Messages

2771

General Mach Discussion / Re: Jerky Jog before I even Code

« on: March 29, 2019, 08:07:00 AM »

Hi,
until recently I had access to Mastercam through work. It is exactly the opposite of what you want, very expensive,
top of the line and hell of a learning curve......but damn was it good!

So its back to Fusion 360, its not bad and of course it is free. Say whatever you like about Autodesk, and I am one of their
critics, but they have given a true gift to the hobby/maker/student community.....Thanks to Autodesk.

A lot of stuff I do at my mill is pretty simple, face a bit of aluminum, pocket a rectangular hole then drill a series of
equidistant holes say. For that purpose Mill Wizard ($75 from NFS) is great. Chain together a few simple ops and
the job is done. Produces Mach3 and Mach4 compliant code. No CAD, no CAM, just a Wizard.....too easy. Download a demo
and try it out. You'll have tool paths chained together within half an hour.

That's what i'll be buying and considering I have a license of mach3 and it already has the THC built in per say, I'm not going to wait right now for the newer version to come out.

Hey, if you already have Mach3 then carry on. Later if you find there is some particular functionality that Mach4 has that Mach3
does not, or not easily, then consider it. The ESS will be just as good with Mach4 as it is with Mach3, you'll have it for years.

Craig

2772

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 Parallel Port Legacy Plugin

« on: March 29, 2019, 06:58:36 AM »

Hi Gerry,
I agree on both counts.

Trying to use the forum to estimate a proportion of users is probably hopeless.

Ultimately Mach4, Mach3, UCCNC and LinuxCNC will attract (or lose) market share on the basis of functionality and value.
All four are strong contenders.

Hobby CNCer's are spoiled for choice.

Craig

2773

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 Parallel Port Legacy Plugin

« on: March 29, 2019, 06:14:31 AM »

Hi,

Also Mach3 users may have more than 1 machine.

What.....and Mach4 users are not going to have more than one machine??

Number of Products listed made for MACH3 on ebay far exceed those listed as compatible with Mach4

True, but what does that signify?

Have you questioned the notion that the most respected manufacturers of Mach3 controllers are EXACTLY the same
manufacturers of Mach4 products. That suggests to me that they are the businesses whom are prepared to invest
the effort and resources to make Mach4 products. They are of the opinion that Mach4 is here and here to stay and
they have put their money where their mouth is.

I don't trust Chinese products for use with Mach4 and I am not really happy about their quality and usefulness with
Mach3 either. I fail to see that the number of rubbishy components and assemblies on sale is an true indication of the
quality or lack thereof of either Mach3 or Mach4. That would be like saying that because 90% of the clothes to be bought
in Sydney, being made in China, must mean that Armani suits must be crap.

I think it is possible to guestimate from NEW USERS introducing themselves.
How many of them say they have got Mach4 vs those who say they have Mach3?

That is at least a documented indication as to what those newcomers are doing. Question: Do those newcomers
actually represent the collective uptake of Mach4?  I'm dubious.....many of them don't go on to buy Mach3 either?

I'm interested in the results of the survey you posted. Who is Bob Warfield? Where and how did he collect the data?
Where did he publish?

If the data is genuinely representative it supports your contention that Mach3 is ten times more used than Mach4.
You may recall that I did not call your contention wrong, in fact left to guess I would have come to a similar conclusion.

What that does not account for is the large amount of traffic that Mach4 users are generating given their apparently
much smaller numbers. My contention (opinion) is that those users are actively developing their machines and increasing
their understanding. Their seeming over representation in the traffic statistics is due to their enthusiasm and that enthusiasm
speaks well for the quality of Mach4.

In any event this is a purely academic conversation. Mach4 has just recently surpassed Mach in terms of functionality
and has always been more flexible. When those qualities are sought after then Mach4 will be taken up. At the current
time it would appear that most Mach3 users are happy enough with their software solution....that's good isn't it?
It bemuses me that Mach3 users should try to run down or criticize Mach4 users for their choice, especially given you've
never used it or vehemently oppose the notion of an external controller.

Craig

2774

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 Parallel Port Legacy Plugin

« on: March 29, 2019, 04:56:29 AM »

Hi,
I stated:

Mach4 users, the small minority, have achieved 83% of the forum traffic

Which clearly is rubbish, what I meant to say is that Mach4 traffic is 83% as much as Mach3 traffic.

Apologies....funny how you can read something many times before posting and yet a glaring inconsistency
still gets through!!!

Craig

2775

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 Parallel Port Legacy Plugin

« on: March 29, 2019, 03:45:58 AM »

Hi reuelt,

BUT Mach4 is unlikely to overtake Mach3 market share in 10 years since in 2019 Mach4 still has probably only 10-15% the number of users of MACH3.

You raise some interesting questions......

There is without a doubt a large and loyal Mach3 user base. But where did you get this information:

Mach4 still has probably only 10-15% the number of users of MACH3.

I am not going to say that you are incorrect but I have being trying to estimate that proportion for some time. I have
no evidence one way or another. I don't think it is helpful to bring an unsubstantiated piece of data to this conversation.

One source of information that I have been trying to tap is the member traffic on the forum. At any given time there
are a large number of guests on the forum and the overwhelming majority of them are reading from the Mach3 board,
or at least non-Mach4 boards. However a guest  cannot post a reply or start a topic.

I have been trying to estimate the number of posts in the Mach3 board vs the Mach4. Regrettably the forum stats don't
yield those numbers directly.

What the forum does yield up is the number of topics.
In the Mach3 board the last post in the 1000th most recent topic occurred in 23/10/2017
In the Mach4 board the last post in the 1000th most recent topic occurred in 13/2/2017

Current stats for the Mach3 board is 150,123 posts in 18,397 topics for an average of 8.16 posts per topic.
Current stats for the Mach4 board is 17,246 posts in 1,762 topic for an average of 9.78 posts per topic.

Thus in the Mach3 board since 23/10/2017 I would expect 8,160 posts or 480 posts per month.
In the Mach4 board since 13/2/2017 I would expect 9,780 posts or 399 posts per month.

This is an interesting result......it suggests that while it is assumed that Mach3 is the vast majority of users that
Mach4 users, the small minority, have achieved 83% of the forum traffic. It suggests to me that there is much more
interest and activity among Mach4 users than many would guess. In absence of NFS stating the sales or rate
thereof its the best (documented)  indicator I have.

NFS needs to do something to win over more MACH3 users. Discounted upgrade path perhaps.

Why bother? Many people are happy with Mach3 and NFS no doubt derive sales income therefrom. Mach4 is approximately
the same value and NFS derive a proportionate share of income from Mach4 sales. It would be silly to discount your shiny new
product.....I mean do you go to a car yard and see this years model discounted.....no, you see the old models discounted.
No doubt if you have followed my posts you will be aware that I am of the opinion that NFS need to make OEM sales, and
I suspect they are. The sales are of much higher value and therefore hugely significant to the business. This need to produce
flexible and fully functioning software that can be used by OEMs in their own machines dominates NFS strategies and
development priorities and we as Hobby users get to benefit.

Is MACH4 going to be simply as successful as only Windows Vista or windows 8.X while people wait for Mach5?

My subjective opinion is that Mach4 is ALREADY successful. In my previous post to stevehuck Mach4 has overtaken Mach3
in terms of functionality and has been light years ahead in terms of programming flexibility for years. If you what to try it
go ahead. If you don't just carry on with Mach3.....but don't whinge when you find Mach4 out performing Mach3.

Craig

2776

General Mach Discussion / Re: Goofy forum layout

« on: March 29, 2019, 02:24:50 AM »

Hi reuelt,
I have found the same thing, if I use the new theme the video downloads whether I pause it or not, whereas if I use
the SMF theme the video does not download.

I don't really care which theme I use but I don't want to be unnecessarily downloading a video all the time. Ergo I will
use the previous (SMF) theme.

Craig

2777

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: Mach4 Parallel Port Legacy Plugin

« on: March 29, 2019, 02:07:15 AM »

Hi stevehuck,

In my case I have a system that runs perfectly on the parallel port. I would like to upgrade to Mach4 but I am not going to spend hundreds of dollars to rebuild my control panel for a software upgrade.

Yes I understand your point of view.......but you have stated the problem already.

'I have a system that runs perfectly on the parallel port', that is correct BUT that is all it will ever do, new features
like Surface Map, Zero Brane Studio editor/debugger, Mach Touch Module and PLC scripts (including PMC ladder logic)
will not be available to you.

There was quite a period of time when Mach4 had, at best, most of the features that Mach3 had, and for the last year or
so its had ALL the functionality of Mach3. Just recently Mach4 has added functionality that EXCEEDS Mach3, and
the pace is accelerating.

So the quandary for you is IF you want that extra functionality and the flexibility that Mach4's structure, API
and Lua bring, then it will cost several hundred dollars to get it. The essential point is that you are buying into
a new product with enhanced capabilities.

Your description suggests that you are entirely happy with your machine the way it is, you neither need
or want extra functionality, so stick with it.

As to why Art has chosen not to develop Darwin with stuff like THC and lathe threading, I don't know.
Maybe it runs contrary to the business model envisaged by NFS?

What is true is that there are five or six manufacturers of Mach4 ready external controllers ranging from
$120 for a single port IO, $150 to $250 for two and up to five ports IO and $600 plus extras for an industrial
grade controller. I don't think that is unreasonable for a controller that will out perform any Mach3 installation.

Craig

2778

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: scr list

« on: March 29, 2019, 01:30:16 AM »

Hi,
edited the Lua listing to make it a bit more readable.
Is a straight out list of available functions and value definitions, it does not explain what each one does.
Still better than no listing at all!

Thanks to Chatoicone for the idea, Daz to highlight the means and to whomever in NFS that cast the info
into the Lua file in the first place.

Craig

2779

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: scr list

« on: March 29, 2019, 01:11:09 AM »

Hi Chaoticone,
that's a great idea.

I also rememberd that Daz has done a video to add elements to the auto-fill feature of the Zero Brane
editor.

https://www.machsupport.com/forum/index.php?topic=37784.0

Using Daz's suggestion I looked in Mach4Hobby/ZeroBraneStudio/api/lua/scr.lua, I have extracted the text
and posted it. It could be tidied up to exclude some of the Lua logic....

Craig

2780

Mach4 General Discussion / Re: scr list

« on: March 28, 2019, 05:58:54 PM »

Hi,
to be honest I try to avoid them, not the least amongst the reasons is that they are not documented clearly
and comprehensively.

Craig