Re: My CAD CAM evaluations

>--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Askew, Jason" <jaskew@u...> wrote:
> Ok, that having been said: Concerning CAM, what are the:
>
> Must have features:
>

A post processor that outputs code that is exact for your machine.
This means NO editing in the gcode or on the machine.

The facility to group similar operations together so if you have say
five pockets you only need to select the first and the other four
follow on. Saves clutter on the screen.

The ability to see your part being machined and then to alter any
machining statergies without having to redo all the toolpaths.

>
> Nice to have features:

DXF import directly into the cam to save having to define toolpaths.

>
>
> Negative features to avoid:

Duplicating operations. Being asked information and then the program
not using it. Having to draw offsets. Split screens. Ambigious
commands. Searching for a word or command in help and not finding
anything.

>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: CL [mailto:datac@l...]
> >Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 1:12 PM
> >To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y...
> >Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] My CAD CAM evaluations
> >
> >
> >As I chase down the "demo" Path, I too find things that are not
> >necessarily the way I like. But, it is usually in one side or
> >the other,
> >Cad... or Cam.
> >
> > When plenty of companies are already making Cad programs that

people

> >enjoy using, and the pure number of them is boggling, why are not

more

> >developers looking specifically to development of GOOD Cam
> >only prorams
> >?? Why waste time trying to wedge in cad to a program at all ?
> >No doubt
> >there are many techniques that are protected or need to be

licensed in

> >the Cad arena, like the techniques first introduced by Ashlar.
> >Incorporating these, why, even researching it must cost a lot of

time

> >and money
> >
> >. It leads me to believe that a smart developer will start looking

to

> >keep those departments very separate. Think about it, Rhino users

are

> >overwhelmingly happy, AutoCad users are, well, put it this
> >way, they are
> >staying with AutoCad no matter what. Why bother sticking a
> >crippled Cad
> >program into a Cam program at all ?? Absolutely Great 2d programs

are

> >only $99... Excellent 3d stuff for under $999 That part has
> >been handled
> >and handled well.
> >
> >My comments for big business would be a little different... But,

for a

> >hobbiest / future business user, think really hard about

the "Issues"

> >involved of a "mixed" program, and just how "proprietary"

the "Cad"

> >portion of your drawings really are when thay are part of a

integrated

> >Cad/Cam program. Sure, on the surface, the combo has always looked
> >refreshing. But,
> >What about the programs future ?
> > Can you afford to upgrade every time they add a button ?
> > Can you continue to use really antiquated drawing techniqes while

the

> >rest of the Cad world makes "leaps and bounds" improvements ?
> >(because
> >in reality, this is how it is working)
> >When you Do come across a new program that does it all, how
> >difficult is
> >it for you to "Transfer" all of your current work into the new
> >system so
> >you do not have to balance the two programs for eternity?
> >Finally, Are you really willing to spend the extra money necessary

for

> >your integrated program to bring the Cad techniques up to date?
> >
> >Not to pick on anyone, but look at the few "Free" programs out

there.

> >(the ones with routine registrations)
> >
> >What are YOU going to do with a pile of drawings that are now
> >LOST in a
> >program you cannot even start when ( it's a question of when) they
> >decide to no longer issue licenses ??? Bye, Bye to all your
> >hard work.
> >Food for thought............
> >
> >It is pretty easy to understand this as I now look at it. IF
> >you have a
> >Cad program capable of saving really good .DWG's, (not saying you

need

> >AutoCad)AND a separate Cam program, you have an open door to
> >the cad/cam
> >future. You Pay for the latest in Cad, and you Pay for the latest

in

> >Cam. At least you are not throwing away one half of the equation
> >everytime you make a change.
> >
> >As I get older, I conclude to keep my drawings, my drawings. They

are

> >real easy to move to newer environments. They will folow me no

matter

> >what. I will not "lose" the ability to access them.
> >
> >Developers.....Develop JUST Cam, AND do a great job at it. Do
> >not bother
> >putting Cad into your program, It just drives development cost
> >up, which
> >affects my ability to buy your product.
> >
> > Besides, I've already got a really great Cad options and I like

the

> >ones I am using..
> >
> >Chris L
> >
> >
> >Addresses:
> >FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> >FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
> >Post Messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y...
> >
> >Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@y...
> >Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@y...
> >List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@y..., wanliker@a...
> >Moderator: jmelson@a... timg@k...
> >[Moderator]
> >URL to this group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
> >
> >OFF Topic POSTS: General Machining
> >If you wish to post on unlimited OT subjects goto:
> >aol://5863:126/rec.crafts.metalworking or go thru Google.com
> >to reach it if you have trouble.
> >http://www.metalworking.com/news_servers.html
> >
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jobshophomeshop I consider
> >this to be a sister site to the CCED group, as many of the
> >same members are there, for OT subjects, that are not allowed
> >on the CCED list.
> >
> >NOTICE: ALL POSTINGS TO THIS GROUP BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN BY
> >POSTING THEM. DON'T POST IF YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT THIS.....NO
> >EXCEPTIONS........
> >bill
> >List Mom
> >List Owner
> >
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >