Hi Jimmy, Thanks for taking the time. I appreciate it. "As for multiple fixtures/offsets check out transform toolpaths." Pretty much all CADCAM programs have a transform toolpath feature. While the transform function is nice, it's not anywhere near as powerful as being able to use geometry grouping, editing and creation tools on your toolpath. As has already been pointed out grouping and regrouping the toolpath elements is one aspect (a major one) which gives SmartCAM so much power over the toolpath. As I mentioned to Charles Davis we use multiple CADCAM systems here. I just recently upgraded to FeatureCAM 2007 from an older version and I also added the lathe module. One of the biggest improvements in FeatureCAM 2007 is a Graphical Toolpath Editor but it does not yet have the ability to group and ungroup elements. I have asked for this to be added to FeatureCAM because I feel it is so important.(FeatureCAM does not use the term elements like SmartCAM does, they use the term curves.) Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

Hi Charles, Thanks for the thoughtful response. Much appreciated. "Actually, there are a lot of problems, for lack of a better term, "hard linking" the geometry and toolpath." I think I understand what you're getting at with the term "hard linking" and you may very well be correct in this aspect. In FeatureCAM 2007, which we use, DELCAM just just added a Graphical Toolpath Editor. It does not have the power of SmartCAM for Graphical Toolpath Editing but I'm now working with my local DelCAM rep to try and get some changes made. I've known him for years and he is just awesome to work with. When you make changes to the toolpath using FeatueCAM 2007 it does not update if you make a geometry change... hence no "hard linking". I actually used the FeatureCAM 2007 Graphical Toolpath Editor today to edit a pocketing toolpath because the pocketing toolpath cuts much better and much faster than trying to use an island for containment. Our shop uses several CADCAM systems and I'm thinking of adding MasterCAM. Does a user get to choose their VAR? If so, I would like to talk with you about being our VAR and about purchasing your books. You can contact me on my cell phone at 602-446-8053 if you're interested. "The geometry with toolpath attributes is convenient, and it sounds good. It's been many years, but as I recall, it "didn't use as good as it sounded". It created more headaches than it solved." I loved it! Others that I know who still use SmartCAM love it. Since SmartCAM is not associative I fail to see any drawbacks or headaches. Perhaps I'm missing something here in what you are trying to get at. "I experienced Point Control first as an employee, then as a VAR. I was an employee during the fast growth phase, which is fun." Sounds like it would have been. "I experienced as a VAR just before they started crumbling; beating the horses, jacking with dealers, and undermining their VAR's. Not fun." I have no doubt your correct about that. One thing is for sure with CNC Software things have been and most likely will continue to be more stable. "Nice idea, I just think the two career tracks are so different, that there aren't a handfull of those people out there." Would be nice though wouldn't it. "What made Edwin a good programmer was his natural brilliance, creativity, lack of arrogance, desire to do good work, and his ability to really listen to what you were saying and deliver what you asked. You couldn't ask for more." Sounds like a really cool person to work with... especially if you had a good idea and wanted it implimented. Hope to talk with you soon, Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"I do find his skewed viewpoint rather amusing though." In the big unprotected world outside this forum you might find that others feel exactly the same way I do about SmartCAMs ability to give the user Total Graphical Control Over The Toolpath. Of course one would really need to have an open mind and want to read what others (many of whom have acquired different CADCAM systems since purchasing SmartCAM) have to say. Speaking of which... Here are some quotes from a poster to comp.cad.solidworks that were made today: "I don't disagree that SmartCAM is the ultimate program for total control." "We are not dumping SmartCAM, we are just adding a new way to make NC code. Just because we get a new CNC horizontal mill doesn't mean we will get ride of our Bridgeport knee mill." Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"The ONLY reason you have control in smartcam is because you are working directly with the element database." I tend to doubt that SmartCAMs approach is the only approach that can be used to gain Full Graphical Control Over The Toolpath. Even if it is I fail to see where MasterCAM can't be made to do this. You have one CAM author on the Rhino Forum who has created a CAM program that runs inside of Rhino that apparently does it. CNC Software employs some very bright people. I fail to see where MasterCAM can not be made to give the user Full Graphical Control Over The Toolpath. Heck, CNC Software completely rewrote MasterCAM from the ground up for MasterCAM X. Seems to me the task of giving the user Full Graphical Control over the toolpath pails by comparison. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"In the link you gave goto the search function type in smartcam you get 5 books (5 results) type in Mastercam you get 4 pages (37 results)." Full Graphical Control over the toolpath is the issue not how many people use SmartCAM or MasterCAM. Is there some reason you and others don't feel you can benefit from something good in another CADCAM package and ask for it in MasterCAM? Would it matter if there was only 1 seat of SmartCAM sold but it could do things that MasterCAM can't do? A good feature is a good feature despite all the extraneous issues that keep being brought into this thread. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"AND you have no problem pirating software." The copy I would borrow would be from a licensed SmartCAM user who has a legal version and paid for the dongle rather than having his key tied to a hard drive. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"So to answer his question you send him to a link where he can BUY a 1995 era book for close to $80" What I wrote is quite different than what you wrote above. Here is what I wrote *again*. "I have the book and could make you a copy of the example that the book uses showing just how easy and fast it is to Fully Graphically Edit The Toolpath in SmartCAM." Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"Graphical editing of the toolpath" is nice when the RARE occasion it is used." "Smarmy Dolts" example posted to Usenet clearly shows that in some shops (like ours) it's not "RARE"... it's pretty common place. Change happens very frequently in some machining job shops. A CADCAM system should always easily allow change whether its James Meyettes example of wanting to change a pocket routine to a contour, my example, or Smarmy Dolts example. Further since so many are focused on SmartCAM rather than Full Graphical Editing Control over the toolpath you might want to check out this thread in the MecSoft forum where I have asked for this feature in RhinoCAM and another RhinoCAM user has agreed with me. I do believe MecSoft is working on this feature right now because many people know how valuable Full Graphical Control over the toolpath is. http://www.mecsoft.com/cgi/teemz/teemz.cgi...cement_Requests Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"Just out of curiousity, no sarcasm involved, I'd like to know step by step how you would perform this in SmartCAM." Well... a book that shows just how easy this can be done in SmartCAM and takes you step by step thru doing it is: SmartCAM Production Milling and Turning http://www.techedu.com/SmartCAM_Books.asp I have the book and could make you a copy of the example that the book uses showing just how easy and fast it is to Fully Graphically Edit The Toolpath in SmartCAM. I'm sure I could also get a hold of a seat of SmartCAM and install it on my PC and post step by step screen shots for you. You could also check out comp.cad.solidworks where someone has upgraded from SmartCAM to DP Technology Esprit and admits that SmartCAM has no equal right now when it comes to control over the toolpath. I do agree that SmartCAM is dated in many ways but not in the area of Graphical Control Over The Toolpath. I feel the answer is getting the Control that SmartCAM gives you over the toolpath into MasterCAM. Note that both "Smarmy Dolts" example and my example are not about editing bad toolpath to make it good. Both examples are about handling the frequent changes that often occur in a machining job shop in a timely manner. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"Go check out the off-topic thread about you." Not thanks. I'm much more interested in someone showing how MasterCAM X² can Fully Graphically Edit The Toolpath like SmartCAM can... after all it's now been labeled as "StupidCAM" so being able to show how MasterCAM X² can Fully Graphically Edit The Toolpath like SmartCAM could do years ago should be no problem, right? I've posted on alt.machines.cnc for many years. It use to be a great group. I'd like to think alt.machines.cnc is making a come back of sorts now. alt.machines.cnc is a place where employees of CNC Software use to post before this forum was established and I have had several pleasant experiences there discussing how MasterCAM needed to be improved and what was coming in future versions. For me adressing what is apparently a short coming in MasterCAM X² is a lot more interesting than trying to gain the acceptance of a clique of which I have no interest in belonging to. It's also more interesting than engaging in worthless gossip so if you don't mind I'll pass and leave that to you and the others and concentrate on trying to get some answers to the questions I have asked. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"That all said, cost of MCX is not an issue where I work and that was the deciding factor." In what specific areas would UG Manufacturing help you if cost was not "the deciding factor"? Perhaps if this is spelled out more clearly than MasterCAM can improve faster in the areas you think it should. I would also like to know how you define "true solids". Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"CNC Software needs to remove the wall between solids and explicit geometry very soon." Can you be more specific in what you would like CNC Software to do in this regard? Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"The inability to break the link between CAD geomety and toolpath was the achilles heel of Smartcam, and killed the product once surface modeling and machining emerged. Smartcam was slow to accept the fact that you HAD to evenually de-couple the two." Why do geometry and the toolpath have to be "de-couple"?(ed) What is wrong with the approach of giving geometry a toolpath property as SmartCAM does it? I know of another "modern" product where you can convert back and forth between geometry and toolpath. This product runs inside of Rhino. It's a mold and die CAM product. "Their business policies towards their dealers got really goofy too. To sum it up, they "beat the horses" pretty bad, taking an arrogant and bullying approach to dealers, and blaming dealers when their sales were slow, rather than accepting that their architecture just wasn't keeping up anymore." You were there and I wasn't so I will take your word on this. Were you a SmartCAM VAR at the time or did you observe this as an employee of Point Control? "Some day someone should write a book about Point Control Company. It is a fascinating study in business." Why not you? "I'll always be grateful to Jerry Blakely for giving me a start in this business. I learned a heck of a lot working for Point Control in tech support. I also left a few good friends there who were brilliant programmers (Edwin Wise in particular)." What made Edwin Wise a "brilliant programmer"? Did he actually know how to machine something besides know how create software code for CADCAM programs? In my opinion if more CADCAM software programmers were actually machinists first we would have much better CADCAM products and I doubt I would be debating the need for full graphical editing control over the toolpath. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona [ 01-01-2007, 02:55 PM: Message edited by: jon_banquer ]

"Graphical toolpath editing, if thats what you call it, is cool but has more limitations than expectaions. Labour intensive and 'inefficient', period." 1. That's what I call it. 2. Are you suggesting that *less grahpical toolpath editing power* in MasterCAM X² vs. SmartCAM is some how acceptable? 3. Have you noticed that no one is this thread, including yourself, is able to show how MasterCAM X² can handle the "Smarmy Dolt" challenge posted to Usenet many years ago other than James Meyette who first said he would use Fanuc Macro B on a control that supported it and then stated that it could be done without Fanuc Macro B but failed to show how it could be done in MasterCAM X² without using Fanuc Macro B. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"I won't go into the MC -vs- SC debate. I do and have used Smartcam for 16 years. Many of the "it won't do this" are false but this isn't the place." The one thing you got right in your post. Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona