3poro

From what I can tell, the chassis is surprisingly sturdy given its light weight. Probably the chassis couldn't deal with a heavier print head, but I guess this is Ultimaker's design choice - to keep the print head light and agile. I also believe the X-Y gantry can be durable in its light weight, but the time will tell. I'm actually more worried about the Z axis, after seeing the wild vibrations and rattling caused by print head bouncing on uneven surface (partly caused by Cura's algorithms). The Ultimaker is rather expensive, true. I didn't pay too much attention on the price - I have already now ordered filaments worth over 1000 EUR (having owned the printer for less than a week), so I guess I have forgotten the price of the printer before too long Stupid question maybe, but does the filament diameter matter to you? Is there better availability of different materials in 1.75mm size? I have seen people complaining about filament diameter of printers X and Y, but I still haven't seen very strong arguments one way or the other.

I'm replying to my own post to give an update... I placed my order on Dec 27 and received UM2 on March 10, so the total wait was a bit over 10 weeks. Together with the printer, I ordered 6-7 reels of filaments, they arrived at the same time with the printer. Now, after spending about 1kg of filament and trying very different types of prints, I wanted to share some of my notes: 1) Packaging of UM2 looks good and is mostly OK. The way the giant power supply is placed on top of the printing platform gave me some creeps - but fortunately FedEx hadn't been very heavy-handed. 2) The calibration process (partly necessary because of #1?) is straight-forward - you can actually get to the business quite quickly. However, the calibration adjustment needed some MacGyvering. The countersink M3 bolts start rotating when the adjustment knobs are turned. It's easier to calibrate without the glass plate - but the result won't be accurate. At least in my case the heads of the countersink M3 bolts are slightly higher than the aluminum plate underneath the glass plate. I actually guess this shouldn't be the case. 3) The filament path from the reel to the filament feeder is not a design masterpiece. I now understand why some people prefer to keep their reels on floor on a lazy Susan. At least with non-full PLA reels there is obvious risk of under-extrusion with the factory design. The feeder just doesn't have the power to pull the filament - but it's not the feeder to blame. 4) Generally speaking the print quality is very good. If the printing speed is kept low enough and the printed object is small in size, the results can be truly amazing. 5) With larger objects slow printing is mandatory - my longest print so far took about 50 hours. If object is large, the printing platform starts to vibrate. This is especially the case with hard PLA when printing head is traveling across areas of infill. These idle travel itineraries should be somehow randomized by Cura in order not to create a very beaten and bumpy path which will rattle the whole printing platform quite violently. 6) In general, Cura's algorithms have a lot of room for improvement - but I guess this is the case with all software implementations for the time being. From what I have read, Cura is not bad when compared to the others. The market is still immature and at a stage where you don't have to be good in order to be among the best. 7) Overall build quality of UM2 is very good. It looks like high quality components have been used. Do I regret my purchase? Absolutely not. I knew I was putting money on progressive technology with some surprises on my way. So far, UM2 has pretty well met my expectations and I have already seen a lot of magic when using it. I installed a HD webcam on top of my UM2. Now I can check the progress also remotely, which is very useful.

When you are selling something truly immaterial (like music or SW licenses), your risks are limited. If everyone in the food chain is ready to take some risk, you can accept whatever peanuts for payment. If you are selling something which actually costs you something in some "hard" currency, it's quite risky to accept some virtual currency.

I believe I've been there - having received a few dozen e-mails during flight and trying to get them sorted out before connecting flight... Given all the frontiers Sander needs to fight on, he's surprisingly active on the forums. Now in the meanwhile he has posted a very informative summary: http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/topic/3255-ultimaker²-lead-time-update/?p=38647 At Ultimaker, this kind of information must have existed all the time. If it would have been made actively available (as a "Note to customers" on website - or pinned topic on the forums - or by email), the number of redundant support messages would have been smaller.

Normally, if you sell both directly and indirectly (through channel), the channel gets advantage through volume pricing - not through priority in queue.

I know this question wasn't for me, but I have to say I have considered cancellation myself - my reason being poor customer service experience. I placed my order precisely 8 weeks ago; back then the lead time was up to 8 weeks. Earlier this month I noticed somebody reporting a 12-week delivery time, which would mean problems for me. I sent a question to support on February 10 about risk of significantly longer delivery time, but I haven't received a reply since. I resent my message on February 18 - no reply. In my messages to customer service I have made it clear I'm not trying to get any special treatment - I'm just in need of information. As there apparently is a delay, I'm not delighted to learn some resellers are getting units for which they don't yet have orders for. What makes me worried is - once I'll have the Ultimaker, I might actually be in need of support. If the communications is so poor now, how is it going to be then?