X Verify

[Steve Biehl - Cimquest Inc]

quote:

---

I could have sworn that I paid $$$ for the true-solids verify.

---

The billable item for verify is 5 axis true solid verify.

[somename75]

I stand corected Steve

 

guess I owe ya a beer

[Steve Biehl - Cimquest Inc]

some micro-brew Oregon beer ?!?

[somename75]

There are more excelent micros around here than I could possible count, It is definately a nice place to live. We might have to wait till westec, or IMTS, as I think my boss would shat if I tried to send a beer ups red.

[cadcam]

Chip, you work for this company ?

http://www.allenengine.com

[chip]

No Jay. I work for Http://www.waterwayplastics.com

 

That's a buddy of mine in Ventura whom makes a pretty Bad to the Bone Supercharger kit!

[cadcam]

Cool, mr graves. thanks Chip.

[cadcam]

Chip is your last name Kramer or are you the other steve? just wondering

[chip]

Kramer took off. I'm the other Steve.

[cadcam]

Cool, when did Kramer leave?

[Hardmill]

quote:

---

I'm the other Steve.

---

I knew this guy was cool

With a name like that you can't go wrong.

Good to see you hangin' out all day Jayson

 

 

PEACE

[P_Scott]

somename75,

 

quote:

---

I could have sworn that I paid $$$ for the true-solids verify.

---

AFAIK, Verify in Mastercam will allow for True Solid simulation at no extra charge to the user. The only thing I've ever heard of requiring an extra fee in Verify was with the optional Multi-Axis toolpath Verify. Perhaps they were charging for the True Solid simulation back in V7 but that's been a while so I can't honestly recall. If that's not the case and you were charged for the True Solid simulation in V9, I apologize for making that bold remark.

quote:

---

With all the dollars we paid for it, and now with maintenance what is wrong with asking them to adress what many feel to be weak points in the software?

---

They are addressing it. I can tell you that it is already an improvement from V9 to Mcam X, even though it's still in Beta stage. It will continue to improve, just as it has from day one.

In the past, Verify wasn't fully developed by CNC Software. For Mcam X Verify may be entirely CNC Software's development. They've taken the task upon themselves because of suggestions from users, many who are members of this forum. You are participating in the largest product feedback resource in CAM software history. Your investment in Maintenance is specifically to fund the further development of ALL functions of the software, including Verify.

 

The question was asked if it was an improvement in Mcam X. I believe that to be so, even though I can't give you specifics or show you directly what I mean. I have tried it out enough to know that it is an improvement. You'll just have to take my word for it. I wouldn't endorse something if I didn't believe it to be true. That's one of the greatest things about this software company. They truly care what their users think and will actively pursue changes for improving the product they develop. That's rare in today's business world.

[chip]

quote:

---

That's one of the greatest things about this software company. They truly care what their users think and will actively pursue changes for improving the product they develop. That's rare in today's business world.

---

I absolutly agree. That's why it's soo frustrating to see something like this:

quote:

---

Is the verify in X going to be the same crap as 9.1.

---

What is Wrong?! It's almost a knock on the designers of this software. Mine's not perfect, It's come a long way from crunching a small swept on an ol 256 that use to crunch for (sometimes literally) hours.

 

Jay he left last year.

[somename75]

Thank you Peter, all I wanted to hear is that they were working on it. In the past, I heard a few about the farming it out thing, and that was sort of the end of it. If they are looking into it, and trying to improve it, I am satisfied. Have a great day all

[Steve Biehl - Cimquest Inc]

X's verify is already better. I've had a few jobs that I was working on in V9 that I had to give up on Verify, then I'd open in X and do my verifing there. Already better, faster, better STLs. And not done yet!!

[Tom Dorgan from American Precision]

I just have to add my two cents. My company has sent me to train on 3 different softwares as a dealer in the past 2 years. My first stop was CNC Software which I left so impressed with the first class facilities and the way they treated me as a customer that I still brag about the experience 2 years later. The two other software companies, both of which are #1 in their fields, left me unimpressed, barely trained and feeling like my travel expenses were a waste of money. There is not another software company in the world that cares more about the customer than CNC Software and Mastercam.

[crazy^millman]

quote:

---

I just think that if some of you guys would wipe the little brown spot off the end of your noses and speak up like this guy (and plenty of others) did, we might just possibly get them to fix something thats been broken for a long time.

---

You know WTF. I am willing to give you a Browns jersy and let you sit right damb in the middle of Steelers 50 yard line and start screaming the Steerlers are crap and they suck, or better yet let you go to some parts of Jacksonville, Florida and say rednecks suck and see how well and nice you are treated. I spent years making complicated 3d parts and multiaxis parts without any CAM software. I have seen Alot of different people's software and I personally and profressional like Mastercam and if that makes my nose brown then please serve me a 55 gallon drum of the bronw stuff because of this software in the last 3 years my salary has more than doubled. I dont seem to think that would have happend with others software becuase guess what it is not the most sold and not the most used. Want to come in to here and stir up the brown stuff expect and unhappy response and expect those of us that make are living using what you call crap to take offense.

 

I will ask this did I come over to your work and ask you what do you have a box full of crappy tools becuase if I did I would expect you to take some offsence to it. I will ask this how often do any of the people who do come in here and complain take book homes. copy sections about ideas or tricks off of here. Go to work earlier or stay later to learn more so they know more. How many have tried to tackle post probelms on there own. Majoirty, but not all just want the easy way out and it's just easier to complain, cry and say the software sucks and it is crappy software than be a person and say I don't know and can you please help me. I have been they we all have been there with a boss breathing down our backs and parts needing to get out the door and are stressed, but you want someone to repect your difference of opinion then repect the fact that we are here to help and we here helping with this software not, GIBBS, WORKNC, UNIGRAPHICS, or who everelse's software you want a comparsion about. You want to know about their software do what I and alot of the others have done go work where they have it. Get the other companies to give you a Demo, or go spend about $150,000 to $300,000 on everyone's software then you will know what you need. I have given alot to this place but the more I see these topics the less I want to come here. Good night and Good luck but I got 55 gallons of brown stuff to finish before going to bed!!!!

[Harry Morse]

Well I suppose this is the response I expected where the usual ones get off topic to what the question even was. From the answers given only a few actually had anything to do with the actual question "Verify". I was infact only referring to the verify which if you look at the real substance of the actual replies to the real question most agreed is not good. I have looked over our paperwork and cant see anywhere where the software was free all I can see is we paid many dollars for it. The sales rep actually demonstrated more of verify than any other feature when we purchased and at shows the verify is prominent also as a feature. With all the dollars paid why should it be necessary to go and purchase further software from another supplier to make it work as it should be expected to work.

[Rekd™]

Seems like we have another case of idiots trying to run complicated software. While it's true that MC is easy to use for simple parts, the harder the parts, the more intelligence must be used as well.

 

I suppose using up all that intelligence to make the difficult parts deprives the true idiots from being able to function properly in a public forum. *cough* Harry *cough*.

 

I'm suprised you got any answers at all, Harry. You're either slightly brave or really stupid. (I'm guessing the latter). You come in slamming something we all make good livings on, something that works good for the rest of us, and yet you expect help? (That clinches it, it's the latter)

 

Let me ask you, Harry... are the rest of your posts going to be the same crap as your previous posts?

 

Let me ask you, Harry... are your NC programs going to continue to be the same crap as your previous ones?

 

Let me ask you, Harry... are you still going to be sporting that crappy hair-cut when X comes out?

 

Get over yourself. Verify has come a long way in the last few versions. It's going a long way in X. Hopefull you will have given up on MC by then and gone with something you might be able to handle, like Gibbs. Why don't you leave the real software to the real programmers and go get a diaper.

 

(Sorry webby, haven't had coffee yet)

[Rekd™]

quote:

---

Well I suppose this is the response I expected

---

To what, this?

 

quote:

---

same crap as 9.1.

---

Stupid is as stupid does.

[Hardmill]

 

 

quote:

---

haven't had coffee yet

---

Here you go buddy

First cup is on me

 

 

PEACE

[Rekd™]

Thanks, bra..

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Zero said

quote:

---

"......I just think that if some of you guys would wipe the little brown spot off the end of your noses and speak up..."

---

Plenty of us speak up. The difference is we do it with class and dignity. We address the issues with [email protected] and resolve them that way. We give them a sample file with information on how to re-create the problem and a description of the problem. If you're not willing to do something as simple as that... then you really have no business complaining. There are two types of people, those that are part of the problem... and those that are part of the solution. I know what kind of person I am. You people that come in with these rants and tirades about "... sucks..." and "...sucks...", need to look at what kind of person you are. Just because some of choose to not criticize CNC publicly does not mean we are not criticizing them, it just means we are dealing with the problem in another, more effective manner.

 

Now for the original criticism... Harry said

quote:

---

...but if you are serious you would need to agree it is bad. They (-added by me- CNC Software) even seem to admit that the supplier of this is giving them crap at present and seem to be content with blaming them.

---

This statement could not be farther from the truth. You sir are seriously uninformed.

quote:

---

...seem to be content with blaming them...

---

CNC Software is never content. If they were, we would probably still be running Version 3.x They are constsntly adding new features, fixing issues, improving the product, etc... While it is true that CNC uses a 3rd party vendor for the verification side of things, to say they are

quote:

---

...content...

---

is ridiculous at best, and it would not surprise me in the least if they were looking at other options. I don't know that they are but it would not surprise me if they were. CNC Software is a class company that prides itself in being #1 in CAD/CAM and they are not resting on their laurels. Version X is going to be great. What is coming down the pipe that I've heard about ... I'll just say this and leave it at that.

 

You guys that are chronic complainers about the software, I challenge you to find a more customer driven Top 5 or Top 10 CAD/CAM company. You won't find one.

 

That's my take and I'm sticking to it.

[Fig sign]

As a backnote -what would I earn and gain sitting under the station with a perfect Cad -Cam ?

Every boy from grocery can run it ,or at all ,who needs programmer ,the program works alone ?

This approach killing me ,Man ,if this would be a perfect program ,Harry ,who the heck would need you !

[P_Scott]

Harry Morse,

 

quote:

---

I have looked over our paperwork and cant see anywhere where the software was free all I can see is we paid many dollars for it.

---

Let me explain it a little more simply for you. I will try to restrain my reply to keep from sounding irritated for repeating myself. What your company paid for, not you, unless you own the company, is the #1 proven working CAM software package in the world. CAM is Computer Aided Manufacturing, not Computer Aided Verification and Visualization. Master cam is the world's best CAM package. The Verify feature in Mcam is a nice function that is included with the software.

 

It's an accessory feature, meaning it isn't necessary in order for Mcam to complete it's main task, the generation of toolpaths for CNC machining. Verify in Mcam is completely unneccessary. If it wasn't there, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You would still have the world's best CAM software, just without Verify. That's why I called it free of charge. It's the cherry on the top of a sundae. Not necessary but makes the whole thing look better.

 

Verify is used in demos and shows because people are attracted to visual stimulus. Which would you rather look at during a demo or show? A programmer filling in parameters and regenerating toolpath? Or a visual representation of the tool machining a part. I think it's clear what's more "eye-catching".

 

We did actually answer your question. Verify has improved with every version and will continue to improve. It has been improved for Mcam X. For an accessory feature, that is included with the purchase of a license to use that software, I think they've done very well with it. It does a good job of representing what should happen in the machine. It often produces a visual image of errors in toolpaths before they are even coded for the machine. This saves time and reduces scrap. For any feature to do so without costing anything additional to the whole package, that is remarkable. And to keep improving that feature, while it remains relatively unneccessary to the actual generation of toolpath, is worth applauding, not degrading. Have a nice day.