smNOVT

I also work for a company that is full of nice people. But decisions are made there by others who are not necessarily evil either, but are subject to certain constraints - unfortunately also constraints from shareholders. If you want to force your customers into the cloud, then you should communicate that openly. It's legitimate to say that you have to earn your money via this service in the future. The fact that it is very easy to accidentally lose functions should not be possible. I don't have a problem with being faced with the choice of whether I want to get additional functions and switch to the cloud for that, or whether I don't get any more updates but can keep what I paid for. Customers who are grudgingly forced to do so will not remain customers in the long term. If that is what is wanted, then everything has been done right. --------------- If it is really the case that the Printcore is sold almost at cost price, either the dealer has a very large margin or the buyers at Ultimaker should reconsider their choice of supplier. 100 euros for this component and nothing earned from it? Oh, come on. Time to start your VAVE process. Also, I would say that from the customer's perspective, both in terms of cost and sustainability, it would make much more sense if the nozzles could be changed independently of the rest. (See 3D Solex Alternative). In my opinion, this should not be a problem, even noting that the components above the hotend are also subject to some wear. However, this is certainly not on the scale of the wear on the nozzle. Please don't get me wrong, I think it's absolutely legitimate to make money on this kind of wear material, however I don't particularly like it when you have to dispose of an entire assembly. But that is actually a completely different topic. Regarding the comparison with HP, I can only say: Compared to materials from other manufacturers, Ultimaker's are definitely in the higher price segment. And I don't want to compare it with very cheap material. Example: PLA Ultimaker €33 PLA BASF €22 Certainly, one can argue that a large chemical company that produces the material itself can offer it cheaper, nevertheless, with a price difference of 50%, certainly not only a few euros arrive at Ultimaker. Again, I have to emphasize that this is absolutely legitimate to make money with this and I'm very happy that you still have the free choice. That's a plus. That was an important criterion, because with our Keyence Agilista we are already caught in an ecosystem where the material costs are outrageous. --------------- It is absolutely understandable that company-specific processes cannot be taken into account here. But the mentioned ones are not that specific at all, but seem to be quite common, since not only one customer complained. Not to speak of the large mass of people who do not report here, but only get annoyed and draw their consequences. Personally, due to problems that have occurred with our S5 and the Material Station lately, I am at the point that I can hardly imagine to rely on an Ultimaker system next time. In the meantime, there is enough competition that even offers more functionality and reliability. It's a pity that even in the private DIY area, more useful and innovative things are offered that I would wish for in an industrial system. In addition, I have to note that this now even applies to print quality and speed. --------------- gr5, I hope that you will be compensated by Ultimaker in some way for your time spent here in the forum. After all, you invest a lot of time. If that is not the case, then talk to them about it.

Yes, now they are there. Thank you.

Today I saw it on the display. I'll wait a bit. This time I'll let the others go first. My trust has gone down. (Seems that there aren't any release notes yet?) Would have been nice to get a response to my last post. 🤷‍♀️ I thought this would only take a few minutes of your time.

Well, for me that's quite simple: everything that was there before 8.x At least I don't understand why that's impossible. That's not an answer that helps me to understand. For me the mentioned functions are just data/information that is available for the printer anyway and it's just necessary to display it on the web interface.

Could you explain that just a little bit more? Not extremely detailed, but just a little bit to make me understand the scope of something like that. As I mentioned, I'm a layman concerning that. The difference is that you are giving your data voluntarily to a cloud provider. We don't. To get the functionality we had a few days ago, we have to provide data to you. I think, that this is a huge difference. And coming back to the reduction of local fuctions and thinking crazily further: In case there's no Ultimaker B.V. anymore, then there also won't be a DF anymore, right?

What kind of threat from my local network should that be? If there's a threat from there, then I guess access to my 3D printer is the smallest problem I have. And we all agree that attacks from the Internet are much more likely than those from the LAN, right? Well, I'm no software developer, so my question is: What is the reason to remove such relatively simple but useful functions from a firmware? I would guess that the things like the "reprint", the job history, the maintenance reminder and the statistics are not features that would mean a lot of future development effort. They are already there. Period. Another question: Is Ultimaker a company that puts its own sensitive CAD files, electronics or software data on a cloud server that is controlled by another (relatively small) company? After all, you also have IP that you do not want to give outside where it's not in your hands to protect the data. Concerning my first post: Yes, that one was definetly quite emotional. I think it's not uncommon to get emotional when things you need for good reasons are taken away from you without telling you before.

Wow, that was a detailed reply. My satisfaction with the printer is increasing rapidly. We are using the S5Pro for 2 years now. There have been a lot of annoyances with the machine, but now it's getting really interesting. First print after the firmware upgrade: A lot of material in a place where it shouldn't be - see photos attached. The build plate was shifted to the right side by about 30 mm. I don't know if this is related to the new software, but we never had something like that before. btw: I think you definitely deserve a "design for environment award". The whole print core is scrap with the cables baked into PLA.

Hello, this is my first post, so I hope it gets the approval by one of the moderators. Today, I also had to find out the lack of these functions that are important to us. I find it outrageous that there was no warning and that a return to a previous firmware version is not possible in a simple way. De facto the use of the cloud is forced through the back door. And we don't want that. I tried it but couldn't find any real added value for us. First of all, it is an incredible thing that elementary functions are simply gone, but in addition this basically happened secretly. Yes, certainly it is in the changelogs, but I don't see them on the device. What I see on the device is the update request. And this update can be initiated by anyone passing by. There are actually a lot of handy functions (which even self-made printers offer) which uLTImAKER as a manufacturer that aims at professional users, does not provide. Basically, this includes exactly that more can be done in the local network. You should work on such things! In addition, I had problems with the update - the printer hung when restarting and in the log data there were many errors listed. It was a bit nerve-wracking to pull the power plug. After the relief that the printer is still booting, the disillusionment came. It sounds like mockery when you get as a second web search result for the keywords "Ultimaker Firmware 8 features GONE", a site with the title "Ultimaker firmware: Enhanced Performance With Every Update". How funny. As a customer, it is very important to me that functions that I bought and that have contributed to my purchase decision are preserved. And I think this is absolutely understandable, isn't it? Your excuses are ridiculous: "The reason we want to move away from the management console on the printer is the limited processing power on the printer." That may explain that some new performance-hungry functions aren't possible, but until now the power was enough for the current features.