Is Alibre the next best thing to Solidworks?

[ger21]

but there are too many customer who dont want internet connection with their vmc.. or lathe..

It doesn't matter what you want when it's the only thing available. All the major players will be cloud based in ~5 years or so.

[datac]

>>> Yeah, those are "HTTPS" connections, which are a secure "tunnel" just between you and the server... There is no proprietary/security "Not Professional" issue there..... Worldwide Banking is done there......

Ahem.... Just how many "compromises" have been made this year already of all sorts of "secure" environments ?

>>>If the concern is the security of your data on the server, it will be far more secure on the servers setup to do it than leaving the security to all the Toms, Dicks and Harry's that have notoriously in the past been responsible for their own computers..... Pretty sure their Security IT team will be "better than yours"..........

I beg to disagree as I currently control data security for a mail order company. But "Security" was not my first concern... it is WHO is watching potential proprietary data you really have no control over other than they say subcribe and "trust us". The fact is ALL SORTS OF PEOPLE have access to data in every host environment. And YOU have no clue who they are. Any real company should not trust an unowned, not personally managed "cloud" IMO.

Perhaps though you could get hilary to fall for it...... Har !

>>> The only thing that concerns me is the lack of an "offline client", which a lot of the Cloud systems supply. I don't want to be locked out of my work if I have no internet...

What good is ANY client if THEIR servers are wacked ? Sure is easier to store and manage your own data if you ask me. Easy enough to put into play something like a Synology NAS for reliable storage rather than relying on some doofus on the far end.

BTW, what GUARANTY is offered for loss of your data ? What assurances exist for them to remain in business or properly transfer if sold (and everything sells in that world these days)?

Seriously, this is exactly the thing we will read about down the road, as users find out it was not exactly as safe, as secure, or as wonderful as first thought. Need I list the breaches of other popular cloud based services over the last few years ? Again, I am talking about PROPRIETARY data and development. Its NOT safe on someone elses cloud. Can't be. All it takes is one rouge employee and data can be compromised.

[datac]

It doesn't matter what you want when it's the only thing available. All the major players will be cloud based in ~5 years or so.

Sources ? Any real commentary on the security of proprietary designs ?

If that happens, it wouldn't last very long with the large players because they simply could not trust that someone is not watching what they are developing and perhaps even selling concepts to the high bidder before the originator could even build the prototype. Illegal sure..... But what does that matter these days ? This crap is happening now. Pretty obvious that governments are already watching everything they can watch.

Cloud based CAD will not get much past the hobby market other than newbie managers that really have no clue what "Cloud" really means...... its just DUMB. It's right up there with a company sending proprietary information to a 3rd party "cloud" PDF creator in order to have it forwarded because they think they are saving money by not having their own fax machine.

[BurrMan]

>>> Yeah, those are "HTTPS" connections, which are a secure "tunnel" just between you and the server... There is no proprietary/security "Not Professional" issue there..... Worldwide Banking is done there......

Ahem.... Just how many "compromises" have been made this year already of all sorts of "secure" environments ?

Your entire post about how unsecure it all is is answered by answering this one single question in it.....

"Far less than personal computer environment losses".........

Just to be sure. Your contention is how unsafe and unsecure your proprietary data would be. You are operating on a myth that ANYTHING on a computer is secure. If one wants in, they are in... Its just that simple....

If you contend that you have an "entire organization" that has never been hooked up in one way or another to the internet or some external source, then I wonder about the honesty in that post....

Also, the rogue employee works for you too, you know....

Calling those responsible for security in any of the breaches you may site over a few years "a doofus" is pretty brash on your part.... Maybe you have never been in a real security environment?

Perhaps though you could get hilary to fall for it...... Har !

But what your suggesting is "be more like Hillary!" as opposed to having experts handle it... Pretty sure security will be a high priority because their "software" they are banking millions of dollars on is running on that system too....

[ger21]

Cloud based CAD will not get much past the hobby market other than newbie managers that really have no clue what "Cloud" really means......

I think it will be the opposite, with the hobby market the last to move to the cloud. The big companies are the ones with the resources and clout to do it.

Look at AutoDesk. All their software is moving to subscription based next year, and cloud based Fusion 360 is being touted as the next big thing. On the Fusion forums, I've seen your security concerns brought up several times, but AutoDesk doesn't seem to think it's an issue.

Look at most new versions of Windows. When released, everyone complains about them, but sooner or later, everyone uses them.

[RCaffin]

> I think it will be the opposite, with the hobby market the last to move to the cloud.
Especially when you realise that many, many home shop or hobby machines are OFF the net. Mine is, and it's staying OFF.

We are talking very serious real-time systems here with CNC (even with a Smooth Stepper), and Windows is NOT a real-time OS. You can screw up a Windows-Mach3-SS system just by working the Mach3 graphics hard. If you want to be able to run CAD on the same system (I do), then you have to be very careful. Hook up to the net and you have all sorts of other SW there, interfering: virus scanner, firewall, root-kit blocker, ping handler ... web browser ...

> Look at AutoDesk. All their software is moving to subscription based next year, and cloud based Fusion 360 is being touted as the next big thing.
Oh yes - it's being touted that way - but will the market really buy it? Some will of course - after all some also bought W-Vista, W7, W8, but many stayed with WXP. We may find in a few years that the next big thing will be hosting your own CAD/CAM SW on your own machines. I can just see it...

Me, I am looking quite seriously at moving our whole net to Linux. At least I can read & understand the config files there!

Cheers
Rogr

[datac]

>>> You can screw up a Windows-Mach3-SS system just by working the Mach3 graphics hard.

This is exactly why I brag up Flashcut constantly. Since 1996, they already knew how to properly create a CNC control for windows. No special configs, no special anything. easy install, easy COMPLETE removal.

>>> If you want to be able to run CAD on the same system (I do), then you have to be very careful. Hook up to the net and you have all sorts of other SW there, interfering: virus scanner, firewall, root-kit blocker, ping handler ... web browser ...

Not with a well designed control !

>>> We may find in a few years that the next big thing will be hosting your own CAD/CAM SW on your own machines. I can just see it...

You can see it NOW ! Flashcut has worked for the last year or so integrating a full 3d capable cad program (and it reminds me a lot of MOi3D), that can be handled in the traditional CAM sense, or in some cases, go directly to Control without any user cam manipulation.

Indeed, this "cloud" concept is a dream for fools, or hobby projects the users could care less about if someone else gets the files. In a world where nothing is secure or not being "watched" or "monitored", the ONLY security is within your own walls, on your own servers where YOU control access, not some unknown clown at a webhost who is contracting space with another set of clods hundreds or thousands of miles away. We will see if the proprietary development departments of GE, GM, Apple, Etc. blindly put all their developments in someone elses trust.

>>> Me, I am looking quite seriously at moving our whole net to Linux. At least I can read & understand the config files there!

THAT would be most excellent. Sadly, we just do not have quite enough QUALITY options in CAM, CAD or Control. Otherwise, I would be all over it as well.

[RCaffin]

Hi Chris

Yes, I know you like Flashcut, but its scope or usefulness in the real world is limited. For a cold start, yes, it's an option.

For someone who has a more generic existing system - say two PP-input BoBs driving the rest of the system, Flashcut does not seem to be a compatible upgrade. You would have to replace far too much. This means there is no simple upgrade path from a typical Mach3 system to Flashcut, unless you spend thousands of dollars. Of course, if they are not chasing that huge upgrade market, then no problem.

In addition, Flashcut shoot themselves in the foot a bit by claiming on their FAQ page
'How can you do real time control in Windows?
By design, Windows is a multitasking operating system that constantly services multiple programs and peripherals in time slices on the millisecond level. Real time motion controllers like FlashCut CNC, however, require a dedicated clock that is accurate on the microsecond level. Windows is therefore not capable of outputting the timing necessary for real-time motion control by itself.'
Well, we all know that is just not true: Mach3 can do the real-time control of a CNC machine over the PP. Thousands of customers around the world do just that. Yes, I know it is not easy, but the fact remains, it works. Making that statement today (as opposed to 10 years ago) damages their credibility. And NO, I am not linked in any way (financially or emotionally) to Artsoft or Mach.

Now, if Flashcut were to produce an Ethernet version of their controller which could drive a couple of standard BoBs, then I imagine they might get an awful lot of retrofit sales. But they would need to do that before Mach4 is fully released and debugged. Um - not sure how long the debug part will take, so they might have some time!

Linux CAD/CAM - I think it may be closer than you allow. But time will tell.

Cheers
Roger

[BurrMan]

By design, Windows is a multitasking operating system that constantly services multiple programs and peripherals in time slices on the millisecond level. Real time motion controllers like FlashCut CNC, however, require a dedicated clock that is accurate on the microsecond level. Windows is therefore not capable of outputting the timing necessary for real-time motion control by itself.]

Incorrect.

'How can you do real time control in Windows?

By setting the priority on your process to "realtime" and the affinity of every cpu core to that app, windows will dedicate the entire machine and everything about it to that process.... The computer itself will not work until you eliminate that process by ending it.

All the jab jab jab about "windows versions" is from someone who has issues with windows because they don't set it up correctly and run it well.

All the jab jab jab about cloud security and their propriety is also from the uninformed.

All the others reading this thread have to read it with a grain of salt.

[datac]

Yes, I know you like Flashcut, but its scope or usefulness in the real world is limited.

.....Late reply to a friendly discussion. No need for anyone to get their undies "fluffed".

I have no idea what is "limited" about it, nor how its "usefulness" is limited...... What is "the scope" of 99% of Mach users, or 99% of LinuxCNC users.... Kflop, Etc ? The majority in this forum simply runs a 3-5 axis machine. It does everything regards controlling a machines motion, that any of the rest do but with far less required knowledge, especially from a newbie.

.....For someone who has a more generic existing system - say two PP-input BoBs driving the rest of the system, Flashcut does not seem to be a compatible upgrade. You would have to replace far too much.

.....But the majority... heck none of the BoB's I'm aware of dont really drive anything. The control does. A BoB simply gives a builder the terminals to connect the control to, in between the motor drivers. Yes, SOME BoB's add "features".... but frankly, those "features" already exist in Flashcuts outputs. No NEED for ANY BoB at all.... Run the FC output directly into the motor drivers if you want.... and limits and I/O directly to their respective needs. Done. Easy. You can use a bob though if you like... I used the existing BoB on my Novakon mill (one of the PC4CNC models) and just ran FC into the Bobs DB25 just so I did not have to rewire everything.

This means there is no simple upgrade path from a typical Mach3 system to Flashcut, unless you spend thousands of dollars. Of course, if they are not chasing that huge upgrade market, then no problem.

.....Not "Thousands" actually.... $1200ish if you use your existing Bob(s) and Motor Drivers. Sure... lots more than $150, but there is no monkey business during operation, I'll tell you that much. Funny thing is I believe they do grab some of the upgrade market,... I think they are selected to replace controls like those from large platform Multicam or Thermwood machines. Having worked with MultiCam machines, I know for a fact that the control they use is way, way overpriced compared to the type of controls we in these forums are familiar with. And, it would appear that the hobby "retro-fit" market is not their main focus because they do not inject themselves here at all to my knowledge.... but at least they are FRIENDLY to those who do want to retrofit !

In addition, Flashcut shoot themselves in the foot a bit by claiming on their FAQ page: [I]'How can you do real time control in Windows?........

.....Ha! I bet that statement is still lingering from about 1996. Back when forum users continuously claimed you could not make a CNC control that worked in windows because windows was not real time. They did not care to think about the fact that FC did not use windows, only to complain about it. Regards the absolute argument over "Real Time", I find that an argument never to be concluded in any forum..... I've always asked why it matters so much to users.... Do people think that you press the feedhold or Estop in Flashcut and it takes a few minutes to actually stop ? I've heard that can be the case in some others, but certainly not FC. Real time is for ?? Perhaps 1% in the forums we visit have anything that remotely comes close to needing such a thing.

Now, if Flashcut were to produce an Ethernet version of their controller which could drive a couple of standard BoBs, then I imagine they might get an awful lot of retrofit sales.

.....Again, there is nothing to "retrofit" and nothing one needs "ethernet" for. Flashcut simply HAS a DB25 connector on the back of the box. Make a DB25 to DB25 crossover cable requirement for requirement, and plug it into your existing Bob. If your Bob has "Charge Pump" turned on, turn it off... its more unecessary monkey business. Thats all I did for my Novakon conversion... Yes, it costed $1200ish.... but it no longer gives me ANY grief. And lucky for me, it now matches all my other machines.

......But like Ger21 says, its really the PRICE POINT. Once about a time, there was..... Old Dos controls.... Mach.... and Flashcut. Cheap, cheap, and pricey. Now we do have newcomers to that whole once hated (and boy, was it hated) "black box" control market, and some of those are sitting right in between mach and FC price wise. With Flashcut adding really legitimate CAD and CAM to the control (and it NOT being cloud based), it still goes a step farther than the competition. I'm not sure how they calculated the ability to create and support all of that wrapped into one, but they did.


But they would need to do that before Mach4 is fully released and debugged.

.....Oh... is that still happening ? Lol !

Linux CAD/CAM - I think it may be closer than you allow. But time will tell.

I'm waiting for more people like the Flashcuts and Edings to realize that LINUX is the better option to start with. Everything Windows has done in the last few years just plain ole stinks. People who want to love it can.... I dont care.

And one last time, Trusting PROPRIETARY drawings, close held future patents, Floor plan drawings for secure buildings etc. on ANY cloud based service that you do not PERSONALLY OWN and have complete and utter control of is as ignorant as perhaps, installing and using a "personal email server" for secret/official government communication in a politicians personal residence. In this modern world, I'm SURE it will sound just wonderful to plenty of people.... just not for me.

[RCaffin]

Hi Chris

OK, educate me please. Yes, I do mean it.

My Mach3/ESS system is set up with two fairly standard BoBs, all nicely wired up to the rest of the gear. The ESS drives two PP-style ribbon cables into those BoBs. I would really prefer that I did not have to alter all the wiring loom.

Can I unplug the two ribbon cables from the ESS and plug them into a FC interface box, and with the appropriate setting of pins and ports in the FC SW, have my CNC run?

Obviously, if the answer is yes, then FC can provide a 'compatible upgrade' path. That would be interesting.

Incidental question: what is the latest release of FC and when was it released?

Cheers
Roger

[datac]

.....My Mach3/ESS system is set up with two fairly standard BoBs, all nicely wired up to the rest of the gear. The ESS drives two PP-style ribbon cables into those BoBs. I would really prefer that I did not have to alter all the wiring loom. Can I unplug the two ribbon cables from the ESS and plug them into a FC interface box, and with the appropriate setting of pins and ports in the FC SW, have my CNC run?

Essentially Yes. Lets look at what you currently have: Mach itself communicates with the smooth stepper device. Mach dictates step pulse and direction requirements to the SS, and the SS creates and issues them to your motor drivers, albeit a fancy connection board in between. This method of using Mach was created for what reason exactly ? A few reasons perhaps... things like the future demise of Parallel ports, but MOSTLY for performance reasons, taking some or all of the step calculating away from the windows PC and assigning it to the SS board.

That is exactly what Flashcut has been doing since they began. Back then it was only done via Serial port (COM) communication with their signal generator because USB was still a dream. Then we had heard about the USB naysayers when some people had troubles using it for communication which led those to ethernet. Ethernet was nothing new for motion control as it had already been used in general motion control for years prior.
I'm also reminded of the days when CNC forum members screamed about not having any need for a "black box" at all, given their new friend Mach Cnc, which did not need one and never would.... or so many proclaimed. (nothing to be assumed as against Art Fenerty, an obviously BRILLIANT man). Actually, Mach wasn't the first "windows" operable control for our markets, that would have been IndexerLPT with its Windows interfaces. In any event, in recent years, we have seen this "amazing trend" towards the once frightful black box (or card based options) because it does happen to be one of the only sure ways to use a PC for CNC, given the challenges developers really have keeping up with both hardware and software advancements.
The neat thing about a "black box" development, is they can decide at dev time which aspects of a control can be handled by which side of the equation... the PC, or the box and corresponding electronics. If you get that part correct, you have a GREAT control !
Now there are those who have told me in this forum, that PC advancement as such really does not matter so much, because any machine put together with aging components could continue to run forever.... no requirements to do anything but use it..... unfortunately that means the WAY IT IS. I guess if you really dont mind not having any of the many, MANY new features that have been added to hobby CNC over the years, then by all means, people can wrestle to keep their old limited controls running. Myself, I kind of like the "teach" functionalities... the "reverse run" options.... the adjustments of things like accelerations midfile..... And, with Flashcut, never stranded by the never ending changes to Windows OS's.
Back to your current setup, we did not address the BoB. The BoB itself is pretty much an "industry" because of Mach. It was first when people had trouble making things work via simple connections with Mach ala parallel port, 3rd parties started to make circuitry to go between the troublesome parallel port and the motor drivers. The most basic aspect was simply it gave people easily understood marked TERMINALS to run their wires to, but with the less than stellar LPT port performance of all the variables in PC's, also helped for other various reasons..... be it providing higher voltages for the TTL driver requirements and or adding "pull up" resistors to make I/O work correctly. I'm sure some even did what they could to make unwanted noise less of an issue.
So, as forums and whizbang "marketing" took over, all people coming into this market suddenly thought a BoB was an "integral part" of making a CNC actually move and operate. Taadaa ! Instant industry. Great for them !
But, before Bob's, people using LinuxCNC were not requiring BoB's.... People with Indexer did not need a BoB, nor did we need them for any of the DOS controls from TurboCNC to AhHa!
The bottom line.... Flashcut can be wired DIRECTLY to the motor drivers inputs. All input and output lines can also be wired DIRECTLY to the end of a limit switch or SSR. Nothing is required between them, making them things.. well, just another "thing" that better keep working if you want to machine stuff. Most of my machines have a simple European type screw terminal barrier anywhere I need to make connections between harnesses, making things super simple. Radio shack has them for like... $2 ish. Sure beats the price of a Bob!
On the flip side however, nothing stops you from running thru an existing BoB, just like I did with the Novakon standing here. It was all in place and did not want, nor need to rewire anything. I believe I have the C11? from PC4CNC. It has everything I needed right there in that DB25 input, so I just made a proper cable wired for what I needed to match. You can unplug your existing ribbon cables and put them in a drawer... then with new ribbon ends or short ribbon cables, interface into them with the same euro barrier and your on your way.
Now, in the event that not ALL of your controls wires go to the same place, I'll point out that Flashcut does have EVERYTHING for 5 axis motion, 8 inputs and 8 outputs in the DB25. But they also have separate Molex Minifit Jr. plugs paralleled on the back panel. This is helpful when you perhaps want a DB25 cable to just run to a drivers cabinet, but your inputs and outputs need to go somewhere else. Just makes it easier to fit the current need. No reason to jump into a cabinet and back out of it just because you have to run in with the DB25.
Copious amounts of additional I/O is handled by daughterboards that plug into the main black box board, and all of that I/O is handled via MiniFit Jr's which also protrude out the back of the box.
So, "compatible" upgrades could not be easier.
Finally, I have always heard people gripe about the intitial cost, with it often being compared to $150. But truthfully, by the time a lot of fellows get their machine to actually run with some predictability, the bought the $150 program, in your case, bought 2 BoB's (I think C11'a are $130 ea.), and they bought into smoothstepper for the faster pulse rates and port fixes... another $130. More wires, more time, more connections and now THREE part time "hobby" companies products to rely on. LOTS of them got STIFFED from grandios claims and new hardware that absolutely failed to work. That is Sad.

.....Incidental question: what is the latest release of FC and when was it released?
I believe they are still on version 4 for contact cutting machines. It has been out for some time now... over a year for sure, but they do have a new version. From what I gathered at IMTS last fall, they do sell version 5 to everyone who is buying it for plasma use... for now. I believe it will interface and work with the older hardware at least at verson 4 levels, but only a newer black box or perhaps chip upgrade will take you into any new motion functionality. The way I understood it, was that they felt that they could make the fastest progress possible with a new version by just focusing on Plasma to start with given that all the basics regarding integraded Cad/Cam could be established to work for 2.5D, then grow from there. I often thought that them taking on all new hardware, all new software with everything they already offered, then adding torch height control, Full blown Cad and also Cam was an astronomical challenge to take on. Yet, there it was, running at IMTS for all to see !
I HAVE been able to visit them at their business location in Chicago when I was in the area... They have a great product, great business model and have a really great team of people of the ones I got to meet. The BIGGEST thing though is that they have a product that does what you expect it to and certainly has not been behind the curve for functionality. It is so easy to learn, so easy to use, has excellent documentation and I rather like having it on every machine I have.

Probably should yield the Alibre forum back to Alibre. I've fallen prey to both the expert copy with Cam, and a personal copy. Not thrilled... way harder to use for what I do than other programs, never use it anymore at this point,..... wont ever use it if it REQUIRES ME to always have a live internet connection to use it.

[RCaffin]

Hi Chris

OK, you have given me a lot to think about.

However, I am puzzled about something you wrote:
'EVERYTHING for 5 axis motion, 8 inputs and 8 outputs in the DB25.'
For 5 axes I would expect 10 pins (Step&Dir), and for 8 inputs and 8 outputs I would need 16 pins. That's a total of 26 pins, and that's without any Gnd pins. You can't get that much out of a single DB25 connector.
Um????
Or do they use two of them?

BoBs - well, yes and no. The bit about BioBs is that they provide optical isolation between the world of microprocessor control and kW/RF motor drivers. The ESS does not include optos; if the FC box does then you don't need externasl BoBs as well.

> I believe they are still on version 4 for contact cutting machines. It has been out for some time now... over a year for sure,
> but they do have a new version.
Ah, interesting. Someone claimed somewhere that FC development had ceased in the 90s, but I gather that is not so then?

I am being eductated.

Cheers
Roger

[mcphill]

I have called Flashcut a couple times, and they are VERY helpful and more than happy to discuss every detail with me. This is while I am still in the "discovery" mode (have not sent them a penny yet). I WILL use their control on my new 5 axis servo build, though, no question about it... Well, actually a few questions, which is how long until I actually get started, and how long before I need to even worry about a control to make it move... Neither of those are waiting for input from Flashcut, though!

[datac]

......However, I am puzzled about something you wrote: 'EVERYTHING for 5 axis motion, 8 inputs and 8 outputs in the DB25.'
For 5 axes I would expect 10 pins (Step&Dir), and for 8 inputs and 8 outputs I would need 16 pins. You can't get that much out of a single DB25 connector.

MY error. I was just thinking about how the base version has 8 total outputs..... But, FOUR of the outputs are in both plugs: DB25 and Minifit-Jr. The Other 4 outputs are available only in the minifit jr plugs. I've wired machines mulitple ways over the years... on some, I just do all the step/dir via the DB 25 and all the I/O on 2 separate cables.

......BoBs - well, yes and no. The bit about BioBs is that they provide optical isolation between the world of microprocessor control and kW/RF motor drivers. The ESS does not include optos; if the FC box does then you don't need externasl BoBs as well.

Optical isolation IS included inside Flashcut's Signal Generator. Additionally, the Signal Generator also has in internal +5volt source specifically for that, BUT, it is made such that if you'd rather use 5 volts from an external source for the isolation, you can. I've been told that some will do so if they have noise issues, but honestly, I've done a lot of retrofits with FC over the years just using the built in without issue. All those problems people seem to have with other stuff just boggle my mind. Not that it can't happen, but I have not had any trouble. I've built TWO plasma machines as well... no noise issues there either.

.....Ah, interesting. Someone claimed somewhere that FC development had ceased in the 90s, but I gather that is not so then?

Nope.... Perhaps people were so focused on the $150 control, the facts just got lost in the shuffle ! I'm very sure that the development of V5 with the integrated Cad and Cam will make it into contact machining soon. I got to play with it at IMTS and it was already good to go for 2.5d, but it sounded like they did not want to drop it into the market without full 3d capability. I just think that is a truly shocking amount of development to come up with. Perhaps they bought into or bought out some other programs to make this happen ? Who knows.

With everyone else only having "conversational" helpers, Flashcut kind of leads the pack again ! I wonder what the new price will be though ?? :-o

Too bad that Mach has been so slow in coming up with reliable new stuff for their existing customer base. That's been a long wait......

[datac]

I have called Flashcut a couple times, and they are VERY helpful and more than happy to discuss every detail with me.

I know. Its one of the reasons I like to brag up their control. Their receptionist (Anne) has been there a long time so even she knows the product inside and out !

[RCaffin]

Hum...
Now what we need is an impartial but informed comparison of FC with CNCdrive/UC. That would be interesting!
(Both are alternatives to Mach.)

Cheers
Roger

[datac]

Hum...
Now what we need is an impartial but informed comparison of FC with CNCdrive/UC. That would be interesting!
(Both are alternatives to Mach.)

Cheers
Roger

Well, we did get a report here from a mach user: http://www.cnczone.com/forums/uccnc-...-software.html
He did say uccnc "blows mach out of the water", which did not surprise me as I have used Mach here and there until I got annoyed with it.

And, we did see a nice report about edingCNC here, but the user never did use mach to tell us his comparison viewpoint:

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/vertic...262-forum.html

I tend to like the Eding GUI lots better than the UCCNC. UC seems to be modeled after Mach's messy interface.

[RCaffin]

Chris

I have been reading the FC manual. OK, it has IF-THEN-ELSE and other very nice things, but there are a couple of things I could not find. Could you enlighten me please?

M4: run spindle in reverse. It seems FC does NOT have this command? That would be BAD, because I use it!
FUP - OK, found that.
MIN & MAX: can be done with IF statement, but no shortcut?
Swap Axis: Mach allows you to swap two axes, such as Y and A. This can be very useful. Does FC?
Mixed servo and stepper: can FC handle this? I have servo on XYZ and stepper on A.

EdingCNC: only 4 axes, no room for 5th?

Yes, UCCNC does seem to be very similar to Mach3, doesn't it? One wonders whether the two companies might not have found it economic to combine their efforts?

Cheers
Roger

[BurrMan]

And one last time, Trusting PROPRIETARY drawings, close held future patents, Floor plan drawings for secure buildings etc. on ANY cloud based service that you do not PERSONALLY OWN and have complete and utter control of is as ignorant as perhaps, installing and using a "personal email server" for secret/official government communication in a politicians personal residence. In this modern world, I'm SURE it will sound just wonderful to plenty of people.... just not for me.

I like nice friendly discussions in forums, where information is traded. For instance, in this statement above, lets not spread any myth about the system that was being discussed.

The 2 systems you are referring too (apparently the Onshape cloud system and HILLARY CLINTON?) are 2 completely different scenarios, not in any remote way the same....

The reference to having "some rogue employee" on the other side steal your proprietary stuff (I guess that would be like a reference to Edward Snowden) Being somehow "LESS" secure than that happening to you at your shop is somewhat misguided I think. The odd's that you will get a disgruntled employee are far greater than some "MOLE" getting in their system and having the ability to remove (or even find) some proprietary information of yours.

If you would like to have an intelligent discussion about it, we can continue here, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion about it, and I don't have a horse in that race either... It's just the misinformation being spread in the last few posts, like the windows stuff, or the server comparisons to Hillary that I had addressed.

Anyway....