4 ms·

Dramatic post for something you seem to know nearly nothing about.

by glhaynes 13y ago

angersock 13y ago
And I may ask, what leads you to this conclusion?
- glhaynes 13y ago
  Its dramatic lamentations over conclusions you've drawn apparently without basis.
  - angersock 13y ago
    I'm sorry, I assumed that it was common knowledge that getting printers setup, especially in a team or enterprise environment, was some of the fucking worst and most annoying work you'll ever run into in IT. That it was common knowledge that proprietary driver bundles and features and whatnot are the bane of any consumer, and that interoperability was a fucking joke beyond the most basic of printing features (if then). I figured it was also plainly obvious that the article suggests strategic partnerships creating this support, which very strongly indicates that the print support will be either some gnarly plug-and-play driver nonsense or weird stilted API defined by Microsoft. I'm rather fond of the current "give me g-code I'll emit parts" model, as it is very open and hackable. EDIT: By all means, downvote me. We all know printing sucks.
    - glhaynes 13y ago
      This non-technical article references a "print dialog" and you're ready to cry about how all of humanity is oppressed by our 3D Printed Future being infected by the Win32 print subsystem? Forgive me if I feel like this moaning would seem more relevant on Slashdot.
      - angersock 13y ago
        The bit relevant to me was this: "The company is announcing the new feature this morning, working with partners including MakerBot Industries, 3D Systems, Afinia, AutoDesk, Netfabb and others." So, are those nice folks on a standards body? Or are they each going to be putting forth a model where they supply drivers that somehow convert .obj or .stl models into whatever makes their printers happy? The current solution works so well precisely because it isn't all locked up in goofy proprietary formats and comm methods. I don't want you to think I'm an anti-Microsoft zealot here; I'm just making the completely reasonable observation that this could be a repeat of all the nonsense that we've had to deal with from 2D printers. A better announcement would've been "Microsoft pushes for open standard for 3D printer communications, supplies open-source reference driver and API". Then again, that's still not as simple and useful a solution as old G-code.

Dramatic post for something you seem to know nearly nothing about.

angersock 13y ago

And I may ask, what leads you to this conclusion?

glhaynes 13y ago
Its dramatic lamentations over conclusions you've drawn apparently without basis.
- angersock 13y ago
  I'm sorry, I assumed that it was common knowledge that getting printers setup, especially in a team or enterprise environment, was some of the fucking worst and most annoying work you'll ever run into in IT. That it was common knowledge that proprietary driver bundles and features and whatnot are the bane of any consumer, and that interoperability was a fucking joke beyond the most basic of printing features (if then). I figured it was also plainly obvious that the article suggests strategic partnerships creating this support, which very strongly indicates that the print support will be either some gnarly plug-and-play driver nonsense or weird stilted API defined by Microsoft. I'm rather fond of the current "give me g-code I'll emit parts" model, as it is very open and hackable. EDIT: By all means, downvote me. We all know printing sucks.
  - glhaynes 13y ago
    This non-technical article references a "print dialog" and you're ready to cry about how all of humanity is oppressed by our 3D Printed Future being infected by the Win32 print subsystem? Forgive me if I feel like this moaning would seem more relevant on Slashdot.
    - angersock 13y ago
      The bit relevant to me was this: "The company is announcing the new feature this morning, working with partners including MakerBot Industries, 3D Systems, Afinia, AutoDesk, Netfabb and others." So, are those nice folks on a standards body? Or are they each going to be putting forth a model where they supply drivers that somehow convert .obj or .stl models into whatever makes their printers happy? The current solution works so well precisely because it isn't all locked up in goofy proprietary formats and comm methods. I don't want you to think I'm an anti-Microsoft zealot here; I'm just making the completely reasonable observation that this could be a repeat of all the nonsense that we've had to deal with from 2D printers. A better announcement would've been "Microsoft pushes for open standard for 3D printer communications, supplies open-source reference driver and API". Then again, that's still not as simple and useful a solution as old G-code.