Also there is a male character named Ashley in Gone with the Wind, which was extremely popular since book release in 1936 and movie in 1939.
You would think there should be a lot of boys named Ashley in the 50s and 60s.
Your regular printer, like mine, presumably puts down a line of melted plastic material with an extruder, bit by bit, so the print time is guided by complexity as well as size.
Resin printers, basically, are stereolithographic. They:
- dip the build plate (upside down) into a thin tray of resin
- push it all the way onto onto a screen at the bottom of the tray
- blast that screen with UV through a translucent LCD display that contains a mask image of the current "slice" of the whole plate, enough that the thin layer of resin partly cures
- lift the plate out of the resin so it peels off the screen and the resin replenishes below it
- repeat, with the next slice.
- then the whole model is taken out by hand, washed off, blasted with UV light to completely cure it, and the (more or less inevitable) supports snipped off.
So instead of printing line by line, the entire plate prints layer by layer — a small print takes (approximately) the same time as a full plate.
There are several big differences, notably that it is single-colour, much higher resolution, the various peel/adhesion forces are managed differently, larger parts need to be hollow with a vent so uncured resin drains out, most resin prints are quite brittle, and the whole process is traditionally really rather cytotoxic.
There are eco resins, tough resins, and printers that do a better job of not being chemically evil; this is one.
I've stayed away from it, because it's not the kind of printing I need (for all except one part that I might end up subcontracting) and because it is chemically nastier than b/w darkroom printing, which until now has been about my limit of risk.
The above is a bit of an oversimplification but it covers the main differences I think (happy to have corrections/additional comments)
Just to add to this post, the resin isn't great to handle, but crucially for the end user, you need to post process the part quite a bit before its "usable"
The part needs to be washed, and then stuck in a UV bath to do a final curing.
Having said that, you get higher precision parts and can print in optically transparent materials.
Optically transparent materials is a very good point, and it hints at something else that I should have included in my roundup, which is that resin prints are much, much closer to isotropic than FDM prints. There are layer lines in resin prints but they are hard to see, and the nature of layer bonding at exposure means there are few layer-to-layer weaknesses.
And they started being available to consumers some ten years ago or something, I recall them blowing up in popularity like crazy a couple of years later. For someone to have a 3D printer and not know what resin printers are seems very unusual.
The commenter you're replying to doesn't represent the company and they are 100% correct. The company sells expensive products to educated commercial customers pretty much exclusively. A five second Google search for "what is a resin 3D printer" gives you a very good idea of what's being talked about. Clarifying every single obvious details in the comments doesn't improve the conversation being had here.
This is not a product for the masses, it's a niche manufacturing device that can cause severe health issues if not installed safely (exhaust ventilation, spill pad, etc.) and must be used with personal protective equipment.
It's a resin 3d printer. It uses toxic resin, you really don't want it working near humans without proper ventilation setup, you need to wear gloves, will need alcohol for cleaning prints.
And then unless you plan only on printing already prepared models you will need to learn how to user slicer software and maybe learn to model things yourself.
It is a product for enthusiasts by nature of how it works.
You say “they” as there is a single coherent mind in this case. In the large orgs there are a lot of little independent minds doing their little things, barely producing coherent result through shared incentives.
In this case most simple explanation is inaction. Yeah, it was coming, but nobody was exactly in position or cared enough to do something about it.
When your business model is to provide valuable thing for free to corner out competition out of business, don’t be surprised that your service gets to be used asymmetrically.
But why sell hardware then? From customer perspective, wouldn't buying racks from Dell or HP be more stable procurement-wise and equally manageable by the excellent Oxide software stack (if such thing exists)?
This is akin to asking why not install iOS on a lower cost, easily available Android phone. Much of the benefit is only available if one provider designs the hardware and software as one. The complete elimination of the security-nightmare UEFI layer is a good example.
It’s not like they get magical components or firmware. All it takes is supporting specific rack configurations from top vendors. Or, if you want more lockdown, reselling custom-ordered racks with your software on top.
they do get custom firmware, for example there is no hardware vendor in the world that can supply a server that could start an AMD CPU without a UEFI the way we require. Supporting the existing hardware out there would necessitate worsening the Oxide software to compensate. Trust me, if this were possible to achieve on commodity hardware, it would be done on commodity hardware. Same reason AWS, GCP, and Azure make their own hardware- there are advancements that can't be made on commodity gear. The cabled backplane is another good example, it can't be done on commodity gear and eliminates days of setup and manual servicing/configuration errors.
Something that comes up frequently on their podcast - often in passing, I'm not sure I remember a specific episode to refer you to - is the woes of trying to support/debug commodity hardware. Think waiting for Dell to get back to your support ticket about a BIOS issue. Or being told "well you're the only person with this problem, so it must be your fault sorry!" This seems to come especially from Bryan's experience at Joyent. The way they describe "Oxide value" is being able to own as much of the stack as possible so that they can debug things down to the lowest level possible.
>Corolla is expected to come in several powertrains, including gas, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric.
And also it’s just going to be confusing for the customers. Which one to get? Which one is better? It’s hard to imagine how same platform can have efficient structural layout for the large battery and for the ICE engine.
EV is much about software as well, and Toyota is not going to shine in this area either…
Arguably hybrids rely on software much more than EVs do since it has to all the motor/battery management EVs do, but also coordination with the engine and transmission which EVs do not have, and Toyota has been the leader in that area for almost 3 decades now.
Unless you mean software as in fart apps on the touch screen, then yeah, Toyota lags in that department.
That is completely different from the system management software that handles the drivetrains, braking, etc. Toyota has been good on system management. Just because those both use code, don’t confuse the hardware management code with the Infotainment code.
I don't think "which one to get" has been a problem for choosing cars -- much easier than choosing between i3/i5/i7 (or whatever they are called these days), and most consumers understand what they mean and the tradeoffs. It basically comes down to these questions -- do you want to pay more on the car to save on gas in the long run (hybrid)? Do you want to be able to plugin and charge your vehicle similar to an EV (PHEV)? Do you want to get rid of gas completely (EV)? And I'm sure salespeople will happily walk this over for a buyer.
> efficient structural layout
They don't need to be the most efficient on the market. Efficiency varies a lot among cars, and people don't make purchase decisions solely based on that (if at all).
Aero and hence power efficiency suddenly matters a lot for EVs, because it affects the range per unit battery. That's how we get silly range shaving tricks like the folding door handles.
IMO a prospective car buyer likely has a preference towards a certain drivetrain already.
An age old choice betwen petrol and diesel never seemed to be a problem, and electric vs hybrid/ICE are way more different to each other.
And as for the car software- after driving a new Prius I don't see any areas where Tesla's or BYD software is significantly ahead unless we are talking navigation which is shit either way, and I'd rather prefer car play
Also for traditional fuel you don’t have to carry half of the fuel - oxidizer comes from air. And then when you spend fuel, you have less weight to carry (which becomes noticeable on the plane).
I got curious about this but it seems that this is also the case for all his siblings. His bio dad gets it (EUR 300k/y) because of a transitional compromise but the future princes aside from the presumptive heir to the throne will not get it.
Not that they might be any close to being destitute given the estate size.
As for him, I suppose you can sue for backpay child support.
reply