Post Processor Modification

[Brady Watson]

Don,
I agree. There used to be a team of volunteers who were part of the 'beta testers' group of owners. However, testers haven't been asked to test anything of any kind in a very, very long time. In addition to this, there came a point where, and I do not want to sound condescending, but...'green' users somehow became beta testers and SB listened to a lot of their dumb ideas and in my opinion, ruined the software. Case in point - 'Easy Mode', which is one of the dumbest, most confusing things they could have done to a brand new user. But that's the way of the world it seems these days...'Dumb' is the new cool.

Sorry to say, but I think the writing is on the wall. No news, no updates, no progress in hardware or software in the past 6-months - or longer. S̶c̶o̶o̶b̶y̶ ̶D̶o̶o̶b̶y̶ ̶D̶o̶o̶ ShopBot where are you? The only interaction from SB has been handling connectivity issues on the HandiBot forum. (sound familiar?)

The control software hasn't been good in a very long time & if it's taking you years to get a reliable release, maybe it's time to realize that continued development of your own controller isn't working and isn't viable. It makes no sense to cut off your nose to spite your face... If your MO is genuinely for the highest good of all your customers/users, then you should be exploring re-skinned controllers proven to be reliable. Nobody outside SBHQ really cares that you make the controller in house. Nobody. They care about it being reliable, just like any other appliance that needs to be relied upon.

[brian.owen]

I was just in Atlanta at Construct 3D with Eric and he told me this thread had been revived. I spend most of my time on the Handibot forum troubleshooting connection issues and chatting about projects with Handibot owners--but I thought I'd pop over here for a few minutes since this is something I think about frequently! I do hardware design for Handibot--so it drives me crazy when people bash the Handibot because they have connection problems with the controller. However, I realize that almost anything interesting that might be tried with hardware design has been done already and done better/cheaper--so if we're going to make any big leaps forward, it is going to be in the way that the controller software allows people to interact with the tool.

I think that a lot of the newer users don't appreciate how much of an improvement SBP language was over GCode. I used to hand-write GCode before I knew what CAM was and I don't remember a single command--however, I intuitively understood what MX, ZZ, and J3 meant when I started working with ShopBot code. The ShopBot language did a great job of flattening the learning curve when the alternative was writing out GCode commands. That broke down a barrier for people that hadn't already picked up knowledge of GCode from other CNC usage.

Now we're at another barrier with customers who are completely unfamiliar with CNC, CAD or CAM. The Handibot customer base is a great place to observe what the future holds for CNC in general. At Handibot we get a majority of customers whose introduction to CNC came by way of 3D printing. We also unfortunately get a large number of customers who buy tools and don't use them. I imagine that for every one tool we sell that sits unused, we lose 5 sales because people hear that CNC is too complicated and not worth the effort or money. So I'm very concerned about ease of use and reliability.

From the hardware side--I'm working on connection reliability--I think that no matter what we do with the software, we're going to struggle to make it work on the variety of computers and security setups out on the real world. So I'm about to release a tablet that will ship with all Handibot tools--just so I know that everyone who gets a tool will have a device that works with their CNC. If we can count on that, then we can stop worrying so much about connections and how it works on Windows or OSX or Linux or whatever--and just focus on chipping away at the basic CAM features that people want to have access to without opening VCarve.

I get that most of the "dumb" features are a total waste of time to the experienced users, but if they don't interfere with experienced use of the tool and don't alienate new users (I agree that easy mode is confusing as hell and I look like an idiot every time I install SB3 on a customer's computer and can't find my buttons)--then I think we're going to make our tools better. If you want to watch the painful progress then come over to the handibot forum and watch people gripe at me about all the issues we've yet to solve with FabMo -- https://handibot.com/forum/list.php?2

I've been one of the harshest critics of FabMo internally--but one exciting thing that I have done with it recently is algorithmic processing of cut files--I've taken cut files and run them through a bit of javascript code (in an app). The first application was an oscillating tangential knife accessory that I'm still working on--the algorithm breaks moves up into chunks and inserts Z moves to create oscillation and B axis moves to orient the blade tangent to the direction of cut https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pYaZ8Qifw4 . Another one lets me do cut tiling without using VCarve's tiling manager--any file can be loaded and tile size set in FabMo. For Construct 3D in Atlanta I did a project where the Handibot made watercolor paintings--the app added the dips of the paintbrush in specific paint colors based on move distance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3NIEDo8eYM . These are all pretty silly--but the format has opened up a lot of possibilities for a somewhat experienced user...which kind of makes the struggle worth it.

[Brady Watson]

Brian,
Welcome to the SBF. You sound like a nice guy, so don't take anything that I say personally.

I realize that almost anything interesting that might be tried with hardware design has been done already and done better/cheaper--so if we're going to make any big leaps forward, it is going to be in the way that the controller software allows people to interact with the tool.

This is not correct thinking. First, there ARE leaps to be made for ShopBot in regards to hardware. Huge leaps could be made in machine stiffness and deflection reduction - just to get parity with competitors. Where the changes need to be made can easily be determined by running a competitor's machine and noting how fast it can cut dense materials like aluminum & what the edge quality looks like. The only leap to be made by the SB controller is chucking it off a cliff. It's severely outdated, slow and unreliable. Again...this is not personal, just factual. There comes a point where one's ego and arrogance stifles progress - in this case, any number of proven reliable controllers out there can be rebranded for SB and all of your controller problems will be solved immediately (for well under $10k). You don't need a programmer on staff for the controller or an army of support staff because they can't connect via USB. Imagine how nice THAT would be? SB could make some money...and get beyond the unreliable stigma that turns new & repeat buyers away. In business you make decisions with your brain...not your feelings.

I think that a lot of the newer users don't appreciate how much of an improvement SBP language was over GCode.

It's not an improvement. It's an impediment. Somewhere along the line it was decided that SB buyers are dumb and we need to dumb it down for them 'real good' - so much so that if we were to go out into the real world, where 99.99% of shops run GCode, we'd be at a complete loss and ill equipped to get a job on anything other than a ShopBot CNC. It's a real neat idea that doesn't work in the real world. Very few people ever look at the code that comes out of CAM. Even less want or need to mod the code to do what they want. GCode really isn't that hard to learn - and I think with a proper teacher, you'd see that it's actually EASIER than SBP to learn.

The Handibot customer base is a great place to observe what the future holds for CNC in general.

Not unless you are looking for a needier, cheaper customer. If you want to see what the future holds for CNC in general, you need to know what your competitors are doing - and do better. HDPE CNC things aren't anywhere near the pulse of what is considered state of the art. I consider HDPE tools coming out of SB appalling. You ruined your name by going down market and you alienated your base by ignoring them. Current tools need to be on par or better than your competitors - then you can spend energy on what the future of CNC is. If your past and present are plagued with reliability issues, what makes you think the future will be any different if you take the same tack? Isn't that Einstein's definition of insanity?

At Handibot we get a majority of customers whose introduction to CNC came by way of 3D printing.

Good - they are used to GCode. Don't ruin their brains with SBP.

From the hardware side--I'm working on connection reliability--I think that no matter what we do with the software, we're going to struggle to make it work on the variety of computers and security setups out on the real world.

Reliability is the most important feature of any CNC. However, struggle is not necessary - we don't care that you make the controller/develop the controller software - we care ONLY about reliability - 5yrs+ is too long - unless the plan is to fade into obscurity.

Where's Ted? Why isn't he getting on here and telling us all what's up? We're starting to get the impression that you don't care about us anymore.

[brian.owen]

I don't think that SBP vs GCode is really an issue anymore--you said yourself, no one even looks at the machine code that comes out of their CAM anymore. However, looking back--if GCode is easy to learn then I don't think that learning SBP first is really keeping anyone out of a job; it is giving them a slightly easier entry point into the idea of code controlling a tool.

I definitely don't think that ShopBot has done everything it can in terms of hardware design--but I do think that there are very few places where ShopBot can jump ahead of its competition in the way that it did 20 years ago when it comes to the tool designs themselves. A large portion of the development effort at ShopBot goes into improvements to tool design--linear rails on the PRS gantry and Z axis, redesigned DT tools being the most recent projects completed. I think that devoting another portion of the development effort to not just replacing SB3 but seeing if we can improve the experience of using our tools is a worthwhile effort--it isn't an either/or thing.

In general, ShopBot wouldn't still exist if it weren't for our customers in education--those customers are unique in that CNC is never the only technology they're trying to learn--they also work with 3D printers, laser cutters, vinyl cutters--and they tend to be new to most of it. Devoting a portion of our efforts to making their lives easier is good business. Handibot is an interesting, if flawed example of that. While it might seem that Handibot consumes a lot of the energy at ShopBot, the truth is that the Handibot team is pretty tiny--at the moment they're built, designed and supported by one person--and they account for a small part of the marketing spend. I'd say less than 10% of ShopBot employees have any day-to-day interaction with the Handibot tool line. Despite that, Handibot has engaged a group of users that would never have used a ShopBot PRS or even a Desktop. That actually prevents the slip down-market for our larger tools--I work to drive costs down and increase accessibility on Handibot while ShopBot works to add features to our larger tools that are requested by our more experienced customers. Handibot is fortunately able to maneuver quickly because all of the parts are made in house and it's just a matter of changing a cut file in response to a customer request.

I don't really think trying to argue one way or another is going to convince anyone that we're on the right track--and the reality is that ShopBot isn't just Ted or me or Ryan or any one person--so you're going to be hearing from a collection of individuals who have very different opinions about where we go from here. Unfortunately today you got the plastic tool guy! I'll see if one of the metal tool guys want to hop on and give some updates sometime!

[Gary Campbell]

I think that a lot of the newer users don't appreciate how much of an improvement SBP language was over GCode. I used to hand-write GCode before I knew what CAM was and I don't remember a single command--however, I intuitively understood what MX, ZZ, and J3 meant when I started working with ShopBot code. The ShopBot language did a great job of flattening the learning curve when the alternative was writing out GCode commands. That broke down a barrier for people that hadn't already picked up knowledge of GCode from other CNC usage.

Yes, I heard that for the first time at "Basic Training" at SBHQ a dozen years ago, and numerous other times since. You left out the part where SBC is so innovative that the world will move to SBC and dump Gcode. That's part of the "message" that has been given repeatedly, but hasn't come to fruition. You need to realize that the things that you believe to be true inside the brick cocoon do not end up being true in the real world.

You mention:

"I spend most of my time on the Handibot forum troubleshooting connection issues..." And: "I'm working on connection reliability--"

Of course you are, most everyone at SB has had their hand in this at one time or another, including myself. The reality is that since the swap to a USB connection in ~2003, what else has anyone at SB been working on? Don't feel alone, virtually every other controller that adopted a USB connection suffered the same woes. Actually, you can feel alone, virtually all of them have solved it.

Writings on the wall. One of the smartest guys out there, one that to this day I feel privileged to have worked for, combined with the smartest guys/gals he could hire have not solved that problem in 15 freakin years. In the real world, if you do not succeed, you fail. Period.

You say: "If you want to watch the painful progress then come over to the handibot forum and watch people gripe at me about all the issues we've yet to solve with FabMo -- "

From the first day Matt placed the prototype Handybot on a meeting table I have been unimpressed. It was a toy made from plastic. When asked at that meeting for my "best uses" for the toy, I had 2 responses. One is best not repeated here in public, but the other was: "Put it in the middle of the table, cut a hole, and throw all your money down that hole". My thoughts haven't changed, actually are reinforced by your comments as that was 6 years ago. My God man, six freakin years!! That's an eternity in the CNC world.

Based on the number of laid off SB employees that have contacted me regarding possible employment opportunities in the CNC world, their statements about how many others have been laid off with them, I would assume that the buying public is no longer believing "the message".

This is sad, especially when you consider that SB once owned a MAJOR portion of the market and was in control of the message with their forum. To loose substantial percentages of market share AND a reduction of units sold in an exponentially growing market shows that the company is either not keeping abreast of the industry, has overpriced its products, or the product hasn't lived up to the marketing hype. Sadly, all 3 may true.

Isn't it true that your own (Handybot) department has constricted from an offsite 3 person operation to a corner of the main building with you as the only dedicated employee? That is not an indicator of success for the product.

My guess is that there are about 800 models of CNC machines from around 150 mfgrs (many offshore) being sold in today's market. They run on about 40 different controllers. It seems that a small minority of mfgrs build both machines AND controllers. Those "proprietary" controllers seem to be in 2 groups, one at the high end of the price and feature spectrum, the other at the low. Eliminating the high end industrial versions that often cost more than most of the machines we are most familiar with, one could surmise that the majority simply develop the products they have success with and leave the ones they don't, and I'm speaking to controllers here, to the providers with a proven track record.

Proven track record. I can speak with knowledge here. I started with SB3 in the mid 3.5.xxx's and worked, due to future implementation of the SBLink, on all of the 3.6.xx versions. All 44 of them plus an equal or greater number of beta versions. I would guess around 22 unique versions released between 2009 and late 2011. On 4/1/2013 Ted published comments regarding the end of public beta testing on the 3.8 versions and noted that 3.8.4 was "is now up and from what we can tell, reasonably stable".

That was 5 1/2 years ago. The current version is 3.8.50 according to the SB website. Lets say that only even numbers are used as release versions. That's around 23 more versions of the software. And as noted TODAY by the head of Handybot development: (you)

I spend most of my time on the Handibot forum troubleshooting connection issues..."

All those versions... If I look over posts from loyal, even blindly loyal, users on your forum, the vast majority recommend the 3.6 versions over the 3.8. Five and a half years of software development and few, if any loyal users recommend it on a regular basis???

Do you realize how sad this is to a person like myself? I want SB to succeed, they are my first "CNC love" and you never forget your first. I so looked forward to working there, but I had to leave as I was not a good fit. Even tho I could get onboard with the company mission statement, its implementation was totally illogical to me. The effort and energy placed on the Handybot when there were (my perceived) serious issues with the larger tools and especially the control software.

And to contradict what one of your workmates has stated, I did not leave SB with all of ShopBots "secrets" or what they were doing in the future. I left with a list of things that I knew they would never do. A list that made me believe would make it difficult for them to succeed. I knew they were going to a smaller and smaller machines, including one made from plastic. I "knew" they were never going to solve the USB comm issue as long as they relied on a USB connection. I "knew" they would never ship assembled full size tools. I "knew" they would not improve the physical strength of the full size tools to match the competition. And if they did, I "knew" it would be too late. Now, all of the things I thought I "knew" have not been proven to be correct, but SB has had over 5 1/2 years to show the community that even one could be wrong.

So, I would suggest that you, and all your workmates, set down the glass, back away from the Kool-Aid, stop repeating "the message" and honestly realize where SB is currently positioned in the CNC world. And then devise a plan to improve it before we all have to sit around and talk about "how cool ShopBot was before they went down the drain". Even of the smartest people I have known, when lacking business or even common sense, will not succeed when living in a world where "group think" is the norm.

[dlcw]

Brain,

I appreciate your input to this thread. I think it is very important for Shopbot to hear the realities of where the CNC industry is going and to hear about what Shopbot is doing to either lead, follow or get out of the way of that movement.

I for one, having been a Shopbot user for nearly 10 years, would not purchase another Shopbot CNC. I use it in my business to make a living. From everything I've read and conversations I've had with some pretty progressive people in the CNC world, my future automation dollars would be much better spent elsewhere. Reliability, speed, accuracy; all are vital to those who make a living with their CNC tool. After all, a CNC is just another tool in the shop like a tablesaw or planer. I decided to upgrade my planer to the newest technology from my older 15 year old planer and I would never look back. Quieter, faster, more reliable. I also upgraded my wide drum sander and finish spray system. Again, faster, more reliable and the ability to help me be more profitable.

When I have to make three passes (2 climb, 1 conventional) to ACCURATELY and CLEANLY cut a 3/4" piece of plywood (PRSAlpha), when I could be getting a better quality cut, faster, and without constant comms errors with a newer machine, I'm loosing profit. In business profitability is the key to staying in business and keeping a roof over your families heads and food on the table. Shopbot needs to understand this. Business owners WILL move to technology that makes them more profitable. They will NOT stay with old technology that puts them further and further behind their competitors. That's a very simple business reality. If Shopbot does not address this, they will find themselves in the realms of the businesses that are falling further and further behind their competitors.

I cut my CNC teeth on Shopbot. I am grateful to Shopbot that I was able to bring CNC technology into my shop a a price point lower then other manufacturers at the time. But time marches on. I hope Shopbot will catch up at some point and maybe become an industry leader again like it was so many years ago. But the industry will not wait for them.

[Brady Watson]

Brian,
Thanks for your reply. No, I don't think there is a problem with SBP as an entry point for some users who never intend to use another tool, but there IS a cost and it's questionable whether it is worth learning in the first place. You bring up education customers who already use 3D printers, plotters and laser cutters, which for the most part (aside from HPGL or a printer driver) run on GCode. There seems to be an erroneous belief that SBP/SB Control code is equivalent to GCode. It isn't. There is a very long list of features effectively missing from SBP that are available to users running even the cheapest CNC controllers. It just isn't a fully formed CNC controller, having tested and used several of the most popular controllers on the market. My hope is that whatever controller you use going forward supports the full set of GCode commands and features commensurate with competitors in the same gantry tool market. If it just so happens to run SBP also, great...but the focus should be on GCode.

I think from an educational standpoint, the introduction to SBP in lieu of GCode does the students a tremendous disservice. Instead of them understanding the similarities from one machine to the other - and how they all pretty much work the same with cartesian coordinate systems - and in many case the SAME EXACT GCode commands, they have to learn another language - one that is used no where else but SB land. It does nothing more but add a level of confusion to someone trying to understand how these machines work. Clarity is imperative in a learning environment & one must take responsibility for muddying the waters IF you truly are a stand for education. If you just want to say you are to sound hip while doing the contrary, that's different. It doesn't prepare students for industry - only to be a ShopBot operator. So I think that one must ask if you are doing your best work for the highest good of the customer, so they can be as successful as possible with the least amount of confusion, or if you just believe that you are.

Linear rails are a good move forward...however much quality can be achieved by getting away from aluminum extrusion and going to a fully welded frame. You want to put one up in an attic? Make ONE model that comes apart/bolts together. Not ALL of them. People out there STILL call these kit machines...and it irks me as much as the crew in Durham.

Handibot has little relevance to to gantry tool owners - who for the most part, use these machines to make a living. I doubt many use a HandiBot commercially. Where are the developments for the gantry tools? The size of machines used by professionals? As it stands today, I only see a 2009 machine being sold at 2018 prices. Others see this as well. Why would we want the same machine from 2009 - with block/rail to address the BWC rails being mashed into the gantry beam - a design flaw - and no apparent focus/feedback/news from official sources about the 2018 offering of full size tools?

My hope was that someone from SB would get on here and speak about the current state & direction of gantry tools. The fact that no one has is concerning. I've seen this same kind of thing all before - right before my Plan B became my Plan A courtesy of KPMG...

[Gary Campbell]

Brian...
I missed your post before my last.

When you say: "

A large portion of the development effort at ShopBot goes into improvements to tool design--linear rails on the PRS gantry and Z axis, redesigned DT tools being the most recent projects completed."

I
Having personally worked (with others) on the linear rail prototype in 2012 and helped prep the spreadsheet showing the advantages in both lower material cost and a major improvement in deflection I would ask: Why did it take so long? and when does it happen across the entire product line? A V roller gantry that relies on gravity(its own weight) to stay on the rails is not sound engineering in todays world, if it ever was.


And then you say: "

In general, ShopBot wouldn't still exist if it weren't for our customers in education--"

This is a sad statement of todays time on a couple levels. So, can I interpret this as even tho the general public is not purchasing our products, educators are? Why is that? Is academia losing touch with general society? Hopefully you offer a value added package for them.

To CNC education in general: Wouldn't it make more sense to train these new users in the CNC language they are most likely going to use in the real world? ShopBot has a different version or word for most commonly used terms in the CNC world. Why? Even more relevant, why would we want our children to learn terminology that is seldom, if ever, used in the commercial CNC world, reducing their income potential and ability to converse with their peers?

[brian.owen]

Hey Brady, Thanks for seeing handibot for what it is--it is not a replacement for a Gantry tool, and with a few exceptions that I've seen in my customers--it is almost always better to get a more standard CNC for a business venture. I wasn't around when we launched the handibot 5 or 6 years ago so I can't really debate the initial scope of the project. I took on handibot 3 years ago--and since then I've been trying to steer it into a market when I see an opportunity to compete. There are a handful of education focused, small CNC tools that have popped up over the last few years from Inventables, Carbide 3D, Bantam/Othermill and Shaper to name a few--and I feel like we can do what they do better. These are not the competitors that ShopBot needs to be focused on, and largely SB is not. However, these companies are chipping away at the customer base that might buy our desktop tools--we all know that a Desktop is in a different league than an XCarve--but a lot of the disappointed XCarve customers I talk to did not know that when they purchased.

Handibot has not been a success--that's clear from the fact that we just shrunk from 3 employees and a 1500 sqft shop to 1 employee and a 400sqft room. I'm fortunate enough that I've been able to shift roles and take on some responsibilities at ShopBot while devoting part of my time to staying engaged with my customers and keeping handibots moving out the door. To Gary's point, it has been 6 years since the original Handibot prototype was plopped on a conference table at ShopBot--since then we've released three versions of the tool (with sub-versions and upgrades in between)--and I don't plan to stop doing that as long as there is still a market for small CNC. Fortunately for all the ShopBot owners, we've piloted a number of new things on Handibot first--so the connection troubles with FabMo that I'm battling on the HB forum (not SB 3.8--almost none of the active customers are using SB3) have been limited to a smaller user group--and I've driven all over the country to support our handibot customers as we work on improvements.

But I realize that no one here is really interested in Handibot--I just wanted to put in my 2cents in light of concerns about ShopBot's focus shifting to plastic tools. I think a majority of the development team at ShopBot would agree with what is being said here about the bigger tools--welded frames, stiffer gantry, no V-wheels. Old companies don't usually fail because the employees are bad at their jobs--they fail because they become so good at doing things in an outdated way that they don't notice the world moving on. We've definitely had some turnover in the last few years and there has been a shift to a newer generation taking place for at least as long as I've worked here. I enjoy seeing the rumblings on here and it is definitely a nice counter-balance to the interactions I had with customers at Construct 3D over the weekend.

[brian.owen]

Gary,

I think that academia is struggling to integrate technology into their curriculum. A lot of teachers who trained to teach science class are being thrust into CNC--and it is both exciting and frustrating for them. They aren't just training CNC operators at the elementary, middle and high school level--they're training future engineers, doctors, web developers, graphic artists...most of these kids won't need to know GCode or SBP or anything else. So how do we serve both an elementary school teacher and a community college instructor? We should try to do both--and I think Ryan's focus on GCode use in FabMo to the exclusion of SBP is an attempt to bring us into line with what the community college instructor wants. For the elementary school teacher, we're going to have to get more creative--and that's a reason that Handibot has been more successful with that group than any other. You can turn on a Handibot, draw a shape on your tablet screen and have the handibot carve it--no CAD or CAM required. The kids aren't going to learn how to operate an industrial CNC like that, but they are going to learn how to solve problems and how technology can be harnessed to create things.