Re: Post Processor

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., Doug Harrison <prototype@c...> wrote:

> 8/14/02 6:06:42 PM, "stevenson_engineers" <machines@n...> wrote:
>
> >Normally they are user configuarble so you can get them to output
>the exact code needed.
> >
>
> Two notable exceptions to this are Mastercam and Surfcam.
>Beginning with Ver.5, Mastercam began omitting crucial
> information from their post documentation. They stopped shipping
>the post manual at Ver.6, though you could get it for
> asking. I did and found it a farse. With the release of Ver.7
>they were telling customers that the regional reps were now
> handling post development.

Doug,
I do agree with you on this. Although I mentioned the high end
programs it was only in passing as I'm sure that unless someone has
access to a works copy no one on this list is going to spend $15,000
on Mcam or similar, it is after all a hooby list.
Industry OTOH will glady spend 1K on a post to get a machine to run
correctly. 1K on some big mould jobs will quite easily pay for itself
on the one job alone.

John S.

>
> A few months ago the local Surfcam rep told me that post processor

development was a fee service. He was also boasting

> about the new universal post he had just developed, only $1000.

The post was universal in that he (and he alone) could

> configure it to nearly any machine in a matter of minutes - for

another thousand bucks.

>
> These programs can be effectively made obsolete when the developers

decide to stop supporting the version you purchase.

> Your option is to pay the annual support fee (one of my clients

pays $950) to assure automatic upgrades. The support fee

> does not include post development. And for some reason, new

versions need new posts. Imagine that.

>
> Doug