New zeroing/mapping to cost $$$$$

[sk8nmike]

You're comparing apples and oranges here...

Makerware while closed source uses many open source routines, the majority of the software is written by users and will work with other 3D priters using variations of the repraptor design. Makerbot is also deciding the fate of it's "open source" approach to their machines and software as they are not seeing a profit.

The Shark Control software on the other hand is propriety software designed for and only used on the Shark. All upgrades and programming is completed "in-house".

If you want to compare prices... The cost to upgrade your Carvewright from designer 1.5 to 2.0 is $200 and that does not include the extras.

[milo30]

I have no issue with charging for 2.0. It is an optional program and you aren'trequired to use it. As long as I have the standard software then I am fine. They aren't forcing it on you and evidently there are quite a few people that need it.

[EdThorne]

Hi GullyFoyle,

I respect your viewpoints and appreciate the fact that you took time to express your differing opinions. I also appreciate the fact that Rockler allows individuals, like us, to express differing opinions on this forum. It sounds like the philosophies of the manufacturer of the MakerBot are more in line with your expectations. I understand that you are only comparing the philosophies of these companies and not the functionality of their respective products.

I am a hobbyist and you sound like you have more professional expectations. I don’t make money using my CNC. I wanted a package that I could use without tinkering for months and months. Vectric’s Aspire software suited my needs. It was certainly not an inexpensive upgrade. I would welcome Shark compatibility with MACH3 and other third party software but I am not sure that I would utilize such compatibility even if it becomes available. I have never used a CNC before buying my Shark; this product requires enough of a learning curve for a beginner so that it is challenging and yet still fun. I can make things on this machine that I could only dream about making in the past. I don’t need years of woodworking experience to make very attractive pieces for myself, family, and friends.

I agree with you that some features on the Shark could be improved. Many of us have already made “improvements” to the original design. Some individuals have even replaced all plastic parts with metal replicates. I have considered doing this but haven’t done so. Overall, the Shark meets my needs and does a remarkable job.

Your argument that controller software upgrades should be free is a reasonable viewpoint. Some individuals on this forum have suggested that $50 would be a reasonable upgrade cost. NWA seems to feel that $150 is reasonable. Owners will obviously vote with their wallets. I would like NWA to be profitable so that they may continue to improve their products and introduce new products. I am still waiting for the 4th rotary axis to appear.

Best regards and Happy New Year,
Ed

[Glug]

A lot of CNC control software is based on the public domain and freely available NIST Enhanced Machine Controller software.

The freely available LinuxCNC is one such version. Those of us who can write software can actually fix and enhance that code. We can add features to benefit both ourselves and others. We can easily add support for 4th axis tables, automated clamps, indicator lights, whatever. You can probably find someone to add custom features for you, in exchange for beer or cash.

CNC is rapidly being commoditized. I don't agree with the notion that there is a bunch of money to be made in control software. Especially when the user base for that control software is small because it is specific to only one hardware platform, like the Shark.

Some people would probably like us to believe the features in Mach3 should cost $5000.

My Shark control software requires a key to use, otherwise it will not function. In 5 or 10 years, NWA may not be around to give me a new key. If that happens (and history suggests it may) my controller will become useless. A controller that is compatible with LinuxCNC or Mach3 would not likely have that issue.

[4DThinker]

My Shark control software requires a key to use, otherwise it will not function. In 5 or 10 years, NWA may not be around to give me a new key. If that happens (and history suggests it may) my controller will become useless. A controller that is compatible with LinuxCNC or Mach3 would not likely have that issue.

Your Shark controller with key will continue to work as long as the Shark does. You only need a new key if you pay for their upgraded version, and if Nextwave goes out of business there will be no new versions to need a key for. Keys are kept in the user's document's folder, and can even move to a new PC (running the same Shark) so long as you copy the contents of that folder to the new PC.

I''ll agree though that LinuxCNC and other "free" controller packages are what makes the price of small CNCs keep coming down while their hardware quality goes up. In the 3D printer world even Windows 8 is including built-in 3D printing support (if the machine maker provides a standard driver). To that end the trend now is to make money on selling 3D files to people owning 3D printers. There is profit in the plastic/resin/whatever as well, just like printer companies make money on cartridges after selling you a printer for what seems to be less than cost. Vectric knows that not everyone can generate those 3D files, so they sell them to you as well. No one makes money on razors. The money is in the blades you buy and buy and buy again.

The Virtual Zero technology is revolutionary though. NextWave leads here. I don't mind the $150 cost for that feature alone. As far as I know all the other control software players out there will be following there rather than leading. JMHO

[milo30]

The Virtual Zero technology is revolutionary though. NextWave leads here. I don't mind the $150 cost for that feature alone. As far as I know all the other control software players out there will be following there rather than leading. JMHO
4DThinker
 

I just don't see it. I haven't seen all the different cnc machines out there but I frequent many different forums and I really don't recall anyone complaining about having issues with flexing tables, which if I understand VZ correctly, that is its primary use. If my material wasn't flat to begin with I would just plane it quickly on the cnc and have it done right. It will be interesting to watch and see whether it catches on or not. I just look at it as one of those "cool tools" that everyone has to have but dies away.

I see the posts of people who got it and love it. Just not something that I seem able to wrap my head around as needing.

[Joseph Poirier]

Honestly, I believe Next Wave Automation was very generous with the pricing of the 2.0 control panel, especially considering all the new taxes everyone started paying in 2013, and the going rate for competing and supplementary Windows programs.

I have written other software packages (in other industries) with zero upgrades that companies licensed to users annually for over $1000/PC, and a group of updates for one company that licensed all the updates as a package to a single customer for $150,000.00, while continuing to license the individual updates to other customers on a per user per application basis. Given that, Tim has been more than generous in his price point.

[McBuster]

Joseph

I respectively disagree on the pricing of 2.0.

1) The User Interface is clumsy, disorganized and in some cases, dangerous.

2) The Virtual Zero concept is a good one. Here are some improvements that would have been nice to have in the first release.

a) Instead of five (5) points that describe a pyramid shaped piece of wood, take a minimum of nine (9). Four corners, midpoints of four edges, the center. That way, if the board is warped along one axis, cone shaped, twisted or just plain flat, the formulas have a better chance at getting it right. In addition, one could offer "shapes" that describe the shape of the wooden piece. With five points, the Z dimension for a warped board can not be calculated correctly.

b) Instead of marching right out to the extreme corners and exactly in the middle, have it user defined. You know where the Gantry X,Y is at this moment, you know where the corners are as defined in the Job Dimensions and Origin. If you can interpolate towards the middle, one can interpolate outwards as well. I can not use V Zero, as, my pieces are clamped into jigs and using the Touch Plate in the corners, is too time consuming to do. Plus, I deal in cylindrical warps, not pyramid shapes.

3) The Touch Plate seems to work a bit different in 2.0 than 1.5. I use a sharp 60 degree bit, Rockler #44276 to do my lettering on my panels. This is the fourth type of bit I have tried and this one works very well for my needs. Each time I use it with V Zero, the tip gets flattened/chipped. I have gone thru four of them now and for what I do, I need that perfectly sharp point. When reading the four corners etc, it seems to push that plate a bit too far, hence chipping the bit. But also giving erroneous readings with that much pressure.

4) Price Point. The upgrade price, for me, is too much just to gain V Zero. Had it been better executed, maybe. Toss in a User Interface that is clumsy as well? Priced too high. I will state, the math for V Zero cannot be that difficult to do. Imho, it is offered to largely fix the issues of the bed/gantry relationship.

5) There is also another issue at work. Let's say, my neighbor purchases the HD at the $4000 price. About September or so. Then, Rockler/NWA decide to have a Christmas Promotion. Does not matter who decides what to offer. I buy one with hundreds of dollars of goodies and get 2.0 for free. How does my neighbor feel? How about his neighbor who bought one a few months after I bought mine? Fair?

+++

I published a redesign of 2.0 earlier that takes 2.0 and after spending an hour doing the "Wigs and Lipstick" route, I believe is easier and far more clear to use.

I have attached an improvement to that design in this response.

This may serve as a starting point for a Dialog how to improve v2.0.
.

[rungemach]

I have to agree with Jon, regarding mapping of the work surface.
Initially the Virtual Zero used 4 points, now changed to 5.
A flat surface distorted by clamping issues can form various shapes and only 5 points can not determine the direction of the part "bowing".

Other methods I have seen others use in mapping to a surface all involve more touch points to get the surface right.
That would be useful if you are trying to carve on intentionally curved surfaces, like musical instruments or gun stocks.
You can't do that well with 5 points. As the mapping gets more complicated, it takes more time.

I tend to agree with Ralph (Consultingwoodworker) in that you may be best in starting with a flat table sacrificial surface, and plane the work surface flat if needed.

[Glug]

Just stumbled upon two free auto-leveling options. The first modifies your g-code. The second is part of linuxcnc.


http://www.autoleveller.co.uk/

http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ProbeKins