Microsoft has concluded that none of the existing 3D output formats meet the goals for its 3D printing support in Windows and is now proposing instead to develop a new XML based format, the 3D Manufacturing Format (3MF) for Windows 8.1. 3MF will be designed to make 3D output a much more straightforward and manageable process. The format is intended to deal with issues such as the loss of detail and metadata during export, the need for intermediate stages en route to printing and the use of multiple apps in the workflow. In addition, the format is intended to provide a standardised framework to encourage the growth of a hardware and software ecosystem for 3D printing.
STL, the most common 3D printing file format, is missing features such as colour and material support and is not rich enough as the primary data format for passing data from apps to devices. In addition, many of the existing 3D formats are unsuitable for the Windows spooler and print pipeline. Thus, the decision was made to develop the new format.
3MF is an XML-based data format, which includes definitions for data related to 3D manufacturing including 3rd party extensibility for custom data. The 3MF format will provide a solid foundation for 3D printing support in Windows 8.1. With this data format defined, it becomes possible to integrate 3D printing support into the OS, using familiar Windows technology.
Microsoft strikes again. Absolutely typical of them to take something like 3D printing and develop their own proprietary file format for it. This is not good news at all. Microsoft already have a very poor track record of doing exactly this. Take for example their continued unsuccessful renderings of HTML in internet explorer along with the IE5 microsoft only HTML tags, or their attempt at hijacking the open office format and making it a closed format. They have already so much to answer for why one earth would anyone think that this is a good idea? (makerbot are you listening!?!?)
There has already been much work done on updating the STL file format with a new STL2 / AMF (additive manufacturing format) (see – http://amf.wikispaces.com & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Additive_Manufacturing_File_Format).
If Microsoft is allowed to go ahead you can bet thier format will be poorly implimented, limited in scope and incompatible with the existing AMF format. The worst thing is that by letting Microsoft take charge, the development and maturity of the format will suffer. Typically Microsoft updates are slow, poorly tested and lagging behind the competition. Not only that but it will be a locked and proprietary format.
Dont let Microsoft choke the 3D industry. Give STL2 your support before Microsoft pushes the industry back 10 years.
The problem Microsoft is addressing is the fact that massive standards bodies suffer from “too many cooks in the kitchen” syndrome. Design by massive committee takes forever. Then, the certification process takes forever. The implementation takes forever. Then, widespread use takes forever. The 3-D printing hardware market is moving far too fast for everyone to wait on AMF to finally be defined, implemented, and widely adopted. Getting to the end result has taken years and it’s still not even version 1.0.0.
Microsoft can create a specification, implement it, and incorporate it into the OS used by 90% of the desktops in the world within months, not years. Currently available 3-D printers are already hindered by the lack of color and material support in the STL file format, so we can’t afford to wait on the sluggish AMF development process to finally complete.
People complain about the proprietary extensions that appeared in IE, but they don’t consider the entire situation at that time. Those extensions filled a dire need long before the standards bodies finally came up with a standard solution. Once there were adequate standards in place and widely adopted, Microsoft supported them. Prior to that, they quickly fill gaps in functionality long before standards bodies get around to creating them.
I currently own a 3 color/material 3-D printer and I’m forced into using proprietary files created by the printer manufacturer in order to print multicolor objects. It’s extremely annoying and tedious because it severely limits the tools I can use to prepare prints. I’m excited to see Microsoft implementing a file format immediately while the final features of AMF are still being debated. When use of the AMF format eventually becomes widespread, I’m sure Microsoft will support it. In the meantime, we will have something immediate that works.
There is a very good reason that development of standards takes a long time. It is the same reason that rushed implimentations always fail.
The AMF is actually a current standard, there is no reason for Microsoft not to adopt it right now, in its entirety. There is no need to wait for anything.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/F2915.htm
Of course, the cynic within me is telling me that whilst this is the most ethical thing Microsoft could do, it is most certainly not the most profitable.
As far as the time to implement is concerned. The AMF has already been discussed and tabled with all of the major 3D design software houses and likewise within the 3D printer industry. The groundwork is already set. It is even possible that many are already at work implementing the AMF format. [citation needed 🙂 ]
If Microsoft railroad their own format all it will achieve is to create a divide within the industry. It will not assist the AMF in any way, in fact it will have the opposite effect, it will effectively prevent the AMF from becoming widespread. My guess is that it would 10 years for the AMF to overcome an act like this – if ever.
TBH, as a printer user myself, Microsoft is the absolute last company I would recommend for anything to do with 2D design let alone 3D design. Have you seen Microsoft paint? They haven’t got a clue. I vote that they leave it to the experts.
(I get the feeling that this is going to be like the browser wars all over again.)
*sigh*
After looking at information on both again, it seems as if they are actually filling two different purposes. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like AMF is designed to be an upgraded STL replacement while Microsoft’s standard seems to be a g-code replacement or transcoder. In other words, AMF is the pre-sliced model data and 3MF seems to be the output of the slicing process which would be spooled directly to the Windows 3-D printer drivers. After looking again, these actually seem like complementary standards, rather than competing standards. I think the article portrays this relationship differently than it actually is. Look at the information available on both and see if you come to the same conclusion.
> Correct me if I’m wrong
I think you’re wrong. According to Microsoft’s info, the authoring app is supposed to generate 3MF data, which is then packaged up and sent to the printer driver. The printer driver is to be written by the printer manufacturer, and its s job is to convert the 3MF into data that the printer can understand. So, if printers continue to be driven by g-codes, the printer driver would do the slicing and in-filling, and produce g-codes. So, in my view 3MF plays exactly the same role as AMF.
There is a very good reason that development of standards takes a long time. It is the same reason that rushed implimentations always fail.
The AMF is actually a current standard, there is no reason for Microsoft not to adopt it right now, in its entirety. There is no need to wait for anything.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/…
Of course, the cynic within me is telling me that whilst this is the most ethical thing Microsoft could do, it is most certainly not the most profitable.
As far as the time to implement is concerned. The AMF has already been discussed and tabled with all of the major 3D design software houses and likewise within the 3D printer industry. The groundwork is already set. It is even possible that many are already at work implementing the AMF format. [citation needed 🙂 ]
If Microsoft railroad their own format all it will achieve is to create a divide within the industry. It will not assist the AMF in any way, in fact it will have the opposite effect, it will effectively prevent the AMF from becoming widespread. My guess is that it would 10 years for the AMF to overcome an act like this – if ever.
TBH, as a printer user myself, Microsoft is the absolute last company I would recommend for anything to do with 2D design let alone 3D design. Have you seen Microsoft paint? They haven’t got a clue. I vote that they leave it to the experts.
(I get the feeling that this is going to be like the browser wars all over again.)
*sigh*
I wonder will developers need to pay a licence fee to use the format?