5 ms·
This seems obvious. A generic solution can do everything, but there's no reason to expect it would be the best at anything; a specialised, single-function machi
by evincarofautumn 14y ago
This seems obvious. A generic solution can do everything, but there's no reason to expect it would be the best at anything; a specialised, single-function machine can always beat a 3D printer for performance, for the simple reason that printers have traded away performance for versatility. And in software, abstraction gives you flexibility while degeneralisation gives you efficiency. It's the same old story.
- forgottenpaswrd 14y ago" a specialised, single-function machine can always beat a 3D printer for performance" But there is no more specialized thing than a 3d printer. You can print glasses for your face, not for a general model of faces but for your unique face, your specific sizes in all dimensions. Getting to performance on the big machines is cost prohibitive for lots of things because you need big runs.
- evincarofautumn 14y agoYou misunderstand my use of the term "specialised". A 3D printer can print anything, barring some of the limitations outlined in the article. Most machines are intended to serve much more specific functions, and do so with great efficiency: I can print a hole in any shape I like, but if all I want is a hole, why shouldn't I just use a drill press?