> This isn't actually possible

This is only true due to a firmware they pushed last year. It's an artificial limit.

There's no reason at all a local client couldn't just talk to a local printer without any cloud.

Every problem BambuLabs have here is self-inflicted. They could allow simultaneous cloud and local queue management with or without authentication.

▲

parasubvert an hour ago | parent [-]

Sure, but it's their right to enact that restriction on their software. There are more open alternatives like Prusa , Elgoo, or Creality if people prefer a more open/freedom approach. On the other hand, Bambu has a reputation for having most of the best products in the space.

Of course, many prefer to break their license agreement because They Really Want It, in effect daring Bambu to get aggressive with license enforcement. They probably won't...

▲

gcr 21 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

This is HP’s current philosophy towards consumer desktop inkjet and laser printing, and customers universally hate it. No thanks!

▲

hamandcheese an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It is my right to do with my printer whatever I want.

▲

parasubvert an hour ago | parent [-]

The hardware yes. Bambu's software, not quite. If you want to flash it with 3rd party firmware & use 3rd party slicers, have at it.

If you want to use Bambu's software against their TOS, OK you wouldn't be alone in that, but there's no moral high ground in it.

▲

shakna 41 minutes ago | parent [-]

Sure there is. When purchased, it was able to do something. Due to an update, the customer has now been misled, because a feature was removed.

In most countries, that would violate consumer rights. There's an ethics argument here.

▲

parasubvert 31 minutes ago | parent [-]

That's a highly creative interpretation of events. The software license agreement usually upfront covers what can or cannot not change. It is pretty rare in most countries to see successful legal action for changed features, but best of luck.

	▲	josephg 12 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Taking functionality away from a product after you bought it is a scum move. If the law lets them get away with it, the law should be changed. When I buy a product, I look at reviews and make my purchasing decision on the features and functionality at the time of sale. If a software update later ruins that, I want the option to get my money back.
	▲	mystraline 8 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The "agreement" is at best coerced, and under blackmail of hardware you bought and paid for. At worst, its a fraudulent indefinite rental masquerading as a 'sale'. And lets discuss 'updates that fuck over your hardware'. In dwcent countries, thats hacking, and a serious criminal charge. But lol, companies are somehow exempt.