not a problem. Most people who want to build 3D printed stuff are generally happy to assemble robots too.
- maratd 14y ago
  > If you want a 3D printer and cash is an issue, look to building your own Reprap. Or you can just buy a Solidoodle. I did. http://store.solidoodle.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=56 http://store.solidoodle.com/index.php?route=product/product&...
  - ajross 14y ago
    Great link, thanks. My reprap-fu is a year stale and I hadn't noticed these guys. Seems like it's the printer the Cupcake should have been.
  - bri3d 14y ago
    I can firmly recommend the Solidoodle 2 - it came fully assembled about a month ago for just about what my housemate's RepRap Prusa Mendel cost him to build last year, and is only slightly less capable (mostly in that the build area is a bit smaller).
    - ratsbane 14y ago
      Me too. My Solidoodle 2 arrived last week and I've kept it busy. So far I'm very pleased. The Makerbot 2 does look very nice and I like the high resolution and larger build area - but I'm holding out for one with dual extruders.
    - 14y ago
tibbon 14y ago
I'm guessing they are using more precision parts each time, which are a major step forward, but definitely still not cheaper.
- forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
  You can make your RepRap for $400. I know because I did it. Very useful, but the material cost is too high. The main change in the recent future are not the printers, but the "personal filamnet extruders" that are appearing now that will make material cost drop 10X when they are improved.
enraged_camel 14y ago
3D printers are still several years away from regular consumers.
- leot 14y ago
  Really? Remember how much most computers used to cost?
  - ceejayoz 14y ago
    They took several years to become affordable, too. What exactly are you disputing?
    - wtallis 14y ago
      Personal computers were thousands of dollars in the '80s, and didn't drop below $1k until after they were mainstream. If you account for inflation, this MakerBot is cheaper than desktop computers were in the early to mid '90s. If it's perceived as a useful tool, then the current price is already low enough to not prevent widespread adoption.
      - enraged_camel 14y ago
        What I meant above is that currently it's perceived as a hobbyist device. It's not a necessity, or even something that improves one's efficiency and quality of life (like the computer is/was). I might become interested once I'm able to pay for and download the new iPhone model and print myself one, instead of ordering one online or waiting in line for it. :)
  - ChuckMcM 14y ago
    I was thinking the same thing, you need to define "regular consumer" of course. My Mom could have bought an Altair 8800 for $1,000 but there really wasn't any reason too, and she didn't buy a PC when it was $3,000 either because she didn't need one. These days though she can't live without her $1,000 laptop. I've got a Replicator, helped build a Cupcake when Bre and company were just starting their kit business, and used the Z machine a bit at Google as well. The "reality" of 3D printing is a lot less impressive than the hype. Sure like computers before them, 3D printing will change everything. But until recently (and maybe this changes with the Rep2) you would be lucky if you could make a full set of chess pieces in one go, and if they had been made in a factory in China they would have been discarded as too inferior to send to the customer. Current 3D printing enthusiasts (and I'm one of them) see "through" the obvious defects of the current systems to the systems they can be. No 'regular' consumer would put up with a 10 hour print where the extruder head clogs in hour 9 and screws it up. But someone like me can say "I wonder what this wheel would look like on a robot, lets print one out" and having something tactile to work with. 3D printing is becoming 'real' at a relatively rapid pace, unlike some other technologies (looking at YOU OLED TVs)
eckyptang 14y ago
That's not expensive for what it does. It really isn't. I'd buy one in a snap if I had an application. It's beyond amazingly cheap for a tool of that power. This is comparatively expensive for what it does: http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC975LL/A http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC975LL/A
- wtallis 14y ago
  That's certainly an expensive laptop, but you really can't say it's comparatively expensive, since it's got more than twice the resolution of any other laptop. There is no direct comparison to be made as yet.
  - eckyptang 14y ago
    It's got more pixels yes, but that doesn't make it N orders of magnitude more useful.
    - forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
      "It's got more pixels yes, but that doesn't make it N orders of magnitude more useful." FOR YOU!!. People use to believe they really are the center of the Universe, so if they don't find something useful, NOBODY does!! I know some professions in witch it certainly makes it 10*N times more useful.
      - gwern 14y ago
        Such as?
      - eckyptang 14y ago
        The only thing I can think of is medical imaging and they use windows.
      - freehunter 14y ago
        I've noticed an increase in immature sounding posts on HN lately. Isn't school back in session yet? What (or witch?) profession finds it 10x more useful to have a laptop with a higher pixel count but still a standard, unimpressive effective resolution?
VMG 14y ago
Are regular consumers the target market or businesses? If I bought one I'd think about how I could make money off it - a high-quality, reliable $2k machine would be more desirable than a less powerful $500 product.
- scarmig 14y ago
  I think what's truly revolutionary is that it helps blur the line between those categories.
- ajwinn 14y ago
  I've wondered the same thing. If you bought one - what sorts of things do you think people would be willing to pay you to print?
anigbrowl 14y ago
There's a similar problem with vehicles, which was especially apparent when the financial crisis hit: many manufacturers use efficiency improvements to add features rather than lower costs. It makes perfect sense for a company that sees itself as a supplier to small manufacturing businesses, but it's counter-productive if one's goal is to reach consumers or expand market (rather than just market share).

by kiba 14y ago

mtgx 14y ago

Much more detailed printing, more efficient, faster, I would assume.

kiba 14y ago
All of which doesn't necessary mean that their 3D printer they're selling have to be expensive. They could have keep the spec of their first generation and try to figure out how to make it cheaper over time without losing quality.
- HeyLaughingBoy 14y ago
  Ask yourself what their incentive is to make it cheaper. The market probably won't increase by much with a slightly lower cost, but it increases considerably when you improve the capability. For many people, a e.g., 30% larger work envelope along with a smaller feature size can be worth 200% higher cost. Then again, I'm comparing it to milling machines and lathes; perhaps the market for low end 3D printing is sufficiently different that what I know doesn't apply.

fotbr 14y ago

I'm just happy to see they've moved away from a hacked-together plywood and screws case and have switched to metal. They've finally discovered that some things are better made if you get away from the limitations of low-end laser cutters. That said, I think it was stupid of them to drop the kit versions of their printers, which more people could actually afford, although this is coming from someone in a "fly-over" state, where a mortgage payment on a nice house in the 'burbs is less than half the replicator2 cost. I suppose if you live someplace where the cost of living is much higher (New York City, for example), then spending $2k+ on a toy isn't really a big deal.

stcredzero 14y ago
Take a look at a "Type A" - $1200 fully assembled. http://typeamachines.com/details http://typeamachines.com/details Disclosure - don't work for them, but I've met them at Noisebridge and perused the design. I've also built my own 3D printer, so I know a little about these things. The Type A design is a very good design! It's built for low moving head mass, thus high printing speed, but without the disadvantages of a Bowden cable.
- jedahan 14y ago
  +1 for specs, price, design, originality -1 for closed source
  - stcredzero 14y ago
    Actually, when I met him at Noisebridge, Andrew gave me permission to do a knock-off machine designed to be cut on smaller bed laser cutters. I think the design is open, but not on the website.
- fotbr 14y ago
  Not a bad machine, still uses the laser-cut-plywood and screws approach that I don't particularly like. I also went the build-my-own route because about the time my "buy silly toys" fund was up to where I could buy one, anything with a useable build envelope had a price increase pushing it beyond what I wanted to spend, and I wasn't really happy with the designs -- I really don't like that plywood & screw style construction. Using my own design allowed me to get away from those issues.
speednoise 14y ago
I saw Adam Mayer speak at a meetup and he said they dropped the kit versions because they were a huge customer support burden. A lot of things can go wrong putting one of these together.

libraryatnight 14y ago

When I saw this announcement my instant hope was, "Maybe it's one in my price range!" My excitement was sapped fairly quickly. I think it's neat they're offering more advanced machines, but I'd also like to see them release a budget model.

tisme 14y ago
This is a budget model. Think about it: you're getting absolutely amazing machinery, the stuff of science fiction not all that long ago for a little more than $2000. It is incredible. I understand that your price range is lower than this but this is a tool not a toy, and as a tool with this kind of capability it is absolutely dirt cheap.
- bduerst 14y ago
  From what other people have said in this thread, there are more affordable options for hobbyists. This comes of as being more of a semi-professional grade.
- libraryatnight 14y ago
  I actually agree. While I wish it was more accessible to someone like me, I do feel like - for those who can afford it - it's an amazing purchase and well worth it. It's like when I was much younger and CD burners were released. I didn't have a job then, I was a kid, but had I had that kind of money I would have gladly purchased the CD burner and felt like I was paying a fair price for an amazing piece of technology. But, I still hoped they would make affordable models sooner than later. I think after reading about the Kickstarter, where the gentleman was being praised by some and chastised by others for deliberately trying to undercut makerbots, and reading about some of the other less expensive options, that maybe Makerbot would be trying to start lowering costs with new models. It's great that instead they've scaled up quality and performance, but still disappointing to the kid in me waiting for a CD burner. So maybe "budget model," is poor terminology? Perhaps what I'm hoping and waiting for is it to reach the diffusion point in technological change? It seems to have already begun, as there are less expensive options, but eventually I'd like to a reputable name like Makerbot putting out sturdy models most people can afford.

ajross 14y ago

With Cupcake -> Replicator -> Replicator 2 the devices are getting physically larger and more capable. Larger machines are more expensive to manufacture and assemble, and this is still a small-volume, mostly hand-assembled (in Manhattan! {edit: sorry, Brooklyn. I misremembered.}) industry. If you want a 3D printer and cash is an issue, look to building your own Reprap. Assuming you get it right the first time and don't need to buy tools, a total cost of under $500 for a Prusa Mendel is achievable. Obviously you have to build it, but given the target market that's often not a problem. Most people who want to build 3D printed stuff are generally happy to assemble robots too.

maratd 14y ago
> If you want a 3D printer and cash is an issue, look to building your own Reprap. Or you can just buy a Solidoodle. I did. http://store.solidoodle.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=56 http://store.solidoodle.com/index.php?route=product/product&...
- ajross 14y ago
  Great link, thanks. My reprap-fu is a year stale and I hadn't noticed these guys. Seems like it's the printer the Cupcake should have been.
- bri3d 14y ago
  I can firmly recommend the Solidoodle 2 - it came fully assembled about a month ago for just about what my housemate's RepRap Prusa Mendel cost him to build last year, and is only slightly less capable (mostly in that the build area is a bit smaller).
  - ratsbane 14y ago
    Me too. My Solidoodle 2 arrived last week and I've kept it busy. So far I'm very pleased. The Makerbot 2 does look very nice and I like the high resolution and larger build area - but I'm holding out for one with dual extruders.
  - 14y ago

tibbon 14y ago

I'm guessing they are using more precision parts each time, which are a major step forward, but definitely still not cheaper.

forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
You can make your RepRap for $400. I know because I did it. Very useful, but the material cost is too high. The main change in the recent future are not the printers, but the "personal filamnet extruders" that are appearing now that will make material cost drop 10X when they are improved.

enraged_camel 14y ago

3D printers are still several years away from regular consumers.

leot 14y ago
Really? Remember how much most computers used to cost?
- ceejayoz 14y ago
  They took several years to become affordable, too. What exactly are you disputing?
  - wtallis 14y ago
    Personal computers were thousands of dollars in the '80s, and didn't drop below $1k until after they were mainstream. If you account for inflation, this MakerBot is cheaper than desktop computers were in the early to mid '90s. If it's perceived as a useful tool, then the current price is already low enough to not prevent widespread adoption.
    - enraged_camel 14y ago
      What I meant above is that currently it's perceived as a hobbyist device. It's not a necessity, or even something that improves one's efficiency and quality of life (like the computer is/was). I might become interested once I'm able to pay for and download the new iPhone model and print myself one, instead of ordering one online or waiting in line for it. :)
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  I was thinking the same thing, you need to define "regular consumer" of course. My Mom could have bought an Altair 8800 for $1,000 but there really wasn't any reason too, and she didn't buy a PC when it was $3,000 either because she didn't need one. These days though she can't live without her $1,000 laptop. I've got a Replicator, helped build a Cupcake when Bre and company were just starting their kit business, and used the Z machine a bit at Google as well. The "reality" of 3D printing is a lot less impressive than the hype. Sure like computers before them, 3D printing will change everything. But until recently (and maybe this changes with the Rep2) you would be lucky if you could make a full set of chess pieces in one go, and if they had been made in a factory in China they would have been discarded as too inferior to send to the customer. Current 3D printing enthusiasts (and I'm one of them) see "through" the obvious defects of the current systems to the systems they can be. No 'regular' consumer would put up with a 10 hour print where the extruder head clogs in hour 9 and screws it up. But someone like me can say "I wonder what this wheel would look like on a robot, lets print one out" and having something tactile to work with. 3D printing is becoming 'real' at a relatively rapid pace, unlike some other technologies (looking at YOU OLED TVs)

eckyptang 14y ago

That's not expensive for what it does. It really isn't. I'd buy one in a snap if I had an application. It's beyond amazingly cheap for a tool of that power. This is comparatively expensive for what it does: http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC975LL/A http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC975LL/A

wtallis 14y ago
That's certainly an expensive laptop, but you really can't say it's comparatively expensive, since it's got more than twice the resolution of any other laptop. There is no direct comparison to be made as yet.
- eckyptang 14y ago
  It's got more pixels yes, but that doesn't make it N orders of magnitude more useful.
  - forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
    "It's got more pixels yes, but that doesn't make it N orders of magnitude more useful." FOR YOU!!. People use to believe they really are the center of the Universe, so if they don't find something useful, NOBODY does!! I know some professions in witch it certainly makes it 10*N times more useful.
    - gwern 14y ago
      Such as?
    - eckyptang 14y ago
      The only thing I can think of is medical imaging and they use windows.
    - freehunter 14y ago
      I've noticed an increase in immature sounding posts on HN lately. Isn't school back in session yet? What (or witch?) profession finds it 10x more useful to have a laptop with a higher pixel count but still a standard, unimpressive effective resolution?

VMG 14y ago

Are regular consumers the target market or businesses? If I bought one I'd think about how I could make money off it - a high-quality, reliable $2k machine would be more desirable than a less powerful $500 product.

scarmig 14y ago
I think what's truly revolutionary is that it helps blur the line between those categories.
ajwinn 14y ago
I've wondered the same thing. If you bought one - what sorts of things do you think people would be willing to pay you to print?

anigbrowl 14y ago

There's a similar problem with vehicles, which was especially apparent when the financial crisis hit: many manufacturers use efficiency improvements to add features rather than lower costs. It makes perfect sense for a company that sees itself as a supplier to small manufacturing businesses, but it's counter-productive if one's goal is to reach consumers or expand market (rather than just market share).