'Wants' for Version 10

[CAM-mando]

200

 

Sorry couldnt resist.

 

+1 ot Rekd's S/U sheet access DB.

 

Infact ... If they could build some db connectivity into X, perhaps expanded file properties make file properties accessable to db's, maybe some of the job setup data. Thinkin' out loud here.

[d00d]

I would like to see Master Cam buy out Solid Works and integrate them in to one

[Thad]

Make WCS fully functional within MC. For example:

 

Allow verify to an .STL in different WCS.

Allow viewports to properly show the current WCS views.

Allow verify to show the views of the current WCS without having to manually spin the part around.

 

I'm sure there are others that I haven't found yet.

 

Thad

 

[ 05-14-2003, 02:33 AM: Message edited by: thad ]

[Marty A]

i don't know if this was said yet. i would like to see the (xy stock to leave) split so you can leave stock in just x or y.

 

marty

[markb52]

I really don't understand the hype of the graphical interface. I think the menu based interface of mastercam is wonderfull. I've programmed quite a bit with Powermill which is a graphical interface and it slows me down. Think about it. What is faster hitting a hot key or mousing onto a tinny screen button that you miss anyways some of the time? What hand gets sore first after sitting at the PC for hours on end, the mouse hand or your typing hand? I admit that mastercam could use a refresh on the visual appearance. However, going away from the menu based interface would be a mistake!

 

My biggest wants for V10

 

-more powermill features

-better roughing

-better rest machining

-ability to create rest boundries

-ability to machine between a boundry within a boundry (inner and outer boundries)

[Thad]

quote:

---

I really don't understand the hype of the graphical interface. I think the menu based interface of mastercam is wonderfull.

---

I agree.

 

Thad

 

[ 05-15-2003, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: thad ]

[markb52]

Almost forgot the best feature of Powermill that Mastercam needs to have in V10. Collision testing. The ability to draw your endmill, collet, toolholder, spindle or whatever you want and collision test it to your block. Powermill even tells you how far you have to have to hang the endmill out and will even split the toolpath up for a long endmill/toolholder and a short one. I'ts awesome for deep cavity and force work and is always reliable.

[CAM-mando]

My understanding is that MC X will retain a classic interface like cadkey did when they went windows.

 

Incedentally I kinof agree, but that being said... A properly done interdace can be very efficient if it allows for extensive customization.

 

For example the new Cadkey Workshop product has customizable toolbars that allow you to place a button for virtually any function or group of functions on the tool pallete. The palletes can be docked on any edge of the screen. Further "Workspaces" can be saved which are screen layout configurations which can have any combination of tool palletes and and configuration options saved. So you can set the software up so commonly used functions are right there for a single click. In this tyoe of interface you caould set up different workspaces for say Modeling, Detailing, Toolpathing or whatever. Of course the hot keys could still be preserved too.

 

My guess is that 90% of us will hate the new interface for a month then come to like it and eventually love it.

 

The other reality is that it is a Must for continued sales and market share which trickles down to us in the form of solid support and continued product development. All that said, My experience as a Cadkey user shed a light on how enormous the task is of pulling all the old algorythyms and such together and incorporating it into the new foundation. Old bugs new bugs new species of mutated bugs, functions that were dropped coause the development team thought noone needed them anymore but quickly found out otherwise (in no uncertain terms). Im looking with great anticipation to vX, but I am updating all my posts do work effeciently with V9.X and plan to dig in just in case.

 

Oh the other thing that vX should bring (I suspect) is quicker development cycle. THe ability to add functionality and patch bugs quickly. The new code stream will undoubtedly be easier to manage than the code that has been drug around for 18 years or so. It seems to me that this is essential for MC to continue to compete with products that have been developed more recently.

[Rekd™]

Very nice, CAM. I'm an old-school cadkey user myself.

 

And to shed a little more light, look what happend to Gibbs. They had an awsome package in GibbsNC. Then they went to Virtual Gibbs and lost so much of their functionality, it wasn't funny. They thought we didn't need the functions they had so they took them out.

 

I say leave the original interface basically the same. Or at least leave the option for users to choose their own style.

 

Mastercam is wonderful to navigate, and to change to a windows style would decrease the productivity IMHO.

 

Also another good point, CAM, is the tediocy involved in a complete gui overhaul. I made a program in Basic a few years ago that I have since converted to Visual Basic. It ended up being a complete re-write of all but the very core of the engine. And now there's so much crap left over, I pity anyone that has to go thru it and actually figure out how it's working. (The program, BTW, converts single part NC files to run multiple parts with sub programs using either a 1 Tool All Parts method, or a 1 Part All Tools method.)

 

'Rekd teh Just because it's old doesn't mean it's out of date

[kccadcam]

Hey CAMmando and Rekd,

I'm glad to see some other CadKey users out there.

 

It would also be nice if Ver. X had Acis based solid modeling along with Parasolids (I can see the legal battles already!)

 

 

CadKey allows complete control of geometric shape creation and editing without any of the constraints, history and feature dependencies.

Being able to pick features off of a model imported from anywhere and either modify or completely remove them at will is awesome.

 

JM2C

 

[ 05-15-2003, 08:54 PM: Message edited by: Kevin Clark, Central Valley Machine ]

[CAM-mando]

Kev I think their next release will have surfacing capabilities rivaled by only the high end systems. I use Workshop 21 for my heavy modeling tasks, but still use 19 for detailing and day to day work. Hoping to migrate to WS exclusively with next release.

 

Hey remember when CK and MC had similar menus ?

 

Hmmmm ....

 

[ 05-15-2003, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: CAMmando ]

[Thad]

quote:

---

(The program, BTW, converts single part NC files to run multiple parts with sub programs using either a 1 Tool All Parts method, or a 1 Part All Tools method.)

---

Hey Rekd, that sounds familiar. That's a Gibbs feature.

 

Thad

[Rekd™]

thad,

 

Gibbs does post programs that way via a click of a check box. I tried to duplicate that for generic files when I quit using Gibbs and couldn't do it any other way except manually.

 

The difference is that this is a stand alone proggie that modifies any FANUC NC file, provided it's not outside the scope of the format I found most common and built into the engine. I also made one for Boston Digital's 3 axis hi speed machine.

 

'Rekd teh Post Post Processor

[Rekd™]

Kathy,

 

Check you email box..

 

'Rekd teh Gift that keeps on giving

[CAM-mando]

Hey 'rekd,

 

I was wurk'n for a shop last year that had a ton of OOOOOLD "tapes" .... yeah the paper ones (although) the term tape meant any text file with lots of lines beginning with the letter N. Also a G41 = Righthand Comp shop

 

Anyways the tapes were actually all very good and included lots of "tribal knowlege" and the parts were fairly complex. So alot of them we continued using and just got away from the paper tape. We were forever changing tool numbers though because of other setups in the machine and whatnot. So I started a Visual basic program that would allow you to re-define T,D and H values, and filter the G code accordingly. I wound up leaving the job before it got finished. Reading your post reminded me of it so now I have to go try and finish it. thanks for the inspiration. Of course nothing will get done around the house this week.

 

Dave teh "Strong at the start ... occasionally lacking endurance"

[Rekd™]

Lets go! Chop chop! Get that stuff done!

 

Who'd have thunk you'd still be using those old tapes after all the tech that we've had since then. Reminds me of an old shop in downtown SD, Star Machine I think it was. They made (make?) re-loading dies for ammunition. They had one engine running all the machines in the place, dozens of them.. all with belts and pullies running up to each machine. What a field trip that was. Don't know if it's still around.

 

quote:

---

Dave teh "Strong at the start ... occasionally lacking endurance"

---

'Rekd teh I bet yer wife isn't happy bout that

[CAM-mando]

quote:

---

'Rekd teh I bet yer wife isn't happy bout that

---

Ahh well ... you get to a point where ya say if we make it quick, you can go shopping and I can catch the end of the ball game.

 

Dave teh "deceptively humble regarding personal skills intimate in nature"

 

 

The good part about being sallary is when you screw around you cant figure out if its on company time or not... other than that it s#cks

 

[ 05-16-2003, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: CAMmando ]

[Mark Lovelace]

For V10, I want MasterCam to always know exactly what it is that I'm trying to do, and to do it for me without me having to tell it how I want it done. Is that so much to ask?

[Saultspics]

I would like a surfacing tool path that you can leave stock in x y or z. The same way as the 2D paths work. This way you can finish the bottom and come back with another tool to do the side walls. Example a tapered end mill. Or you can do the side walls and come back with a radius tip cutter and finish the bottom. Right now we are roughing with surface rough pocket. Then I go back in and do a lot of 2D clean up.

Stephen

[Rekd™]

quote:

---

For V10, I want MasterCam to always know exactly what it is that I'm trying to do, and to do it for me without me having to tell it how I want it done. Is that so much to ask?

---

Lol, Mark

 

We're not that far away from that, actually. Look at solid drill. I would imagine 10 years or so and we will have removed about 90% of the human input required to program parts.

 

'Rekd teh Yeah, Right

 

[ 05-19-2003, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: Rekd ]

[MIKEHCPC]

i just want v9 my distributer told me was on it's way a month and half ago.

[Noel]

I want a surface/finish/parallel tool path that will cut a cavity at 90 deg to the center line but act exactly like a wire frame/revolved toolpath where the step over you program is maintained no mater what.The project blend in 9.1 still doesn't do it. Theres hope for V10.

 

Noel

[Jack Mitchell]

Change the GUI drastically. We should in-fact make the interface similar to Solidworks and Inventor otherwise the competition will anyways.

 

Think about what I am saying for a moment - We are already Mastercam junkies, we will adapt and progress to anything that Cnc has to offer - the new interface is what will attract an additional user base and this will attract sales generated, (It's what Cnc Software desires and truly needs - it sort of pays the bills if you know what I mean).

 

Although Mastercam enjoys market share for the moment, it does not disclude improving a good product perhaps before its time; I fully expect Ten to be significant and a very bold statement in the future of cam machining. This is a monumentous task and Cnc Software, in my opinion is biting the bullet when it comes down to cost utilization and hedging the bet.

 

Kudo's to Cnc for pushing it to the max, and as many members already know - I usually predict a good argument.

 

Damn - I just noticed that I am pushing 400 posts and still apoligizing (sp) my butt off every now and then.

 

Regards, Jack

 

[ 05-19-2003, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Jack Mitchell ]

[Trevor Bailey]

One thing to consider, Jack, since you mentioned sales. Some sales of MC have been generated because the interface is NOT like everyone else's.

 

Just a thought.

[?Mark]

How about making V10. a 100% Solids based...

and on a simple side how about showing a distance between a point(or line) and a line in Analyze... without creating a line between them...