Some CAD/CAM history

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

Bill

2010-03-25 22:32:54 UTC

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"

That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.

An easier reading view of general cadcam history...
http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united

--
Bill

cncmillgil

2010-03-26 10:57:14 UTC

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam history...http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united
--
Bill

ah............ & then enter :
Cimatron(high end top secret Israeli shit)Quicksilver/
Masterscam,PointControl,.............................

But there was a point in time, around early 80's right before the
"flood" of affordable CAM software available to the smaller "mom&pop"
shops. We had 3X CNC's but no good way to program 3Dshapes required in
molds. The bigger shops in the area Had McAuto running on VAX
(1/2million in hardware the "original" UG)- Mudusa/CV . Those guys
were the kings of the graphical/computer based CAM systems. The big
ticket was data-3D scanning of beautiful wood "master" models(from
the 1:1 Deckel/Kellar/Kamph duplicator guys) into a "point cloud" of
XYZ's & punching a nice mylar tape for it & hopfully not longer than
8k fee, cause it wont fit on the reel. then eventually specialized
software that would lay surfaces of them.
It was the NC Tape preporation era? Glad that did'nt last too long
before the advent of BTR's RS232 data transfer. That Xon Xoff kermit-
Xmoden,,,,,,,,,,,.............all the diff. termanal communications.
Hey you can hyper my terminal! right here buddy LOL
ah........................Too bad the CNC's were so freekin pickey,
had 0 & 1/2 memory, were real finicky as how & when they wanted to be
feed data. Thank god for Preditor DNC. Serial comm. in a highly
electromagnetic environment of machine shops -------- whata freekin
pain. WTF? ya can't run thin minimally shielded RS232 wires around
the conduit that has 460V for the big ass arc welder in back?<g>One
fuckin "cosmic ray" spike <g> from whereever & there goes your serial
communication- missing data of giving you a dot matrix smiley face
character in your g-code. making the > just freekin blink. Gemee a
freekin brake! Glad that did'nt last too long. .......

just before that was the literally "run" DNC communication network
with a floopy disk in your hand. Hopefully you did'nt run the disk by
your pocket scribber magnet end or by the tele ringer. oh WTF? Glad
that did'nt last too long. .......

So what did the small shops do to feed the hungry CNC's before
WYSIWYG?
Manual tape(g-code) preporaton systems. Those guys (me) were the so
called programmers in its infancy. Localy we had NUMERIDEX tape prep
systems. LC9800 keyboard/teletype-printer with a built in bullet proof
tape punch- &phonemodem communations to online $sources$ like MDSI
(apt). Later on LC6000 dual 8" floopy drive with a shit ass tape
punch, but it had all mighty serial communacations to allow that all
that XYZ import/export of data & access to the tape punch! If all
else failed, I had tusty manual 8 hole tape splicer/puncher that could
easily fix ripped tapes or make continuous run "loop" tapes - for 4/S
6/S tappered sidwall rib cutters & pocketing.
Still had the 3D shape problem with tappered sidewalls - sweeping type
contours
Mathmaticaly it was all fairly easy to figure out using a ball cutter-
Its just CL data.
The craze was Radio Shack model TRS-80 for math calculations. That sob
could do 9zillioon A^2+B^2=C^2 in minutes! in very easy to learn
BASIC. Not much more than a fancy calculator- but still no graphics,
besides peek & poke<g> Glad that did'nt last too long. .......

Well thats about all the time we have today for Animal Stories little
Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S- ( larry
lujack - disc jockey WGN radio)

--

©¿®
~gil~
http://tinyurl.com/HoldzemOnEbay

vinny

2010-03-26 22:43:20 UTC

Post by Cliff
http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam
history...http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united
--
Bill

cncmillgil

2010-03-27 04:05:58 UTC

Post by Cliff
http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam
history...http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united
--
Bill

Cimatron(high end top secret Israeli shit)Quicksilver/
Masterscam,PointControl,.............................
But there was a point in time, around early 80's right before the
"flood" of affordable CAM software available to the smaller "mom&pop"
shops. We had 3X CNC's but no good way to program 3Dshapes required in
molds. The bigger shops in the area Had McAuto running on VAX
(1/2million in hardware the "original" UG)- Mudusa/CV . Those guys
were the kings of the graphical/computer based CAM systems. The big
ticket was data-3D scanning of beautiful wood "master" models(from
the 1:1 Deckel/Kellar/Kamph duplicator guys) into a "point cloud" of
XYZ's & punching a nice mylar tape for it & hopfully not longer than
8k fee, cause it wont fit on the reel. then eventually specialized
software that would lay surfaces of them.
It was the NC Tape preporation era? Glad that did'nt last too long
before the advent of BTR's RS232 data transfer. That Xon Xoff kermit-
Xmoden,,,,,,,,,,,.............all the diff. termanal communications.
Hey you can hyper my terminal! right here buddy LOL
ah........................Too bad the CNC's were so freekin pickey,
had 0 & 1/2 memory, were real finicky as how & when they wanted to be
feed data. Thank god for Preditor DNC. Serial comm. in a highly
electromagnetic environment of machine shops -------- whata freekin
pain. WTF? ya can't run thin minimally shielded RS232 wires around
the conduit that has 460V for the big ass arc welder in back?<g>One
fuckin "cosmic ray" spike <g> from whereever & there goes your serial
communication- missing data of giving you a dot matrix smiley face
character in your g-code. making the > just freekin blink. Gemee a
freekin brake! Glad that did'nt last too long. .......
just before that was the literally "run" DNC communication network
with a floopy disk in your hand. Hopefully you did'nt run the disk by
your pocket scribber magnet end or by the tele ringer. oh WTF? Glad
that did'nt last too long. .......
So what did the small shops do to feed the hungry CNC's before
WYSIWYG?
Manual tape(g-code) preporaton systems. Those guys (me) were the so
called programmers in its infancy. Localy we had NUMERIDEX tape prep
systems. LC9800 keyboard/teletype-printer with a built in bullet proof
tape punch- &phonemodem communations to online $sources$ like MDSI
(apt). Later on LC6000 dual 8" floopy drive with a shit ass tape
punch, but it had all mighty serial communacations to allow that all
that XYZ import/export of data & access to the tape punch! If all
else failed, I had tusty manual 8 hole tape splicer/puncher that could
easily fix ripped tapes or make continuous run "loop" tapes - for 4/S
6/S tappered sidwall rib cutters & pocketing.
Still had the 3D shape problem with tappered sidewalls - sweeping type
contours
Mathmaticaly it was all fairly easy to figure out using a ball cutter-
Its just CL data.
The craze was Radio Shack model TRS-80 for math calculations. That sob
could do 9zillioon A^2+B^2=C^2 in minutes! in very easy to learn
BASIC. Not much more than a fancy calculator- but still no graphics,
besides peek & poke<g> Glad that did'nt last too long. .......
Well thats about all the time we have today for Animal Stories little
Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S- ( larry
lujack - disc jockey WGN radio)
*********
Things were different way back as far as geometry goes. We had 20
different shampoo bottles on the grocery shelf with all kinds of cool
shapes, but those shapes were a combination of arcs and lines.
you could program almost everything with g code, incrimental loops and a
little math and 20 lines of code cuts a bunch of stuff.

Still does last I checked.

Post by cncmillgil
We have gotten better, but society keeps screwing it up. If we had this
power to make the stuff from 30 years ago......daym....it would be insane.
They couldn't truck the steel in fast enough.

We'd all like to go back & do stuff of yesterday with today's
technology? (including some girls!)
I think that show was called the Time Tunnel? now its that flippin big
ass ring ma thing WTF is it? Oh Ya stargate. Some worm hole shit, come
on man.............geta fuck'in life & dont tell me about some fucked
up society in some million light year away galaxy far far away. We are
living in it right now! & really dont need to know about some
cinematographers day dreams whilst high on ???? WTF are these people
who make this shit smoking?
The latest from Schwarzenegger land : legalize it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-gutwillig/ca-marijuana-legalization_b_511484.html

So besides the particle transporter & transparent aluminum, we right
on the technology schedule?

Oh If I could only have a do-over.
dream on buttercup, only a mulligan in golf is bout it, which I am in
desperate need of when entering the 18 hole zone. May as well take the
par & multiply by 2<g>

Ok Back to the Future now,
but the stuff you've learned 30yrs ago still applies today. Its the
foundation. Without it ya fall on your face? politically correct shop
talk "Trip over your dick"

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have today for Animal Stories,
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No little snot nose Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S

--

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF happened

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Bill

2010-03-27 01:39:06 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
Cimatron(high end top secret Israeli shit)Quicksilver/
Masterscam,PointControl,.............................
But there was a point in time, around early 80's right before the
"flood" of affordable CAM software available to the smaller "mom&pop"
shops. We had 3X CNC's but no good way to program 3Dshapes required in
molds. The bigger shops in the area Had McAuto running on VAX
(1/2million in hardware the "original" UG)- Mudusa/CV . Those guys
were the kings of the graphical/computer based CAM systems. The big
ticket was data-3D scanning of beautiful wood "master" models(from
the 1:1 Deckel/Kellar/Kamph duplicator guys) into a "point cloud" of
XYZ's & punching a nice mylar tape for it & hopfully not longer than
8k fee, cause it wont fit on the reel. then eventually specialized
software that would lay surfaces of them.
It was the NC Tape preporation era? Glad that did'nt last too long
before the advent of BTR's RS232 data transfer. That Xon Xoff kermit-
Xmoden,,,,,,,,,,,.............all the diff. termanal communications.
Hey you can hyper my terminal! right here buddy LOL
ah........................Too bad the CNC's were so freekin pickey,
had 0 & 1/2 memory, were real finicky as how & when they wanted to be
feed data. Thank god for Preditor DNC. Serial comm. in a highly
electromagnetic environment of machine shops -------- whata freekin
pain. WTF? ya can't run thin minimally shielded RS232 wires around
the conduit that has 460V for the big ass arc welder in back?<g>One
fuckin "cosmic ray" spike <g> from whereever & there goes your serial
communication- missing data of giving you a dot matrix smiley face
character in your g-code. making the > just freekin blink. Gemee a
freekin brake! Glad that did'nt last too long. .......
just before that was the literally "run" DNC communication network
with a floopy disk in your hand. Hopefully you did'nt run the disk by
your pocket scribber magnet end or by the tele ringer. oh WTF? Glad
that did'nt last too long. .......
So what did the small shops do to feed the hungry CNC's before
WYSIWYG?
Manual tape(g-code) preporaton systems. Those guys (me) were the so
called programmers in its infancy. Localy we had NUMERIDEX tape prep
systems. LC9800 keyboard/teletype-printer with a built in bullet proof
tape punch- &phonemodem communations to online $sources$ like MDSI
(apt). Later on LC6000 dual 8" floopy drive with a shit ass tape
punch, but it had all mighty serial communacations to allow that all
that XYZ import/export of data & access to the tape punch! If all
else failed, I had tusty manual 8 hole tape splicer/puncher that could
easily fix ripped tapes or make continuous run "loop" tapes - for 4/S
6/S tappered sidwall rib cutters & pocketing.
Still had the 3D shape problem with tappered sidewalls - sweeping type
contours
Mathmaticaly it was all fairly easy to figure out using a ball cutter-
Its just CL data.
The craze was Radio Shack model TRS-80 for math calculations. That sob
could do 9zillioon A^2+B^2=C^2 in minutes! in very easy to learn
BASIC. Not much more than a fancy calculator- but still no graphics,
besides peek & poke<g> Glad that did'nt last too long. .......

That's a mouth full. Kind of like reading those keyword scripted junk
mails where they include all kinds of nouns and verbs that don't make
sense. <g>

In short... yes, conventional machining followed by paper tape,
followed by cam programming, followed by cadcam with thousands of
pages of setup books to show the inexperienced operators how to
machine the part.

--
Bill

vinny

2010-03-26 22:43:20 UTC

Post by Cliff
http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam
history...http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united
--
Bill

Cliff

2010-03-27 19:09:40 UTC

Post by vinny
We have gotten better, but society keeps screwing it up. If we had this
power to make the stuff from 30 years ago......daym....it would be insane.

We did.
Use APT.

--
Cliff

Cliff

2010-03-27 19:06:41 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
WTF? ya can't run thin minimally shielded RS232 wires around
the conduit that has 460V for the big ass arc welder in back?

The conduit is both grounded AND a Faraday cage, right?
And magnetic fields should cancel, right?

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-03-28 00:05:58 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
WTF? ya can't run thin minimally shielded RS232 wires around
the conduit that has 460V for the big ass arc welder in back?

The conduit is both grounded AND a Faraday cage, right?
And magnetic fields should cancel, right?
--
Cliff

no canceling of cosmic rays batman, those sneaky bastards go through
damn near everything, except lead or gold? unless of course you "lost"
on the island<g> That SOB can do any freekin thing! WTH?

I had a service tech tell me about that years ago when the tape prep
teletype system kept crashing & burning. Oh cosmic rays, ya thats
whats doin it. He had them charted on a calender & matched them up to
the amount of service calls they were getting.
Oh man its almost April 15th! Fuckin huge cosmic ray up the ass day.
LMAO

--

Gil©
Member of
==American Toolmakers==
using the "old world" ways
with yesterdays technology
building
Tomorrows Dreams

Cliff

2010-03-27 19:02:25 UTC

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam history...
http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented for
CADDS 5 than for anything before IIRC.

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-03-27 22:50:05 UTC

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam history...
http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented for
CADDS 5 than for anything before IIRC.
--
Cliff

well ya that was high end shit?
Us little people could only dream of that.

--

~g~

Dave B

2010-03-28 00:56:22 UTC

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam history...
http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented for
CADDS 5 than for anything before IIRC.
--
Cliff

well ya that was high end shit?
Us little people could only dream of that.

Cliff only used the best or he didn't work.
Kinda like now.

db

Cliff

2010-03-29 07:38:10 UTC

http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf

"The third problem area was the difficulty customers had in making the
transition from CADDS 4X to CADDS 5. When initially released, CADDS 5
had far too many technical problems and many of the applications
customers had come to depend upon were only available for use with
CADDS 4X. The transition from one to the other was difficult and many
customers felt if they were going to go through such a difficult
upgrade why not look at alternative products on the market. Those that
did frequently ended up buying software"
That was when I'd just started using the program. And just like the
above statement, the company changed over to UG after 1 year of CADDS
5.
An easier reading view of general cadcam history...
http://design.osu.edu/carlson/history/lesson10.html#united

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented for
CADDS 5 than for anything before IIRC.
--
Cliff

well ya that was high end shit?
Us little people could only dream of that.

Cliff only used the best or he didn't work.
Kinda like now.
db

You & jb miss 2D.

--
Cliff

Bill

2010-03-28 01:16:39 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

Hence, another reason CV went in the toilet. I could not imagine in
today's world of deadlines dealing with all that background technology
(and workarounds) required to program good parts (that I though was so
cool at the time btw). Think about it, to be at the top you had to be
a sysadmin, know several scripting languages, know APT backwards and
forwards, know all the little nuance of the CV workarounds, AND write
a good program on top of all that.

--
Bill

cncmillgil

2010-03-28 10:40:59 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

so your saying at the time, those guys would be pulling down 6figures?
<g>
All I can tellya is the guys I meet that used CV- CADDS-Personal
Designer were ok in my book.
Because? Well they were the Designers/Engineers,they had the "power".
Those guys were the pioneers in 3D.
they could make & handle 3D surface wireframe data no sweat - & with
some 3rd party translator -being able to IGES out all that important
true 3D data to the CNC guys (me). Not so sure about personal
machinist modual though.
The data I received from those systems was usuially good (easily
fixable) 3D data in Cimatron.
So data translation really was "king" in my arena.
gimme a IGES 3D file & I'll cut it. - end of game- in a perfect world.
& Where TF is that?
Not to mention the game has 4 quarters consisting of 8-14wk deliveries
before the mold/tool ships.
That time span moldmakers are "married" to their part / parts (family
tool)
You know that bitch inside & out & why it has to be like this or that
shape.
Building a good dialog upstream with the customer (molder), his
customers - the product mfrs/
product designers is key. Its called Early Product Design
Involvement- too bad it doesn't work.
Parts are still fucked up on ease of manufacture ability & ease of
customer use.

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have today for Animal Stories,
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No little snot nose Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S

--

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF happened

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~
CNC Mold shops just had to

Cliff

2010-03-29 07:50:51 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
IGES 3D file

At one point CV IGES had real problems with UG's IGES
for surface & curve data.
Seems that UG used some odd matrixes all over the place ...
IIRC UG entities in some cases carried their own WCS-of-creation
about with them (and perhaps their parameter space as well).

Allowed by IGES IIRC but a bear for other systems to try to
decypher.

--
Cliff

Cliff

2010-03-29 08:15:01 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
All I can tellya is the guys I meet that used CV- CADDS-Personal
Designer were ok in my book.
Because? Well they were the Designers/Engineers,they had the "power".
Those guys were the pioneers in 3D.
they could make & handle 3D surface wireframe data no sweat - & with
some 3rd party translator -being able to IGES out all that important
true 3D data to the CNC guys (me). Not so sure about personal
machinist modual though.

Personal Designer & Personal Machinist were sort of offshoots
of CADDS III during the days of CADDS IV-X IIRC.
Was covered a bit in the link I posted:
http://www.cadhistory.net/chapters/12_Computervision.pdf
....
[
Personal Designer Complicating this product mix, in September 1984
Computervision began shipping its first PC-based system, the Personal Designer
System. With MicroCADDS software developed by Seattle-based 4-D Graphics, a
Personal Designer System including a PC/XT sold for $13,580. Bezier curves and
surfaces added $2,800 to the price tag. A PC/AT version was also available at
$17,890 and customers could purchase just the graphics hardware and software for
$9,980 if they wanted to install the system on a PC they already owned. There
was no ability to share data with either a CDS 3000 or CDS 4000 system although
a CADDS viewing program was available.
The Personal Designer, which eventually was joined by a number of other PC
applications, resulted in the company establishing its first domestic dealer
channel. Although this was much more comprehensive software than what Autodesk
had at the time, the price tag eventually proved to be too high for the product
to be generally competitive with AutoCAD. In June 1985, a three-dimensional
architectural design package developed by one of the companys French customers
was added to the Personal Designer product line. Called Personal Architect, the
software sold for $9,200.
]
[
The companys Personal Systems business took off in 1986 with revenues up 75%
over 1985. Computervision introduced a low-cost two-dimensional drafting
package, microDraft, during the year. It also launched Revision 2.1 of Personal
Designer with on-screen menus. In addition, the company continued selling
Personal Machinist and Personal Architect. In late 1986 the company announced a
bi-directional translator between Personal Designer and the CADDStation-based
CADDS 4X software. Computer Aided Design Report, which was not known for its
superlatives, declared this package had become of the best mechanical CAD/CAM
program running on a personal computer.
]
[
face of the CAD/CAM industry. Perhaps the most important was the move away from
proprietary turnkey system to unbundled software running on industry standard
platforms. Prime recognized this trend and took two difficult steps in response.
One was to begin the switch from manufacturing its own workstations using a SUN
CPU core to running on standard Sun workstations while the other was to
unbundled its software.
A major second trend was the move away from expensive UNIX workstations to
DOS-based personal computers. Although Prime had the second largest selling PC
CAD package after AutoCAD in VersaCAD, it was slow in porting its CADDS product
line to the PC platform and eventually lost significant market share to
Autodesk. In fact, in mid-1990 the company was moving in the other direction
when it launched a SunOS version of Personal Designer.
]
....

We were a distributor for it but I don't recall that we ever sold any seats
(not my side of that business).

--
Cliff

Black Dragon

2010-03-28 14:44:29 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

Cliff knew none of that. He was merely a CAD checker. Said so himself.

=====================================================================
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.cw.net!cw.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Cliff <***@aol.com>
Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
Subject: Re: Finally wrote-up my "How to Design Parts" section...
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 19:54:09 -0400
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
References: <***@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <***@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <***@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net ib0rJrG7lEhFxosQ4wMpAAK5K7ky1guuaDrrn7nLqpTx7tWJqP
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 2.0/32.652

On 28 May 2006 15:51:32 -0700, ***@aol.com wrote:

Not to jump on Joe for unpaid work rather well done with good
intentions & much effort .....

Post by Bill
Thanks for the comments. Yes, there are a few faults in the print. This
was not meant to be a "perfect" print as per CAD style guidelines (you
can write that e-booklet yourself :-)).

There are drafting standards that probably went thru much discussion
& debate, such as the ANSI Y14 series, GM standards, ISO standards,
etc. for valid reasons before being published.
Sometimes the designers don't kow of them or the reasons. Usually
a bit of thought makes the reasons clear.

Post by Bill
The point was to show a
real-world print that would yield a decent part without confusing the
machinist and wasting time and money. Truth is, we *very rarely* even
see prints this good!

Part prints have (or should) a single "origin" datum point, usually, and
axes constraints ... all of which aid in assuring that any part made to
them will be "correct", unambiguous and clearly defined. .

Post by Bill
In regards to your point, I did think about the double dimension, but
liked the clarity of it. I should add a "ref." though, you are right.

"REF" dimensions for various purposes are usually fine, if so
called out, but they duplicate other information that should be
there in some clear form and do not control anything. Beware
the effects of tolerance stackups when using REF dimensions.

I checked CAD data for GM (among others) for a bit too long <g>.

Don't ask about "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" !!!!

--
Cliff
=====================================================================
--
Black Dragon

Finagle's First Law:
If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.

Cliff

2010-03-29 08:20:44 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

Cliff knew none of that. He was merely a CAD checker. Said so himself.
=====================================================================
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.cw.net!cw.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
Subject: Re: Finally wrote-up my "How to Design Parts" section...
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 19:54:09 -0400
Lines: 37
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net ib0rJrG7lEhFxosQ4wMpAAK5K7ky1guuaDrrn7nLqpTx7tWJqP
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 2.0/32.652
Not to jump on Joe for unpaid work rather well done with good
intentions & much effort .....

Post by Bill
Thanks for the comments. Yes, there are a few faults in the print. This
was not meant to be a "perfect" print as per CAD style guidelines (you
can write that e-booklet yourself :-)).

There are drafting standards that probably went thru much discussion
& debate, such as the ANSI Y14 series, GM standards, ISO standards,
etc. for valid reasons before being published.
Sometimes the designers don't know of them or the reasons. Usually
a bit of thought makes the reasons clear.

Post by Bill
In regards to your point, I did think about the double dimension, but
liked the clarity of it. I should add a "ref." though, you are right.

"REF" dimensions for various purposes are usually fine, if so
called out, but they duplicate other information that should be
there in some clear form and do not control anything. Beware
the effects of tolerance stackups when using REF dimensions.
I checked CAD data for GM (among others) for a bit too long <g>.
Don't ask about "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" !!!!
--
Cliff
=====================================================================

I suppose the CAD/CAM systems manager should neither understand what the
customer wants, their & industry standards nor check the work being produced
and train employees, eh?

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-03-29 09:02:34 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

Cliff knew none of that. He was merely a CAD checker. Said so himself.
=====================================================================
Path: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.cw.net!cw.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
Subject: Re: Finally wrote-up my "How to Design Parts" section...
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 19:54:09 -0400
Lines: 37
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net ib0rJrG7lEhFxosQ4wMpAAK5K7ky1guuaDrrn7nLqpTx7tWJqP
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 2.0/32.652
Not to jump on Joe for unpaid work rather well done with good
intentions & much effort .....

& Who TF is joe & why did'nt he cough up?

Post by Bill
Thanks for the comments. Yes, there are a few faults in the print. This
was not meant to be a "perfect" print as per CAD style guidelines (you
can write that e-booklet yourself :-)).

each design group works in "their" way. sometimes adhering to the
understood interpretation of ANSI/ISO GD&T weather the part requires
it or not.
Bullseye!
Its just a matter of " true position" around a point using min/max
material conditions not falling outside the tolerance of that polar
circle being sqr & perpendicular to planes XYZ. - simple shit? Takes
like a 1/2 hr to figure if you can be off .0005" & still pass.
DIN is the bible in Europe - its so easy to make backwards upside down
parts

Not that easy if your little drop in the bucket part is siting off in
3D space in "running" position.
politically correct term is "article drawing/print" not piece part
print?
Best term I've heard, kinda hits the nail on the head, "cartoons"<g>

Post by Bill
In regards to your point, I did think about the double dimension, but
liked the clarity of it. I should add a "ref." though, you are right.

Oh ya thats alot of fun, looking through 29 views for the dim, I know
its here somewhere, because I found the REF. for it.

Post by Black Dragon
"REF" dimensions for various purposes are usually fine, if so
called out, but they duplicate other information that should be
there in some clear form and do not control anything. Beware
the effects of tolerance stackups when using REF dimensions.

Exacatly REF notes - & Its merely a note do not machine to it.
Its good for OA. sizes of "space required" or footprints there of
assemblies/machines to get a quick basic number- maybe somthing a "CAD
Checker" would require? open the sheet - get the number- write it
down- move on to next sheet- of course entering that data into an
excell spreadsheet. Then at the end of adding all the REF
notes ............ its oh fuck! we are off on space required! How can
we cheat/where can we chinse & squeeze shit into less than size
needed?
Glad we don't do that shit any more.

Post by Black Dragon
I checked CAD data for GM (among others) for a bit too long <g>.
Don't ask about "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" !!!!

Just look at the ECN's how long the revision box is- is how much
trouble the part is.
Sometimes simple parts are made intentionally to tolerances high or
low to compensate big fucked up mate parts that can not be fixed.

Post by Black Dragon
--
Cliff
=====================================================================
--
Black Dragon
If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.

if the experiment worked, it has to be improved till its no longer an
experiment but an exact science?

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have today for Animal Stories,
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No little snot nose Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF happened

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-03-29 09:21:54 UTC

Post by Bill
In regards to your point, I did think about the double dimension, but
liked the clarity of it. I should add a "ref." though, you are right.

Oh ya thats alot of fun, looking through 29 views for the dim, I know
its here somewhere, because I found the REF. for it.

REF can apply to a dimension controlled by other explicit ones.
It does not mean "dimensioned explicitly elsewhere."
The explicit (and non-redundant) ones control. The REF one is redundant
and does not control anything ever.

Example: The point of intersection (on or off) a part of two lines might
be a REF dimension while the lines are actually controlling and
are determined by a point and an angle each.

Inspection is to the points & angles, not the REF.

--
Cliff

Cliff

2010-03-29 09:26:28 UTC

Post by Black Dragon
I checked CAD data for GM (among others) for a bit too long <g>.
Don't ask about "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" !!!!

Just look at the ECN's how long the revision box is- is how much
trouble the part is.

"REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" removes all prior items in the revision
box as well as all symbols about same on the drawing.
Often the old drawing is archived at this stage as a backup.
Then you get new changes to the "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" <G>.

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-03-29 10:59:47 UTC

Post by Black Dragon
I checked CAD data for GM (among others) for a bit too long <g>.
Don't ask about "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" !!!!

Just look at the ECN's how long the revision box is- is how much
trouble the part is.

Thats a convenient way to hide all part history.
Is this part a fucked up design? Does it fit into a "problem"
assembly? Does it need to be re-desgined?
Nay fuck-it we aint got time. just keep making them to this newly
drawn Acad print, so what if thew fall-out is 30%, we'll just give'em
new ones as they fail. We're making a $ton$ on this cheap shit.
Move on soldier!
Yours is not to question why, yours is just to do or die.

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have for Animal Stories today
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No little Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF just happened

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-03-29 21:22:17 UTC

Post by Black Dragon
I checked CAD data for GM (among others) for a bit too long <g>.
Don't ask about "REDRAWN W/O CHANGE" !!!!

Just look at the ECN's how long the revision box is- is how much
trouble the part is.

Thats a convenient way to hide all part history.

It does not hide it. It proclaims that it's a new drawing
unchanged from the prior release.
Same exact function & specs.

As I said, often the old drawing gets archived to
preserve the change history just in case it's ever needed.

Post by cncmillgil
Is this part a fucked up design?

Over time parts might change a bit. Better manufacturing,
materials, fits more places with minor changes, etc.

Post by cncmillgil
Does it fit into a "problem"
assembly? Does it need to be re-desgined?

Add a small radius where there had been a sharp to cut the service failure
rate by .00001%. Change heat treat & better new alloy, etc.

Post by cncmillgil
Nay fuck-it we aint got time. just keep making them to this newly
drawn Acad print, so what if thew fall-out is 30%, we'll just give'em
new ones as they fail. We're making a $ton$ on this cheap shit.
Move on soldier!
Yours is not to question why, yours is just to do or die.

--
Cliff

Cliff

2010-03-29 07:45:06 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

<G>

Bill,
You could write entirely new commands & applications for use
with CADDS. A full CAD/CAM system with a huge list of existing
features & applications already there.
Plus, from an N/C standpoint, you could add even more
automation with pretty simple tools such as (for CADDS III)
PEP-NC.

--
Cliff

Bill

2010-03-29 20:36:41 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

<G>
Bill,
You could write entirely new commands & applications for use
with CADDS. A full CAD/CAM system with a huge list of existing
features & applications already there.
Plus, from an N/C standpoint, you could add even more
automation with pretty simple tools such as (for CADDS III)
PEP-NC.
--
Cliff

Cliff... re-read what you just wrote. You're asking the programmer to
create new commands and applications just so he can program the part
efficiently! That doesn't seem inefficient to you? I'm fully aware of
the underlying text based commands that CADDS actually used (very past
tense). They did the same thing as Applicon Bravo - put a pretty mouse
interface to drive the same cryptic underlying interpreted text
commands - an interface that often crashed the system.
--
Bill

Cliff

2010-03-29 21:33:17 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

<G>
Bill,
You could write entirely new commands & applications for use
with CADDS. A full CAD/CAM system with a huge list of existing
features & applications already there.
Plus, from an N/C standpoint, you could add even more
automation with pretty simple tools such as (for CADDS III)
PEP-NC.
--
Cliff

Cliff... re-read what you just wrote.

I know what I wrote, Bill.

Post by Bill
You're asking the programmer to
create new commands and applications just so he can program the part
efficiently!

I said "CAD/CAM" IIRC.
Simple early example: you can create a rectangle with points & lines ...
or add an "Insert Rectangle" command.

Post by Bill
That doesn't seem inefficient to you?

About every business has unique needs. CAD/CAM systems are
general-purpose tools.
What's wrong in adding more custom automation that is specific to those
needs?
Take an hour to automate & save 300 hours per year ... ?

Post by Bill
I'm fully aware of
the underlying text based commands that CADDS actually used (very past
tense). They did the same thing as Applicon Bravo - put a pretty mouse
interface to drive the same cryptic underlying interpreted text
commands - an interface that often crashed the system.

The text commands just ran thru the command interpreter (see the verb-noun
table) which then executed the binaries.
Don't blame text commands.
And those could be easily altered or aliased of given synonyms; IP for
"Insert Point", etc.
Really simple & faster than anything mouse-driven for a good user - no
need to hunt for icons ...

--
Cliff

Joe788

2010-03-30 02:35:07 UTC

What's Significant And New In SolidCAM 2010?

As per usual you can only get this information on the Jon Banquer
blog!

Cut and paste the link below into your browser and start getting the
information you can't get in this worthless wasteland.

www.jonbanquer.wordpress.com

Cliff

2010-03-30 04:35:11 UTC

Post by Joe788
What's Significant And New In SolidCAM 2010?
As per usual you can only get this information on the Jon Banquer
blog!
Cut and paste the link below into your browser and start getting the
information you can't get in this worthless wasteland.
www.jonbanquer.wordpress.com

LOL .... How long have they been that backward?
Plus you have no clues at all, as usual.

The OLD UG NC-Batch program with minor changes
20 years ago could run similar with priority ("nice"),
at a specified time or even on another workstation's
CPU (if allowed).
This just needs at least a dual core CPU, youbetcha.
Plus no nice or priority or time settings nor any bells
or logs or restart options .... What a hog!!

--
Cliff

Joe788

2010-03-30 14:45:22 UTC

What's Significant And New In SolidCAM 2010?

As per usual, you can only get this information from copy/pasted press
releases and nonsensical jibber jabber from a frothing lunatic that
doesn't have the software, or you can just go to the Solidcam website!

http://www.solidcam.com/

http://joncluelessbanquer.blogspot.com/

Joe788

2010-03-31 00:13:18 UTC

Joe788

2010-03-31 01:05:03 UTC

Joe788

2010-03-31 01:31:23 UTC

cncmillgil

2010-03-30 10:19:00 UTC

If you had a source code license the CV subroutines
were much better & much more extensively documented...

<G>
Bill,
You could write entirely new commands & applications for use
with CADDS. A full CAD/CAM system with a huge list of existing
features & applications already there.
Plus, from an N/C standpoint, you could add even more
automation with pretty simple tools such as (for CADDS III)
PEP-NC.
--
Cliff

Cliff... re-read what you just wrote.

I know what I wrote, Bill.

Post by Bill
You're asking the programmer to
create new commands and applications just so he can program the part
efficiently!

I said "CAD/CAM" IIRC.
Simple early example: you can create a rectangle with points & lines ...
or add an "Insert Rectangle" command.

Post by Bill
That doesn't seem inefficient to you?

EZ-NC- circa 1981ish out of Detroit - Some computer science grad wote
& marketed it. Steaming from his Dad's machine shop needs to program
the NC's (not CNC yet)<g>
BASIC code to run on TRS80 model 1's 2's 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10- How many
were there?
Any minimaly dimensioned 2D geometry could be entered via keyboard
input commands.
with in minutes g-code was created
Slicker than shit. Once I figureed out how to program in BASIC & store
all the g-code output to the floppy files or later terminal mode in
RS-232 between Trash80 & Numeridex LC-6000 tape prep system, to access
the tape punch
-the BTR reader boxes with 5-1/4 disks. That literally was a DNC
network- Put Run in front it- with sneekers & you'd have RunDNC. That
was the mode of file transport right after tape readers went bye,bye.

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have for Animal Stories today
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No little Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of A N I M A L S T O R I E S

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~
Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF just happened

~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-03-31 06:53:15 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
EZ-NC- circa 1981ish out of Detroit - Some computer science grad wote
& marketed it. Steaming from his Dad's machine shop needs to program
the NC's (not CNC yet)<g>
BASIC code to run on TRS80 model 1's 2's 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10- How many
were there?
Any minimaly dimensioned 2D geometry could be entered via keyboard
input commands.
with in minutes g-code was created
Slicker than shit. Once I figureed out how to program in BASIC & store
all the g-code output to the floppy files or later terminal mode in
RS-232 between Trash80 & Numeridex LC-6000 tape prep system, to access
the tape punch
-the BTR reader boxes with 5-1/4 disks. That literally was a DNC
network- Put Run in front it- with sneekers & you'd have RunDNC. That
was the mode of file transport right after tape readers went bye,bye.

If all you are dealing with are lines & arcs or some simple surfaces
you just offset them & bingo, tool centerline data for simple tools in
2D or some simple 3 axes.
A bit more complicated for 3 axes surface machining wth a ball endmill
but not by much. You just need to offset the surface and ....

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-03-31 10:06:04 UTC

If all you are dealing with are lines & arcs or some simple surfaces
you just offset them & bingo, tool centerline data for simple tools in
2D or some simple 3 axes.

Well duh....... all geometry can be defined as a series of simple
lines/arcs, its just how you traverse across them is how complex the
toolpath is.

A bit more complicated for 3 axes surface machining wth a ball endmill
but not by much. You just need to offset the surface and ....

ball cutting across surface geometry is the easiest, bull or flat nose
- now thats some math

--
Cliff

Back to the future now,
Most 3D parts can be broken down in a series of intersections of
common shapes, thus moldmaking 101.
So sweeping 2D tapered shapes are milled in large tools just by
"sweeping" 2D geometry down on a taper- draftangle.- A nice new OSG
tapered EM used to make my day :-)
Small or tight / or constantant rad. corners are EDM'ed or "pencil
head" picked. Thats they way it was done before any computer aided
design / computer aided machining software was available to the
general public.
The wizz kids / computer guys that could figure out how to use BASIC/
FORTRAN on the "toy" computers like radio shacks mod 1 with cassette
tape storage <g>, that all us little people could afford.
Input a few variables & bingo ! there's your XYZ data. Ah its
trigonometry............. you know those sin tan cos buttons? Its
pretty easy, just keeping track of a few trig calculations the deeper
you mill. Basically making area/shape specific 3D g-code for that job/
cavity shape or rib cutting.
Being able to output all that wonderfull organized XYZ data to machine
specific code was other problem.
Ah....... p o s t processing

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have for AMC today
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No! little Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of pioneers in 3D moldmaking
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~
Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF will happen
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-04-02 10:20:24 UTC

If all you are dealing with are lines & arcs or some simple surfaces
you just offset them & bingo, tool centerline data for simple tools in
2D or some simple 3 axes.

Well duh....... all geometry can be defined as a series of simple
lines/arcs,

What is the intersection of two cones?
The offset of an ellipse?

Post by cncmillgil
its just how you traverse across them is how complex the
toolpath is.

Sell jb AutoCAD <G>.

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-04-02 11:35:01 UTC

If all you are dealing with are lines & arcs or some simple surfaces
you just offset them & bingo, tool centerline data for simple tools in
2D or some simple 3 axes.

Well duh....... all geometry can be defined as a series of simple

correction: all geometry can be approximated with a series of simple

Post by cncmillgil
lines/arcs,

What is the intersection of two cones?

waffle, sugar or traffic?<g>
The hyperbola is very cool

The offset of an ellipse?

an ellipse is the angled slice cut of a perfectly round diameter. The
major dim of the ellipse it is the diameter of the round.
Ellipses are every where! Ford logo, cutting round stock with a dull
saw blade<g>
Masterscam used to have a routine or c-hook to break ellipses into a
series of arcs for a much "smoother" toolpath thus part finish.

Post by cncmillgil
its just how you traverse across them is how complex the
toolpath is.

Sell jb AutoCAD <G>.

probably the most user available software in the world?
who hasn't used Acad?
use it to program a CNC? I dont think so.

--
Cliff

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have today for AMC
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No! little Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of pioneers in 3D CAD/CAM history
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~
Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just don't know WTF will happen
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-04-02 19:16:08 UTC

Sell jb AutoCAD <G>.

probably the most user available software in the world?
who hasn't used Acad?
use it to program a CNC? I dont think so.

IIRC There are quite a few third-party add-ons
to do exactly that.
Many are free IIRC.

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-04-02 19:32:52 UTC

Sell jb AutoCAD <G>.

probably the most user available software in the world?
who hasn't used Acad?
use it to program a CNC? I dont think so.

IIRC There are quite a few third-party add-ons
to do exactly that.
Many are free IIRC.
--
Cliff

They should be free! they, they just "automate" acad commands?
which begs the question: is lisp dead?
WTF cares?
anyone using it is in the "stone age" unless they are just "playing
around" with nothing better to do, not really concerned about being
efficiency & profitable. So its ok for "hobby lobby" use for those
that don't know how to use a scientific calculator?
Ok back to work all you AutoCad slaves!
Make that POS work!

I feeeeeeeeeel your pain! (slick willie clinton)

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have today for AMC
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No! little Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of pioneers in 3D CAD/CAM history
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~
Some people make things happen....
Some watch things happen...
While others just wondering WTF will happen
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-04-03 09:03:13 UTC

Sell jb AutoCAD <G>.

probably the most user available software in the world?
who hasn't used Acad?
use it to program a CNC? I dont think so.

IIRC There are quite a few third-party add-ons
to do exactly that.
Many are free IIRC.
--
Cliff

They should be free! they, they just "automate" acad commands?
which begs the question: is lisp dead?
WTF cares?

Ought to be fine for arcs & lines <G>.
Though I doubt jb could drill any holes.

Post by cncmillgil
anyone using it is in the "stone age" unless they are just "playing
around" with nothing better to do, not really concerned about being
efficiency & profitable. So its ok for "hobby lobby" use for those
that don't know how to use a scientific calculator?

Probably lots faster.
I used to have a calculator.
It was faster than COMPACT-II, all things considered ....
(in that specific work environment).

--
Cliff

cncmillgil

2010-04-03 14:03:32 UTC

Sell jb AutoCAD <G>.

probably the most user available software in the world?
who hasn't used Acad?
use it to program a CNC? I dont think so.

IIRC There are quite a few third-party add-ons
to do exactly that.
Many are free IIRC.
--
Cliff

They should be free! they, they just "automate" acad commands?
which begs the question: is lisp dead?
WTF cares?

Ought to be fine for arcs & lines <G>.
Though I doubt jb could drill any holes.

Probably lots faster.
I used to have a calculator.
It was faster than COMPACT-II, all things considered ....
(in that specific work environment).
--
Cliff

COMPACT-II ?
Thank god I missed that era by just a few years.
Hmmmmmm
IIRC COMPACT was more geared toward business accounting? like COBAL?
FORTRAN was king for 3D, or for us simple people that aint that great
in math, BASIC was power.
Now its "visual basic" damn! VB - its visual (like I can't see) & its
basic?
Dont ya just hate it when your computer is missing a visual basic
file? sometimes .VBX
Keeping the current version was a major pain. 1 2 3? WTF?
Its no backward compatibility, which was also major problem with CAD
files.Once you've updated your data files to current software version
there's no going back. So, always keep a backup in the old version
because the new version crashes! Like that never happens.

--

Well little snot nose Tommy, that's about all the time
we have today for AMC
Auh gee uncle Lar, just one more?
No! little Tommy. Join us again tomorrow, same time same
station for another
amazing true life events of pioneers in 3D CAD/CAM history
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~
Some people make shit happen....
Some watch things shit happen...
While others just say shit happens
~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~o~~~o~~

Cliff

2010-04-04 22:15:16 UTC

Post by cncmillgil
COMPACT-II ?
Thank god I missed that era by just a few years.
Hmmmmmm
IIRC COMPACT was more geared toward business accounting? like COBAL?

See the MDSI stuff at
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3101/is_n6_v70/ai_20161041/pg_2/

--
Cliff

Cliff

2010-04-04 22:20:59 UTC