Fix the current software before creating new?

[Izzzy]

Why is it that CNC Software doesn’t seem to care about fixing and or improving the current software? Instead they focus there attention on developing new features, toolpaths and whatnots full of bugs and problems.

[Guest]

2 1/2 years and THIS is your first post?

 

I think this qualifies as trolling to the n'th degree.

[Reko]

Can you be a little more specific?

 

Maybe if you ask a question, someone can help you.

[Tyler Robertson]

2 1/2 years and THIS is your first post?

 

I think this qualifies as trolling to the n'th degree.

 

or reading the forum, not contributing..

[Izzzy]

For example solid, chaining it lacks functionality. Try to chain the outside of a block that has a chamfer around it. It’s a pain

[Izzzy]

"or reading the forum, not contributing"

 

Yes, I must admit.

[Tyler Robertson]

Okay - so if a new version of Mastercam comes out that has better solid chaining... that's a problem? because from what you said up top it sounds like you don't want them to come up with new features (ie: improved solid chaining)

[Izzzy]

You have to frequently regenerate dirty machining operations in Mastercam. Why do machining operations go dirty just from opening a Machining Parameters dialog box even if you construct no changes?

[Izzzy]

Solid chaining is still the same as when it first came out.

[Tyler Robertson]

You have to frequently regenerate dirty machining operations in Mastercam. Why do machining operations go dirty just from opening a Machining Parameters dialog box even if you construct no changes?

 

they do? if that's the case then don't regenerate them ... you can send in a bug report [email protected]

[Roger Peterson]

Scott, the best thing we can do is send files in to Mastercam than lay out exactly why improvements are needed. Send me a file and we can get lay out exactly why and what needs changing and get it logged as an enhancement request. The more clearly laid out examples of why improvements are needed the better.

 

 

 

Regards,

[Izzzy]

Roger, I’ve sent in files lots of them. Do you remember my file merge problem? I’m still waiting for a solution.

[Izzzy]

"Okay - so if a new version of Mastercam comes out that has better solid chaining... that's a problem? because from what you said up top it sounds like you don't want them to come up with new features (ie: improved solid chaining)"

 

Is this sarcasm? You are an administrator?

[chris m]

OK, enough bullsh!t; how about decent multi-spindle, multi-turret mill / turn functionality? We've only been waiting for that for about [10] years. Get off CNC Software's jock for a minute and think about the fact that they actually are more in love with putting out new releases than fixing the things that are broken or developing powerful new functionality. I know that you straight milling guys have gotten quite a bit out of the last few years, but the rest of the world has not. Kiss Mastercam's a$$ at home and keep it real here, please.

 

C

[Tyler Robertson]

"Okay - so if a new version of Mastercam comes out that has better solid chaining... that's a problem? because from what you said up top it sounds like you don't want them to come up with new features (ie: improved solid chaining)"

 

Is this sarcasm? You are an administrator?

 

No sorry I was being serious - I didn't know what your problem was exactly because you were saying 'don't release new features' but then said 'solid chaining lacks functionality'. Improving existing features is something that happens in updated versions - but you're right, doesn't happen on a current version.

[PeterM]

You know, Chris has a point. I know of at least one bug that has been around since v8. BTW a bug that I long ago communicated to cnc software, now how long has that been? Perhaps I am being too picky, but I think of an enhancement that doesn't function correctly as just another PIA.

[Roger Peterson]

Scott, I'll check into the file merge error "no matching opfile" if I remember right, that error is usually tied to using an an updated config file in X5. Have you tried a default config file?

 

As for any other issue, all we can do is show them what and why it needs changing, regardless how many times it has or hasn't been sent in.

 

 

regards,

[mayday]

how about decent multi-spindle, multi-turret mill / turn functionality

 

I have to +1 that. As a beta tester and everyday 5 axis mill/turn programmer, I and others have been asking for this for quite some time.

:crickets:

[Izzzy]

"No sorry I was being serious - I didn't know what your problem was exactly because you were saying 'don't release new features' but then said 'solid chaining lacks functionality'. Improving existing features is something that happens in updated versions - but you're right, doesn't happen on a current version."

 

 

 

 

 

Everyone knows what I’m talking about. Stop pretending you don’t understand. FIX THE SH*T.

[Roger Peterson]

nobody's pretending anything. I send things in all the time, and I try to lay out exactly what I'm looking for and why. Many things get fixed, enhanced, improved, or whatever else you want to call it every version. I do know what you are talking about when it comes to solid chaining a chamfer, it's simply not possible based on the edge you select. it usually requires picking a different edge and using stock to leave or simply using wireframe geometry. But just because I know what you are talking about doesn't mean the developers do, we need to get examples to mastercam for anything to change, period.

[ReDEyZZ]

Is buying Gibbs an option? I haven't seen a bug yet in over a year of using it. Jes sayin.

[Izzzy]

That wasn’t directed at you Roger.

[#Rekd™]

I have to say that not fixing the existing bugs before releasing a new version is a problem IMHO. If it is an enhancement or an improvement it should be in a future or new release IMHO.

[Izzzy]

All I’m trying to say is fix the bugs first. Everything else should come second.

[Guest]

All I’m trying to say is fix the bugs first. Everything else should come second.

 

Seems to me you could have said that plainly in your first post and avoided the rest of this debacle.

 

Juss' sayin'