Wow wee what a response! Look here Sparkie, I have been programming since 1978 using good old APT and then in 1989 started with SmartCAM V4.5 which by the way is what I am still using to program with. My bottom line depends on one thing only. Satisfying my customer's demands. My customers are a collection of JOB SHOPS where their customers comes to them with a CAD print or a HAND DRAWN print or a FAX or a HAND DRAWN SKETCH on a piece of graph paper. Then they say I need this many of these pieces by this date. Then my customers says to me I need a program like now! I fail to see your "More and more customers are wanting things SmartCAM and other 'hobby cam packages can never offer - associatively of NC programs to engineering geometry." logic here because, guess what? If I do not get the required program(s) by the required date(s) then my customer's spindles are not turning. Therefore, my customer will goto programmer X next door and say I need these programs now. And guess what I am out of work! See the connection here SPEED=MONEY.
Just the other week I was at one of my customer's job shop which has 3 vertical mills, 2 vertical lathes, 1 horizontal lathe and a 4-axis horizontal mill. This customer was getting another programmer to make lathe programs using Compact II on a 486 computer with an EGA monitor. Yes these computers still exsist. This other programmer was helping my customer setup a line of work from his now "DOWN SIZED" large unionized job shop, which by the way he had worked there for 19 years. A down turn in sales and it was pack up this plant and move all operations to this non-unionized more profitable plant. Except for this line which you SUB CONTRACT to a smaller local jobbing shop and leave one person in charge in a tiny office to over see the line. Anyway, you know what? I could not compete with him when it came to changing from one Similar lathe part to another. A quick edit of Compact source code here, re post process and a new program in just seconds! No "intense engineering data " here buck wheat just raw NC code going directly into the lathe using ProComm through a manual switch box. Bottom line... TIME which equals customer satisfaction which equals MONEY!!! That is why you have a thousands and thousands of job shops on every corner competing. To make money. However, I do work for a large company that uses ELECTRONIC data to manufacture components. In the good old days a typical job would require 3 to 4 hours of manual input from a print to get to the point where you can start to layout your tools and only then begin to make a program. The 3 to 4 hours is now gone because, this company uses "intense engineering data" because it makes its OWN products. I had an agreement between us stating that if they provide me with electronic data and the part was wrong because some designer changed a dimension but not the data then it was there problem. As you know electronic data is only as good as the person whom is drawing it. That is why a good designer should start from the job shop level and work his/her way up the Designer/Engineer status. Not take College and/or University courses and then say I am a Designer/Enginner! Just my two cents here... -----Original Message----- From: Larry Hoke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, June 08, 2000 4:08 PM Subject: [mfg-smartcam] Dead Product >To all SmartCAM users: > >I have been following the lament that SmartCAM is dead; SmartCAM is the >best thing since sliced bread; and why can't SDRC do something to support >it, with increasing annoyance. To all of you I say, "Grow up!! SmartCAM is >dead - move on!!" > >If you all want to collectively go crawl into a corner and cry about how >SmartCAM is dead and no one wants to support it then go ahead. The ones >who understand life, will leave you in the dust to rot. There have been >many good things in life that have died only to be replaced by something >better. Such is the case with SmartCAM. > >The '39 Ford coupe was a good car, but it was replaced by newer technology. > The B-17 was a good war plane but it was replaced by newer technology. > COMPACT-II was a very good lathe package - it died and was replaced by >newer technology. APT was (and still is) a good product, but there are a >hell of a lot of products that are better. SmartCAM was good but it too >will be replaced. > >None of you have a clue to life about technology. SDRC made a very sound >business decision to stop supporting that particular technology. And to me >it was for a very good reason. More and more customers are wanting things >SmartCAM and other 'hobby cam packages can never offer - associativity of >NC programs to engineering geometry. If engineering changes the NC >automatically updates. Your hobby cam packages simply don't have the horse >power to build, support, and handle the intense engineering data being >created these days. > >That is why SDRC, Dassualt/IBM, Unigraphics, and PTC are investing millions >to create associated data bases from design to manufacturing. That is why >they are building NC packages that allow users to capture frequently used >data and reuse it on other jobs. None of your hobby cam packages have a >snow balls chance in hell of doing that. Having to pass data from a major >system to hobby cam looses all of that. > >The statement made recently about being able to learn SmartCAM in three >days is absolutely ridiculous. My company inherited several hundred >SmartCAM programs, and decided to try to train someone to use the SmartCAM >seat we also inherited. After two weeks of hands on training by a local >user, we are no farther along with SmartCAM than we were before. Yes we >can make some programs. Yes we can generate some code. But no we are not >proficient enough after two weeks to be able to handle all of the >programming situations that arise on a daily basis. > >I have been in this business since 1966, and have never seen any >programming system that could be learned in 3 days. It hasn't existed in >34 years, and I don't see it in the near horizon. And that goes for APT, >UCC-APT, Westinghouse CIN-TURN macro package, LATHESEQ, CADAM NC, and CATIA >NC. Each package had/has it's strengths and weaknesses. You don't sit in >a corner and cry about not being able to do your job because it doesn't run >like I want it to. You get your ass in gear and make it work to the best >of it's ability, and learn how to work around the faults. And that >philosophy will never change my friends. > >If you put any well trained, seasoned operator (such as Mr. Lazarus) on any >system, he/she will be able to make it dance an Irish jig and whistle Dixie >at the same time. The complaints about long training on new systems are >unfounded and basically "crying in your beer." You had to invest time in >SmartCAM - so will you on a new system. > >As far as those programs we inherited goes - they are absolute junk. And >this guy supposedly had three years experience in programming. Every >program is being converted to CATIA as they come up for re-run. So it goes >to say, it's not totally the package being good or bad. It's the >experience of the people, and how willing they are to invest the time in >learning new skills and making things work to the best advantage possible. > Something you SmartCAM folks seem dead set against doing. > >Instead of complaining about the lack of support and how much you are going >to miss SmartCAM, why don't you form a for real users group, or some other >type of organization, and go to SDRC and say, "Look folks, we like what >SmartCAM could do. We understand your decision to kill SmartCAM, but we >would like to work with you in trying to implement some of the SmartCAM >features into your new product, if possible." And you know what, with SDRC >being reasonable most of the time, they probably would be receptive to that >idea. > >At least they would be more receptive to that than everyone throwing rocks >at their windows, and telling them how arrogant you think they are. Your >recent attacks and attitudes are similar to the NRA who doesn't have a clue >as to how to win friends and influence enemies. > >Or maybe better yet, if there is an entrepreneur among you, why don't you >put together a group of investors and buy the code from SDRC? Then you can >do any damn thing you want with it. > >The bottom line is - SmartCAM truly is dead. Get a life and move on. If >you want to stay in the Mom and Pop shop mode where hobby cam products are >the only ones you can afford, then go buy a new one, learn how to use it >and shut up. You would be suprised what you can do if you just try. > >Larry M. Hoke > >====================================================================== >To find out more about this mailing list including how to unsubscribe, >send the message "info mfg-smartcam" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >====================================================================== ====================================================================== To find out more about this mailing list including how to unsubscribe, send the message "info mfg-smartcam" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ======================================================================
