This has got to be the 3rd or 4th post on 3MF compatibility I’ve read about since the release of 2.0. But I will add my $0.02 on this one.
The 3MF file format is an industry standard.
The 3MF consortium is an open membership. Autodesk is one of the founding members. Here’s that list.
I didn’t see Bambu Labs listed but I did see Stratasys and Autodesk. If Stratasys doesn’t ring a bell, they are suing Bambu for patent infringement. But that’s another story that many posts here go into deeper.
So to answer the first part of your question.
Let’s look at the data.
Autodesk is a $6 billion company. They already have deep—though now outdated—support for 3D printing baked into Fusion 360, which hasn’t been updated in quite some time. Interpretation? 3D printing support is on the back burner for them.
As a charter member of the 3MF consortium, they make the rules. Bambu could do this as well but they’ve chosen not to participate.
Bambu is only interested in selling new printers. Unlike Prusa, which has a proven track record of providing upgrade kits for its older models, Bambu isn’t interested in improving what they’ve already sold. That includes their new software, which may have been rushed to market with H2D support, breaking other features in the process.
Based on the numerous complaint posts here about version 2.0 of Bambu Studio, it’s clear the product wasn’t fully tested or fully baked before release. But hey, it’s the “Chabuduo” (差不多) way, so what’s the problem?
So is it Bambu’s fault or the rest of the industry’s? Hmmmm… I’ll let the reader puzzle that one out.
