Thanks HN: Glowforge will open-source its firmware(glowforge.com)
glowforge.com
Thanks HN: Glowforge will open-source its firmware
http://glowforge.com/gpl-licensed-open-source-firmware-for-glowforge/
15 comments
These folks didn't invent the CNC ecosystem. They didn't even invent the realatively inexpensive laser cutter. If the firmware is GPL, I'm fairly certain plenty of existing toolkits will get drivers for the it in short order.
But then you still have a totally different product.
If I buy hardware and software, and can execute the software on my own systems, I can run that combination for as long as I like exactly like on day 1, and as the product was advertised.
If I buy hardware and only borrow the software, I have a big problem the moment the access to the software goes away. The open source release of the firmware is a good step to ensure I might get out of the story with more than a paperweight, but won't let me keep using the product I once bought and wanted to use.
If I buy hardware and software, and can execute the software on my own systems, I can run that combination for as long as I like exactly like on day 1, and as the product was advertised.
If I buy hardware and only borrow the software, I have a big problem the moment the access to the software goes away. The open source release of the firmware is a good step to ensure I might get out of the story with more than a paperweight, but won't let me keep using the product I once bought and wanted to use.
CAD/CAM software is not cheap either. When their cloud suite goes dark, you'll have to cobble together your own toolchain.
The maker world already has lots and lots of alternatives for existing laser printers, homebrew things etc. The toolchains are getting more robust by the day - heck the CUPS just added compatibility layers for gcode based "printers" (laser cutters, 3d printers, etc). This simplifies even further the common use case for low-end laser cutters - turning an illustrator or pdf file into a cut device.
Yes!
Our competitors in the 3D printing space did the exact same thing, they open sourced their "client". But all of the real processing is on the server, so it's really inconsequential. In my opinion it's just a way to market your product as "open source" even though 90% of it is proprietary.
The hackers/makers that they target with this branding should see through it pretty easily. I'm not sure if there is a segment of users who would be fooled by it.
Our competitors in the 3D printing space did the exact same thing, they open sourced their "client". But all of the real processing is on the server, so it's really inconsequential. In my opinion it's just a way to market your product as "open source" even though 90% of it is proprietary.
The hackers/makers that they target with this branding should see through it pretty easily. I'm not sure if there is a segment of users who would be fooled by it.
Completely agree. But devices should work without a connection to a cloud, even if that cloud was open source. In this case, I see no reason for performing logic in the cloud, except that it makes DRM easier: You can't copy code you don't have.
You can continue to use proprietary hardware that is no longer supported by the manufacturer, as long as it is self contained. I think that SaaS is an unfortunate misstep, and making hardware depend on SaaS is even worse.
You can continue to use proprietary hardware that is no longer supported by the manufacturer, as long as it is self contained. I think that SaaS is an unfortunate misstep, and making hardware depend on SaaS is even worse.
Given the firmware source, it generally isn't too hard to port an existing open-source motion control software (which there are plenty of) to run on this machine. Electronics schematics would help but the firmware source is enough.
"The firmware is a very small piece of the puzzle."
Probably right. What's needed is source code escrow for the cloud service, so if Glowforge tanks, the code goes open source.
Probably right. What's needed is source code escrow for the cloud service, so if Glowforge tanks, the code goes open source.
This won't help you if your internet connection is down.
With source code escrow of their services, you can presumably use dns redirection of their site and the open source version of their software to run your own local instance of the stack.
Truly Open Source doesn't mean runs without any other components, it just means you can replace any of the components yourself.
Truly Open Source doesn't mean runs without any other components, it just means you can replace any of the components yourself.
Sure it will. GCE just runs containers.
That's a good idea in theory, but what about maintenance and related devops? It's not enough to assume the code would be reliable on its own.
What kind of organization would provide this service? And who pays for the infrastructure?
What kind of organization would provide this service? And who pays for the infrastructure?
>This doesn't change the huge red flag that should give prospective customers pause.
No it does not. And among the people who care, they're just digging the hole deeper. It felt evasive to ignore the question about the cloud over and over while conspicuously answering other questions, and responding with a disingenuous "thank you" while throwing out a half-measure (that really doesn't help that much) makes it worse.
There is one response to this that will work: Oh we get it. It was our business model but its feeling like more rotten DRM to our customers. We have to change it.
Might I suggest: "We have this cloud service that we think adds tremendous value to the product and is offered for this amazing low price, but if not, here is exactly how to use the product as a standalone ordinary laser machine if you so choose."
Its not too late.
No it does not. And among the people who care, they're just digging the hole deeper. It felt evasive to ignore the question about the cloud over and over while conspicuously answering other questions, and responding with a disingenuous "thank you" while throwing out a half-measure (that really doesn't help that much) makes it worse.
There is one response to this that will work: Oh we get it. It was our business model but its feeling like more rotten DRM to our customers. We have to change it.
Might I suggest: "We have this cloud service that we think adds tremendous value to the product and is offered for this amazing low price, but if not, here is exactly how to use the product as a standalone ordinary laser machine if you so choose."
Its not too late.
It would be so much more friendly to have a functional UI hosted locally on the device and to serve updates and optionally populate additional functionality from the web. If your web offering is good enough, most people would have no problem with this setup; it satisfies everyone's needs. If they don't want it to connect out, they just block external connections from this device.
way more expensive to put all that processing power inside each cutter though
The founder has said it would be on the order of a few hundred dollars, which is less than the cost of any of the add on packages.
This is outstanding. I want to order one of those lasers now. Not only because I like the product, but also because I want to support companies going this way.
I'm sure this will also help them attract talent. Amidst this patents/walled gardens/copyrights debate, someone saying: "If you buy it, it’s yours – you should be able to do what you want with it." is someone you might want to work with. Privacy advocates feeling scared to be tracked using their laser cutter will also welcome the news favorably.
I'm sure this will also help them attract talent. Amidst this patents/walled gardens/copyrights debate, someone saying: "If you buy it, it’s yours – you should be able to do what you want with it." is someone you might want to work with. Privacy advocates feeling scared to be tracked using their laser cutter will also welcome the news favorably.
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10276430
They open source the firmware because the firmware is a dumb client; all the logic that controls the laser (aka makes it not set your house on fire) is hidden in the cloud.
They open source the firmware because the firmware is a dumb client; all the logic that controls the laser (aka makes it not set your house on fire) is hidden in the cloud.
But that logic is hardly complicated. The firmware is the bit that would be really annoying to reverse engineer. The rest anyone can write fairly easily.
Thanks for presenting a balanced opinion. I still find their position quite fair (looks like there lies their real business model) even though I wish they'd be more clear about it. Everything makes more sense now.
This is a great step in the right direction, but I wonder how difficult it may be to actually use considering they've removed so much of normal laser hardware. Anyone know how feasible it will be to control it?
http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/20/glowforge-series-a/
How defensible is Glowforge’s laser cutting tech? Shapiro says the key innovation the team has come up with is moving a large number of functions out of the hardware itself and into the cloud. “We have ripped out huge amounts of hardware from the machine — from a typical laser design, and replaced those with software that we run in cloud servers instead of running locally,” he explains.
One example is the motion controller board used on many traditional laser cutters to translate whatever line the person wants cutting or engraving into a series of electrical pulses that choreograph the motor. Instead of using that type of component, which Shapiro says starts at $400, or even using a cheaper alternative controller like an Arduino, the Glowforge uses cloud software to do the grunt work. “We simply send down the ones and zeros for the motor to the machine over the internet which reduces the cost by a factor of 100,” he notes.
“The thing that’s relatively easy to clone is the hardware, although we have some interesting innovations and patents there, but the place where we think we can really add a great deal of value is in the software,” he adds.
http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/20/glowforge-series-a/
How defensible is Glowforge’s laser cutting tech? Shapiro says the key innovation the team has come up with is moving a large number of functions out of the hardware itself and into the cloud. “We have ripped out huge amounts of hardware from the machine — from a typical laser design, and replaced those with software that we run in cloud servers instead of running locally,” he explains.
One example is the motion controller board used on many traditional laser cutters to translate whatever line the person wants cutting or engraving into a series of electrical pulses that choreograph the motor. Instead of using that type of component, which Shapiro says starts at $400, or even using a cheaper alternative controller like an Arduino, the Glowforge uses cloud software to do the grunt work. “We simply send down the ones and zeros for the motor to the machine over the internet which reduces the cost by a factor of 100,” he notes.
“The thing that’s relatively easy to clone is the hardware, although we have some interesting innovations and patents there, but the place where we think we can really add a great deal of value is in the software,” he adds.
(Glowforge CEO/cofounder here)
Glowforge has enough horsepower to work offline if someone built the custom firmware, albeit without the features that differentiate it from a traditional CNC laser cutter/engraver. We started out the design with a minimal microcontroller but decided to bump up the capabilities of the onboard processor along the way.
Glowforge has enough horsepower to work offline if someone built the custom firmware, albeit without the features that differentiate it from a traditional CNC laser cutter/engraver. We started out the design with a minimal microcontroller but decided to bump up the capabilities of the onboard processor along the way.
Why "the cloud"? Certainly there's more than enough horsepower on my local PC and enough bandwidth in my USB cable to direct it, or even better, allow my PC to queue up the movement instructions and just hold them in a memory buffer in the cutter. Then I can use it without my internet connection being up.
I think that TechCrunch article makes it quite clear: they're using the cloud to make it harder for people to see what their product is actually doing and clone it. Basically, trying to get their laser cutter to work without access to their cloud service should be as hard as building a new one from scratch, by design, since they claim to have put all the hard parts of their system in the cloud.
I agree, I just wanted him to say it.
Hi Dan,
Can we get some answers for other concerns too? Like this one; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10276426
Can we get some answers for other concerns too? Like this one; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10276426
3d printers (i.e. RepRap) do the same only the "work" is done by the user's PC.
1. Consumers are moving away from desktop PCs
2. If you have a laptop, and a 13 hour print, you shouldn't need to have it tethered during the whole print. Many repraps don't even have SD card readers.
3. Why are we still tethering and transferring files physically? This is 2015.
4. Processing toolpaths on your PC means that your results will vary based on which PC you are using. And the majority of users won't get the performance that you could get by just sharing cloud server resources.
5. The PC requirement also severely limits your ability to access data about your machine, and integrations into other services.
Now that my 3D printer is driven from the cloud, I don't need to worry about slicer updates, driver updates, or hardware performance. My machine operates as a service that I can access and control from anywhere.
In summary, using the cloud for toolpath generation untethers us from the machine, removes the manual labour, enables mobile usage, and allows these machines to integrate into other services.
2. If you have a laptop, and a 13 hour print, you shouldn't need to have it tethered during the whole print. Many repraps don't even have SD card readers.
3. Why are we still tethering and transferring files physically? This is 2015.
4. Processing toolpaths on your PC means that your results will vary based on which PC you are using. And the majority of users won't get the performance that you could get by just sharing cloud server resources.
5. The PC requirement also severely limits your ability to access data about your machine, and integrations into other services.
Now that my 3D printer is driven from the cloud, I don't need to worry about slicer updates, driver updates, or hardware performance. My machine operates as a service that I can access and control from anywhere.
In summary, using the cloud for toolpath generation untethers us from the machine, removes the manual labour, enables mobile usage, and allows these machines to integrate into other services.
I disagree with these points on some general levels, even though for this particular product at this particular price point I can see the raionale somewhat:
1) Consumers might be moving away from desktops, but I don't know that creators are so much yet. However I think that's a moot point - desktop, laptop, tablet, whatever. It's not about form factor it's about computing power and it wouldn't surprise me if the latest iPad Pro or even top-end smartphone had the computing power to do these calculations locally.
2) My 3D Printing Systems UP Mini does the heavy lifting on my local PC and then sends that data off to the printer where the printer stores it in memory. Once the print job is sent off and the printer starts going, there's no longer any need for the PC - you can shut the PC down and leave the printer going.
3) Easily solved with a local Wi-Fi connection. Printers (the paper kind) have had this problem solved for ages now. There was no complicated setup for my cheap printer with Wi-Fi; my desktop just found it.
4) Job queue time may vary sure, but once it's sent to the printer it shouldn't matter.
5) This isn't all-or-nothing. What's stopping this from being an optional feature?
"Now that my 3D printer is driven from the cloud...." That doesn't preclude core functionality being available locally. It does mean that if this start-up doesn't succeed, you'll be left with an expensive paperweight until someone writes open backend firmware.
I really love the idea of this product and I can see how cloud connection can be a real enabler (look at what it's done for voice recognition on low-power devices, for example). I'm just really sceptical of this type of cloud-connected device as a general good thing for consumers - there are both good and bad sides to this. We really do need to be asking these questions and getting proper answers and assurances that as consumers we're getting something that's of benefit to us and that we won't be abandoned.
1) Consumers might be moving away from desktops, but I don't know that creators are so much yet. However I think that's a moot point - desktop, laptop, tablet, whatever. It's not about form factor it's about computing power and it wouldn't surprise me if the latest iPad Pro or even top-end smartphone had the computing power to do these calculations locally.
2) My 3D Printing Systems UP Mini does the heavy lifting on my local PC and then sends that data off to the printer where the printer stores it in memory. Once the print job is sent off and the printer starts going, there's no longer any need for the PC - you can shut the PC down and leave the printer going.
3) Easily solved with a local Wi-Fi connection. Printers (the paper kind) have had this problem solved for ages now. There was no complicated setup for my cheap printer with Wi-Fi; my desktop just found it.
4) Job queue time may vary sure, but once it's sent to the printer it shouldn't matter.
5) This isn't all-or-nothing. What's stopping this from being an optional feature?
"Now that my 3D printer is driven from the cloud...." That doesn't preclude core functionality being available locally. It does mean that if this start-up doesn't succeed, you'll be left with an expensive paperweight until someone writes open backend firmware.
I really love the idea of this product and I can see how cloud connection can be a real enabler (look at what it's done for voice recognition on low-power devices, for example). I'm just really sceptical of this type of cloud-connected device as a general good thing for consumers - there are both good and bad sides to this. We really do need to be asking these questions and getting proper answers and assurances that as consumers we're getting something that's of benefit to us and that we won't be abandoned.
These points should be in a top level comment. There are some very good reasons for running a printer from a cloud based service. It solves more problems that it causes.
Oh man, this is the second best thing I could have hoped for after their earlier announcement today. The best thing would have been also open sourcing their cloud software, but I can see how they'd be reluctant to do that given that it is a competitive advantage over other laser cutter manufacturers.
I'm really really tempted to buy one now.
I'm really really tempted to buy one now.
That would be a great move for VolksWagen too ;)
It great that they're open-sourcing the firmware, but its still not great that the product depends on "a cloud" in order to operate. I hope that is one of the very first things that gets addressed by contributors .. as someone who has orbited around some nice laser firmware projects in the past, I'll be interested in their source release and see if I can help in some way .. so, kudo's for the open source! Now lets get rid of that cloud ..
PS: no pentalobe screws either.
I cut (engraved?) my teeth on the laser at Metrix - love to get them one at some point soon, but it'll be after preorder campaign is over I'm afraid. We'll be at the Geekwire event next week if you'd like to check it out, though. (and are at Maker Faire in NYC this weekend for those eastwardly inclined)
Any way-out future plans to offer deals to hackerspaces? makehackvoid.com in Canberra, Australia could probably make great use of one of these. (As could many others, just wanted to get a shoutout in)
Good to know, thanks!
To be fair, other types of screw drives in the same socket-like family, e.g. Torx or hex, are a good choice since they are generally more resistant to stripping.
Then again, the type of fasteners is not at all an obstacle for someone wanting to hack around on a machine like this. The software is the far more important part.
Then again, the type of fasteners is not at all an obstacle for someone wanting to hack around on a machine like this. The software is the far more important part.
Can watch the latest video tour here https://www.facebook.com/RobertScoble/videos/101536135477696...
I love to see this kind of immediate, positive, appropriate response to feedback.
Outstanding! I say this as the owner of a 100% FOSS & open hardware laser cutter...
I'm glad I found this, but saddened it relies on "the cloud".
I'd rather support a company that didn't have this silly restriction - I'm not willing to throw a few grand down the toilet if somebody else's servers stop working.
I'd rather support a company that didn't have this silly restriction - I'm not willing to throw a few grand down the toilet if somebody else's servers stop working.
Might want to consider Affero GPL. Without that, there's a possibility some competitor comes along, improves the software, puts it behind a cloud-only service, and never publishes the code.
That's... Glowforge's business model. The high-level control logic software is in the cloud.
That shouldn't make it Affero GPL incompatible as long as they make the code available. Regardless, if they own the copyright, they don't need to follow Affero GPL despite licensing it that way; it only applies to those who don't have copyright.
edit: ok it's only the firmware that's being open sourced. Still I think my original comment applies. Maybe a competitor improves code from the firmware and puts it behind the cloud.
edit: ok it's only the firmware that's being open sourced. Still I think my original comment applies. Maybe a competitor improves code from the firmware and puts it behind the cloud.
Considering the firmware is the code that directly interfaces with the hardware, how would it even be possible to move it to the cloud?
You're probably right, but I don't see the harm in making firmware Affero GPL. For instance, intimate communication between two programs tends trigger GPL provisions. So there's an argument to be made that if a competitor improves the firmware for another device with a different cloud-powered backend, then that backend code must be released if the firmware is Affero GPL.
But my original thought was that maybe there's some useful logic in the firmware that's extracted to cloud. And on that point, it's pretty speculative.
But my original thought was that maybe there's some useful logic in the firmware that's extracted to cloud. And on that point, it's pretty speculative.
[deleted]
Affero GPL would be suitable if they were releasing the serverside code, not the dumb client code. Here, it would make no difference.
Class act.
Awesome! Thank you.
It's a daunting thing, at first, to open up a proprietary security blanket.
May the market treat you well!
It's a daunting thing, at first, to open up a proprietary security blanket.
May the market treat you well!
Good move in response to a rather vociferous desire.
I want this so badly... still no money :/
The device will still operate only as long as Glowforge's servers stay up. If there are internet outages, or the company goes out of business, the device will no longer function as a laser cutter.
The firmware is a very small piece of the puzzle. The cloud service is being portrayed as doing all of the heavy lifting. That's image processing, CAM, toolpath creation, and motion optimization/lookahead. Once the motion is optimized so that the motion system will move as fast as possible within its acceleration limits, the result is a list of explicit instructions for the motion system and laser. Accelerate at rate A for T seconds. After X steps, pulse the laser at a power level of P.
Thus, the firmware simply processes these instructions, and actuates the motors and lasers. That's not to say the firmware is trivial. But in comparison to the overall codebase, it is a very small chunk of the complete CNC system.
I'm not arguing that Glowforge is under any obligation to open source anything. But this is a fairly small concession that does not address the main concern that most people have voiced, the inability to run the complete system on your local machine.