Hello Guest it is April 18, 2024, 03:46:15 PM

Author Topic: The great screen debate  (Read 15520 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ger21

*
  • *
  •  6,295 6,295
    • View Profile
    • The CNC Woodworker
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2015, 08:13:12 AM »
That's because your using Large Fonts, which many people do now on higher res monitors.
The programmers need to account for Large fonts, as they're use is becoming more and more common.
Gerry

2010 Screenset
http://www.thecncwoodworker.com/2010.html

JointCAM Dovetail and Box Joint software
http://www.g-forcecnc.com/jointcam.html

Offline simpson36

*
  •  1,369 1,369
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2015, 08:59:36 AM »
The problem with having the cycle start button run both G-code and the MDI is that the MDI does not clear after execution.

Therefor, if the operator does not remember to clear the MDI, it will execute again when Cycle Start is pressed.

The multi-line MDI is probably my favorite new 'screen feature' and it would not be nearly as useful if it had to be cleared each time you want to run G-code, especially if it contains a multi-line routine that is run before or after the G-code.

If semantics are the issue, then the buttons could be renamed "G-Code Run" and MDI Execute" or something similar. This way, whatever pre-conceived notions there may be about what "Cycle Start' should do are moot.

In addition to the above arguments, there is the issue of multiple MDI entry points and multiple 'Cycle Start' buttons. How many of each should there be? What would the correct interaction be between them? Should Cycle start check all of the mdi? What if there are different commands in mdi1 and mdi2?
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2015, 12:33:18 PM »
That's because your using Large Fonts, which many people do now on higher res monitors.
The programmers need to account for Large fonts, as they're use is becoming more and more common.
Thank you very much Gerry,
I had no idea that there were so many settings, went to a lower setting and the screens are better.
Thanks again,
Larry

Offline Chaoticone

*
  • *
  •  5,624 5,624
  • Precision Chaos
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2015, 02:08:16 PM »
Quote
Do you like the extent DROs where they are?

I rarely use them, but yes, that seems fine.

From my experience, very few new Mach users use 1024x768 monitors, which are probably hard to find these days. I suspect that Most Mach4 users will be new users as well, and will be running 1920x1080 monitors, or laptops with widescreen resolutions.

I agree Gerry. I dont think I have ever used the extent DROs myself.

I am told lots of machine builders still use 1024 X 768 monitors.

attached image would be close to how I would like it just one more button added, all the main tools used everyday on one page is good. FRO, RRO moved to tab used 10 times in 4 years if that.

MDI page removed, every other page is fine.

also it would be good, to not have it look so fancy that is not important to me.

have more keyboard control of screen main tabs on F keys, the bit at the bottom on tab key to move from page to page,
have it so it`s tab or F to page hit enter to select page, then tab to move through page and enter to action or key`s pre set to commands I know you can do it now but more than what can be use now. like what can be done with pokey keyboard.

Daniell, I don't like any of the sliders in the Screen anywhere myself. I use pots on my machines but for those who do not I think it is critical to always have them in view and the FRO close to the Cycle Start button. Lots will run the first time through constantly lowering and raising the feed. But I did put them in their own groups so you can easily delete them if not needed.

The page control/tab/selection bit is a little tougher. Whats logical for one will not be for another. Adding to that is the Keyboard input plugin. This is why I like touch screens............. until a lady bug crawls around on it.  :o  So in short, there really is nothing to compete with hardware buttons, sliders, selectors, etc. IMO. I will likely make a screen for those that agree as time allows. Once we get the do all Mach3ish defaults buttoned up deleting is easy. But I am hearing your input and appreciate it.

Thanks Fellas!
Brett
;D If you could see the things I have in my head, you would be laughing too. ;D

My guard dog is not what you need to worry about!

Offline BR549

*
  •  6,965 6,965
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2015, 03:08:06 PM »
I have never seen a widescreen on a commercial controller. Well I do know of 1 but it is turned sideways for a standard witdth extra LONG look.

You really need to consider the MOUSELESS approach as most machine do not HAVE or some do NOT allow mouses on a machine tool.

The screens need to be tab enabled and have a set tabbing order (sans HAAS approach) to be ABLE to navigate teh screens easily .  ALL the main functions need to be hotkey capable to be able to use {FKEYS}  you have CRTL FKEYs  ALTFKEYS  to work with. On me keyboard there are 96 possible Fkey assignments  F1-24 and the double taps Crtl, Alt, etc  MOST are useless for Mach4.

THINGS like sliders should be removed as they do NOT work without a mouse.  Hotkey a UP /Down button . I use rotary switch controls for these
 but you need a keyboard method to use them as well..

DO NOT duplicate functions OVER AND OVER again it is a waste of screen space.

You NEED to keep the basic LOOK and FEEL the same as a commercial controller.   The Haas look is one of the best going today. THERE IS a reason it looks plain and SIMPLE to use.

But you will NEVER get any DIY group to agree on a screenset design. It aint gonna happen. It would be like a church group picking out new carpet.

Build a Basic Keyboard enabled screenset (Mach4 EZ)THEN everyone else can build what they want. There is a big market sector that can build customs for them(;-).


Just a thought, (;-) TP

Offline ger21

*
  • *
  •  6,295 6,295
    • View Profile
    • The CNC Woodworker
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2015, 03:23:32 PM »
Quote
I have never seen a widescreen on a commercial controller. Well I do know of 1 but it is turned sideways for a standard width extra LONG look.

You really need to consider the MOUSELESS approach as most machine do not HAVE or some do NOT allow mouses on a machine tool.

You really need to define who you're designing the screen for.

Most hobbyists want widescreen monitors and mice. My guess is that those people are the majority of your customers.

Commercial machine manufacturers will want something completely opposite.
Gerry

2010 Screenset
http://www.thecncwoodworker.com/2010.html

JointCAM Dovetail and Box Joint software
http://www.g-forcecnc.com/jointcam.html

Offline dude1

*
  •  1,253 1,253
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2015, 03:28:20 PM »
Chaoticone I here ya about nobs after a year or two most people stop using FRO, RRO so could you do a bask screen like yours minus MDI and have one like BR549 and I suggested, over here a touch screen is in $000 so that's a no go. simple is good (and forget the M3 look )

Offline simpson36

*
  •  1,369 1,369
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2015, 03:31:06 PM »

You really need to consider the MOUSELESS approach as most machine do not HAVE or some do NOT allow mouses on a machine tool.

Build a Basic Keyboard enabled screenset (Mach4 EZ)THEN everyone else can build what they want. There is a big market sector that can build customs for them(;-).


This is one of those occasions when I must agree with Terry.  From an operational standpoint, these are the guys that know what works.

My question would be, if no mouse and no physical buttons, are key combinations adequate or should a touch screen be considered?

Also you mentioned tabs.

Assuming a touch screen, would it be better to have a 'menu' , say across the bottom, where you would call up entire recognizable screens or have repositionable pop-ups (i.e. like windows screens) again recognizable, but on screen as long as you need then, placed where you need them, (like not covering the other controls you are using).

-or-

A section of the screen that is perpetually the same and has the most important controls 'in the same place all the time' as you have said in the past, and a separate section (or even a separate screen for that matter) where 'controls of the moment' can be called up and dismissed as needed?

  

Offline simpson36

*
  •  1,369 1,369
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2015, 03:49:45 PM »
Quote
I have never seen a widescreen on a commercial controller. Well I do know of 1 but it is turned sideways for a standard width extra LONG look.

You really need to consider the MOUSELESS approach as most machine do not HAVE or some do NOT allow mouses on a machine tool.

You really need to define who you're designing the screen for.

Most hobbyists want widescreen monitors and mice. My guess is that those people are the majority of your customers.

Commercial machine manufacturers will want something completely opposite.

I agree with this also. Terry hit the nail on the head, in my opinion, with this comment:

...(Mach4 EZ)THEN everyone else can build what they want. There is a big market sector that can build customs for them(;-).e

'Hobby' is the keyword.  There are people like yourself who make screens and vendors can supply screens for their own products. I am working with HiCON controller at the moment and they supply screens for their pendant.

That should be the model for the hobby version. B&B; basic and bulletproof.   

A useful tool to supply would be one that makes it simple to add a screen as a tab. This way, If a hobby user got a custom screen from a vendor or designer, it would be a simple matter to integrate it without having to choose between loosing what he has or gaining something new.


Offline BR549

*
  •  6,965 6,965
    • View Profile
Re: The great screen debate
« Reply #19 on: August 24, 2015, 03:52:38 PM »
Touch screens are NICE but they also require larger screen elements(buttons) to safely use.  control keys/buttons have worked for about 40 years now no reason they still can't.

MACH4 NEEDS to stay focused on FUNCTION not form. The OEMs and $creenwriters can serve the DIY users for custom stuff . Lets get M4 FULLY functional .

THEN we can argue about which of the 30 custom / OEM  screensets is the best (;-)

(;-) TP