• ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    2 days ago

    An open source 2d printer is possible but will probably never happen

    The print head is incredibly complex, the drivers and communications to talk to printers are all closed source, and unlike 3d printing the level of quality people are accustomed to is covered by patents for another 20-30 years

    • The_Decryptor@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      the drivers and communications to talk to printers are all closed source

      That hasn’t stopped CUPS

      • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        55
        ·
        2 days ago

        just today I read that microsoft will stop accepting any new printer drivers. If new printers are to work, they must support mopria and IPP.

        That should eventually have positive side effects for us linux users

        • hydrashok@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          2 days ago

          If I remember correctly, the restriction is that Microsoft will no longer distribute new print drivers via Windows Update. But I agree that moving to a common standard will help everyone’s print experience immensely. Trying to deal with HPs drivers is nightmare fuel.

      • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        CUPS works great when it does work but it can be a real pain in the ass. That said if you build the printer around it it would probably work pretty well

    • Maki@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The print head is not complex, the printer companies just make it out to be. Essentially it’s just a funnel to transfer ink onto paper. All that’s needed is a needle to deliver the ink to the paper, or puncture the top layer to inject the ink to it. Apply heat to set the ink afterward. Moving the head over the paper and moving the rollers for the paper to move is already software which is known to the 3d printing community. The big trick is finding a system which doesn’t hit some backward patent and getting a prototype made. That largely takes time and money.

      • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        2 days ago

        Most modern printers aren’t what you describe though, they’re either a piezo that flexes with electricity to create pressure on the ink chamber and release a precise droplet of ink or they are a thermal design where a resistor heats inside the ink chamber to create pressure that forces ink out of the nozzle and subsequently draws more ink into the chamber as it cools. Heat is used here to eject the ink but heat is not used to set the ink in either process, that is done with evaporation and absorption (which is why printing a full page image can smear).

        It’s not some big secret as you’ve said, the patents are openly available, but as you’ve said they’re off limits even for noncommercial use because America is stupid. It’s true that they’re not mystical and impossible to recreate but they’re definitely harder to replicate than a heat sink with a tube cut in it, a heat break, a cartridge heater, and a metal nozzle with a (typically) 0.4mm hole

        The print head in most inkjet printers (at least non commercial ones) has no moving parts (unless you count the piezo flexing). Dot matrix used needles but why recreate that unless you specifically want that for the vibes or something?

        • Maki@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Don’t overengineer the prototype. Make it simple and efficient as a jumping off platform to lead to further developments down the road. Any open printer project doesn’t have to start with the technology the proprietary models have. They just have to be proof-of-concept that it’s doable. Once that’s proven, further developments can be made down the line. Dot matrix is easy to create and cheap to produce compared to the overengineered systems proprietary models use nowadays and it would work as a stepping stone toward that further development.

          • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            That makes sense. If you’re going that route though you should be fairly safe patent wise I would think? Most of the dot matrix patents, if not all, have to be expired by now?

            • moody@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              You would still need to explore patents. Just because patents exist, doesn’t mean they are in use. I would not be surprised to find out that a company like HP would hunt down and buy any patents that could interfere with its profits just to prevent others from using them.

                • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Patent infringement is about use, not price

                  It’s total bullshit that stifles innovation but such is life in the USA. At least the period isn’t completely obscene like copyright

      • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Or use plotters. These are the same X-Y setup as a 3D printer, where you use a pen instead of an extrusion module. There are a bunch of DIY projects for this. But now you’re talking about minutes per page, not pages per minute.

        • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Plotters are so much slower than printers, but having one write your document out for you would be so cool. This is one reason I would buy a Cricut.

      • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        That is correct but it means it’s a lot of work for not much benefit

        3d printing took off in 2009 when the stratasys patents on FDM expired. You can literally look at the history of consumer 3d printing and it’s basically nothing nothing nothing nothing 2009 reprap makerbot prusa. Similarly when SLA patents expired we suddenly got formlabs and eventually cheap resin printers.

        Why reinvent the wheel? If a patent is about to expire just wait and do that. If it’s not and you truly have a novel idea for how to achieve the function that does not infringe on any patents, most people would end up trying to sell it (assuming they have the skill to bring it to market). Our culture is ruthless and requires capital to survive so I don’t necessarily fault someone for trying to secure the bag, though I wish they would at least do it in a way that wasn’t totally gross

        • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s just it, most people don’t mind paying for a printer or ink. It’s the way they charge insane prices for ink, and then make you do backflips to get a scan or one page out.

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Most of my printing needs don’t even require “near letter quality”. I can deal with a modern equivalent to a 9-pin printer and just send out final versions for professional printing.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        obscenely expensive birth, no parental leave, no childcare support… it’s a wonder they last that long.

        edit: now op changed parents to patents and i look like an idiot. let us make fun of your obvious typo

    • virku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Are you saying the very concept of high resolution 2d printing is patented? Or that the way so and so manufacturer does it is patented?

      • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        The latter. Someone could create a novel means of transferring ink onto paper in a way that results in high resolution images and give it to the world for free i suppose

      • vivendi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        You can buy dedicates scanners who don’t fuck with you.

        CANON PIXMA MG 2440 which I have also has full Linux support OOB without the bullshit, either print or scan. But it’s an old boy now, it can’t do the kewl ayy oo tee bullshit like LAN printing

          • vivendi@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            How tf did canon brick them

            My shit is so ancient it has no idea what an “Internet” is. I’d like to see canon touch this mfer lol

            • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              I had a printer that I used that was offline. It was accidentally put online and it bricked. My day had a printer that bricked when it became a little older. He bought the same one and it bricked immediately. It’s planned obsolescence on the last 2.