Why does the documentation use Slic3r PE instead of PrusaSlicer  

RE: Why does the documentation use Slic3r PE instead of PrusaSlicer

Prusa Slicer is a Superset of Slic3r PE ... anything you need to do with Slic3r PE can be done with Prusa Slicer.

RE: Why does the documentation use Slic3r PE instead of PrusaSlicer

Posted by: @noppej

I'm a Mac user, and Slic3r & Pronterface are not an option (no 32-bit software support since Catalina). Also, it was my impression that Prusa deprecated Slic3r in favour of PrusaSlicer.

PrusaSlicer is a fork of Slic3r. At this point, it's a hard fork with little change of them reconverging since Team Prusa has ported much of the code from PERL to C++, which is a bit of a shame. Although it's nowhere near as sexy, Slic3r is still under active development, albeit at a much slower pace due to lack of programmer resources. Slic3r has added a few features since the fork that are not yet present in PrusaSlicer. One that comes to mind is more control over variable layer heights. I believe Slic3r offers and automatic option. I also think they've added a "mouse ears" support option (don't recall what they call it).

However, many blog posts and documentation (like official MMU2S manual) still only gives Slic3r instructions.  Is there a plan to fix this or do I need to find a way to run Slic3r instead?

Team Prusa have indicated that documentation will undergo a major update at some point. There has been so much rapid development in the last 6 months that redirecting resources much sooner would've resulted in much of that effort being redone, so I can understand their thinking. I'm having a hell of of a time just keeping my notes pages up to date.

RE: Why does the documentation use Slic3r PE instead of PrusaSlicer

@bobstro

Thank you for your response, and I fully understand. I do feel obliged to point out the obvious though in terms of priorities ... As a new user, who has a LOT to become familiar with, it adds a considerable cognitive burden to have to follow steps in documentation, when you have to understand them in abstract (can't follow along) form, and then go hunt in the new software for achieving similar steps. It really doesn't help Prusa team if new users are having to tackle these steep learning curves before they can become successful.

RE: Why does the documentation use Slic3r PE instead of PrusaSlicer

Posted by: @noppej

@bobstro

Thank you for your response, and I fully understand. I do feel obliged to point out the obvious though in terms of priorities ... 

I don't disagree with your basic point, although as someone who simply wants to dive in, I'm glad they're refining the product first for purely selfish reasons. I find tinkering with each settings is giving me a far better grounding in how it all works together than reading any documentation would.

I opened a GitHub issue noting that some settings were poorly labeled and non-intuitive and the developers said they'd passed the information on to the team working those issues. I'm sure Prusa is looking forward to the day when they finally catch up, and it's promising that they are dedicating resources to both coding and documentation. Meanwhile, GIMME MORE FEATURES!