The person that makes FFF printing on the sides as smooth as the bottom when printing on glass will be very very rich.
You mean the person who knows how to use wet sanding paper/pads/sponges/swoops?
Nah, the bottom of the print on glass is smooth and reflective with no post processing. Besides, trying to get rid of the lines on a tall print using sandpaper is a lesson in futility.
I suppose ABS and Acetone is a possibility, but you lose all dimensional control when you do that, don’t you?
@Mike_Miller unless you let the part completely melt to a puddle, the dimensions stay pretty accurate. Good enough for an iPhone case, at least. Of course, smaller layers require less smoothing, so that’s another thing to keep in mind when your parts need to fit somewhere.
@Mike_Miller People have done that for decades already. Yes, sanding, filling, more sanding, painting, polishing, it takes hours. sometimes days. And it’s you doing the work, not the computer.
If you want a perfect surface right out of the machine, why are you using a 3D printer instead of a CNC milling machine? They can easily deliver that
0.05 layers brings you near the result 
The list of reasons is long. I have the printer, My mill isn’t CNC. But that’s internet pedantry compared to the initial statement.
FFF printing is being held back by the quality of the surface it produces. The part that rests on the glass, assuming tuned flow, is quick, and SMOOTH with no additional work. CAN you make something smooth, with a lot of effort? Yes. That doesn’t invalidate my statement.
No you can’t.
Smooth to the eye = 1/100mm = 10 micron. That’s possible (I’m doing 15 micron regularly)
Smooth to the touch = 1/1000mm = 1 micron.
Even if it would be possible to realize flow rates this slow, the time required would be in the order of 10-15 weeks for a 10x10x20cm part as opposed to 1 week with 15 micron.
We printed a sample to show at Makerfaire Rome, it looks like 0.1 but at the touch is really smooth.
Smooth as in “polished”?
@Marcus_Wolschon I thing we’re arguing on the same side of the debate. My statement restated: The Person that can create a printer that prints, quickly and with little to no post processing, prints with a surface quality that is the same as the bottom of prints printed on glass…will be a very popular guy*.
(*I won’t say rich, as you have to walk a fine line to get compensated for things like that, and it’s only a matter of time before China reverse engineers it, and makes it available for pennies on the dollar.)
Joe Average will want a printer that’s fast, and makes smooth, strong, reliable parts.
Integrated vapor chamber with auto-vaping anyone?
And activated Carbon filtration. 
Could be an issue with smoothing edges that are supposed to be 90° (and of cause the machine dissolving it’s own parts)
+Marcus Wolschon do you have a link to your gallery?
@Mike_Miller I would argue that it’s pushing FFF into an area where other technologies are already better - and after you address the z smoothing then someone will want better x/y resolution. The current generation of resin printers are accomplishing these already, albeit at a generally smaller scale.
Without the mechanical properties of PLA/ABS, though.
@Mike_Miller you’d be surprised - the current generation of resins from MadeSolid and MakerJuice span a pretty wide range of mechanical and physical properties. If you expand beyond the ‘maker friendly’ suppliers you can get into even more exotic materials.
I see lots of purple mentioning +Marcus Wolschon but i see no replies on here from him. Is my g+ broke?
@D_Rob do you have him muted/blocked?
Don’t think so. I checked his profile and I’m following him