Multiple Part Simulation
Joe788
Find out how DP Technology Esprit does Vs. Mastercam X4
http://jonbanquer.wordpress.com/dp-technology-esprit-vs-mastercam-x4/
Joe788
Very, very well. It's all we do here.
Zymrgy
You really should learn to focus your rants Yoni. Last week (or month,
time flies) you were pimping Delcam for Solidworks as if it was the
ultimate solution. Before that it was ????....I don't keep track, but
I do know you have posted about how pretty much all CAM programs are
superior to Mastercam in one way or another.
I would like to present you with another theory.....maybe the operator
(yourself) is inferior? Most things you have complained/bitched like a
girl about can be done in Mastercam by an slightly educated user. Is
Mastercam the "ultimate solution"...fuck no.....We all know it has it
weak points and can be improved upon. However... Can a slightly
educated user make good parts quickly with it... yes. If you spent 1/2
your time learning bout the program as you did bitching about it, you
would be a fucking pro.
Cliff
MC has 5 axes capabilities.
He bitches as a result.
He then promptly misuses about any feature in a most
clueless way.
Funny funny .... I doubt he's ever used it.
--
Cliff
Joe788
"D"
It handles it quite well, Thank you!!
Instead of spending time complaining about it on the internet, I sit
down and do the actual work WITH my cad-cam system.
It took me less time to copy, tanslate, rotate, and assign offsets to
a 6 set up part than it took to read the bullshit you spewed about the
"broken, un-useable" software!
Go figure, taking the time to do the work????????
"This aint no vending machine, you dont put a quarter in and get a
finished product out"
"D"
Joe788
say with facts and screen shots?
When you've had enough bullshit, spin, etc. suggest you check out the
Jon Banquer blog and find out why Mastercam fails miserably at doing
practical / real world multiple part simulation. New screen shots
added this morning show how easy it is to setup a tombstone and solid
cut part verify multiple parts in DP Technology Esprit with none of
the limitations that Mastercam has:
http://jonbanquer.wordpress.com/dp-technology-esprit-vs-mastercam-x4/
"Mastercam requires you to join all your individual .STL parts so they
make up one connected piece. Mastercam won’t simulate separate .STL
files all at once. DP Esprit has no such ridiculous limitation.
Simulating a tombstone with many different parts on it is easy in DP
Technology Esprit. It’s a exercise in frustration in Mastercam and
isn’t practical by any stretch of the imagination."
You can only find this kind of information on the Jon Banquer blog.
The Jon Banquer blog is the leading CAM-centric blog on the internet.
http://jonbanquer.wordpress.com/dp-technology-esprit-vs-mastercam-x4/
Joe788
Like the screen shots I posted of your embarrassing mask on arc
debacle?
Jon, you've been desperately struggling with stl simulation since the
dawn of time. This is not Mastercam's fault. Your "Mastercam User"
alias at CNCZone was begging for help with this years ago, even after
getting the help you were still unable to grasp the concept, going so
far as to actually stating about yourself, "I have no clues". Then
just a few months ago I gave one of your emastercam aliases very
specific instructions on how easy it is to take a complete assembly
from solidworks, and verify on it in Mastercam. Apparently you still
aren't unable to grasp the basics. Big surprise there.
Joe788
Joe788
Like the screen shots I posted of your embarrassing mask on arc
debacle? Or the screen shots I posted of FBM Drill to prove that you
had never even seen the function, let alone used it, or had the
experience to comment on it.
Joe788
Joe788
Like the screen shots I posted of your embarrassing mask on arc
Joe788
Joe788
> http://jonbanquer.wordpress.com/dp-technology-esprit-vs-mastercam-x4/
> http://jonbanquer.wordpress.com/dp-technology-esprit-vs-mastercam-x4/
Like the screen shot I posted on emastercam that has more hits than
your entire worthless blog?
Joe788
John R. Carroll
Hey Joe,
If you, or anyone for that matter, didn't respond to Connie's husband's
blathering - nobody would even know he was alive.
--
John R. Carroll
Haywood JaBlowme
John R. Carroll
You say -
> When DP Esprit 2001 is released in September it WILL BE a much more
> comprehensive .. package than ...........
and -
> Among it's many advantages over ....... WILL BE .......
> an API that SUPPOSEDLY is fully exposed......
and -
> Also in this release, is the PROMISE of 100 percent toolpath
>editability. ------------------------------
Finally, I've cracked. Having read your rantings for the last couple of
years and ignored them, out of politeness, it is time to kick ass.
You know very well that Licom's AlphaCAM was the first CAD/CAM system to
implement a 100% fully exposed API with integrated VBA plus 100% toolpath
editability plus an associative toolpath function that instantly updates
your toolpaths if you change or move or add or delete any geometries
associated with the creation of the original toolpaths.
Licom does not say that AlphaCAM WILL HAVE or SUPPOSEDLY will have .......
We have been delivering the dream for more than two years. Since then, we
have improved and refined what you can do and how you can do it by
responding to customer and Dealer feedback. If our experience counts for
anything, DP Technology is four years behind us - two years behind before
first release plus two years of development since first release.
More than a year ago we sent you a full function AlphaCAM multi-module
system to try out, because then I thought that maybe, just maybe, you had
something to contribute to the debate about different CAD/CAM systems. You
have not even said 'thanks'. Have you bothered to install it and try it?
Our Support Team have not had to deal with any questions from you.........
This posting is not about promoting AlphaCAM. It is about exposing you as a
'know nothing'. Your posting makes it clear to me that you are a charlatan
(or in the pay of at least one CAD/CAM company) and should be exposed as
such. You have nothing to contribute to this NG. Your vituperations and
rantings may amuse some of the regulars, who know that they should take your
pronouncements with a pinch of salt, but you probably cause confusion in the
minds of newbies. This is not what this NG is about. Find another NG to vent
your spleen.
Sandy L
PS I am well aware that posting this will subject me to an outpouring of
your bile. So be it. I've got broad shoulders.
'Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn' as Rett Butler said to Scarlett
O'Hara at the end of Gone With The Wind.
"jon banquer" <jon_b...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:2ug7ptogtt2nfhoda...@4ax.com...
> When DP Esprit 2001 is released in September it will be a much more
> comprehensive stand along package than MasterCAM, SURFCAM,
> GIBBS, etc.... BY FAR !!!
>
--
John R. Carroll
Haywood JaBlowme
Mike Henry
"John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in message
news:OPadnX0gRJmStLnW...@giganews.com...
Joe788
Cliff
Everytime his claimed part mix changes he has to
reprogram EVERYTHING <BSEG>.
All in 2 1/2 axes (at best)
He can only hope the parts have no holes or open
pockets ....
--
Cliff
Janes
"Mike Henry" <Michae...@msn.com> wrote in message news:hg375...@news2.newsguy.com...
And those that do respond risk getting kill filed as well.
technomaNge
>
> PROPER RESPONSE TO SPAMMERS. QUIT INCLUDING US IN DISCUSSIONS WHICH DO
> NOT CONCERN PRO-E USERS (I.E. SPAMMING US!!!!!!!) AND SAVE US THE
> TROUBLE OF KILLFILING YOUR FATUOUS, RIDICULOUS "CONVERSATIONS". BTW,
>
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS!FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!FUCK THE
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
>
> Respectfully,
> David Janes
And just why did you decide to post your poison to r.c.m.?
technomaNge
--
Prolly just to show his ignorance of the difference
between spam and crosspost.
Paul Gress
>
> "Mike Henry" <Michae...@msn.com <mailto:Michae...@msn.com>>
> wrote in message news:hg375...@news2.newsguy.com...
> And those that do respond risk getting kill filed as well.
>
>
> PROPER RESPONSE TO SPAMMERS. QUIT INCLUDING US IN DISCUSSIONS WHICH DO
> NOT CONCERN PRO-E USERS (I.E. SPAMMING US!!!!!!!) AND SAVE US THE
> TROUBLE OF KILLFILING YOUR FATUOUS, RIDICULOUS "CONVERSATIONS". BTW,
>
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS!FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!FUCK THE
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!
>
> Respectfully,
> David Janes
Hopefully it will work, I'm tired of all the spamming. It seems to be
started by one person
joe788
is there any way to get those messages blocked?
Paul
Cliff
> Only thing more ignorant than a spammer is a
>multi-part poster, which is one of the rare things
>worse than a crossposter.
Well, there is the stuck caps key .... and poor idiot jb.
--
Cliff
Joe788
Janes
"Staying Active" <st...@active.invalid> wrote in message news:hiflte....@active.invalid...[rcm x-post removed]
In <kIAVm.86099$Xf2....@newsfe12.iad>, on Sun, 13 Dec 2009 19:41:35
-0800, Janes, dja...@cox.net wrote:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CA7C2C.47C97230
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> "Mike Henry" <Michae...@msn.com> wrote in message =
> news:hg375...@news2.newsguy.com...
> And those that do respond risk getting kill filed as well.
>
>
>
> PROPER RESPONSE TO SPAMMERS. QUIT INCLUDING US IN DISCUSSIONS WHICH DO =
> NOT CONCERN PRO-E USERS (I.E. SPAMMING US!!!!!!!) AND SAVE US THE =
> TROUBLE OF KILLFILING YOUR FATUOUS, RIDICULOUS "CONVERSATIONS". BTW, =
> WITHOUT THE SPAM, NO ONE WOULD KNOW ANY OF YOU DUMBFUCKS WAS ALIVE =
> (EXCEPT YOUR FELLOW SPAMMERS).=20
>
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK =
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! =
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS!FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK =
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! =
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK =
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!=20
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS!
>
> Respectfully,
> David Janes
> ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CA7C2C.47C97230
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
> http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
><META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 8.00.6001.18865">
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
><BLOCKQUOTE=20
> style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; =
> PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"Mike Henry" <<A=20
> href=3D"mailto:Michae...@msn.com">Michae...@msn.com</A>> =
> wrote in=20
> message <A=20
> =
> href=3D"news:hg375...@news2.newsguy.com">news:hg375...@news2.newsgu=
> y.com</A>...</DIV>
> <DIV>And those that do respond risk getting kill filed as =
> well.<BR><FONT=20
> face=3DArial><BR></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>PROPER RESPONSE TO SPAMMERS. QUIT INCLUDING US =
> IN=20
> DISCUSSIONS WHICH DO NOT CONCERN PRO-E USERS (I.E. SPAMMING =
> US!!!!!!!) AND=20
> SAVE US THE TROUBLE OF KILLFILING YOUR FATUOUS, RIDICULOUS =
> "CONVERSATIONS". BTW,=20
> WITHOUT THE SPAM, <EM>NO ONE</EM> WOULD KNOW ANY OF YOU DUMBFUCKS WAS =
> ALIVE=20
> (EXCEPT YOUR FELLOW SPAMMERS). </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS!=20
> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS! FUCK=20
> THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! =
> FUCK THE=20
> SPAMMERS!</FONT><FONT face=3DArial>FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE=20
> SPAMMERS!</FONT><FONT face=3DArial>FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! =
> FUCK THE=20
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK =
> THE=20
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE =
> SPAMMERS!</FONT><FONT=20
> face=3DArial> FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! =
> FUCK THE=20
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK =
> THE=20
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! </DIV></FONT>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>FUCK THE SPAMMERS! </FONT><FONT =
> face=3DArial>FUCK THE=20
> SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS! FUCK THE SPAMMERS!</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Respectfully,</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>David Janes</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CA7C2C.47C97230--
>
Only thing more ignorant than a spammer is a
multi-part poster, which is one of the rare things
worse than a crossposter.