Survey about EMC 2 ( Aimed at non users)

[lerman]

Emc2 is gpl licensed. They cannot just start charging money for it.
<<>>
thanks
sam

Of course we can. Consider this an offer to sell you a copy of EMC2 for $9.99, tax, license, and dealer prep excluded. Offer void where taxed, limited, or prohibited by law. :-)

Open source doesn't mean that I can't charge for the program. It just means that I have to make the source available for no extra charge. It also means that I might have a lot of competition.

Ken

[jmelson]

1. Don't like the Cad programs that are avaiable. I refuse to use a CAD program that I don't like. And yes I have codeweavers but I couldn't get the cad program I was using to run at all.

I have used VMware for years to run Windows programs on a Linux system. I think at one time they didn't have a version that would run in a real time system, but I believe that they now do have such a version. It still needs a Windows OS to be loaded, but you can have both systems running at the same time and switch back and forth, and share files between the two systems.
VMware has a free "player" edition that is missing some bells and whistles, but does what you need.

Dual boot is a pain in the backside and I have enough to do without rebooting the computer all the time.

agreed, I'd rather have two computers than do it that way.

4. Mach3 looks better to the eye. I will load the new live CD and reevaluate this and repost.

The old TKEMC screen GUI was quite spartan, but worked. If you haven't seen EMC's newer Axis screen, then I think you should check it out. It is MUCH more "user friendly" in a number of ways.

Jon

[jmelson]

I find the results of this survey interesting. It confirms everything I thought.
Whats interesting is the stubborn resistance to acknowledge what the majority of people feel. With that attitude EMC is destined to remain a distant second.
It has taken a distribution like Ubuntu to finally sit back and listen to what the majority of users want and finally put Linux on the map. Suddenly many of the other distros are coppying Ubuntus lead, as if they are onto something new. EMC should take off its blinkers and follow the design attitude that Ubuntu developers have taken on board.

Yes, of course, I agree totally! EMC is total crap, and has never run any actual machine tool, ever! I have been lying that EMC has run my Bridgeport since 1998. The minimill I bring to shows is really run by Mach3 on another computer hidden under the table, the Linux computer that people see running EMC is purely a sham.

No, Mach is a commercial product, with an advertising budget. ArtSoft pays to put ads in magazines (and on CNCzone, too!) EMC will never do that, as it had been declared by the developers to be TOTALLY non-commercial. The total yearly budget is absolutely ZERO. The only press we get is if a satisfied user or a developer/integrator writes an article about it.

I'm sorry there isn't a way for EMC to advertise, as a lot of people have no idea it exists. If you read some of the related publications, it is very rarely mentioned, except for a couple articles in "Digital Machinist", and an occasional one-line mention in Roland Friestad's articles.

Jon

[lerman]

The question must be asked.....Why do more people prefer to pay $160 for Mach3 than use the free EMC ? Its not because its on Linux, as most people have answerd on the survey, that they are aware that they can dual boot.

I'm fully expecting the "your just bashing EMC" whine. But I really would like my question answered before you hit back.

OK. I'll take a shot at an answer. It's because they are familiar with the Windows platform. Just because you can dual boot doesn't mean that you will be familiar and comfortable with the linux platform.

If you don't want to use EMC, don't. It makes me feel good when you say something nice about my work, but most of my contributions are made because they are something I want or need.

If anyone wants or needs a better web site, they should stop talking about it and just do it. It won't require the permission of anyone. If it is any good, people will use it and contribute to it, as they have with the rest of EMC. To use your word, don't just "whine" about it; do it.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

Regards,

Ken

[dertsap]

Whats interesting is the stubborn resistance to acknowledge what the majority of people feel. With that attitude EMC is destined to remain a distant second.
.

going for the attack or defense is a trend that i had found with many of the linux groups , there is a strong self rightious attitude about linux ( real bunch of rebels ) , rather than hearing what people would like to see they attack and go off on a tangent about windows bloat , personally i see no difference between either windows or linux in regard to attitude , they are both a dictatorship .

my cure to windows bloat was to buy a decent computer , i had to do the same for ubuntu which is a larger resource hog

[jmkasunich]

emc users will drop like flies if they decided to charge money for the software

How many hours do you have in your CNC machinery (if you built or retrofitted it)? How many dollars (if you bought it turnkey)? The $150 price of Mach vs. the $0 price of EMC2 simply isn't that big a factor. If you have thousands of dollars (or the equivalent in time) invested in a machine, you should choose whatever control software works better for you, as long as the price is within reason.

Frankly, if a someone prefers Mach but chooses EMC because they are too cheap to pay for Mach, then I don't want them as EMC users.

the magic of linux emc is the fact that it is efficient , free and an all around decent piece of software , but if they wanted to charge money for it i would drop it and not look back

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Seriously, if you are so cheap that you are using EMC in spite of what it is, instead of because of what it is, then you shouldn't be using EMC2.

Whats interesting is the stubborn resistance to acknowledge what the majority of people feel. With that attitude EMC is destined to remain a distant second.

"Distant second" implies that there is a race. Maybe the commercial marketing oriented mind can only see things that way. I don't. I'm not keeping score. EMC is better for my needs, so I use it. If someone else chooses Mach, good for them.

EMC2 is powerful, flexible, and "Free as in freedom" - freedom to study it, understand it, change it. The fact that is is also free as in "free beer" is its least important feature in my opinion.

Like any powerfull and flexible tool, it isn't going to be trivial for beginners to use. I will admit that I really don't care about that - I am an engineer writing for other engineers and machine integrators.

"Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible."
-- Alan Key

EMC2 stumbles a bit on the first half of that idea, but excels on the second half. If the first half is all you care about, use something else. If you want to do complex things, you have some learning to do. But once you learn, EMC2 makes more things possible than Mach does.

[dertsap]

Frankly, if a someone prefers Mach but chooses EMC because they are too cheap to pay for Mach, then I don't want them as EMC users.



Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Seriously, if you are so cheap that you are using EMC in spite of what it is, instead of because of what it is, then you shouldn't be using EMC2.


. But once you learn, EMC2 makes more things possible than Mach does.

perfect eg to my last post thank you ,



what brought you to the assumtion that i haven t bought mach as well

more things are possible , then tell us WHAT ?

[unterhaus]

perfect eg to my last post thank you



what brought you to the assumtion that i haven t bought mach as well

more things are possible , then tell us WHAT ?

I read your last post (145) as being an attack on linux users that was written without even the self-awareness to recognize it was an attack on linux users. Almost all the linux users I know are also Windows users.

People should recognize that EMC is written by volunteers, i.e. users, for zero compensation. All users are free to come up with code that will do whatever they want. Sitting around and carping about EMC in a nasty manner is unlikely to get one of these volunteers to do what you want. Personally, when I want someone to do something and I'm not willing to pay for it, I'm really nice to that person.

[dertsap]

I read your last post as being an attack on linux users that was written without even the self-awareness to recognize it was an attack on linux users.

i pointed out that MANY linux users have a self rightious attitude but not all , i cant tell you how many times i have seen postings were guys requested a better ease of use or tryed to pass on construtive critisism and they fekk under attack and more or less get a reply kike if your too stupid to use it don't , if you look thru the emc forum here you will see that i have had nothing but great things to say about emc and that goes over a few years and before emc2 came out ,
i think the developers are a great contribution but the words of many have fallen on deaf ears much of the time

[unterhaus]

i think the developers are a great contribution but the words of many have fallen on deaf ears much of the time

that demonstrates your misunderstanding of the way EMC development works. No user, including yourself, has had enough interest in your suggestions to actually implement them. So smack yourself in the face and ask why you don't listen to yourself.

[cncJerry]

Emc2 is gpl licensed. They cannot just start charging money for it.

As far as mach having more more features.. What would they be? (I always hear this but not using mach I don't know what they would be)

thanks
sam

Well, I am still digging into EMC2. I have it working but can't get my code into it due to a few problems. So right now the features I would need to have (unless I build a new post processor) would be the equivalent of mach3's G90.1 for absolute coordinate arcs. My post processor was setup for MaxNC dos software and I used absolute arcs for years, right or wrong, and there is an option in the mach3 general config (as well as g90.1) to select either absolute or incremental format arcs. So this is a big problem right now but easily fixed in the future.

The other feature is the shifted jog for high speed jog along with ctrl+arrow for incremental. I typcially edge find my parts and it is so easy to rapid jog, slow down as you approach the edge and then press control to go into incremental as I get within .001". You don't want to have to take your hand off the keyboard and mouse the slider for jog speed. I typically have gloves on at this point and use a trackball so it is a pain.

Maybe I can program my own interface. I've used some of the programming tools in the past.

Jerry

[jmkasunich]

perfect eg to my last post thank you

I expected something like that.... did you read the part where I said I don't see this as a race and I'm not keeping score?

what brought you to the assumtion that i haven t bought mach as well

Because you wrote that you would drop EMC like a hot potato if it cost money.

If you don't like it, drop it. If you do like it, use it. Why should (a relatively small amount of) money make a difference?

more things are possible , then tell us WHAT ?

Analog servos, mixed stepper and servo machines, mixture of physical and computer controls (jogwheels and real pushbuttons to go with the screen/keyboard stuff), combined linear and rotary feedback to correct screw thermal expansion and other screw errors (not to correct backlash - you can't beat the laws of physics), correction for construction error in multi-axis machines...

The first few are relatively easy with EMC2. The latter are definitely not simple, especially the last (you better know your trig and be prepared to do a bit of programming), but they can be done, and EMC users have done them.

I'm not 100% sure of what Mach's limitations are - maybe it can do some of those things, no way it can do all of them.

I didn't list a number of other things that EMC can do because I think Mach can do them too - rigid tapping, lathe threading, toolchangers and other ladder logic, constant surface speed, feed-per-rev, etc.

[dertsap]

No user, including yourself, has had enough interest in your suggestions to actually implement them. So smack yourself in the face and ask why you don't listen to yourself.

but i havent made any suggestions until a few posts back where i said it would be nice to have an easy to use tool page , but actually it was something that i had questioned in the past and it was dismissed ,
I am only pointing out an obsearvation and if i shall fall under attack for speaking outside the box then it sure wont change my attitude toward the self rightiousness of many linux (not emc) users

[jmkasunich]

So right now the features I would need to have (unless I build a new post processor) would be the equivalent of mach3's G90.1 for absolute coordinate arcs. My post processor was setup for MaxNC dos software and I used absolute arcs for years, right or wrong, and there is an option in the mach3 general config (as well as g90.1) to select either absolute or incremental format arcs. So this is a big problem right now but easily fixed in the future.

Already added to the CVS (development) version - G90.1 means that I, J, and K are absolute, G91.1 means they are relative (the default).

We don't put new features into the current released version, to avoid accidently introducing bugs, but G90.1 will be in the next major release.

The other feature is the shifted jog for high speed jog along with ctrl+arrow for incremental. I typcially edge find my parts and it is so easy to rapid jog, slow down as you approach the edge and then press control to go into incremental as I get within .001". You don't want to have to take your hand off the keyboard and mouse the slider for jog speed. I typically have gloves on at this point and use a trackball so it is a pain.

That would be nice - I don't have a proper mouse on my machine, only one of those trackpad things.

However, there are keyboard ways to do that.

You can change the jog speed slider with , and . (unshifted versions of < and >)

You can change to incremental with "i" (hit it again to make the increment smaller, eventually loops around to big again) On my inch machine, the increments are 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, and 0.0001 inches, then it loops. The increments are configurable.

You can change back to continuous jogging with "c".

[jmkasunich]

but i havent made any suggestions until a few posts back where i said it would be nice to have an easy to use tool page , but actually it was something that i had questioned in the past and it was dismissed ,
I am only pointing out an obsearvation and if i shall fall under attack for speaking outside the box then it sure wont change my attitude toward the self rightiousness of many linux (not emc) users

In the open source world, people aren't interested all that much in "wants". Everybody wants things. I want enough room in my basement for a bigger mill, but it isn't gonna happen unless I move or do serious house surgery.

It doesn't matter how many people want a specific feature. What matters is if one person wants it badly enough to do the work. I'm sure you've heard the saying "Money talks, bull**** walks"... substitute "code" for "money".

I realise that most people aren't programmers, and even for programmers adding a new feature to something as large and complex as EMC can be intimidating. If you aren't a programmer and you want something in EMC (or any open source program), you have two choices - 1) become a programmer and do it, or 2) convince a programmer that the feature is a good thing so they will do it.

Number 1 is always an option, and whiners will be told to take that path with no remorse. Those who do take that path will get a lot of respect - they've earned it. There are a number of those people in the EMC community.

Number 2 is clearly easier, but you don't convince a programmer to add a feature by saying "I want this" without demonstrating at least some understanding what is involved. The more thought goes into a request, the more likely it is to be taken seriously. Vague requests will get vague responses, or be ignored.

You can call this elitism if you want. You can even jump up and down and yell about it. Guess what? I don't care.

Going back to the G90.1 that was mentioned a post or two ago - that came up in a discussion on IRC one evening - it sounded like a good idea. I consulted the Mach manual online and determined what g-codes they used. The concensus of those present was that it made sense, and over the next couple of days I wrote the code. Done. That is how things happen in an open source project. That was a well-defined and well-specified new feature, and it got added quickly.

Now when people talk about an "an easy to use tool page", that is a much more complex problem. If you can come to the discussion with a detailed description of what you want to happen, and it survives a technical discussion, then it has a chance of being done. But without details, nothing happens.

[TOTALLYRC]

I find myself using the html manuals here
http://linuxcnc.org/docs/2.2/html/

Look under User interfaces. (I love axis also)



Also part of emc's hardware abstraction layer (HAL) (yes we make jokes about that) you get halscope for troubleshooting.



you can see it in action here


Emc2 is very very flexable...

sam

Which is why I am going to reevaluate my position after trying out the latest versions.

[dertsap]

In the open source world, people aren't interested all that much in "wants". Everybody wants things. I want enough room in my basement for a bigger mill, but it isn't gonna happen unless I move or do serious house surgery.

It doesn't matter how many people want a specific feature.
Number 1 is always an option, and whiners will be told to take that path with no remorse. Those who do take that path will get a lot of respect - they've earned it. There are a number of those people in the EMC community.

Number 2 is clearly easier, but you don't convince a programmer to add a feature by saying "I want this" without demonstrating at least some understanding what is involved.
You can call this elitism if you want. You can even jump up and down and yell about it. Guess what? I don't care.

.

if you believe that i have no understanding with what is involved then you are sadly mistaken , i am not saying "i want i want " as you have put it , but why is it that someone falls under scrutiny and is an A$$h__ when they do make a suggestion or have constructive critisism , this has been my point all along , great things can be accomplished by one mans suggestions
i feel a great deal of respect for the guys who work to develope this kind of stuff , but it appears that many USERS of any given product feel a certain need to defend that product when someone wants to make a suggestion .
a decent forum was brought up before and Benny suggested he can work to help build a dedicted forum , while some were for it others shot it down ?

[cncJerry]

What makes you think that it's gotten too complex?

I'm not suggesting it hit that point yet, but that it probably will.

[ynneb]

I'm not 100% sure of what Mach's limitations are - maybe it can do some of those things, no way it can do all of them.

I know that without a printer port, Mach can still run a machine via USB or Ethernet. (Hardware required) What are EMC's plans to cater for the lack of printer ports on computers these days? Genuine question.

[ynneb]

No, Mach is a commercial product, with an advertising budget. ArtSoft pays to put ads in magazines (and on CNCzone, too!) EMC will never do that, as it had been declared by the developers to be TOTALLY non-commercial. The total yearly budget is absolutely ZERO. The only press we get is if a satisfied user or a developer/integrator writes an article about it.

I think you will find that word of mouth is its best advertising.