Delays in Mastercam

[Bob W.]

So I have my new Dell Precision laptop with a quad core processor, 4 gigs of ram, solid state hard drive, and a fresh install of X4 MU2. This system seems to operate at warp speed, except when it comes to opening toolpath parameters. I timed it today and it takes 6 seconds to get into the parameters... It takes 7 seconds to load the entire Mastercam programe (no complaints there). Is there a setting to speed the parameters up? Why in the world would something so simple take so long? In X2 the parameters would open immediately with my three year old system.

 

BTW, graphics card is Nvidia FX 3700M

 

[ 12-30-2009, 02:24 AM: Message edited by: Bullet Bob ]

[Chris Rizzo]

Bob, I was going to point you to my poll/rant, but I see you've already found it.

[gcode]

I've got parameter delay down to under a second

on my Win7 x64 machine.

I turned all the Windows eyecandy off and

checked

"Disable visual themes"

"Disable Desktop Composition"

 

This issue will drive you nuts..

you can have 2 identical machines and one will have a delay and the other won't.

 

The 4 XPx32 machine I maintain at work have zero delay.

 

Oddly enough, my lowball Win7 x64 laptop with

a Geoforce gaming card has zero delay.

 

This leads me to believe that some part of the

Win7/Quadro/OpenGl/X4 combination is not playing well together.

I've also noted that the old legacy surfacing toolpaths open instantly on all machines.

Common sense say the new tree style toolpath

ladder is involved as well.

 

I'm having graphics issues with SolidWorks 2010

on my Win7x64 machine as well. SW has a new service pack (2.0EV) out yesterday.

I will install it over the weekend and see if it helps.

[Verndog]

quote:

---

I've also noted that the old legacy surfacing toolpaths open instantly on all machines. Common sense say the new tree style toolpath ladder is involved as well.

---

I've made several posts in reguard to this exact issue. Not only is there a delay, but they force an unnecessary pull down that hides params if you dont make the extra motion. All just to leave a small tiny window the same size? Makes no sence, plus the fact you have a mixture of old and new style params that doesnt flow as well as all similar. They give updated tool holder definition that work and are accessible only to the new style params, and dont stick as default for that tool. You have to keep picking holder for each toolpath with SAME TOOL?? Rediculous...once a holder is defined it needs to "stick".

 

So....for that reason, my new system will be running X3 and no X4 will be allowed in the shop. Listening MC?? Progress means faster...not slower.

[Bob W.]

I have been using the new tree style operation windows for over a year now so I have given them a fair shake. I think they are stupid and much slower than the original window with the radio buttons. I miss so much more in the new window layout and this results in a lot more opening of the parameters dialog at several seconds per pop. Maybe the marketing folks should poll the users before making changes like this. Were they just looking for something for the interns to do? I never thought the old style was broke so why did they try to fix it?

 

[ 12-30-2009, 03:20 PM: Message edited by: Bullet Bob ]

[Fred @ Slate Industries]

Verndog

X3's transform toolpaths Verify and Backplot are broken! (They post ok though)

You have to go back to X2Mr2 actually...

[[email protected]]

quote:

---

I have been using the new tree style operation windows for over a year

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's only been that way since May 2009 ??

[Thee Rickster ™]

quote:

---

Correct me if I'm wrong

---

Um...don't you get tied of that.... J/K

[[email protected]]

If I wanted any crap outta you I woulda squeezed your head

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

Anybody that wants to stick with X3 because X4 and the tree dialogs are "slower" is not looking at the whole picture. Dynamic milling has saved me hours upon hours of time on the machine, and anybody doing surfacng is seeing great time savings because of multithreading.

 

Yea, I don't like the delay either, but I'm not giving up the time savings X4 gives me, just because I might be impatient.

[Bob W.]

quote:

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's only been that way since May 2009 ??

---

You are probably right but I thought these came with X3. At any rate, I have been using them since they first came out, which feels like well over a year and I haven't begun to like them :-)

[gcode]

The tree style toolpaths were introduced

with the 3D High Speed toolpaths in X2(or XMR1???)

The 2D high speed toolpaths came out in X3

and legacy 2D toolpaths were migrated to tree style in X4.

I suspect legacy 3D toolpaths will make the switch

for X5.

Tree style toolpaths are not going away..

Hopefully X5 will solve the lag issue and they will get better organised

[Dave.L]

quote:

---

Tree style toolpaths are not going away..

---

Despite the fact that so many users dislike this layout, I just don't get it

[Bob W.]

quote:

---

and anybody doing surfacng is seeing great time savings because of multithreading.

---

From what I understand multithreading only saves time if regenerating several multithreaded toolpaths at a time (one processor per toolpath). If you edit one multithreaded toolpath and regenerate there is no advantage. Do most programmers create several of these toolpaths and then regenerate them all at once? I typically do them one at a time and they calculate right away. I don't use the HST very often anyways. The roughing has been taken over by Volumill and I will finish up with a HST scallop or similar.

[Bob W.]

quote:

---

Despite the fact that so many users dislike this layout, I just don't get it

---

Seems to me that CNC is more focused on its competition than the needs of its existing customers.

[gcode]

quote:

---

Despite the fact that so many users dislike this layout

---

I doubt 5% of the userbase contributes to this forum.

For every one guy screaming there are 20 that aren't.

I like the new tree system and find it faster,

As a beta sight I've been using it much longer

than regular users

I'm more used to it than someone who started using X4 last summer.

I hated it when it came out, but it's grown on me.

I don't like the lag that has shown up in the

last 2 releases, but I'm not rolling back to X2 to

avoid it... and I have no doubt they'll get it solved.

[Dave.L]

quote:

---

I doubt 5% of the userbase contributes to this thread.

For every one guy screaming there are 20 that aren't.

---

That's a valid point. However, we will never know the opinions of the users who sit silent. The 20 you mention maybe screaming at there desk and maybe not.....

[Bob W.]

quote:

---

For every one guy screaming there are 20 that aren't.

---

I'd be willing to bet that most of the guys screaming are the ones that paid for Mastercam on their own dime. If I used Mastercam as an employee at a large machine shop and everything was paid for by the boss man, you wouldn't hear any screaming from me.

[Thee Rickster ™]

Or affects them financially regardless of ownership.

 

Which is why, and Dave can Attest to it, I sometimes

have make it known.

[gcode]

quote:

---

the ones that paid for Mastercam on their own dime.

---

that would be me

[[email protected]]

quote:

---

legacy 2D toolpaths were migrated to tree style in X4

---

That's the ones I meant. The general MCAM user didn't even know about a tree style dialogue until X4.....or didn't start bitchin about em until then

[Thee Rickster ™]

Kieth, you could possibly be correct there.

[Rocketmachinist]

I've been using Mastercam for just under 3 years now. I started out with X2 at my community college. As far as X4 is concerned, I like the tree layout. I like how they added the visuals to change when you click on a new field. It just makes my life a little easier. I can see how people that have used the program since V9 or before might not like change, it takes relearning. But, All the programs that I have used so far have a tree to them from Mastercam, to Surfcam, and even Solidworks they all seem to have a tree in one form or another. So it just seems natural to have a tree. I like it. That's just what I think.

[Dave.L]

It's not the tree concept that's the problem, it's the way it's designed - that's the problem.

 

This forum probably has 100 posts from different users outlining in detail the issues they have, all very valid issues.

 

The tree in SW does not compare at all. The operations manger tree in MC does not compare at all, that's an example of a good design.

[[email protected]]

quote:

---

This forum probably has 100 posts from different users

---

Out of those 100, how many were identical on how they liked it layed out??

That's why there's Vanilla & Chocolate. Some like, some dont

 

oh yeah, thanks Rickster for the vote of confidence