Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Posted by
hansw
on 2000-02-02 06:54:28 UTC
Fred,
Reply in text..
Fred Smith wrote:
As yet there has only been one argument for the EMC and Linux, and that is the attempt to eliminate expensive IO card for driving CNC systems.
I wonder how the government in all it's wisdom decided to put our tax money into writing EMC ?
Was there a committee on the subject ?
Did the CNC industry ask them ? I often wonder about stuff like that.
If indeed it is our tax money that is developing a "cheaper" solution, will the source code be public also ? If not what is the point ?
If it is public, where is the source for the Windows NT version ? I only found a demo exe, and that's not enough to check see if the code is upto it...
Maybe we have to wait the standard 30 years and then the archives will release it?
hansw
Reply in text..
Fred Smith wrote:
> From: "Fred Smith" <imserv@...>Exactly Correct... A program written for DOS , Windows 3.11, Windows 95(any release) Windows 98(any release) using the API serial port calls will run on NT also... So there would be not need to isolate anyone by insisting on NT.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: hansw
> To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@onelist.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 10:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO]EHP External Hardware Proposal
>
> From: hansw <hansw@...>
>
> It appears there is not real standard for G-Code, just bits and snippets everywhere, some committee has folded and appears not
> to have done a good job.. See previous postings about this...
>
> I guess I missed the previous Postings. Here is the standard:
>
> : ANSI/EIA 274-D-1980 (R1988): Interchangeable
> Variable Block Data Format for Positioning, Contouring, and
> Contouring/Positioning Numerically Controlled Machines.
>
> Here is an interesting link from a school with lots of nice pictures and words about CNC (they have a copy of the standard in their library):
>
> http://iesu5.ieem.ust.hk/dfaculty/ajay/courses/ieem215/lecs/CNC.html
>
> The problem with G-code is not the standard, but the fact that manufacturers of controllers have historically ignored it and taken advantage of the fact that there are some optional ranges of G-codes that were intentionally left up to their discretion. Most of them also add non-standard things into the "standard" words for "competitive" advantage.
>
>>"competitive" advantage H'mmm these companies never understand how short lived this kind of "advantage" can be...
>
> Also along this same thread, I personally reject ANY solution that requires Windows NT OS. The per seat license is outrageous and you will spend more on that OS than the savings in time between the Linux installation problems. Really, the only acceptable hobbyist solution is to utilize the goldmine of used wintel boxes that all were OEM licensed for either Dos or Win95/98. A typical 486 or pentium machine does not have enough hard drive to support Linux, but has plenty of gusto on the parallel or Rs232 port to do this kind of project. Best of all they can be purchased NEW for under $250, and used ones, while not quite a dime a dozen, are probably found for less than $100.00, WITH MONITOR! I think that is why Tom Kaluga's DRO project was so popular.
>
>>wintel boxes that all were OEM licensed for either Dos or Win95/98.... Should work fine.IMHO
As yet there has only been one argument for the EMC and Linux, and that is the attempt to eliminate expensive IO card for driving CNC systems.
I wonder how the government in all it's wisdom decided to put our tax money into writing EMC ?
Was there a committee on the subject ?
Did the CNC industry ask them ? I often wonder about stuff like that.
If indeed it is our tax money that is developing a "cheaper" solution, will the source code be public also ? If not what is the point ?
If it is public, where is the source for the Windows NT version ? I only found a demo exe, and that's not enough to check see if the code is upto it...
Maybe we have to wait the standard 30 years and then the archives will release it?
hansw
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Fred Smith
> IMService
>
> imserv@...
> Phone: 248-486-3600 or 800-386-1670
> Fax:248-486-3698
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
> GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds. Get rates as low as 0.0 percent
> Intro APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW.
> <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/NextcardCreative7SR ">Click Here</a>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the discussion of shop built systems in the above catagories.
> To Unsubscribe, read archives, change to or from digest.
> Go to: http://www.onelist.com/isregistered.cgi
> Log on, and you will go to Member Center, and you can make changes there.
> For the FAQ, go to http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> bill,
> List Manager
Discussion Thread
hansw
2000-02-01 10:30:39 UTC
Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Carlos Guillermo
2000-02-01 14:14:13 UTC
RE: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 15:35:19 UTC
Re: RE: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Bertho Boman
2000-02-01 17:32:38 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Bertho Boman
2000-02-01 17:41:37 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 18:11:46 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 18:37:44 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-01 20:02:29 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Brian Bartholomew
2000-02-01 18:55:01 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 19:44:35 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 19:50:57 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-01 21:25:39 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
William Scalione
2000-02-01 20:31:57 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-01 22:03:50 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Matt Shaver
2000-02-01 20:50:31 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 21:19:34 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 21:26:35 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 21:28:43 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 21:36:53 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-01 23:01:29 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-01 21:52:02 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
John Craddock
2000-02-01 22:33:51 UTC
Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Bertho Boman
2000-02-02 04:04:48 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Fred Smith
2000-02-02 06:30:22 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 06:54:28 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 06:57:11 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Bertho Boman
2000-02-02 07:46:39 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Fred Smith
2000-02-02 08:00:51 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 09:01:06 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 09:14:19 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Matt Shaver
2000-02-02 10:07:17 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Ian Wright
2000-02-02 03:10:40 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 10:29:48 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 10:35:17 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Fred Smith
2000-02-02 11:53:52 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Bertho Boman
2000-02-02 12:25:56 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 12:45:35 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 12:55:39 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Jon Elson
2000-02-02 13:11:35 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Harrison, Doug
2000-02-02 15:03:18 UTC
RE: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Fred Smith
2000-02-02 15:09:25 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Jon Elson
2000-02-02 16:03:20 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-02 17:53:39 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Matt Shaver
2000-02-02 16:43:28 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-02 17:31:56 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Ron Ginger
2000-02-02 18:28:07 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Harrison, Doug
2000-02-02 18:36:25 UTC
RE: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-02 20:15:16 UTC
Re: Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Bertho Boman
2000-02-02 19:36:59 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Jon Elson
2000-02-02 20:38:12 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Matt Shaver
2000-02-02 22:35:45 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
hansw
2000-02-03 06:58:17 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Carlos Guillermo
2000-02-03 07:53:59 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Fred Smith
2000-02-03 10:06:28 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Harrison, Doug
2000-02-03 10:33:39 UTC
RE: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Ian Wright
2000-02-03 09:24:49 UTC
Re: Re:EHP External Hardware Proposal
Fred Smith
2000-02-03 11:42:53 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
George Fouse
2000-02-03 11:49:45 UTC
Re: Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Ron Ginger
2000-02-03 14:20:28 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Steve Carlisle
2000-02-03 17:14:42 UTC
Re: Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Matt Shaver
2000-02-03 21:28:42 UTC
Re: Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Matt Shaver
2000-02-03 22:28:58 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
daniel_puryear
2012-03-10 11:37:32 UTC
Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Roland Jollivet
2012-03-11 00:10:58 UTC
[CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal
Jon Elson
2012-03-11 10:35:40 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal