Copied these words from the Mach4 page:

Mach3 will continue to be sold for a year or more, while the number of compatible hardware devices is expanded through plug-in development.

Does this mean that when it is felt Mach4 is ready for "production", you won't even be able to buy Mach3 anymore. And Mach4 will have a price tag of $1000-$2000 per PC if it's going to produce profit.

Just trying to decide on my cnc future with Mach3/4.

Keith.

I think the $1000.00 to $2000.00 is to cover support. If you want a Mach3 replacement you're looking at $200.00

I think they are missing the mark on their support plan though. You should buy the program and then pay for support as a secondary item. I may need 10 minutes  but someone else needs an hour, yet we both pay $1000.00?

Mach 4 is already at least 2 years behind and far from a finished product. There are too many problems that need to be resolved. Artsoft doesn't have a marketing plan that makes any sense by releasing a half developed product and expecting the costumer to pay $200 for the privilege of debugging it. From what I have read the numerous CV issues that plague Mach 3 still haven't been resolved in Mach 4. As a matter of fact, ArtSoft never even mentions CV in the Mach 4 manual.

Until Mach 4 is a stable consumer useable product, which may never happen at the rate it's going now, I see no rush to jump on the Mach 4 band wagon. Read the Mach 4 part of the forum and that will give you an idea of the problems and issues.   

The $200 version is for hobby use only, no profit making.

I'm a bit gobsmacked too at their business "plan". Manufacturers are already abandoning Mach and moving to Linux. Artsoft is announcing they will at some point make Mach3 unavailable, and the only replacement is a half working Mach4 at up to $2k per PC. I really don't understand such a marketing attack, it's a great way to scare customers away, and have them looking for safe alternatives for the future. Am I correct in saying there is not even a Mach4 specific scripting manual available for Lua, like we have with Mach3 and Cypress Enable.

Based on what I've heard about Mach4 I haven't looked at the forum much. From what I have read, Mach4 seems like a completely different beast to Mach3, so it's not even like moving to an upgraded version of Mach3. Where's the incentive ?

I don't relish the thought of having to migrate to Linuxcnc. I've heard it's MUCH harder to customise but at least it works and costs $2k less than $2k.

Take a look at UCCNC software. It's getting some very good reviews. It's right up there with WinCNC and Lunixcnc and light years ahead of Mach 3 or 4. It has an advanced CV control strategy that actually works like it suppose to. Price is very reasonable and you can download a demo version. Problem is you are locked into UCCNC's external motion controller card and the software is limited on plugin's and customizing. Good news is the customer support is very good and it's free! 

The $200 version is for hobby use only, no profit making.

That's not true. I brought this up to Brian a few weeks back, asking for clarification on the wording on the website.
He said the license for Mach4Hobby is basically the same as the Mach3 license, and you can do anything with Mach4Hobby that you can do with Mach3.

He also felt that the website was clear enough???

You can find the posts on the Yahoo group, but I think I re-posted it here somewhere as well.

You only need to buy Mach4 Industrial if you need the extended support that will come with it.

I've got 2 UC-100 and 2 UC-300 controllers. I have UCCNC software on one router and so far I am very happy with it. There are a couple of things that I have to get used to but the motion is much smoother and accurate than Mach3 with the UC-100 plugin. I'm buying another license for my other router that has a UC-100. That will be the real test as it has a lot of weight on the gantry and a better trajectory planner would really be helpful.  There are two things holding me back on running it on my two mills with the UC-300's. I'm totally hooked on the Calypso ventures screen set with the probing functions. I can't tell you how much that has helped my work flow. The other is I have a couple of fairly complex macros in VB that would need to be converted to C#. I know virtually nothing about either VB or C#.

I feel the UCCNC is geared towards the hobby crowd right now. As was Master5 when I first got on the Artsoft train. I've tried to encourage Balazs to start a forum so that users can start exchanging ideas and helping the software mature. There is an area on cnczone with a little bit of traffic but not too much.  Honestly the software just needs a couple of more things and it would be awesome. It's good enough to do rigid (ish?) tapping right now.  It only has a 20 tool tool table so that's a bit of a problem, and the tool length setting could be a little more elegant.

Sorry for the ramble but I'm so tired of screwing around and waving chicken bones and throwing the blood of virgins on my Mach3 machines every morning to get them to run it's making me crazy:)

Derek

I feel the UCCNC is geared towards the hobby crowd right now. As was Master5 when I first got on the Artsoft train. I've tried to encourage Balazs to start a forum so that users can start exchanging ideas and helping the software mature. There is an area on cnczone with a little bit of traffic but not too much.  Honestly the software just needs a couple of more things and it would be awesome.

I agree with Derek that if UCCNC developed a probing routine and with a little refinement here and there the software would blow away Mach 3 and 4. The UCCNC trajectory planner is light years better than Mach.

Maybe if Gerry would convert his 2010 screenset (That I use and works great) to work on UCCNC I would walk away from Mach 3 and never look back. 

A friend of mine already converted the macros from the 2010 Screenset to work in UCCNC. He posted them on CNC Zone. his username is Banduramaker.

Maybe talk Klaus into a screen designer for UCcnc   C# does not look too bad to deal with ??Maybe(;-) At least the function calls for UCcnc look and feel very familar.  

DEREK, I need to get up to see you. Maybe we get together and plan a UCcnc strategy to convert some Mach3 functions over to UCcnc ? I have some time available(;-).


(;-) TP