11/01/2017 at 1:21 pm #35863
here you got your answer the second they launched their new kickstarter, right ?
CEL would have saved you from a lot of forum time and discontent if they just told you:
“look click, the open source bazar model is great, but we decided we want to make extra money on our software, so we stick to the old fashioned cathedral model”
Do I understand CEL ?
Certainly, every boss I worked for thinks the same, and I am (or should I say was) in the software business as a footsoldier.
Do I agree ?
Not at all.
I bought a Robox, and for me that is hardware and software in one package.
I have a tiny ARM based computer, which they don’t support with AM.
No ? Eh, yes, now they do, if it’s a modified PI I buy from them.
I’ll stick to running robox with my “olf fashioned” pc.
Would love to run it from my Pine64 board, but what can I do …
Certainly not pay twice to do what I can do already: make Robox print.
java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards13/01/2017 at 3:15 pm #35950
The £35 option should work for you.13/01/2017 at 3:36 pm #35951
I guess you choose to ignore the message, but that’s ok,
it was ignored from day one.
No hard feelings 🙂
But I payed for my product, I won’t pay again to have the same,
nor will I pay for a recompile of AM to an ARM processor.
java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards13/01/2017 at 4:59 pm #35955
We can’t give the software away for free, we need to pay people, including me 🙂
The Root software is not AutoMaker recompiled, it can talk to both Robox and AutoMaker and show certain controls and status reports via a web interface but it does not replace any part of the current system.
Root is a new addition to the system. If a similar control was included with Robox from the start then the price would have reflected that so you are not paying twice.
Surely more options is better. You do not need Root, but it does add features and more options for workflow and operation.13/01/2017 at 5:37 pm #35956
a slightly longer usb cable will do the trick for me.
What I would love to pay for is additions to the mini factory that robox is.
It was my understanding that, when you encouraged us all to give ideas for new interchangeable heads,
in a foreseable time we would do something extra then printing.
The DM head, I completely understand, the only thing a disbeliever has to do is read this forum to see how much interest there is for it.
The root ?
Not really, when I read the forum.
A few professionals, the occational hobbyist with too much money, that’s about it.
But it’s your market, sure you saw an opportunity and made it happen.
Just not what we (the majority of your kickstarters) wanted or were suggested that was going to happen.
java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards16/01/2017 at 10:48 am #35977
The control device was planned since our first Kickstarter. Referred to as Black Box.
Heads are still coming, if you pay us more money we can employ more people to make things happen faster 😀
We already have lots of things that are nearly ready to go but there are bottlenecks in development and we would certainly benefit from a bigger pot of cash.18/01/2017 at 11:06 am #36027
I won’t keep going on about it, click did that enough, with no result.
But if CEL would embrace open source, you would by now have a dozen different hardware heads you can CEL and service and not had to spend all your money on your software team.
If you’re a relative small business, think out of the box, and open source fits perfectly for that.
If you’re huge, you can indeed do everything yourself, and within reasonable time.
You’re not huge, and as a result you can’t deliver on your promises from years ago within a reasonable time.
I agree that making the transition from your cathedral model to open source would hurt CEL financially. I wouldn’t have if you embraced us from day one.
Now think a few years ahead: at the rate you develop hard- and software, the competition will not only gain on you, they will leave you behind.
I was very happy with my robox the last few years.
I am still happy with my robox TODAY.
Once maintenance will be needed and it will cost me more then lets say 100 €,
I will do what every smart customer does: I will investigate the competition and compare.
It will not be the software that will sell it, in never is.
It’s the hardware INSIDE the robox.
AM: is great, but nothing more then a “nice to have”, after all I just want to print stuff in 3D.
Root: same …
Mote: same …
Tree: same …
The DM: that is adding real value to robox.
I don’t need it, but many robox users do.
You had an egde: the needle valve.
You had a disadvantage: the PEI bed. You won’t agree, but since I use geckotec the quality of my prints have improved dramaticaly.
In the past few years is saw only 2 improvments that are worth naming:
– your service
The competition on the other hand have the last few years a wide selection of print heads
that are as robust as granite, or that can print +2 materials.
Some have build areas that can be enlarged, some have a selection of heads they can switch already.
They all focus on their hardware, after all, their software is maintained by an open source community.
I’m not on top of the “3D printing world”, but I can be sure the next few years there will me mores surprices I never thought off.
I do hope CEL won’t just say in that time: we have released the “next big thing”: a print head with no needle valve and some great improvments to the AM “experience”,
with the excuse that you didn’t have the time and money to do more.18/01/2017 at 1:55 pm #36038
Some good points Pelgrim.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.