If you can > think it, you can pretty much do it with LinuxCNC. > > Jon > Hi Jon, I don't disagree. The same can be said of Linux (and is by Linux proponents).
Here's the thing though. To set up my motors I had to edit a text file. Oh wait, that's standard Linux practice for everything. Edit command lines. Edit text files. All sorts of text files in all sorts of locations. Often the sample distribution text files have comments that have no relationship to the information in the text files. Now flip to the Windows/MAC world and you get dialogs with all the fields where you can hover and get hints or click and get help files. True, for LinuxCNC (MachineKit) you can search the web for information on what to enter into those Linux text files but as you pointed out, that comparison on Beagle Speed was maybe 2 years old. One never knows what's really up to date. And since LinuxCNC is all powerful the claim can be made that putting all that stuff into windows and dialogs couldn't possible handle all the permutations. I agree there too. But then for the 'experts' they'd roll their own anyway. Do I want to spend hours and hours researching which parameters to change not knowing for sure if the document found on the web is up to date? The Beagle seemed like such a nice idea. But clearly from the 'older' document the AXIS uses up a lot of CPU time. That's shown in my CPU indictor that goes solid green as soon as motion starts with the tool path shown but only about 50% green with only the DROs. Click the Tab button on MACH3 and a Pendant model slides out from the right of the screen. All jog buttons etc are there for the mouse. The Axis interface has radio buttons and one jog button for all. Probably possible to make something like that for AXIS or LinuxCNC and then there's the latency from screen button to motor movement that isn't on my PC. But I agree that's apples and oranges comparison. I want to keep the discussion on whether a Beagle can run LinuxCNC past the demo point of "Look! We got the motors turning!" So far testing with the MDI shows nice repeatability and motion with the Y position commands. Both with G00 and G01. So yet I have motors turning. Since MACH3 was available 10 years ago I'm still amazed that someone hasn't cloned the user screens and basic functionality of MACH3 with LinuxCNC (or even BBB MachineKit). Either it's an attitude in the form of why would we want to? Or maybe it's so difficult or not even possible and it's easier to slam windows and MACH3. Every single MACH3 user out there who has all their fancy screens and custom user interfaces might switch over to LinuxCNC on a PC in a heartbeat if the initial look and feel was the same. Especially if they could use a newer 64 bit machine with Ethernet or USB3 to Parallel Port adaptors. The Beagle appears to have potential still. But the current AXIS system definitely cripples it if you run the graphical path screen. Maybe when I'm retired I'll have time to do something. John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
