Proprietary software! (we literally depend on 923 open source projects and had an intern cook us the software in 2 weeks, we also didn't pay him anything)
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2025
156 points (97.6% liked)
3DPrinting
19195 readers
66 users here now
3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.
The r/functionalprint community is now located at: or !functionalprint@fedia.io
There are CAD communities available at: !cad@lemmy.world or !freecad@lemmy.ml
Rules
-
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
-
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
-
No porn (NSFW prints are acceptable but must be marked NSFW)
-
No Ads / Spamming / Guerrilla Marketing
-
Do not create links to reddit
-
If you see an issue please flag it
-
No guns
-
No injury gore posts
If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe/ may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is ![]()
Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Marketing can turn any sin into a selling point, it's why it should be outlawed as propaganda
Yes I think some people would see it as a plus, but more as "we have developed our own software, not recycled a Chinese product" rather than "it's not open source"
Also possibly because people think of open source software as inherently unstable.
Realistically, this looks like it was made by someone with the barest grasp of the concept, who just put random words on paper.
I use the proprietary software for mine. Flashforge was nice enough to put out a native Linux version. I like it. But it's very comforting to know that if I stop liking it for any reason, Cura works just fine with my printer. I don't get using your closed source software as a selling point, though.
I'm OK with this as long as there is a way to "root".
Think Android->custom ROMs, or Apple->Linux.
If there is no way to change firmware, and/or easily mod hardware, no thanks.
I don't think that it's as common today, and it's definitely not common in the open-source-oriented software world that I tend to inhabit, but I do remember seeing the phrase "proprietary technology" used in a positive sense on various products in the past. Maybe 1990s or so. The idea is, I suppose, that if the technology is proprietary, this is the only product where you can get it, and the implication is that it's better.
i still see it depressingly often, and people just eat that shit up
the public has been taught that "proprietary" means "super special secret sauce developed by us at great expense to be THE BEST"
Proprietary "can" mean better support. But that's asterisk heavy. Often that comes down to commercial hardware putting up road blocks to competitors. Or the open source solution being the product of a single developer in their spare time.
It's not because the dev is on their own that others can't offer separate support.
One can acquire experience anyway offer to review the code of the solution upon noticing an error at a client that can't be fixed with some google-fu.
Proprietary often means "support, as long as we have to, then fuck you".
I learned the hard way, by selling proprietary products from a corpo that promised support. Would unironically be better off manufacturing them myself.
Oh absolutely. You're preaching to the choir here. Part of the reason I have a lot of hope around riscv. The processor designs themselves aren't necessarily open source. But with the ISA being open and open source the first to embrace. It "could" foster a new much less proprietary ecosystem.
Not really. The software being proprietary turns support into a monopoly.
The support can still be better, but it will be despite the software being proprietary, not because of it.
(And by the way, single developers on their spare time create proprietary software too.)
You aren't disagreeing with anything I said. It's all very asterisk-y. And if my personal preference/position is unclear. I run non proprietary *nix systems at a 7:1 ratio to proprietary. Precisely because of the better support. Come October that ratio is going to be getting even more lopsided.
800x800x 200??? That’s the weirdest damn dimensions
I wouldn't be surprised if these were laser wood cutters or something similar that have been converted after not selling. It is very strange to only have 200mm height on a purpose built 3d printer.
I would unironically kill for a printer with very large but short dimensions like that
99% of the time when I'm limited by my printer's footprint, it's in bed area not total volume.
Actually, when you put it that way - I can totally see your point I have 3 large footprint printers but x and y are really what used most, for big z index prints I have a print mill
you could try splitting larger models and joining them - i've had good results with dovetail joints in prusaslicer for wider prints that exceed my build volume, works suprisingly well for functional parts.
I already do that, semi-frequently, but it can be a pain to get right for parts that require really accurate geometric stability (e.g I've been printing some engine components out of PA6-CF these days, had to redesign a few to fit on the build plate).
I'm with you. Joining parts adds a ton of post processing that I'd really prefer to do without.
Proprietary software, but I see KlipperScreen
Just like most marketing selling points, it was a lie too.