X3 MU1 IS A JOKE

[Matt Berube at Ferron Mold]

I have had improved results on the relatively few files that crash verify by reducing the quality slider one or 2 notches. Sure it's not ideal but it's better than "flying blind"...

[neurosis]

I upgraded to MX3 and was disappointed. I waited for MX3 MU1 then tried the upgrade again. I was happy at first and then let down miserably once again. I found several bugs that werent even in the initial X3 release. There were several bug fixes as well but how do you have a bug fix release that breaks things that were not broken in the past? That didnt make sense to me. I hear that they are working on X4? WOW! X3 is lacking and needs fixed much more than we need a new version. I dont care about new functions at this point. I would just love to have "working" functions. Once thats accomplished please by all means continue adding functionality. Some of the new functions are awesome! I just refuse to upgrade to a broken version of the software.

[DavidB]

quote:

---

I hear that they are working on X4? WOW! X3 is lacking and needs fixed much more than we need a new version. I dont care about new functions at this point. I would just love to have "working" functions. Once thats accomplished please by all means continue adding functionality.

---

+1000

[Steve Hattori]

Matt, I have the quality down to less than half- any less and its no better than blind...

[gcode]

Different people use the software in different ways and have difference problems.

I've reported and requested help with one

graphics/advanced 5X crash, but for the most

part 3XMU1 has been a solid and error free upgrade

[Todd Tracey from Fastech]

Have you guys that are complaining about verify thought about trying a NEW graphics driver? It has helped several of my customers! Helped my system as well. If you are running a Quadro, try the 'Certified' drivers from the Solidworks web support site.

JM2C

[DavidB]

gcode

I'm not saying MC is not solid it's much better than the previous version for crashes.

I think the main gripe is what do you get for for maintanence coin?

 

As I said we just payed for 3 seats of MC maintanence. It was late because even we are fealling the global pinch. Then we get charged an extra 10% because or maintanence expired. But it still runs out from the old date. So we pay for 12 months + 10% extra for only 8 months coverage

 

Honestly I can mot say that I will ever use FBM for what I do.

 

HS toolpaths which are great take far to long to process.

 

And the amount of bugs in Lathe is not exceptable.

 

The new arc filter has caused me so much grief I whish they'ed just leave it only.

 

How do I justify the coin to my MD for maintanence??????????

[gcode]

I think FBM was done as a "me too" reaction

to pressure from competitiors.

It is also useful as a sales tool to wow clueless

engineers... You know... the guys who design

something in SolidWorks and think machining is childs play

As FBM matures I can see it being useful.

I've used it to blow out quick and dirty tooling programs and as my template matures, the resulting programs get better.

IF you have the right type of work AND take

the time to work up viable templates FBM can

do a credible job of turning art to part real fast.

[gcode]

X4 is in beta.. there will be no more releases for X3.. you can already do what you're trying to do will drill toolpaths.. Using incremental

top of stock, retract and depth with drill

multiple holes on multiple planes with a single

toolpath. I do it a dozen times a day.

[gcode]

quote:

---

what if some of drill holes need to be at different depths and use the same drill size?

---

In that case, I'd copy/paste the first drill op to make a 2nd, then chain the new holes and set a new depth. It might take 30 seconds.

You could screw around with change at point and get them all into one operation. but the operator

on the floor will probably edit into a standalone drill cycle anyway.. so why bother

[DavidB]

Here is a list of bugs that I have sent into QC.

These are just what I have found.

 

00046542

00046364

00045622

00043363

00039830

00039820

00038782

00038733

00038478

 

And how many have been fixed?

[gcode]

Use an Absolute Clearance plane that is safe for

all the hole patterns and a small incremental

retract plane.

[gcode]

quote:

---

Here is a list of bugs that I have sent into QC.

---

Its good that you send them in.. a lot of guys just bitch and moan about bugs and never do anything about them.

I don't know if any of thme have been fixed or not

[gcode]

I don't think any software can do what you're looking for... I don't mess with change at point..

[neurosis]

quote:

---

Here is a list of bugs that I have sent into QC.

These are just what I have found.

 

00046542

00046364

00045622

00043363

00039830

00039820

00038782

00038733

00038478

 

And how many have been fixed?

---

I have sent in one myself. Ive encountered several others and should have pushed them as well but i just quit using X3 all together. There were functions of the software that I used daily that just ceased to work. I cant believe there will be no fix for these if what gcode said about no more x3 releases is correct. Im sorry to have wasted the time ever installing X3 and wish we could have one year of maintenance paid back to us because it was useless.

 

quote:

---

I don't think any software can do what you're looking for... I don't mess with change at point..

---

Thats not true. Cimatron deals with this situation very well. You can create one drill cycle that will drill on any z level and you can individually change the depths of the drilled hole on the fly or go back and edit the depth when you are done. You can even create one spot drill cycle to spot drill 100's of holes on several different z levels and set the depths of each spot individually and all of this without having to create extra points at different depths to regulate your drill depths. Its a feature that I miss badly.

[gcode]

I've never used Cimmatron.. that sounds useful

 

quote:

---

There were functions of the software that I used daily that just ceased to work.

---

could you give me an example??

[neurosis]

If you look back at some of my old posts there is an entire thread on what stopped working. It has to do with the speeds and feeds calculator / material libraries / tool libraries.

[gcode]

quote:

---

It has to do with the speeds and feeds calculator / material libraries / tool libraries

---

OK ,I remember that thread

[neurosis]

quote:

---

cimatron can do this? I read that mastercam is the best at 2D work and that mold software isn't good at 2D work.

---

Well if a drilling routine is your idea of "good at 2d work" then cimatron has mastercam beat in this aspect.

 

ive used both software and cimatron I have about 13 years of experience with. I havent used cimatron in the last four years "since switching to mastercam", so im not sure what has changed, but mastercam had cimatron beat in some aspects of the game. Multiple fixture offset capability is one good example. Im not sure if cimatron can do it now but it couldnt when I was using it. There are some other things that mastercam is better at as well but its mostly in its attention to production mfg ease than anything. As far as I am concerned, 2d work in cimatron was much easier and required far fewer steps to accomplish the same things. I dont even want to get in to the 3d side. Thats just my opinion.

 

I would like to see mastercam enhance their drilling routines quite a bit but I dont see that happening for some reason. I think that like allot of their old paths its just code that is part of mastercam that instead of rewriting and improving old they just add new to it. Thats really too bad.

[machinehead]

i hope 'they' take serious notice of posts like this.

when the griping gets this loud on a blog used primarily by loyal users who usually defend them, it should be a wake up call to the provider. but i'm not holding my breath.

after upgrading to the latest can of worms, i'm thinking somebody is fat and happy with the way things are going.

 

the way i see it, is if i had a clean product(try not to laugh too hard), one that simply worked. wow. just how much need for maintenance would there actually be? or at least, would i pay as much for services that wouldn't be as needed? not as much and no. the way things are, i can't afford not to have it, the problems are big enough and numerous enough, i have to eat the cost.

 

would a clean program mean no maintenance?

probably not. with a sophisticated product that has a lot of bells and whistles, your'e going to have some issues. perhaps with installation. and obviously some need of technical assistance because we are all not born computer geeks who just get it the first time. but how much would it be worth?

 

if i have a clean version, i won't want to be constantly upgrading and dealing with all of the disruption that comes with it, even if it had a couple new toys. i can get by for a year or two. i will also expect to pay a lot less for a maintenance contract that's only required to solve minor issues. it's just an inherant fact that if you have a lot of problems, you will pay more so they can be fixed.

 

the thing is here, they never really get fixed. it's a neverending cycle. to some extent accepted by 'us'. you just can't ignore aaallllll the problems, aaalllll the time. only some of which are being brought up here(because a lot of people will just put up and not complain).

 

at first, i naivelly thought the intent of a new version was to remove problems and enhance. this just hasn't proved to be true.

while the enhancement side of things may be decent, the getting rid of problems part sucks. while some bugs do go away, there's always a crapload of new ones to take their place. sorry, but that's a failure.

 

+1000 here for first and foremost getting it right.

 

then and only then, make a new one if you want to.

[neurosis]

quote:

---

the way i see it, is if i had a clean product(try not to laugh too hard), one that simply worked. wow. just how much need for maintenance would there actually be? or at least, would i pay as much for services that wouldn't be as needed? not as much and no. the way things are, i can't afford not to have it, the problems are big enough and numerous enough, i have to eat the cost.

---

I look at this exactly the opposite. If I had a clean product that worked well, I would be willing to pay at least as much for further development of a product that has satisfied and even impressed me. As it sits now we feel like we are throwing good money at bad supporting a product that is broken and wonder if it will ever be fully functional. Or are we going to continue to fight and have to work around new problems that pop up continuously. I dont want to say how many hours I wasted installing X3 MU1 because the bugs I found made me think that "I" was doing something wrong. I installed it and set it up three different times getting the same results. If the owner of the company had been back here watching that he would drop our maintenance on the floor. Ive had this discussion with him in the past and told him why it is important to keep our maintenance and software up to date but it is getting harder and harder to convince him to support a product that has so many problems. I will continue to fight to keep our maintenance up to date but I am glad that I am not the one paying for it.

 

There has yet to be a job that we havent been able to tackle with our current version of Mastercam "X2 MR2 SP1" and i am sure it would be the same with X3 MU1, but that is not the point. We shouldnt have to constantly find work arounds for software functions that dont work properly.

[machinehead]

not that i do, but if i paid someone to cut my lawn, and they would miss spots, then come back later to fix it, and get those spots but miss other different spots and charge me a fee to keep coming back and keep fixing the spots they missed and keep missing others... well, you probably get the idea.

[DavidB]

FBM to me was a purely sales driven idea.

Now resellers can say yea we have FBM.

 

Was this funded by our Maintanence?

Instead of bug fixes I get FBM

When was the last time Lathe got an improvement????????????????????????????????

 

[ 02-09-2009, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: DavidB@Rosebank-Engineering ]

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

...if i have a clean version, i won't want to be constantly upgrading and dealing with all of the disruption that comes with it, even if it had a couple new toys. i can get by for a year or two...

---

Sorry but that's just plain wrong for the majority of us that read in CAD Data from other systems. If we don't stay on top of new installs, we're in BIG trouble. That's at least a 3x per year occurrence between CATIA, UG, Pro/E, SolidWorks, Inventor, and SolidEdge just to name a few. Cumulative they necessitate at least 3 installs of something.

 

With the goodies that come with new releases, I get more done in the same amount of time. I won't even hint at some of the cool stuff I'm playing with in X4 and what that will do for programming time. Things like..., and ..., oh and I can't forget... You'll just have to wait and see.

 

Maintenance for MILL is well worth it. Lathe... I'd be flipping over cars and setting fires Well, I'd think anout it anyway.

[neurosis]

quote:

---

With the goodies that come with new releases, I get more done in the same amount of time. I won't even hint at some of the cool stuff I'm playing with in X4 and what that will do for programming time. Things like..., and ..., oh and I can't forget... [big Grin] [Razz] You'll just have to wait and see. [big Grin] [Razz]

---

Thats great to hear that there are new toys in X4. I would much rather hear that the new toys were fixes for old bugs.

 

Things being that they are, I cant wait to see X4. Hopefully it is a big improvement over what ive seen with X3.