Re: Re: virtual hand jive

Annie,

Well said!

But the designs thrown out on the list so far are simple encoders. No
force feedback. And the "big boys" jog handwheel(s) don't have it
(generally) either. Actually, I've never seen one that did, but I'm
not going to say never will... :-)

So there does seem to be a belief that rotation will give better
feedback than pushing buttons. What I've been saying is that I
believe this is a product of conditioning. True, for those so
conditioned. But NOT for those who are new to machining. And I
brought up the "gas pedal" analogy to show that people can use a
pressure to accel/decel large pieces of iron :-)

Ballendo

>> I want Rotation, NOT pressure. I
>> NEED rotation; pressure is just so... Pushy!
>>

>Imagine trying to get a repeatable reading from a micrometer
>by tightening the barrel with a motor run with switches!

Not too tough. Just put the "tighten" motor on the ratchet. :-) And
the "loosen" motor on the thimble.

>So, as somebody who does UI design for a living, I don't find
>it at all suprising to hear a call for retaining the force
>feedback.
>Indeed, I imagine that it's not the rotation people need, it's the
>feedback. Many people would probably be perfectly happy with a force
>feedback joystick.

I think you're right. Where would we derive this force feedback? Will
it make better parts? Enough to be worth the development cost?
And added product cost? If I'm being operated on "by wire", I want
the doctor to have the BEST force feedback possible. And I'll surely
pay for it. But to manually machine parts??? Interesting full circle
we've traversed, IMO.