Re:Da big guys?
Posted by
ballendo@y...
on 2000-09-02 21:39:08 UTC
dk wrote:
(sponsored by the US air force, originally) to define and create the
Next-Generation Controller(NGC) for machine tools. Allen-Bradley (and
others) created a draft document to begin the spec, Referred to as
NCMS in EMC docs. This has been the guiding force for Will, Fred, and
Tom during the EMC development.
If this 10 minute install proves out, they just might need to be
nervous. <G>
In reality, since EMC is a US government project, ANYONE can use(and
modify) the code however he/she sees fit! Including GE.
Until EMC meets or exceeds Fanuc capability, they have nothing to
fear because they can use the "differentiation" claims Matt spoke of.
If or When EMC (all or part) goes beyond what they have internally,
they can co-opt it into their systems! If I were GE, I'd be lookin'at
the hexapod aspects of EMC pretty heavily.
This is why I think we should let EMC (and others writing controls)
know that we would like to use as standard a system as possible. Open
standards work. But they have to be reined-in and re-integrated from
time to time. (Is this still working? What can we do to make it
better?) C went to C++, HPGL went to HPGL/2, RS-274d is going to ???
Ballendo
(RS-274d is the G code spec, last revised in Feb. of 1979!!!)
>Matt,No, of course not!
>Maybe, but GE Fanuc would never do anything like that.
>They strive toward simplicity and compatibility.With ALL other FANUC systems,right?
>Wonder if EMC has gotten their attention?I am sure they are aware of EMC. EMC is an outgrowth of an attempt
>Wonder if it makes them nervous?
>dk
(sponsored by the US air force, originally) to define and create the
Next-Generation Controller(NGC) for machine tools. Allen-Bradley (and
others) created a draft document to begin the spec, Referred to as
NCMS in EMC docs. This has been the guiding force for Will, Fred, and
Tom during the EMC development.
If this 10 minute install proves out, they just might need to be
nervous. <G>
In reality, since EMC is a US government project, ANYONE can use(and
modify) the code however he/she sees fit! Including GE.
Until EMC meets or exceeds Fanuc capability, they have nothing to
fear because they can use the "differentiation" claims Matt spoke of.
If or When EMC (all or part) goes beyond what they have internally,
they can co-opt it into their systems! If I were GE, I'd be lookin'at
the hexapod aspects of EMC pretty heavily.
This is why I think we should let EMC (and others writing controls)
know that we would like to use as standard a system as possible. Open
standards work. But they have to be reined-in and re-integrated from
time to time. (Is this still working? What can we do to make it
better?) C went to C++, HPGL went to HPGL/2, RS-274d is going to ???
Ballendo
(RS-274d is the G code spec, last revised in Feb. of 1979!!!)