I went shopping at Makerbot, added the Replicator 2 to the cart, selected some of the only resin left and added that too, checked the shipping costs and then went to the next step - checkout. I had committed to buy.
However the site then asked me to register before I could proceed, and in an approach that seemed to want to take me out of process. I stopped right there and didn't even click. I hate registering and see no need to register for something when all I want to do is purchase.
One of the easiest ways to improve your sales is to allow check-out without register. Let people buy and only ask them to 'save your settings' at the end and sales lift 5-15% from what I have seen.
Meanwhile I came here instead and read about the upcoming Formlabs release. Sorry Makerbot - I'll wait.
I keep coming across this type of complaint on high-priced items, and it makes me wonder how you justify shelling out 2200$ (at the very least) for something that can't be much more than an impulse buy? After all, you're deterred by a minor distraction.
Hey, there's nothing wrong with having rules to moderate (or enable) impulse buying.
True story: I had been looking at Mazda's twin-turbocharged RX-7. I already had a fire-breathing sports-car. I didn't really need this thing. But I really liked it.
I've been into R/C model airplanes my entire life and have always had a particular attraction to high-end, high-performance gliders.
One fine Sunday afternoon I was coming back from a flying session and decided to stop by the dealership to check out the RX-7 one more time. The sales guy pressured as they usually do. For some reason I put a stupid challenge on the table. I said: "I have a 2.5 meter glider wing in my car right now. If it fits into the twin-turbo RX-7, I'll buy it."
I'm quite sure he was saying it's the only reason that stopped him from the impulse buy.
edit: Instead of replying to d23. There are a lot of things which I buy out of impulse, like "that would be cool to have". But if I have to go to excessive lengths just to buy the thing, I don't.
I think for small things it makes sense, but for a $2,200 purchase I'm surprised he would back out over such a small barrier. Either way, I agree, but for high-information purchases I doubt it matters as much.
I think the lesson is rather that, for impulse purchases, even a very small bit of friction can interrupt the impulse and blow the sale. If he'd spent weeks agonizing over it before buying it, knowing registration was part of it, he'd have probably gritted his teeth and done it because that annoyance would have been factored into the price over which he agonized, and he'd have had time to rationalize it as a small thing. Instead, he went from "WOOHOO! Printing out real objects! Just a few more..." to "WTF? I HATE registration requirements! Why do they have to make me do this?" in a moment.
Our propensity to buy peaks at a certain value - say 10 points for me in this instance.
Every time an obstacle is placed in the way that propensity gets reduced by a value related to the frustration level. As the points reduce our propensity to buy becomes irrelevant in the face of the many other things going on.
They had already for me lost points for 1: not making it clear that the printer only uses PLA and not ABS (-3), 2: the fact that it doesn't accept ABS (-2) and 3: because only one color of PLA is available at the moment (-2). The unnecessary registration was enough to halt the process. (-6)
Note how relatively large the usability scores are versus the functionality scores. Being easy to deal with is absolutely paramount in commerce.
It also seems likely that if you're in the kind of fey, excited mood that leads to impulse purchases then you'll be more prone to rage quitting the browser when something annoys you.
It doesn't matter if he was being fickle or not with his purchase, at the end of the day makerbot didn't make $2,000 from the loss of this sale. Any company that requires it's customers to register before making a purchase is just asking to get hurt.
Look at it another way. Here we have a process which may not be much of a barrier to customers who consider the product a major purchase but is apparently chasing away potential buyers who are prepared to spend several thousand dollars on an impulse purchase.
It is not a small barrier. It is a warning indicator. If there are already some problems (minor) on the site, there may be also hidden problems with the product I wanted to buy. The quality of the site is just another indicator to guess the quality of the product I am buying.
But having a user register for an account isn't inherently a problem with the website, not like a error, missing page or broken feature. It is merely a step in the purchase process that needs to be optimized. I wouldn't assume that the requirement to register for an account (which is completely reasonable, although unnecessary)would indicate that there is a problem with a physical product they produce.
What useful things are people actually using 3d printers for? Yes, I've heard all the hype about prototyping and you can print "anything". But honestly whenever I look at things people are printing its just a bunch of cheap looking plastic toys I would never want. Convince me I need one of these!
Therein lies the tragedy of the end of scarcity. Just because people can finally have anything they want doesn't mean they'll be any better at knowing what it is they want.
Get used to it. It's the quintessential 21st century malady.
With the right 3d printer, you can print out servo-driven anthropomorphic robot hands: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAs2F4sFVdA Whether that's useful or just an interesting-but-expensive model making hobby is a matter of opinion!
I think the designer may have a higher-end 3D printer than we're discussing here - he mentions a 3D touch, and they start at $3500ish.
I've had a few assorted brackets/mountings printed out. Nothing terribly fancy or creative, but useful enough that I'm thinking about getting a low-end rep-rap sometime soon. The next thing on my immediate to-do list is something better than ducktape to mount stuff to my roomba with (and probably a bumper-extension to go with it.)
I've made $500 contracting a short 18 hour gig designing enclosures. I've made shelving. I've made chess sets. I've made heart gears that delighted others. I've made spool rollers, and desktop ornaments.
Just out of curiosity - enclosures for what? Hard drives or something? Did you also sell the shelving, chess sets, heart gears, spool rollers (for spools of filament?), and desktop ornaments? I've got a Printrbot on the way, and I'm interested how people are using these things to make money.
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.
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.
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).
I like the photos of the solidoodle2 and the price tag. How is the end product? Some dudes in a local hackerspace built a reprap a while ago but that thing is nothing but disappointment... Head drift, ooze problems, constant maintenance. What's the most complex thing you've printed, if you don't mind me asking?
Over the last two months, it's been decent. I had ooze issues, but they were cured by removing water from my filament using an oven and a lot of desiccant.
As for head drift and maintenance, no head drift and almost no maintenance required. I had to level the bed as it wasn't quite right when I got it (UPS clearly smashed the package as always, though, so it was probably right when it was shipped).
I think the manufactured steel-frame approach that Solidoodle and MakerBot have taken is superior in many ways to the cobbled-together threaded rods/hardware approach that RepRap designs take - you pay more for a large build area, but it's easier to get decent strength and much less fiddly in terms of setup (no adjusting bolts to make rods line up and the like). Sure, you can't make a copy with just a hardware store and a 3D printer, but for the price and functionality difference, I'll deal with that drawback.
I've printed a couple of decently complex models and what I've found is that settings and filament matter a -lot- more than anything else. The print head goes where I want it to and the extruder pushes the amount of plastic I request through the nozzle - beyond that, it's all about making sure the filament isn't expanding too much in the hot end via high quality filament and making sure there is -no- water in it, and getting the slicer to request the correct amount of plastic at the right rate.
All very interesting, thanks for the detailed response. I'm pretty interested in setting up a fully-automated custom brewery/distillery so I've been looking into making a lot of custom fittings for piping and heat-exchanging. Thanks again
The "resolution" numbers you're seeing are a red herring. The quoted number is the height of a layer that the settings shipped with the printer are good for, not the precision or accuracy of the print head. The X, Y, and Z resolution, as well as the extruder step size on a Solidoodle (and almost any other printer these days) is plenty good to print .1mm layers. The challenge in printing .1mm layers is that you're depositing a very tiny amount of plastic onto each layer, so variation like filament quality and moisture, temperature, and speed matters a lot more.
Check out RichRap trying out different "resolutions" (layer heights) on his MendelMax printer with a Wade's extruder here to learn more about how layer heights work:
I have seen on the Solidoodle forums that the Solidoodle has a .1 "mode" but I don't have the specifics. The Solidoodle website says, "It's possible to print hi-resolution parts at a layer height of .1mm, which gives top-notch looking prints".
Actually it looks like I simply missed it description was below(I didn't scroll)
Base Model $499:
Everything you need to print - just add a computer!
Acrylic Build Plaform - good for doing small prints
70W power supply
Open design (no outer cover/door)
Pro Model $549:
Heated Build Platform - allows you to build large prints up to 6x6x6" without bottom warping. 1/8" aluminum plate.
Upgraded power supply
Spool holder to hold filament (makes unattended printing much easier)
Interior lighting
Open design (no outer cover/door)
Expert Model $599:
All the features of the Pro model plus an outer cover & front acrylic door to give your printer a finished look with clean lines
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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).
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.
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.
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)
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.
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. :)
They're getting cheaper and better, and great for hobbyists/tinkerers, but they're not really useful to the average consumer yet.
The biggest cost with the current crop of < $10,000 3D printers is time. Figuring out how to calibrate them and tweak settings to get perfect prints takes a lot of effort.
If anyone is considering purchasing one, I STRONGLY recommend waiting until 9/26 when Formlabs is unveiling their system. Never been anything like it. http://www.formlabs.com/
I have a MakerBot and love their enthusiasm. Formlabs is barely a week away, let them roll out at their own pace. Look at my profile and believe me it'll be worth the wait.
It's a pretty neat device. I haven't seen any others that operate like the Formlabs device does (starting with a pool of liquid and hardening the desired part out of it). Is that a new development, or has the technique been around for a while?
Anyone heard anything about whether the new hardware and software will be open-source? It would be a shame if MakerBot's continued success and growth come at the expense of openness.
This is going to change the motorcycle industry. Most of the (very expensive OEM) plastic pieces on the bike are small enough to be replicated within the scale of the Replicator 2, and those that are could easily be segmented into printable jobs. For example, right now I'm waiting for a small $70 part to be shipped from a warehouse in Bologna - why couldn't I just print it out myself? Even better, why not replace it with a more personalized design?
I've always wondered; how many pieces of much value can be made from lumpy, soft plastic with a low melting point? The results I've seen always look lumpy due to the resolution of the printer, the plastic isn't that hard, and the melting point is pretty low.
While I've seen a few neat things of novelty value, most of the actual things that I would want to make would require metal or harder plastics, and a lot more precision than these things are capable of.
I have an original replicator. With a little practice, you can have much nicer results than the 'lumpy prints' that you describe. Also, ABS is really easily sanded and is quite solid if you want professional looking parts
I'm curious what actually useful parts you've made from it. I'm not sure I have ever had a problem where the solution was a part that I could print on a 3D printer; but maybe I'm not being imaginative enough, so I'm curious what other people have done with it.
I agree its great tobe able to print our parts, but I don't see many uses. I've owned a few bikes (cbr and supermotos) and not many platic parts fit in a 3d printer, let alone items that would break often
Exactly what I'm looking for. I'm putting a sensor package together for my Dyna, and mounting a display and securing parts is a bit of a problem if you don't have a tool shop. And given Harley's reputation for cost, this printer may actually be a reasonably wise purchase.
And I'm fairly happy with the cost: I've put together the higher end Cupcake, and was severly disappointed with how hard it was to use well. This should allow some really neat rigs, or at least make excellent (instead of merely approximate) prototypes.
PLA only, and they don't mention head speed? (how fast it builds)
Replicator 1 was 40mm/s, which was slow at the time, and glacial now. (Tuned Prusa Mendels do 250mm/s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz56RY6OjM4 ORDbot does faster than that) If they're not talking about the head speed, then that means it'll be lower than 40mm/s.
That and they still use 1.75mm filament, which is 40% more expensive than 3mm filament, and offers only slightly better print quality, again, at the cost of print speed.
I also don't know why they're talking up the 100 micron layer height. Ultilimaker printers will do 50 micron layers pretty easily.
Apt timing for a lunch directly ahead of Maker Faire NY next week.
As an owner of a Thing-o-Matic I was fairly disappointed with my Makerbot. I know people that own Replicators that were also fairly disappointed. Unless there are some significant improvements in this version of the Replicator I will not be buying my next 3D printer from Makerbot. I would much rather buy an Ultimaker or one of the several other startup printer companies that are now out there. The cost of the Replicator also runs very close to the 'home' version of many commercial 3D printers.
Quality vs expense primarily. It had many of the same problems I experienced with my ToM. Not being able to print thin enough walls, bad overhangs, and random problems where it would just stop printing. We had (has since been replaced) one at my local hacker space and the Replicator was the but of lots of jokes. The bottom line is that it was a cool toy but never a useful tool.
Wow, I did not expect the plastic for this to be so expensive. Nearly $100 for a lb of plastic?! Is that cost really in line with their costs, or is this selling razors without giving away the handle?
The price of FDM machine filament is mostly labor-- there's usually a solid 50-80% markup over the cost of the raw plastic.
This is because it has to be extruded. Turning a kilo of ABS pellets into a kilo of 1.75mm filament takes a surprisingly long time, and monopolizes a fairly large machine for the duration.
The new makerbot replicator is in all black, and the casing seems to be made of metal. They've also moved from ABS plastic to PLA plastic, as ABS tends to shrink when cooled, and as a result, it's easier to get failed prints that curled off the platform or cracked with ABS. It's got a slightly bigger build volume, and the default resolution is now 100 microns, rather than 270 microns in the first Replicator. I'm not sure how fast it is to print at that resolution.
Dual headed extrusion, though in my experience, there aren't too many models that take advantage of this. They've positioned this model as something for those that 'like to tinker and be on the cutting edge'.
This is actually pretty neat, since the slicing software you use to prepare models for printing is currently really slow (skeinforge), or fast but doesn't handle all cases well (slic3r).
4) MakerBot announces new retail store: Opens at 298 Mulberry St., New York. mbot.co/1sz
And I think this will help educate the public about what 3D printers can do.
If this model holds up to be a no fuss printing experience, I think we might begin to see consumers thinking about getting one.
The option for ABS is for the previous Replicator 1, and Replicator 2X.
ABS is a bitch to work with. Makerbot is making as many moves as they can towards something that's a consumer appliance. And if PLA can help them get there with an 80% use case coverage, so be it that you can't print parts you can leave in your car.
Makerware still uses skeinforge. They have an alternative slicer with it but it's also very slow. They've also gone dramatically closed source with makerware, and appear to be violating skeinforge's agpl3 license.
Slic3r has been improving at an incredible pace, you should try the latest one.
MakerWare can use both Skeinforge (highest quality settings) and Miracle-Grue (medium and low quality settings). We are still in Beta, so interfacing slicer engine (like slic3r, netfabb, ) is still underway.
The conveyor task engine is Open Source. So if you want to write your own plug in slic3r (or anything else) first, go for it!
Maybe it's just me, but I feel like it would help them to find someone else to do their product announcements. While I'm sure that Bre is a total genius and his work is incredible, he's a very awkward presenter.
That being said, this still looks amazing, and if I had lots of money and could actually use it, I'd be all over that.
Guess we're further away with a 3D printer being able to print itself. Thank goodness - what a stupid goal. This new version is 10x better than the last for only a small increase in the price.
Still too much for the average person but someone with some production capacity will bring this sort of device down in price.
If you want me to actually read the blurb on the fancy graphics on your homepage, don't put it on a fast moving Javascript carousel. Having never even heard of the Replicator 1, I wanted to actually read something about it. :/
No, since the Replicator 2 can only extrude a single filament at a time, and that tractor has more than one color, it must have been assembled afterward. The Replicator 2X is the model with a dual extruder: http://store.makerbot.com/replicator2x.html
It depends on what you mean by strong. A lot of times, the strength depends as much as the structure that you're printing as it is the material. Most of these objects are printed hollow.
Generally, PLA is stronger against stress, but breaks quickly, whereas ABS is less strong against stress, but bends before breaking.
I'm not as knowledgable with 3d printing - but have heard of Makerbot before. Anyone know how this compares to Replicator #1? Is there improved fidelity? (i.e. less print lines?)
The replicator 1 was pretty kickass when they had a demo @ Disrupt SF, but had some noticeable lines.
Most of us here are in software. But if you're in hardware, this might be significantly cheaper and/or faster than working with a plastics fabricator for creating simple prototypes. I know of one company here in Atlanta that will probably jump on this thing right away.
What do you think the company in Atlanta will use it for? I mean, who are the users that need things printed in plastic? Architects maybe? People who want custom desktop toys? I have a 3d printer on the way and I'm trying to think of how I could make money off of it.
Legos are manufactured with surprisingly fine tolerances. You might be able to do it with the Replicator 2, I don't know.
They've also got a lot of 90 degree overhangs, which FDM machines don't like. (It's essentially a hot glue gun in a gantry. The plastic doesn't freeze instantly when it leaves the nozzle, it stays molten for quite some time. If you print over thin air, it'll droop.)
And if you could print it, the bottom layers might delaminate and break off every time you detached it from another brick.
As for a flowerpot, no way. PLA's made from corn. Keep it warm, wet and in contact with soil, and it'll turn into compost within a month.
However the site then asked me to register before I could proceed, and in an approach that seemed to want to take me out of process. I stopped right there and didn't even click. I hate registering and see no need to register for something when all I want to do is purchase.
One of the easiest ways to improve your sales is to allow check-out without register. Let people buy and only ask them to 'save your settings' at the end and sales lift 5-15% from what I have seen.
Meanwhile I came here instead and read about the upcoming Formlabs release. Sorry Makerbot - I'll wait.