Post Processor Modification [Archive]

Gary Campbell

04-14-2018, 01:44 PM

John...
I had no intent on talking down to you, and since you interpreted my comments that way, I apologize.

That said, I was trying to point out that you may have asked that question because you didn't know the other side, which I stall believe is true. Over the last few years as a consultant I have collected a lot of data for a number of CNC companies. Companies NEED to know that those survey numbers are qualified before making decisions that affect their future.

Forget brands, lets talk about spindle vs. router. In reality a couple hundred dollar hand held router should not be compared to a 3 phase industrial rated spindle motor. Yet they are, every day. So given my 5 level answers to "which is better, spindle or router": with one being: 1) A lot worse, 2) A little worse, 3) about the same, 4) a little better , 5) A lot better, around 65% answer "about the same or a little worse". If you use only answers from those that have actually owned both, the answers were over 95% "A lot better". Two totally different numbers. If you were a decision maker wouldn't you want to know both sets of number?

Back to the survey I mentioned above. In almost every category, the overall average was ~1/3 "performs as expected". You are in that group. No issues and lives up to your expectations. According to survey data you are in the minority. If "Performs as expected", "Slightly better", and "Much better" are combined the responses never get to 50%. That is across 6 comparative categories. And if you count those that use them in their business the numbers are much lower.

The writing seems to be on the wall. In an exponentially expanding CNC market our friends are losing market share. A share of the market they once "owned". A shame. I would propose the following statements. Only able to be verified if this post, which is not flattering to folks that are good people, stays on this forum.

I propose, and this is radical, that ShopBot will not survive the next 5 years IF:
1) They do not offer a viable computer to compliment their control system to aid thousands of past purchasers
2) That if they remain with a USB connection going forward
3) They don't swap to Gcode to be compatible with currently produced hardware.
4) They don't produce a full welded frame using linear rails
5) Don't offer a menu of control features and machine options that simply match what the other 150 brands sold in the US do
6) Don't do all of the above, while lowering their prices.

steve_g

04-14-2018, 02:29 PM

“Gary, ok, so you succeeded in talking down to me…”

HA HA HA HA!!!
Oops… sorry.

Interesting… I’ve done things with my PRT Alpha that “big iron” guys only dream about!

With the plethora of CNC routers now available to hobbyists, many under $1,000, suddenly ShopBots aren’t considered “real”! I must ask, “Who thinks they aren’t real!” My own answer comes down to “those who are running heavy iron machines… that cost multiple times as much, require a rigging company to set-up, require 3-phase power, a forklift to manage input and output and sales department to keep it busy! Who is impressed with my ShopBot? Anyone with a “low-cost” machine with plastic components, MDF frames or NEMA 17 steppers!

It's not uncommon for an individual or business to "outgrow" their machine... A crafter gets more work than his smaller machine can keep up with or cabinet shop can't keep up with demand using their middle size tool. These are good problems! Rather than be upset that such and so brand tool can't do the job, recognize a tools limitation and be glad it got you to the point where you need something else! The tool you buy is often determined by your volume of work... You likely can't afford to keep a heavyweight machine that's sitting idle!

SG

Chuck Keysor

04-14-2018, 04:59 PM

Hello Jimmy D..... I apologize in advance for making a post here that is not addressing the topic of your thread..... But Gary and Brady have made a some points I'd like to comment on......

Hello Brady: While I don't know about the majority of Shopbot owners,I do know that I unfortunately fit your comment 100% about my being unwilling to pay for advice to service my Bot. Yes, I have banged my head on the wall for months with issues, hoping to somehow get my problem fixed without having to shell out money. And more precisely, it isn't even as much about spending money, as it is about spending money for technical expertise.......... I always figured it was a guy thing, being willing to buy a physical object, but not wanting to pay for advice/directions,,,, Not that you need any statistical validation, I wanted to express mypersonal resonance with your observation.

Again, venturing out without knowing if this is just myself, or not........ I bought my used PRT Alpha maybe 10 years ago,,,,,,,,,, I bought it because it was all that I could afford, and all that could fit into my basement workshop that would allow me to cut bigthings I planned to make. (A few months ago, I sent you/Brady a model of the type of thing I want to make, and they can be large,as they go on the outside of large Victorian houses.) But IF Iam typical of a significant segment of Bot owners, that could be aproblem for Shopbot itself, as they would of course benefit from a larger customer base that is willing to spend $$$$$$. As if someone is willing to spend for technical advise, that technical advice will almost certainly translate into the need to then purchase some type of hardware.

But the interesting point is, tying into what Gary observed based upon his industry knowledge and the results of his survey, while I am reluctant to spend money for advice, and I am very cheap, I would be willing to spend money to improve my Bot undercertain conditions.

From day one, I have had random Com Error issues, which made me feel that I just couldn’t trust my Bot. And for the last 5 or more years, I have felt like Icouldn’t trust my Shopbot because these Com Errors made me feel my Bot was fundamentally flawed as a platform. Specifically the Bot flaw seemed to me to be: passing corruptible data from a remotely located (5 feet) control PC to the Bot over a corruptible USB port, when powerful computers are so tiny, that they could be stuck inside my big aluminum box along with the motor drivers and all the support hardware, and thusly eliminate the potential for external events from corrupting the USB communications.)

The result is that when my faith in my Bot is shaken by operational instability, andI subsequently come to feel that my problems stem froma flawed designconcept, I just don't want to spend money on my Bot, even for hardware.

So when Gary wrote specifically "that if they remain with a USBconnection going forward"...... He really caught my attention.

I would spend money on my Bot for hardware if I felt like I would be fundamentally making my machine more robust and reliable. And the occasionally mentioned possible future FABMO upgrade at least appeals to my intuition as the way to get me re-energized about myBot. That would also make me more willing to invest in some other possible hardware upgrades to my machine.

But nothing will get me energized when I feel my machine just isn'tstable. And that isn't good for Shopbot, especially IF theyhave a lot of cheap customers like me, who need to be really excited and positive about something before they will be willing to part with precious cash......... I offer this not to be gloomy or mean, but to offer a positive insight into the mind of at least one Bot customer, and to flesh out things I wanted to say in Gary's survey, but for which there weren't any appropriate boxes..........

ThanksGary and Brady. And sorry Jimmy for not following your thread'stheme............ Chuck

bleeth

04-14-2018, 06:17 PM

Frankly I'm baffled by people who don't get that a Shopbot can't be compared to a machine that is built stronger, has heavier motors and cutting tools, typically more capabilities, and are designed to be run all day every day cutting many parts flawlessly with minimal breakdowns. Their purpose is different. They also cost one hell of a lot more money. SB is perfect for the low production/custom shop and the home enthusiast who would rather spend their glad money on making sawdust/chips than the country club. Nothing wrong with either-just a personal choice. (apologize for the off topic comment which has nothing to do with post processor modification). Frankly, there is nothing that you can do with a SB that you can't do with what we almost sneeringly refer to as "big iron". The typical shop that has that type of machine is more into their own product manufacturing and if brought one of those very unique projects that many botters salivate over they may not be able to pull it off simply because it is outside their typical sphere of experience and they don't have either the experience or the available time for R&D to figure it out. Hey-If I decide to buy a roadster and chose a Mazda Miata that doesn't mean that I wouldn't understand that another that was better built, had a hotter engine, and more to it altogether deserved to be more expensive. It's a no-brainer.

Gary Campbell

04-15-2018, 07:55 AM

When Dave says:

"Frankly I'm baffled by people who don't get that a Shopbot can't be compared to a machine that is built stronger, has heavier motors and cutting tools, typically more capabilities, and are designed to be run all day every day cutting many parts flawlessly with minimal breakdowns."

Kids... that the problem. Where back in the PRT days that was soooo true. Became the company mantra. Compare a SB against big iron. Not today tho. Nowdays competitors that didn't exist in the PRT days have products that will outcut the Alpha for the same money as the standard. And for alpha dollars, you get higher powered closed loop or servos, linear rails, helical R&P, planetary gearboxes and the ability to cut much faster while maintaining tolerance.

There is no cut climb to a skin then come back conventional for a no load last pass, you just cut 3/4" at 420 ipm (7"/sec) in a single pass. There is no assembly, the computer is included, the machine has been factory assembled, tested and tuned. And they are thousands less than SB products. And they run on a control system that works properly every day. They have fast enough transmission speed to not need the 5 to1 "gearshift" that allows rapids to work on an alpha.

There are around 40 CNC controllers sold in the US, a half dozen or so proprietary like SB3. The proprietary controls are for the most part on low end offerings with limited features. The majority of MFGR's offer multiple choices, unless they use WinCNC exclusively. In any case, these controllers offer the user so many more options than SB3. They offer faster speeds, higher resolution, ability to run servos. Did you know you could put servos on a machine for half the price of alpha motors?

"I want to pay more for a machine that was assembled by someone with ZERO days experience" said no one. Its 2018, not 2005

Comm errors, SB and Mach with USB own them. Mach went to ethernet to solve it. What if this was a car that you depended on to make a couple bucks and it went brain dead as often as your controller does? Would you put up with that? And maybe even more important is that it started 12 or more years ago, why hasn't it been fixed? If these were 20K plus cars, there would be a recall.

Brady Watson

04-15-2018, 08:59 AM

The writing seems to be on the wall. In an exponentially expanding CNC market our friends are losing market share. A share of the market they once "owned". A shame. I would propose the following statements. Only able to be verified if this post, which is not flattering to folks that are good people, stays on this forum.

I propose, and this is radical, that ShopBot will not survive the next 5 years IF:
1) They do not offer a viable computer to compliment their control system to aid thousands of past purchasers
2) That if they remain with a USB connection going forward
3) They don't swap to Gcode to be compatible with currently produced hardware.
4) They don't produce a full welded frame using linear rails
5) Don't offer a menu of control features and machine options that simply match what the other 150 brands sold in the US do
6) Don't do all of the above, while lowering their prices.

Gary - Thank you for stating the obvious. As someone who doesn't believe in mincing words - and that clear, direct communication avoids confusion, I admire you for speaking frankly. I also admire you for putting in the work, research and freely sharing some of that with the community. I agree 100% with your predictions - and it isn't without a heavy heart. I really want SB to succeed in the marketplace, but they seem to have lost their way. I personally have spent a good bit of time and money trying out other CNC controllers and hardware in the past few years. I've learned so much and fully realize every point you make & what that means to me, someone who relies on these tools to make a living.

Interesting… I’ve done things with my PRT Alpha that “big iron” guys only dream about!

Like what, Steve? What is it your PRT is able to do that a 20hp ATC machine with 4 Becker vacuums can't do?

With the plethora of CNC routers now available to hobbyists, many under $1,000, suddenly ShopBots aren’t considered “real”! I must ask, “Who thinks they aren’t real!” My own answer comes down to “those who are running heavy iron machines… that cost multiple times as much, require a rigging company to set-up, require 3-phase power, a forklift to manage input and output and sales department to keep it busy! Who is impressed with my ShopBot? Anyone with a “low-cost” machine with plastic components, MDF frames or NEMA 17 steppers!

When I mentioned 'real CNC' - I was not thinking about a 'big iron' machine in any way, shape or form. I was thinking about machines in the same price bracket as a ShopBot. The ones that in some cases are cheaper, controllers that are 5-10x faster, real block & rail bearings, helical racks, planetary gearboxes, welded frames and advanced digital steppers or servos - either with encoders - for less money. (HA! - looks like Gary & I are on the same page!)

Yeah sure - DIY'ers are going to look up to the ShopBot as a real CNC compared to their MDF project or 3D printer hardware based machines. But you're looking to the extreme with your 'CNC beliefs' because I am speaking to the ones in the same market as SBs - NOT the low end MDF machines and NOT the high dollar 'big iron' ones. If you've never tried any other viable CNC system, suitable for a large CNC, then how can you know how the SB ranks against others? It's kinda like marrying the 1st girl you meet...Right?

Plastic CNCs? You mean like the dweeby ones that ShopBot has been focused on selling for the past 5+ years? Those things? It seems their focus has shifted to these toys - and I can't take them seriously anymore. The last redesigned full size tool came out was the PRS. That was like 12 years ago. Why would I want to buy 2007 technology at 2018 prices? I can't think of any technology based appliance (and that's what CNCs are - appliances) where I'd pay 2018 prices for 2007 tech. Can you?

It's not uncommon for an individual or business to "outgrow" their machine... A crafter gets more work than his smaller machine can keep up with or cabinet shop can't keep up with demand using their middle size tool. These are good problems! Rather than be upset that such and so brand tool can't do the job, recognize a tools limitation and be glad it got you to the point where you need something else! The tool you buy is often determined by your volume of work... You likely can't afford to keep a heavyweight machine that's sitting idle!

SG

Steve - you really nailed it there. Except for the heavyweight machine part - As someone who has relied on his CNC to make a living & can tell you EXACTLY how hard I can push the tool until it loses tolerance, stalls or otherwise can't do the job as quickly. Customers want good, cheap AND fast, and if the tool is not up to the task, money is lost. That means if COMs puke, I'm not making money because I am tracking down a problem - other machines just don't have all these COM issues - mainly because they don't use USB - they just run. Can't hold tolerance or square because it flexes too much at higher speeds - slow it down to compensate - more money lost. There is absolutely no case where a bolted machine of any type is better than one with a welded chassis. None - in the combined history of all machines ever made by human hands. Once you run one that IS welded or cast iron, you quickly see what you've been missing & get schooled on any blue kool aid trips you've been on. Believe me - it is pleasantly sobering because it speaks to your subconscious KNOWING that something was 'off' - and now you have the solution. I mean, even an EZRouter - which is a complete ripoff of the PRT is fully welded! LOL!!!

From day one, I have had random Com Error issues, which made me feel that I just couldn’t trust my Bot. And for the last 5 or more years, I have felt like Icouldn’t trust my Shopbot because these Com Errors made me feel my Botwas fundamentally flawed as a platform. Specifically the Bot flaw seemed to me to be: passing corruptible data from a remotely located (5 feet) control PC to the Bot over a corruptible USB port, when powerful computers are so tiny, that they could be stuck inside my big aluminum box along with the motor drivers and all the support hardware, and thusly eliminate the potential for external events from corrupting the USB communications.

The result is that when my faith in my Bot is shaken by operational instability, and I subsequently come to feel that my problems stem from a flawed concept, I just don't want to spend money on my Bot, even for hardware.

So when Gary wrote specifically "that if they remain with a USBconnection going forward"...... He really caught my attention.

I would spend money on my Bot for hardware if I felt like I would be fundamentally making my machine more robust and reliable. And the occasionally mentioned possible future FABMO upgrade at least appeals to my intuition as the way to get me re-energized about myBot. That would also make me more willing to invest in some other possible hardware upgrades to my machine.

Roger that Chuck. I would & did spend more to obtain relatively good reliability. The USB COM problem has been the bane of their existence since what, like 2003 when the first Alpha came out - you would think 15 years would be enough time to get COMs sorted.

Yeah...FabMo...no thanks. No pro wants to run their CNC tool in a dirty shop on an iPad. Get real. Besides, it's already obsolete. The Handibot page (https://handibot.com/fabmo.php) says it's based on the Intel Edison - which was discontinued in June 2017 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Edison). It's just really sad. One would expect SB 'engineers' to be smarter and more on top of things (like what state of the art CNC actually is in this price bracket) than some of their users are. How is that possible? Rest on laurels much? Heads in the sand? Elsewhere? I have personally tried to keep them in the loop over the years regarding what the current trends are (and so have others) to no avail.

Frankly I'm baffled by people who don't get that a Shopbot can't be compared to a machine that is built stronger, has heavier motors and cutting tools, typically more capabilities, and are designed to be run all day every day cutting many parts flawlessly with minimal breakdowns. Their purpose is different. They also cost one hell of a lot more money.

Dave,
It's from guzzling down the blue kool aid. I guess to some, the blue machines are like a religion - and I am guilty of that to some extent in years gone by. However, there comes a point where you look elsewhere for better or worse and you find out you are out of touch with old beliefs. To be clear, I have no bone to pick - I just feel let down that the folks in NC haven't been keeping the pace. One can only wait for their buddy to catch up so long before he needs to forge ahead.

Again, I wasn't envisioning 'big iron' - only comparable hardware and controls in the same price bracket. Think about how far SB came in a technological sense from the PR/cable drive days (1998) to the PRS Alpha only 9 years later. The PRS has been out 12 years & SO MUCH has changed in CNC land. And yet, I don't see SB making any advances for commercial machines - which if YOU recall, was a good percentage of their customer base. Think of all the Camps - mostly pros there - and on the forum. So did they go away because SB didn't stay current or SB not stay current because they went away?

-B

coryatjohn

04-15-2018, 09:14 AM

Brady - Wow. That was quite a put down. I guess I am merry in my ignorance and happy with my 2013 edition of a PRS. Maybe I'm frozen in time. My machine has worked just fine for me. Of course, I don't have any time constraints so I never push it. I like 6,000 RPM spindle speeds because there's is less mess and dust. I don't mind using 3 IPS speeds cutting a delicate job. I have a $500 (2013 price) Dell computer that works perfectly with the SB and never experience comm errors.

I am certainly not wedded to the SB. I really am brand agnostic.

So if you were to recommend a $30k machine today, what would it be?

>> I can't think of any technology based appliance (and that's what CNCs are - appliances) where I'd pay 2018 prices for 2007 tech. Can you?

You should look at the world of aviation. It is chock full of those exact examples. We have a 2010 Meridian that is 2007 technology. You can buy a brand new one for $2,000,000 today. Same technology. Well, it's actually 1986 tech wrapped in 2007 avionics... Still viable though. Fun and robust. Sometimes new technology doesn't mean better. It just means new technology.

jerry_stanek

04-15-2018, 11:15 AM

I have run a couple different machines and what Gary said about the controller having a brain fart doesn't fit well. The 2 Beisses that I ran would have a brain fart and the cuts would be off if you weren't checking each piece. I would have maybe 2 a week but that was when I was running them 9 hours a day. We would run about 100 of the same part then move to another part and run another 100 some of the worst were the smaller ones that didn't need a lot of machining but some time the large ones would screw up and you would ruin a 5 x 8 sheet of material. I ran a couple of jobs on my Shopbot for that company because I could get it done quicker and less money some of those jobs were 50 + 4 x 8 sheets. and some had 50 + parts per sheet

tomhartnett

04-15-2018, 02:41 PM

So, I'm just getting into all of this discussion about ShopBot.
With the risk of saying too much I want to provide my inside experience and expertise on what is happening and how we are looking to move forward at least in relation to technical support.

I've been with ShopBot for just about 3 years now, working with not only tech support but just about every department and know that everyone here is dedicated to making the best product we can.

from day one the number one issue i have addressed has been communications issues - ultimately 90 percent or more of them are related to the computer.
Often times i felt like customers probably just thought "'oh here they go again blaming some problem on the PC that they don't know how to fix".

Coming from a background in computer software/hardware support, this was frustrating. I have first hand experience seeing these issues go away by doing something to the PC. those somethings were VARIED like no other. but, there was always something interrupting the cut while it was running. it was around 2 years ago that I wrote the "Windows Notes" document covering the most common issues that I had seen up to that point and how to address them on the PC. I also petitioned for selling a computer with tools and offering a control computer for sale, the process of getting a model we were happy with in house, setting them all up, valuing the time that goes into the setup, and selling them for a price that we were happy with that didn't feel like a ripoff was too great an obstacle for us at the time.

The retail control computer path never really did leave our minds as an option but in the meantime I worked on better instructions and a more complete solution than the Windows Notes. There is a 100% viable solution for computers that meet our hardware requirements already with the stipulation that you are familiar enough with computers in this world to successfully complete these instructions. Which in today's world and our field, that is often not the case, so the info I provided always starts with the stipulation "You may need an IT professional to help you" - following this the basic instructions are to clean install windows, then follow windows notes. That PC is now set up to be a successful standalone computer if the computer hardware is fully functional.

This process can be messed up in many ways as even the best fully-fleshed out process can be, it was only two-weeks ago that I brought up the option of selling a control computer to our sales and tech support team and I believe the consensus is that we should try.

so to address the points as best as i can from support:

- A control computer option is being worked on, and I personally am working closely on this. We are trying to flesh out a model we can receive consistently and price it reasonably. Everything up to this point has looked like we would need to turn around and sell it for $1000 or more, which for the hardware you would be getting I do not feel comfortable offering.

- With the FabMo control system I believe the GCode issue, Application/software offering issue, and USB issue will all be addressed. but I don't work as personally with the FabMo development myself to provide more. I know that what I have seen has been amazing, and would make Tech Support very happy. We are all rooting for FabMo.

- improving rigidity while reducing cost is one of the number one things I know our Development team is working on and has been working on since I joined ShopBot. We are in overdrive mode right now for trying to find the best path forward.

Thanks for offering your experiences, opinions, thoughts, etc... I know it will help us as a company as it has helped me on an individual level.

mirion

04-16-2018, 09:04 AM

My two cents on computer issues........Although I have not taxed my system with intense carving projects as many of you have, (I have only had my Buddy 32 for a half a year and still learning), I have had no computer or com issues. I purchased the 2013 Shopbot barely used and needed to buy a computer for it. Having some experience as a part time IT guy in the engineering room, I knew the importance of avoiding the sharing of the CPU's resources. I went the dedicated route and bought the Intel NUC, a small but powerful box with Win 10 Pro and many other features as shown below. I think the best part of the NUC for this application is the pre-installed "no overhead" installation of the OS on a brand new system. No other programs, (only SB3 and Vcarve 9) no manufacturers advertising ****, no preinstalled demo software, no internet connection, no screen savers, you just have to disable the power saving features. It wasn't financially easy to dedicate a $700 computer but I think it is the way to go. It is also available as an I3 or I7 but I went with middle of the road.......Mike

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIAA0S6MT1095

Intel NUC NUC7i5BNH Mini PC/HTPC
CPU Type: Intel Core i5 7th Gen Intel i5-7260U 3.4GHz
CPU Speed: 2.2 GHz
Memory Capacity: 8 GB DDR4
Hard Drive: SSD 256 GB Samsung 960 EVO NVMe 250GB
GPU/VGA Type: Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
Windows 10 Pro
Wifi
Bluetooth
HDMI
Thunderbolt 3
4k Support
Dual Monitor Capable
Operating System: Windows 10 Pro
Room for additional Hard Drive
Dimensions: 4.5 x 2 x 4.4 inches

$669.00

tomhartnett

04-16-2018, 09:11 AM

That's an awesome machine, and exactly the kind of thing you want. better than a little crappy slim client, and better than an off-the shelf PC with crapware on it that you'll need to clean install after buying.

I may have to start recommending a similar system to people in the interim while we work on a standalone option. The benefit of having the blank OS install on that machine (well enclosed for a dusty shop too) is profound.

Thank you for sharing, Mike.

-Tom H.

coryatjohn

04-16-2018, 09:57 AM

Before my machine was delivered, I bought a Dell INSPIRON 660S computer with Windows 7. The total cost was less than $500. That included a monitor, keyboard and mouse. This computer has no fan, a plus with a dusty shop (my shop isn't dusty). When I got it, I stripped out all the extraneous stuff and did the recommended things such as turning off all updates, internet, screen saver and the rest. While this is a bargain basement computer, it has worked flawlessly on my PRS Alpha. Recently I ran a 16 hour 3D carving job perfectly. I've never had a computer issue, comm problem, positioning error or any other problems while running a job except when the power itself caused it.

The processes that run under the SB are incredibly simple. They are not demanding enough to warrant a high powered processor or lots of memory. If the SB program runs as a dedicated process and nothing else is running, there should be absolutely no interference.

Personally, I think a lot of the computer problems are just like the ones everyone experiences with Windows hardware. Improper configuration, sneaky programs usurping the processor, faulty hardware and inability to follow overly complex instructions carefully. If you aren't a software engineer, you probably are not going to be able to configure your system correctly.

If I were running the SB IT system, I would make it my mission to switch the entire system to one run by Linux using a computer that could be installed as a board in the controller box. Linux is powerful, simple, stable and requires miniscule resources. It's also free. Once installed, it could last the life of the machine and never need updating of any kind. There are many dedicated controllers for machines in the world based on some sort of Linux flavor and they are very stable.

Windows is a very poor choice for a controlling computer due to the extreme number of variations and the overload history of Windows. Every silly Windows computer still has DNA from DOS and Win 3.1 loaded into it. No wonder they have so many problems.

Abandon Windows. That would be my suggestion.

Brady Watson

04-16-2018, 10:10 AM

Tom et al,
The NUC has proven to be a great computer as a front end for a few CNC controllers I have tested, although none were USB. It would be small enough to fit into an Alpha control box & possibly an RBK sized box. Both of these boxes should have a cooling fan on them and filtration. I never understood the reluctance towards good cooling and filtration. The sheet metal sinks are not enough. I can't count the number of Alpha boxes south of the Mason-Dixon line I've personally seen that just leave the control box doors open because they get too hot - mostly because the motor contactors overheat and don't work. A shop I visited in Miami just took the Alpha control box door off completely(!)

A number of competitors bundle the computer and controls into the same box...so doing so wouldn't be revolutionary or radical. Furthermore, from a support standpoint, hardware/pre-loaded software of consistent/known quantity would seriously reduce variables for techs in your building AND save a ton on support costs. It is also completely possible to 'dial in' to the control box having the issue using something like TeamViewer - which in fact is the very thing used by a number of your competitors. If the user messes with the config to the point where it is counterproductive - you could remotely reset it back to factory specs if required - now how cool would that be? This was suggested a number of times over the years - usually with great empathy for SB support staff...(seriously)

-B

tomhartnett

04-16-2018, 10:12 AM

There are pros and cons with any operating system, including Linux.

The main problem with Linux is it can't run the SB3 software which was built/originated on Visual (Visual Basic) before Linux was was an OS, and the SB3 software was always intended to be familiar and accessible to all kinds of people. So for SB3 users, Windows will be a reality for us for the foreseeable future. Our responsibility has to be to serve up an easy way/pre-made platform (computer) that will work with minimal frustration/complication to the user. To me, currently, there is an excess of frustration to accomplish this and that is why all of these options are being thrown out about what needs to be done.

Coming in the future/the move away from Windows - is on the way, this is the FabMo controller which can be accessed from any operating system.
And for those of us who will remain with SB3, providing a PC and/or low frustration process to get the PC in a state that is not going to cause problems should be a great option.

steve_g

04-16-2018, 10:31 AM

“Like what, Steve? What is it your PRT able to do that a 20hp ATC machine with 4 Becker vacuums can't do?”

Nothing, of course… however it’s not practical for a shop that turns out cabinet components all day, stopping to do curved mullions or grills, oval picture frames and very small step and repeat plastic parts. At least for those that have called on me in the past… likely they don’t have non-cabinet specific design software or if they do, no one knows how to use it!
SG

My NUC has been running my Bot smoothly for a number of years… before that, I used a naked motherboard that I occasionally blew the dust off with an air hose, that ended abruptly when I was cutting some di-bond (composite aluminum). ☹

coryatjohn

04-16-2018, 11:01 AM

>> The main problem with Linux is it can't run the SB3 software

A complete re-write of the software is called for. That is not overly complex nor out of the realm of possibility. It happens all the time in the software industry. There aren't that many features in the SB software that make it impossible or even that costly. The job could easily be outsourced too. The entire thing could be written to support a browser interface as well, making it a server project with no UI. Interface to the outside world would be wifi.

Look at how many other products do the exact same thing. This is not only doable, it is simple, robust and has been done in hundreds of other products. People could control their CNC with a smartphone, laptop, desktop or any device with both a wifi and browser.

tomhartnett

04-16-2018, 11:06 AM

The in-development FabMo controller will address these concerns and is entirely a rewrite. for those who will remain on SB3, windows will remain a reality. The upgrade path will be to FabMo, which can be controlled with their smartphone, laptop, desktop, any device as you mention.

coryatjohn

04-16-2018, 11:30 AM

Well, FabMo sounds promising and runs (curiously enough) under Linux.

As someone who is actually entirely satisfied with the existing setup, I would probably wait until the FabMo is totally and 100% working on many machines before even considering upgrading. Perhaps by that time, I will have moved to another shop in the great beyond.

Gary Campbell

04-16-2018, 12:04 PM

Tom...
Crusty ol fart here...from Missouri, the "show me" state. (not really) That means that along with being old and thinking that people actually want to hear what I have to say, I also have been around long enough to know that when its "all said and done", in the ShopBot world, there is much more said than ever gets done.

You say:

"I've been with ShopBot for just about 3 years now, working with not only tech support but just about every department and know that everyone here is dedicated to making the best product we can."

I agree. And a good number of great folks there in Durham. That said, the annals of history are populated those that have failed doing their best while others have succeeded. Success in most cases is more related to a companies performance compared to their competition than an internal judgement that "we have done our best". Our assessment is irrelevant, the world votes with its checkbook.

You also say:
"from day one the number one issue i have addressed has been communications issues - ultimately 90 percent or more of them are related to the computer."

I agree to that also. That said, If ShopBot was really interested in fixing this issue for the thousands that have experienced it, they would have:
1) Digitally signed driver package that the Windows OS doesn't perceive as malicious.
2) A driver that sets SB hardware as USB 2.0 or greater
3) An overpriced (sic) computer solution that was bulletproof for commercial users
4) An extensive set of written and video instruction that shows how to both select the proper computer and then change the settings to prep the computer for proper control use. (Like the competition does)

FYI, I proposed these exact things during my tenure at the company, so, good luck with your well meaning endeavor, but I feel, like mine, it will go nowhere. It will go nowhere because "the next great thing" (read as Fabmo in this case) will solve this. Personally I have heard this for over 6 years and have adopted a "I will only believe that when I see it" mentality.

You say:
"Often times i felt like customers probably just thought 'oh here they go again blaming some problem on the PC that they don't know how to fix".

I would propose: Why wouldn't they think that? It has been happening for ~15 years and has affected thousands and has driven hundreds to other brands. The domino theory says these hundreds have told thousands of their issues.

So, other than pages of apologetic well meaning statements from SB employees and an overwhelmed tech support department expressing the same, is there any evidence in the real world that users could interpret as the problem was being resolved? A global solution?

My God, man. This should have been fixed when it showed up over a decade ago. So as someone that has purchased (at todays prices) over $63,000 of SB products and attempted for years to make a living, along with over a hundred service call, I vote: too little, too late!

Like I used to tell my kids: You don't have to tell me how hard you work or how good you are, It will be obvious, and everyone will know.

tomhartnett

04-16-2018, 12:24 PM

If there ever was a time to act, that time is now, Gary. And I can assure you that at least some of this is being worked on by myself.

I can't address the old issues of not having the digitally signed driver/driver issues - as yes I do believe when it comes to this, it's all hands on deck for Fabmo eliminating these issues - and I can't speak to what it once was like. But I can tell you that at least in terms of addressing the problem today, it's something that we in support want done and have been working on.

And I do wholly believe we have the solution in a simple standalone device - and in the instruction sets I have developed in my time here. Written documentation was useful in this regard but not always 100% effective and it is because of this that I have ventured into video. As a show of the work I am doing, here are links to the two of the videos I made at the end of March on setting up a USB to get your PC clean installed - https://drive.google.com/open?id=19mL1o4oI4bkth87Q8h4w8J2JinHOJri3

The link is just showing the windows 7 and 8 version of this, there is a windows 10 version as well as accompanying videos on how to clean install, setup the SB3 software, connect, install firmware, etc... with the idea that it will be bulletproof (as bulletproof as user instruction can be).

I don't disagree with you Gary, and I agree that if we don't take action we won't make it very far.

Gary Campbell

04-16-2018, 12:53 PM

tomhartnett

04-16-2018, 01:18 PM

Stay tuned... (words engraved on my tombstone) - I do plan on remaining more active on here as I branch into videos/documentation for the future.
I do appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts.

ryansturmer

04-16-2018, 03:43 PM

I (like many at ShopBot I'm sure) do not spend as much time on the forum as I should. You'll notice this is my first post! I'm relatively new at ShopBot, so I'm going to forgive myself for that. These discussions are important though. We see them. We are taking notes.

I wanted to address some of the FabMo comments directly, since that's squarely my deparment. It is a place where we are doing quite a bit of work, and have made (and continue to make) substantial investment. Mostly, we do not post a lot about it, here or elsewhere, for fear of misrepresenting our timelines to those who are excited about getting their hands on new products. We've been burned by that before, and don't want to get out there with too many details until we're really ready to share.

First of all, we are in the process of moving to version 1.7.0 of FabMo, which will address a lot of the issues that we've identified on Handibot, and will add a number of features that we see as necessary to ship the platform on larger tools, starting with the ShopBot Desktop and MAX, then expanding to the Buddy, and eventually gantry tools. We've suffered some substantial delays in doing so for a number of reasons, not the least of which has been the debacle with the Intel Edison, which I'll discuss below. Even without the issues with the Edison, we're a small team, especially with respect to our software development. It's the case that we have a lot of products that we make and support, and as I'm sure is the case in other companies, sometimes things just take a little longer than they feel like they should to get right. When you're building the plane as you fly it, you always need to make sure you're staying airborne. We're expecting the Desktop switch over to happen over the next few months, with the change for larger tools coming not far thereafter.

Second, FabMo has never, and will not ever depend on the Intel Edison. The Edison was our target for Handibot, for various reasons, but we can and do routinely run it on a number of different hardware devices. It runs under Linux, on MacOS, and on Windows, and we've run it on several SBC platforms, as well as on conventional PCs. My tool at home runs on the TI sitara processor. We've got a few handibots here that run on Raspberry Pis, and most of our development work happens on MacOS X.

Intel really let us down with the Edison. It was a half-baked product that they didn't support well, and that didn't really have a market. They pulled the plug on it without warning, without offering a substitute, and the switch caused us a lot of grief and pain. We should have kicked the tires more when we selected it, but that's water under the bridge now. Fortunately, there didn't seem to be a mad scramble to buy them after Intel canned it, (can't imagine why!) so we were able to purchase enough to continue with Handibot production until we have a replacement, and keep repair stock for a good long time, so we can continue to support customers with Handibots.

It's a shoddy craftsman that blames his tools, however, and in the wake of the Edison, we have been hard at work on an alternative design, which will be the foundation of the products that go out in the larger tools. This one is done with an ARM processor from the ground up, and one that has a guaranteed product longevity, both from the chip-maker and the SOM vendor, who is a reputable supplier that deals regularly in the industrial and automotive markets, so that we can be sure that we'll be able to supply and support the product for at least as long as we've been supplying and supporting the ShopBot legacy products that people use today. It's also a platform that has a robust upgrade path, so that as technology advances, our control systems can advance with it. I'm in the process of reviewing that design even as I write this, and I'm hopeful that we'll be testing that in the next couple of weeks.

As for everything else, all I can really promise here is that we are listening, and we are working hard to make things better. We don't get to bite off all the initiatives we'd like all at once. Indeed, many of the suggestions made here are things that we've debated and discussed internally for some time. We'll continue to press ahead on the things that we've got the bandwidth to get done, and keep listening and discussing here as much as we can.

EricSchimel

04-16-2018, 09:59 PM

I totally agree about Windows computers... They can be a pain. Many years ago I can see how it made sense to use them.. They're powerful, cheap, and everywhere. The reality like many of you have said that what was once a powerful part of the SB experience has turned into one of the trickier parts of using a ShopBot.

For me, FabMo is pretty awesome because it moves the computing power on the tool itself. This, in theory eliminates all of the variables that an external computer introduces. So that's pretty awesome. On top of that, it's a totally open system so that anyone can contribute to the code, and fork it for their own use. That's also pretty awesome.

The reality right now is that FabMo is still pretty early stage, and that's to be expected as it's a total re-write of the control software and a total redesign of the control board. Because it's so early stage it's only on Handibots and some Desktop machines. And based on my experience using it on a Handibot, that's a wise choice AT THIS MOMENT.

I commend you guys very sincerely for the FabMo effort. I think it's heading in the right direction for some of the reasons I stated above, including being open source. Here's where if falls apart a bit for me:

The Edision thing sucks. It's something you've got to move away from and you're clearly already doing it. As someone who isn't a real programmer, but a DIYer and tinkerer of many things I've become pretty good at fooling around with Raspberry Pis over the last year. I'm no master, but I built a little print server, a media server, and even a retro gaming console out of a few of them. It's been hard to learn Linux, but thankfully there's a lot of great guides out there and a lot of well documented open source software that I can use and try.

I want to be able to fool around with FabMo, I want to be able to adapt it to a small CNC build I'm considering, and I'd love to build some little web apps to automate some regular production work that I do. As a newcomer to programming, and fooling with this embedded control stuff I don't feel like the resources and support is there. If I feel that way, others do to...

So on a technical front, I'd love to be able to have an official build of FabMo that I could flash to a Pi and connect to the motion control board so I can really fool with it. Maybe that exists now, but I'm not aware of it.

Moreover I, and I'm sure other developers are out there that'd love to fool with and ultimately help push this platform forward. The control software is the heart of the machine and ultimately for the people that use it. If you guys at SB can make it easier for us to help you, either by way of letting is more easily hack it, give feedback, making it available on a ubiquitous piece of hardware we can all help push it forward. I for one want to see this work out, but I don't know how I can help beyond posting something like this.

Brady Watson

04-17-2018, 10:36 AM

Tom...
Thank you for standing like a man and debating this unflattering issue in public. You are unique among your peers. "Official" company presence has been sorely missed on this forum.
Guys like Brady and myself (among many others) wish nothing but the best for our friends at ShopBot. Not from a brand loyal "everything ShopBot does is the best" perspective, but from the perspective of a "first love". You NEVER forget your first.
As a pragmatist, I watch from the wings, waiting on results, not words.

X2 Gary

I am offering my thoughts as a prior professional software developer with expeience with manufacturing hardware integration and client/server development. While the development tools have changed over the years, the way you code, the anticipation of errors/foolproofing and the rollout procedures are the same. (as well as the snafus along the way) I have also been a ShopBot customer for 17 years, giving the company close to $100k over the years, as well as a SB tech/trainer for about 13 of those years - diagnosing, repairing and setting up every SB model. Failure was not an option and the customer needed to be running by the time I left. As Gary could attest to, you get real good, real quick when you've got to get the job done using the tools and resources at hand. I have used my SB machines to make a living since 4 days after I was laid off (with 700 others) as a programmer. Running a job shop isn't easy - you have to think on your feet every day and come up with shoestring solutions to expensive problems. The stability and robustness of the CNC is of prime importance to someone like me. There isn't time for failure. It just needs to work.

In my 7,000+ posts on this board, I would say the vast majority of them have been helping others with some support issue - freely, without pay and with little gratitude from SB. Most of my solutions came from the school of hard knocks. I don't do it for ego, for pay or anything other than I have the knowledge, and with that comes responsibilty. It has a shelf life and why not help a fellow brother out of a jam? Now that I see SB staff taking a role on the forum, I will hand over the reigns to you. It's a shame that it took your most dedicated and supportive customers saying 'enough is enough' before you showed up, but you're here - so welcome and good luck. There's work to be done.

I for one, am neither impressed nor excited about the FabMo project. I think there is way too much blind faith being put into it as if it is going to be the cure to all ails - and I think that nothing could be further from the truth. You may have well said, "The invisible man in the sky is going to deliver the FabMo and all will be right in the world again." Allow me to explain from the perspective of a former developer and professional CNC user - including a ShopBot enthusiast.

The ONLY thing a CNC owner/operator cares about is reliability. All have their flaws, but if they are reliable they can be accounted for. Mechanical failures are usually apparent and fixable by the end user - the control software - not so much. It needs to be stone cold reliable and function properly 100% of the time. As someone who has used another CNC controller for 10+ years - it has been flawless except for one time when the power flickered, which I can't blame it for. I cannot say the same about the SB controller, although through my advanced knowledge, courtesy of being a SB tech, I managed to get it fairly reliable, but it took a lot of work. I truly have empathy for others not as lucky as me in this regard, which is probably why I have volunteered advice.

No professional CNC operator (not speaking about hobby/part timers) that I know is going to want to run their CNC on a tablet/phone or any other delicate device like that. It's silly to us - but if you are marketing small hobby tools - that is a VERY different sector of the CNC market than a professional who relies on the tool to eat. The OS is irrelevant if it is reliable. It's 'really neat' isn't good enough for a pro. They just want it to work and be as reliable as their table saw or drill press. Reliability should be the target in the crosshairs and nothing else. Without that, all else is nonsense. If I were spec'ing out the right hardware to move forward in terms of user I/O it would be a well thought out touch-screen interface and the PC would be in the control box. End of story. It would be easy, reliable and straightforward, with the ability to diagnose the PC remotely, in service to the customer.

This idea that FabMo is going to be able to be driven by any OS or device is both unrealistic and silly. Has anyone who has rolled out software before really thought about the ramifications for your customer base like, at all? OK - it connects via a web browser. Got it. What's going to happen before that? How much will the support staff have to know in order to be able to answer the customer when he asks how to get the network/web interface working on his (insert platform here)? Do you honestly think that it is just simply going to be plug and play? I know otherwise...mostly from getting my butt kicked doing similar things in the past.

There was a phrase that went around the building in Durham not that long ago that went something like this, "We believe no ShopBot should ever become obsolete & that there is always an upgrade path for legacy hardware." Barring the fact that the fairly affordable 4G was kicked to the curb (Why? People still want to buy it) for a $3k RBK that performs no better - what happens when the people want to upgrade their legacy controls over to FabMo? In case you haven't given it much thought - here's what you'd be up against from a support standpoint: Customers will be running XP or Win7 computers that have been stripped down to eliminate the web and networking because those were deemed 'bad' for SB3 operation. They will be running either Internet Explorer v4.02 or possibly IE6 on machines that have never connected to the net or networking ever. Now they need to make sure that they have a current browser and all dependencies in place just to be able to see the FabMo interface, let alone run it. Are you sure you want that added chaos & load on support?

If I recall correctly, it only took SB like 1-1.5yrs to go from DOS SB2 to Windows/SB3 for the Alpha. The FabMo has been under development for 6+ years. Why is that? OK - some hardware setbacks with the Edison - there are many other choices. Beaglebone or ARM come to mind. If I were making the decision for a modern controller, I would just farm it out. If it's open source, who cares who develops it, right? Isn't 'all that' going to be made available? - Or will it just be called 'open source' to sound hip to young buyers? There are many reliable controllers out there available to OEMs that can be skinned with the SB logo for less than developing in house AND they're so good they don't need more than one or two support people on staff to handle issues. Stop and think about that for a moment.

Open source? Sure you want that headache? By open source, do you mean the average user can get in there and mess up the code to the point where they brick your hardware and have to call support? Like that? Or...will it finally let them change out the screenset to things that make the most sense for their skill level? This seems to be a muddy topic because most don't know other controllers support nearly the entire GCode command/feature set to the point where it doesn't leave an advanced user looking for more control. I don't know of any state of the art controller that lets people monkey with the source code...and it is for good reason. (I am not talking about Marlin et al)

The 'Open SBP' thing...neat, but the reality is, every other CNC on the planet(!!!), including 3D printers, routers, mills, lathes etc runs GCode. It isn't hard to learn and the truth is, most never have to learn it anymore than they have to learn SBP. CAM handles pretty much everything except C2/C3 macros for homing etc. Very few even mess with SBP code. Somewhere along the line it was decided that ShopBotters are too stupid to learn GCode - so let's dumb it down to 2 letter phonetic codes for them. Do you know what learning SBP does to your customers? It makes them obsolete/unhireable in the workplace since every place uses GCode - unless they just so happen to have a SB, which is rare compared to GCode machines. Others have brought this up over the years and SB3 barely runs the most basic of GCodes (or not at all depending on the version of SB3 - even with converting it) because SB3 doesn't support all the features of comparable CNCs. I'd like to know if the SBP language is a way to keep customers tied to SB hardware because they'd have to learn dreaded GCode on another CNC or if it was just because they were deemed less intelligent than the rest of the world running CNCs on GCode? (or was it another reason? I want to know) What I find REALLY interesting is if you take a FabMo and run it on GCode it runs like a top - run the same setup on SBP and it runs slower. Hmm...

Going forward (as suggested years ago) there needs to be a new committee @ SB consisting of 3 or 4 employees whose job it was to find out exactly all the features of competing machines as well as what current CNC trends in hardware/software (controllers, motors, bearings, chassis) and use that research to steer the company's future in the right direction. I am available as a consultant should you need help doing this and getting up to speed. I really want SB to succeed and have the major presence it once did in the market. It goes without saying that I love everybody at SBHQ - we've done so much together over the years and have promoted each other & I wish you nothing but good luck.

-B

ryansturmer

04-17-2018, 12:39 PM

These are all great points, and exactly the kind of things that we're considering as we move our platform forward. It's completely understandable to interpret fragmented messages from us as a lack of customer focus, or an indicator that we're developing new products without proper attention paid to the market. These are things we are thinking about constantly, even if our outward messaging doesn't make that clear. It's the case too that we've had some turnover in recent years - some projects have changed hands - this stuff isn't always outwardly visible, and also has an impact on timelines, messaging, etc.

I'll follow the pattern of responding specifically to technical points, since that's where my duty and my strength lies:

The ONLY thing a CNC owner/operator cares about is reliability.
Agreed, for the most part. The issues we're resolving as we start to move toward the tools that are aimed at Manufacturers are largely about getting the reliability to where we want it. I will say that the "cnc operator" is pinned into a box where a CNC controller is a certain thing and does a certain thing and behaves a certain way, and while we're looking to make sure that we have all of the relevant capabilities of our competitors machines, we're also looking to expand how these machines work and what they do in a modern manufacturing environment, without sacrificing that reliability. I'd also caution against lumping "all" customers together, ever. I think it's fair to say that all customers care about reliability. It's probably a mistake to say all customers only concern is reliability. Does that make sense? I feel like my foot is actually inside my mouth every time I manage to say "all customers"

This idea that FabMo is going to be able to be driven by any OS or device is both unrealistic and silly.
My comment about it running on different devices and operating systems was not meant to tout this as a customer feature of FabMo specifically, but rather to illustrate that the fate of FabMo as a control software solution is not somehow entangled with the specific hardware of the Intel Edison, which would indeed be a concern, given that they don't exist anymore. Obviously, we are pulling together specific designs for specific hardware, and that is the qualified product that we will send to customers.

No professional CNC operator (not speaking about hobby/part timers) that I know is going to want to run their CNC on a tablet/phone or any other delicate device like that.
...

Agree on all points. Ability to run on a tablet/phone is an interesting side effect of the network connected platform, and offers options for unique interactions in unique situations, but isn't the cornerstone of FabMo's advantage, in my opinion, at least for shops where a tablet is likely to be banged around, dropped, operated with gloves, etc. A conventional shop-friendly interface is the thing to use here, which it fortunately also supports. I think there's a lot of good reasons that a hobbyist/part timer would choose our products, but I'm not aiming my efforts at people who only need to the tool to work some of the time by definition. We're here to make tools that work, and that always work.

There was a phrase that went around the building in Durham not that long ago that went something like this, "We believe no ShopBot should ever become obsolete & that there is always an upgrade path for legacy hardware." Barring the fact that the fairly affordable 4G was kicked to the curb (Why? People still want to buy it)...
We're actually looking at a refresh of our tools that include more cost effective controls and drive systems, so this is not falling on deaf ears. So far as upgrades for new controls, these upgrades can come with a computer qualified to run the tool - unless you feel that supplying a computer that is already pre-installed with the resources needed to run the tool is a bad idea? I (and others here at the shop) are big fans of it, and I think that an integrated computer with interface must at least be an option on any upgrade trajectory.

If I recall correctly, it only took SB like 1-1.5yrs to go from DOS SB2 to Windows/SB3 for the Alpha. The FabMo has been under development for 6+ years. Why is that? ... There are many reliable controllers out there available to OEMs that can be skinned with the SB logo for less than developing in house
I can't comment on the broader FabMo timeline, because I'm new. See above though, about turnover and direction. I'll hide behind that for now. So far as farming it out all I can say is that I prefer to design tools rather than have them designed for me. I'm not putting ShopBot's sticker on some OEM controller. Our competitors can do that all day and night, and there's nothing wrong with that, if that's your business, but that's not us. We make things, we make them here, and we stand behind them. That's our ethic.

Open source? Sure you want that headache?

I believe in the Open Source thing, and I stand behind it, but I will say that ShopBot institutionally doesn't do it very well. We're getting better. When we say open source, we mean that the source code to all of our hardware and software is available to anyone who wants to work with it. Part of that is just being open, but most of it is about documentation and reaching out to the community. We do the open part well... the documentation part, not so much. We're working on it. - This one is actually a long discussion, that I won't do justice to here in this thread, but perhaps we can talk about it another time.

The 'Open SBP' thing...neat, but the reality is, every other CNC on the planet(!!!), including 3D printers, routers, mills, lathes etc runs GCode. ...
What I find REALLY interesting is if you take a FabMo and run it on GCode it runs like a top - run the same setup on SBP and it runs slower. Hmm...

I have to wholly disagree with your first statement here. The "OpenSBP" thing is more a hassle than it is neat. It exists for a good reason (that happens no longer to be relevant), which is that the early conversational interface for ShopBot was meant to be easy to remember for new users. The early ShopBots were the first tools in a market that wasn't familiar with G-Code, and there really wasn't any good reason to build in that that kind of compatibility. As ShopBots moved "up" in the market, and competitors moved "down", "G-Code support" was sort of begrudgingly added so that customers coming from other environments could run their files. The fact of the matter is though, that when you get right down to it, "OpenSBP" really isn't any simpler to use than G-Code, and in many ways, it's more complex and more confusing. It offers programmability that many g-code systems don't, but even that is increasingly untrue. OpenSBP has tons of issues that drive me nuts. The language is irregular. String quoting is optional, causing syntax confusion. It uses case-insensitive identifiers. The ON INPUT statement is a disaster. The sb3 implementation has issues in its expression evaluator, causing frequent runtime errors if you're doing a lot of complex math. We're including it in FabMo for legacy support reasons, but the fact of the matter is, that you're right. G-Code really ought to be first, and it should be the language focused on in teaching and training so that our customers are learning skills that are portable. I'd like us to move in that direction. There's the issue of programmability, and what to do with C2s and C3s and kooky tools that require special handling, and tool changes, but if we started from scratch the way I'd handle that is have the tool run two languages. G-code, for running jobs, and then have a macro language that is specifically designed for doing the plumbing needed for tool administration activities (homing, zeroing, tool changes, automation) - rather than having one language that does kind of a half-assed job at both of these mostly separate tasks. As it is, our plumbing language is going to be OpenSBP for now, and we're going to steer users towards either openSBP or g-code, as is their preference. Going forward, you can expect to see a more g-code friendly attitude from us. The g-code running quicker on FabMo is, as you observe, the result of translating from OpenSBP to g-code in real time. It used to be much slower, and is now only a little bit slow, but even this is for reasons that are mostly not good, and will be fixed in an upcoming release. I am going to resist my temptation to go into extreme detail here, even though doing so would be a lot more fun than responding methodically to your other criticisms.

Going forward (as suggested years ago) there needs to be a new committee @ SB consisting of 3 or 4 employees whose job it was to find out exactly all the features of competing machines as well as what current CNC trends in hardware/software (controllers, motors, bearings, chassis) and use that research to steer the company's future in the right direction. I am available as a consultant should you need help doing this and getting up to speed. I really want SB to succeed and have the major presence it once did in the market. It goes without saying that I love everybody at SBHQ - we've done so much together over the years and have promoted each other & I wish you nothing but good luck.

I'm not sure we're prepared to pay for consulting when we're getting all this good advice for free on our public forum! Keep the suggestions coming, I guess, unless you're committed to start charging for them. :)

Brady Watson

04-17-2018, 01:45 PM

Ryan,
Thanks for the intelligent response. I'm glad you're on the team and energized to move things in the right direction. A few points:

I think it's fair to say that all customers care about reliability. It's probably a mistake to say all customers only concern is reliability. Does that make sense? I feel like my foot is actually inside my mouth every time I manage to say "all customers"

Of course - it goes without saying that nothing is absolute. But...Without reliability - what good is any one or any thing? Right?

Agree on all points. Ability to run on a tablet/phone is an interesting side effect of the network connected platform, and offers options for unique interactions in unique situations, but isn't the cornerstone of FabMo's advantage...
We're actually looking at a refresh of our tools that include more cost effective controls and drive systems, so this is not falling on deaf ears. So far as upgrades for new controls, these upgrades can come with a computer qualified to run the tool - unless you feel that supplying a computer that is already pre-installed with the resources needed to run the tool is a bad idea? I (and others here at the shop) are big fans of it, and I think that an integrated computer with interface must at least be an option on any upgrade trajectory.

It's good to hear that this is a secondary 'feature' and not the focus. Yes - Agree 1000% that a computer/controller package of known quantity is the only way to go. Otherwise it's just the Wild West and chaotic for all concerned.

We make things, we make them here, and we stand behind them. That's our ethic.

Well sorta...if by 'here' you mean NC :p

I have to wholly disagree with your first statement here. The "OpenSBP" thing is more a hassle than it is neat. It exists for a good reason (that happens no longer to be relevant), which is that the early conversational interface for ShopBot was meant to be easy to remember for new users.

Umm...I remember - I was there! If SB could run on GCode similar to other machines, this would allow for standardization in a shop running multiple machines - in case that wasn't obvious. In addition to this, it would be amazing to run the SB controller on ANY CNC configuration, including milling machines and lathes - but let's walk before we run. There isn't support for the code needed to support a lathe or mill at the moment (with features I require) - but it sure would be nice.

As ShopBots moved "up" in the market, and competitors moved "down", "G-Code support" was sort of begrudgingly added so that customers coming from other environments could run their files.

Sometimes...but what about all those low cost 3D printers that are the perfect segue into wanting a CNC router? They all run on GCode...all of a sudden, they need to learn SBP or just buy a GCode machine - so there's that. But good to hear that GCode will be less of a dirty word going forward.

I'm not sure we're prepared to pay for consulting when we're getting all this good advice for free on our public forum!

I thought I was just stating the obvious - the consulting fee is for stuff you don't already know! You know, the 'good stuff' :cool:

Cheers & thanks for discussing. It is refreshing to have an intelligent conversation. It would be great to meet in person sometime and compare notes.

-B

Gary Campbell

04-17-2018, 02:53 PM

Ryan...
Thanks for being open to this conversation. As you might expect, I have a couple counterpoints, but will take my 3), 5) and 6) above. GO GCODE!

I would propose that if face with the SBP/Gcode/both decision that you should simply: Pick A Lane! Gcode is the larger and far greater supported subset of the 2 and will ensure compatibility and hardware acquisition for SB going into the future.

Don't all controller cards/chips run gcode natively?
Doesn't every line of SB code have to be transcoded before execution?
Doesn't this slow down the code reading ability?
Isn't this even more exacerbated during arc and circles due to the mismatch between SB3's angular coordinate system and that of the Cartesian, which these chips run natively?
If you weren't trying to accommodate an SB3 based operating front end, and just went all gcode wouldn't Fabmo be ready to run?
How many years are you going to keep trying this before reality sets in? The whole world runs Gcode. What in the heck makes you thing something less than that is better?

SB3 as a simpler interface? In principal, and since I have heard ALL the ideas behind the mission statement for SB#'s development, I would propose the following for discussion:

That replacing G1 with MX, MY, MZ, MA, MB, MC, M2, M3, M4, and M5 is NOT simpler
That replacing G0 with JX, JY, JZ, JA, JB, JC, J2, J3, J4 and J5 is NOT simpler
That G1 X10 Y21.675 Z 3.5 B270 is MUCH easier to read than M5,10,21.675,3.5,,270
That G1 X10 Y21.675 Z 3.5 B270 is 10 times easier to type in than M5,10,21.675,3.5,,270
That having at least 3 versions of arc commands that only operate in the XY plane that cannot accept posted depth change is NOT simpler and wont allow action in the horizontal (G18 or G19) planes.
That most gcode controller sets have embedded command and canned actions that already support parsing input and output status and in some, maybe even most, don't require machine action to be halted to execute. The stuff you guys have been fighting is built in to the others!
That not having an absolute or table (G53) coordinate system is a serious detriment and you shouldn't be allowed to put out an ATC until its there!
That not having Absolute/Relative toggling without halting motion is a detriment.
Even if SB3 was simpler, having thousands of "cnc operators" that couldn't get a job due to not knowing one line of code is not "better" and is an unintended consequence as a contradiction to the mission statement.
In most "job shops" with numerous machines, the ShopBot is assumed to have "foreign code" by seasoned operators.
Most folks that have learned more than 1 control will vote SB3 as the harder of the 2 to learn.

The list goes on.... and on.... and on. If you have gcode experience you know. Maybe not so true 10-12 years ago, but in todays world the tools the SB3 users have in the box are much less in number than those that run most other controllers. And with perception being reality, in the CNC machining world, SB3 to Gcode is looked at like Pig Latin to English. No one is typing these commands any more!

Stop worrying about the "old familiar 2 button SB3 commands" The world is using screen buttons. Very few if any require any keyboard (MDI) input of any kind. SB3 control requires more keyboard input, more clicks to get a jog panel operational and more steps to accomplish most tasks than most any other control out there.

And lets not forget the process of starting the spindle.... Key switch on, press green button, press enter. And if that not enough lets listen to a couple seconds of woooah, woooah woooah before the machine actually does something. Its called "Cycle start" It means the operator is clear from the machine and actually is intelligent enough to command the machine to start running. With one button press.

Please understand I an not trying to TELL you these things. Remember the fake reference to Missouri? I am here to show you.

I will be bringing a small format (tabletop) machine to McGrew's. in a couple weeks. ShopBot is sending a DT model. Lets put them side by side with the same files. And being a Northern Michigan redneck, lets hook them up back to back with a chain on the gantry and have a "pulling" contest!! Just kidding about that part.

Seriously, it would give you a chance to see how a 24 by 36 machine with a cast iron frame, 650 ozin closed loop motors on 5mm ballscrews, with a 3hp spindle running on a $350 DIY controller (that didn't exist a year ago) stacks up to your stuff at 60% of the DTMax price point. Like I said, here to show you.

Brady Watson

04-17-2018, 03:11 PM

Ill add one more to Gary's list:

Get rid of the need to press 'k' or 'SK' to get into keypad mode. On nearly all other controllers, you just press the arrow keys PgUp/Dn and it moves. End of story.

-B

coryatjohn

04-17-2018, 05:51 PM

It will be interesting to see the shootout at McGrew's. Gonna be there.

ryansturmer

04-17-2018, 06:19 PM

Gary, thank you for your comments as well. Brady, I'm going to table your request about SK - I don't want this to become a ShopBot software feature request thread. It would become very long indeed! Your suggestion has been noted.

1. Don't all controller cards/chips run gcode natively?
2. Doesn't every line of SB code have to be transcoded before execution?
3. Doesn't this slow down the code reading ability?
4. Isn't this even more exacerbated during arc and circles due to the mismatch between SB3's angular coordinate system and that of the Cartesian, which these chips run natively?
5. If you weren't trying to accommodate an SB3 based operating front end, and just went all gcode wouldn't Fabmo be ready to run?
6. How many years are you going to keep trying this before reality sets in? The whole world runs Gcode. What in the heck makes you thing something less than that is better?

No, (again with the cavalier use of "all") but FabMo, like many of its competitors, runs G-code natively.
Each line of SBP code must be transcoded before it executes, but not all lines have to be transcoded before any execute. Does that make sense?
Transcoding takes nonzero time, but not enough time that it needs to have any impact on tool performance. Ideal transcoding time is not significant at all on the time scale of the tools motion, at any practical speed.
No, even for arcs and circles, translating doesn't take significant time. You're misusing the word "chips" here, leading me think you may not have a complete understanding of all of the hardware/firmware pieces at work, in ours or our competitors controllers. There isn't some kind of hardware-native "g-code chip" at the heart of any of these machines. Like any other controller, ours is just a little computer that takes instructions in a text format, and interprets it to generate a motion plan, which it then executes in real-time. The time it takes to do the interpreting really isn't significant enough to be considered in the grand scheme of the tools performance, so fussing over how long it takes to convert angles and such really isn't relevant.
No, there are plenty of other reasons that writing a complex piece of software takes nonzero time.
Again, our controller runs g-code natively. We have a great many customers that use OpenSBP, and support for it is easy to include too, so why not? We need a language to perform our automation in, and that one is familiar to us and to our customers, and at least has the control structures (in spite of its faults) to support those activities.

That replacing G1 with MX, MY, MZ, MA, MB, MC, M2, M3, M4, and M5 is NOT simpler
That replacing G0 with JX, JY, JZ, JA, JB, JC, J2, J3, J4 and J5 is NOT simpler
That G1 X10 Y21.675 Z 3.5 B270 is MUCH easier to read than M5,10,21.675,3.5,,270
That G1 X10 Y21.675 Z 3.5 B270 is 10 times easier to type in than M5,10,21.675,3.5,,270
That having at least 3 versions of arc commands that only operate in the XY plane that cannot accept posted depth change is NOT simpler and wont allow action in the horizontal (G18 or G19) planes.

Agree on all counts. I may not have made that clear enough in my too-long post above.

That most gcode controller sets have embedded command and canned actions that already support parsing input and output status and in some, maybe even most, don't require machine action to be halted to execute. The stuff you guys have been fighting is built in to the others!

Your perspective here is one of a customer of a controller, which makes sense, because that's what you are, but as the designer of the controller, this is something that we have to think about and work out. Those canned routines are included in the controller, but they're not magic - developers had to write, debug, and test them. We are those developers in this case, and these are exactly the considerations that need to be made. The fact that we are exposing you to our thinking as we make those design decisions is a cultural choice that we make, partly out of courtesy to you our customer and contributor, but mostly out of a belief that being open and transparent about our process and collaborating with you in these fun public discussions improves outcomes for you and all our customers.

That not having an absolute or table (G53) coordinate system is a serious detriment and you shouldn't be allowed to put out an ATC until its there!

Absolutely agree. FabMo has more robust support for coordinate systems, using G53-59, and correspondent structures in the OpenSBP language as well. Indeed, the backport of coordinate systems to the OpenSBP language was done exactly because doing an ATC is a nightmare without it. The ATC we've run here on FabMo works just this way.

That not having Absolute/Relative toggling without halting motion is a detriment.

Agree, fixed in FabMo already. Switch back and forth all you like, in either language.

Even if SB3 was simpler, having thousands of "cnc operators" that couldn't get a job due to not knowing one line of code is not "better" and is an unintended consequence as a contradiction to the mission statement.
In most "job shops" with numerous machines, the ShopBot is assumed to have "foreign code" by seasoned operators.
Most folks that have learned more than 1 control will vote SB3 as the harder of the 2 to learn.

That's the thing about unintended consequences is that they're unintended! All we can do is forge ahead. I believe you when you say that folks who've learned more than one language find SBP to be harder. I could actually go on and on about computer and machine language design, which is actually one of my favorite topics, but I don't want to run aground of the 10,000 character limit on this forum a second time today!

Gary Campbell

04-17-2018, 08:30 PM

Thanks Ryan...
a couple clarifications if you would.
A bit ambiguous, (or I'm a dunce today):

1:
No, (again with the cavalier use of "all") but FabMo, like many of its competitors, runs G-code natively.
So which is it?
2: Perfect sense
3, 4, 5: You are correct, I may not completely understand what you are doing with the Fabmo. But I do understand what others have explained to me is going on with theirs. That said, having had a Fabmo in my shop and having the chance to run SBP thru it, and Gcode thru it, and have the same files run on 2 other controllers, I can say that the "non zero time" (as you call it) longer that the SBP files took, when they didn't puke, was double digit percentages over the gcode version. Neither were as smooth, nor a quick as the other controllers, but gcode was only slower by a sub 4% amount. Both can be explained by differences in acceleration curves.

Last question on Fabmo, forever I promise: Going forward, do you plan on the data connection between the Fabmo and the controller card to remain usb as it was on the one I tested, then controller plugs into IO board? This is in comparison to BBG units I have tested that simply plug into an IO board

I do have another, possibly related item related to 4th axis velocity matching. Given a 2" diameter blank, with Zzero at axial centerline, and a starting position of X0, Y0, Z1, B0, and a feedrate of 2 ips XY and 115 */sec B (~surface equiv for 2" dia), from that position a command of X0, Y10, B720 is given. Without accounting for accel/decel, does that file execute in ~5 seconds, ~6.26 seconds, ~8 seconds or some other number when run on a ShopBot controller.?

Thanks for your time,

ryansturmer

04-18-2018, 08:54 AM

I'm glad this topic is winding down, just for the sake of how long it takes to reply! I have to say how grateful I am for you guys to taking the time out to post your thoughtful comments. No matter how you come across, writing this stuff up takes a lot of time, and I have to appreciate someone who puts in that amount of work.

For final clarification.

1. Do all motion controllers run g-code "natively"? No that's ridiculous. Do most motion controllers aimed at the CNC router market run g-code natively? Yes. What does the FabMo controller run? At the lowest level at which it is interpreting human-understandable code, it's g-code, similar to competing controllers.

3,4,5. It's highly probable that you were running some or all of the following in your shop: 1) An old version of FabMo 2) An un-tuned or inadequately adjusted system 3) Prototype hardware. Earlier versions of the software did exhibit a noticeable delay transcoding SBP to g-code, but this delay was not innate to the process of transcoding, it was simply the result of a poorly structured runtime layer that was wasting a lot of time. The delay essentially existed for a silly reason that has now been resolved. There is still a small delay associated with parsing for very large files in FabMo 1.6.x, but that delay is also for a silly reason and will be gone entirely in 1.7.0

For the foreseeable future, the link between the realtime component and the SBC will continue to be USB. Before you cringe at that, know that on the current and future versions of the physical hardware that doesn't mean a USB cable and connectors - it's all on one board, with the USB link being properly shielded and matched, carried over properly balanced, impedance controlled connections between the two processors. It is is also a "real" USB phy, and not the USB->Serial type of jiggerypokery that is seen in ShopBot legacy and some competing controllers, so it is not susceptible to the dreaded "connection issues" that are so prevalent in certain circumstances. There are actually a lot of advantages to using full speed USB here. Bandwidth and robustness being some of them.

I don't know the answer to your rotary axis question for SB3, but for FabMo, the answer is going to depend on the kinematics that are defined for the machine. For now, with the default kinematics that ship, assuming you don't hit any speed limits and you neglect accelerations, that move would execute in ~6.26sec. The reason for this is because if you go by the "NIST Standard" g-code (which is the closest thing g-code has to a standard) the way coordinated moves are computed that include rotary axes is to compute the vectored distance of the rotary axes by themselves, and then to run the linear part of the move at the speed necessary to execute the move in that amount of time.

Re: Shootout.

We're bringing a tool of course, but if you think you're going to "show me" how much more horsepower a 3HP spindle has than a 1HP spindle - I'll tell you. It's 2 more. If the aim is to show me that there are competitors in the marketplace for our products - Surely you know that we realize that?

If you want to have a race-to-the-bottom about pricing on essentially comparable tools, I invite you to sell me that tool you plan to bring at 60% of what a MAX costs, including CAM software. Then support it forever, with free replacement on defective parts, provide me a cost-effective upgrade path when you come up with something new (or find something new that someone else made, in your case), offer training at an unbeatable cost, and run a community forum at your own expense so that people can communicate, collaborate, and complain. Surely you're factoring those costs into your 60% of our price point on the tool?

nat_wheatley

04-18-2018, 09:44 AM

I'm glad this topic is winding down, just for the sake of how long it takes to reply!

I bought my PRS Alpha 60x96 10 years ago. I can't express the amount of time, effort and work that's been needed to get my machine up to the point where it was able to cut satisfactorily and reliably in a production environment. The full sized machines still appear to remain a hobbiest machine, with some beefed up components.

Don't get me wrong the machine was the right choice for me at the time (and owes me nothing), but I would no sooner recommend it today to someone in my situation, based on the other machines available at the same pricepoint. I'm not clear on why this doesn't appear to be a concern to the those at SB. (No need to respond, just needed to say it.)

ryansturmer

04-18-2018, 09:54 AM

Nat,

We appreciate your business - the tools have come a long way in ten years, and we're working on them still. Many (most?) of our current efforts are aimed at making changes across the board that improve the experience of customers specifically in production environments. The experience of getting a new gantry tool today isn't anything like it was when you bought in ten years ago, and I expect the experience in another year or so to be even further changed (for the better!) Thank you for hanging with us, and for your feedback.

ryansturmer

04-18-2018, 10:12 AM

Gary,

I misspoke above - had it backwards. For the rotary axis move, what it should do is compute the time for the linear traverse, and run the rotary, vectored, in inverse time mode, essentially to match that speed. So if it's a 10 inch traverse in the Y, it's going to be a 5 second move.

EricSchimel

04-18-2018, 11:17 AM

Brady, I wanted to respond to you on a couple of points... For some background on me:

I was/am an early tester of FabMo. I also have a "job shop" where I build all kinds of odd things. Everything I do is different. I also run a small farm of 3D printers, I've built my own CNC (albeit a crappy one) and I do some rudimentary coding. As Gary would say, I've got a "few pragmatic bones" in me so not everything I do is just for fooling around. I make money with my tools and they need to perform fast and reliably. I suppose I sit somewhere in between being a programmer and a maker... Right now I run a 4x8 PRS "High Voltage" and a FabMo Handibot weekly, along with some other CNC and digital fabrication tools.

I'm going to argue FOR FabMo here, just to bring another perspective to the table. Let me preface this argument with saying that if FabMo were nearly bug free and ready for a full size tool. The reality right now is that it's not quite there... But let's imagine that it is:

Computers suck, and they're all different and perform differently. I think we can take that as read as it's been discussed over and over here. The 3D printer market realized this a long time ago.. You do your slicing on a computer, you get your GCode (or X3g or .Makerbot file) and bring it over to your 3D printer either by way of USB, Wifi, or SD card and you put it in the printer. All of the processing of the job is done on the 3D printer. It ingests all of the movement code and just runs. You can turn your computer off at that point. This is done to 100% eliminate the need for a computer to live stream data to the printer. This means that they all run the same way, firmware can be upgraded across 1000s of machines, and diagnosis elminimates the PC altogether.

FabMo works this way as I'm sure you know. The UI, the motion control, and all of your scripts and customizations are stored on the tool itself. This means that it fires up and works the same way every time. It doesn't matter if you have a 10k gaming machine, or a $100 dollar Chromebook. As long as you can connect via a browser and send GCode over, you're good to go. I love this feature, I use my expensive Mac for design work, I load GCode to my Handibot, and then I use a cheap old phone that I knock around the shop for zeroing and job management. It's awesome. What's also awesome about this is that you never have to upgrade if you don't want to. FabMo can run totally offline, and if you never want to update/upgrade it because "it just works" you never have to. FabMo isn't dependant on internet.

I know there are a lot of shops out there that have PCs that aren't connected to the internet, or are running REALLY old browsers. Being that you can connect to FabMo with only a browser, the upgrade path is really easy. Just get a modern browser (if you even need one). All you have to do is download Chrome. You can even buy a cheap $50 dollar Pi and strap it to the back of a monitor and have a really snappy interface (granted it won't run Aspire). Chromebooks are also dirt cheap now, are super reliable and fast.

As far as the open source thing... I don't think it's a headache at all. At a minimum it's great for people that want to see how something works, and how active development is. Open source doesn't mean a free for all, ultimately ShopBot gets to decide what user submitted code/enhancements included in the software. If you, or anyone else wanted to fork the code for your own purposes, you're free to do that. If you've followed at all what Ultimaker has done with the open source project Cura you'll see how much benefit open source can have to stuff like this.

As far as the GCode/OpenSBP thing... As I mentioned earlier I'm a bit of a hack coder. Back in the day I was pretty good at BASIC so OpenSBP is reasonably easy for me to learn. The language for me is a bit obtuse at times, but I can get it to do just about whatever I want. The reality as you've pointed out is that it's not ubiquitous, so it's foreign to those outside fo the SB world. I can't disagree there. I do however rely on it's ability to do a lot of custom scripting. I believe that a lot of what I do couldn't be accomplished with pure GCode. This is likely why other controllers I've seen still do rely on some macros and other external support to do machine tasks like zeroing, calibration, etc.

FabMo let's you use Javascript to build macros for the machine. Javascript is one of the most popular languages out there. It's reasonably easy to learn, and there are resources everywhere for it. I believe this is the right choice for a language moving forward.

Also, most people I see don't care what code the machine runs. They're using 3D print slicers, or CAM software. They rarely if ever even look at the code. The reality that I see is that we're moving farther and farther away from even needing to think about code. Just look at a lot of the new tools that are coming on to the market, almost none of them require direct interaction with any code.

So to put this all together: I'm excited about having a totally self contained control unit for my ShopBot. I'm also excited that I can customize it any way that I want using a really popular language. I'm excited for something that works exactly the same way, every time regardless of what computer I'm working from. I'm also excited for something that's built to run on a ubiquitous and well supported platform: a browser. These days the browser can do incredible things, to name a few: Fully functional CAD and CAM. We're heading to a future where a tool can be shipped that has every piece of software ready to run on it, rock solid reliable and ready to go out of the box. That's pretty awesome.

The reality is that FabMo isn't ready for prime time, at least for me. It's had it's growing pains, bugs, and all the other stuff that a brand new hardware and software platform has. My biggest frustration is that it's not done yet. I really don't know how many people are working on FabMo, or what it would take to get it ready to go primetime, but if I was in charge that'd be a huge focus for me.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents :)

ryansturmer

04-18-2018, 12:29 PM

Thanks for your comments Eric - the upcoming release is much more polished, as we intend to move to larger tools. Unfortunately, in the run-up to that release, we've pulled away a bit on you and some of our lead adopters, owing to just being very short handed and busy pushing things across the finish line. We appreciate your participation and encouragement. Stay tuned - there are exciting things coming soon.

Gary Campbell

04-18-2018, 07:34 PM

Ryan...
In reverse order: Rotary
If I can remember correctly (its been a while) your first answer is more likely to be correct. I think you explained it that way. I'm fairly certain SB3 worked that way also. Imagine if the rotary motion was 10 times that much.

With a surface equivalent rotary feedrate, the rotary distance was longer, thereby determining the time for the motion. I am doing a rotary presentation at McGrew's and wanted to see which of those 3 groups SB's stuff fits into. Very few (unless using inverse time feedrates) will execute in the ~8 seconds which would adhere to the 2ips feedrate. The 5 second version actually results in ~3.15ips and the 6 second one ~2.67ips. As long as an operator knows what he is dealing with he can adjust accordingly. If I cant get it ahead of time, maybe Ryan will take a minute to run it before the show.

RE: the shootout
There aint one. Just some redneck humor. There was always a bunch of alcohol and even more stupid at every truck pulling match!

That said, other than a forum, of course that all would be included, if not it would be at a 35% price point. As you mention there is no realistic comparison to be made between production type builds and one offs. I will take exception however, to your "(or find something new that someone else made, in your case)" comment by countering that I would be willing to bet that there are more components on my machines made from raw materials in my shop than are by SB employees in yours, across all lines. Handibot excluded. Digital fabrication and complete assembly. "Ready to run, right out of the box"

RE: My Fabmo testing. All of what you say is most likely true, but in my defense I was simply running what I was provided. Comparisons to "known working" other controllers from low to high end, are just that comparisons. They were suggested by other testers. A am agnostic, I call em like I see em. I usually have at least a couple different controllers running at a given time.

Last item on this topic forever: Your quote: "You're misusing the word "chips" here, leading me think you may not have a complete understanding of all of the hardware/firmware pieces at work, in ours or our competitors controllers." This is the phrase I want you to take away from this conversation. That is exactly what I want you to remember.

This has been great, thanks for allowing me to participate, I think those that followed it have a much better sense of the direction for ShopBot in the future under your leadership. I know I do.

Gary Campbell

10-06-2018, 10:50 AM

It has been 6 months since this thread was posted on and since it has had over 4100 views, I would assume that finding out what had actually been done would be of importance to those that have invested large amounts of time and dollars into their ShopBot products.

It also has been 6 months since this was posted:

Stay tuned... (words engraved on my tombstone) - I do plan on remaining more active on here as I branch into videos/documentation for the future.

I do appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts.

Since you mentioned sharing my thoughts....
Tom was good to his word as in less than 30 days a number of "How To" videos were posted online and they have been viewed by hundreds of users. Kudos to you.

That said, in these last 6 months, and specifically regarding his quote above, Tom has posted 34 times. 30 in the first 30 days on a number of helpful threads, 3 more times on 1 thread in the second 30 days, one post in July and nothing at all in the last 90 days. There seems to be a pattern developing, shall we get out the engraving chisels?

There does not seem to be anything since April of 2016 posted on the ShopBot News page and I am sure that the items mentioned by Ryan and Tom would be important news to most anyone running a ShopBot controller and very important to those that have been longtime sufferers of the dreaded comm errors, it could be considered both proper and important if staff could jump in and update the community as to what progress had been made in these last 6 months.

A report of what HAS been released and how it is working would be much more relevant than the empty claims of what is planned for the future that have been so prevalent over the last decade.

Jerry Carney

10-06-2018, 06:01 PM

It has been 6 months since this thread was posted on and since it has had over 4100 views, I would assume that finding out what had actually been done would be of importance to those that have invested large amounts of time and dollars into their ShopBot products.

It also has been 6 months since this was posted:

Since you mentioned sharing my thoughts....
Tom was good to his word as in less than 30 days a number of "How To" videos were posted online and they have been viewed by hundreds of users. Kudos to you.

That said, in these last 6 months, and specifically regarding his quote above, Tom has posted 34 times. 30 in the first 30 days on a number of helpful threads, 3 more times on 1 thread in the second 30 days, one post in July and nothing at all in the last 90 days. There seems to be a pattern developing, shall we get out the engraving chisels?

There does not seem to be anything since April of 2016 posted on the ShopBot News page and I am sure that the items mentioned by Ryan and Tom would be important news to most anyone running a ShopBot controller and very important to those that have been longtime sufferers of the dreaded comm errors, it could be considered both proper and important if staff could jump in and update the community as to what progress had been made in these last 6 months.

A report of what HAS been released and how it is working would be much more relevant than the empty claims of what is planned for the future that have been so prevalent over the last decade.

I love civil dialog thanks all

dlcw

10-07-2018, 01:54 PM

I'm a late comer to this discussion but would like to add my 2 cents to the discussion. I'm not nearly as versed in the hardware aspects of CNC's nor the inner workings of the CNC software. I do, however, come from a background of 23 years in the Coast Guard as an electronics technician working on a VERY wide variety of electronics. I also have 18 years experience as a software developer working in everything from machine code/assembly language up to modern languages like C/C++. I've done system level development (i.e. I/O controllers) as well as standalone applications (DOS, Windows, Unix), mainframe applications (IBM 360) and client/server (PC and Unix) applications. I am an Extra Class Amateur Radio operator thus understand the complexities of building, maintaining and troubleshooting communications systems.

With that said, one of the things I've experienced in my nearly 10 years of using a ShopBot CNC is the lack of testing of the control software before releasing it. I was onboard as Shopbot went thru the 3.2 to 3.6 versions of SB3. I stopped at 3.6.44 because I was tired of beta testing "released" software. The frequency of releases of the 3.6 versions of the software showed how little in house testing was done prior to releasing it to the public. The adage of having the user community help us uncover bugs is not something that a company should EVER do. That's like Pelosi saying we have to pass obamacare so we can see what's in it. That's pure ****. A user should expect the software to be thoroughly debugged prior to making it available to the public. I spent many weekends and weeknights, while SB support was closed, trying to troubleshoot problems (production STOPS) only to find out it was a bug in the software once support saw my feedback. That is UNACCEPTABLE!!!!

For those that use a CNC to make a living, running beta software is not an option. That is why I have NOT upgraded to 3.8. I don't have the time to spend trying to figure out why things aren't working with the latest, and greatest, release of the software. I use ShopBot Link A LOT in my business. I cut thousands of sheets of plywood a year and can't afford my machine to be down. Now here's an interesting twist on several of the previous posts debating SBP versus GCode. SBLink runs GCode thru the SB3 3.6 software. It is fast and it is reliable. In the years I've been running it (9), the number of problems I've had can be counted on 1 hand. On the other hand, when I create a cutting model with Aspire outputting SB code, I have regular COMS issues. The Aspire PP for ShopBot outputs SBP code, not GCode. So, it seems to me that maybe there is a problem with the translation of SB code to perform cutting operations. 3D cutting operations are the most notorious for having these problems. The constant 3-axis movements are a bit much for SBP? Or am I reading into something that is simply not there?

So to reiterate some previous statements of all/most people want reliability above all else? I would say, for those that make a living with their machines reliability is PRIORITY 1!! For those that tinker with their machines or do little bits of commission work here and there, cool, fancy features might be very important to them as every minute their machine is down is not costing them money. I can say, if I had the money, I'd probably sell my SB and purchase a machine that could cut faster and more reliably. Maybe I wouldn't have to do the 2-pass climb/1-pass conventional cut dance (1/3 more time to cut a sheet of plywood) required on a Shopbot to compensate for machine flex.

Brady Watson

10-10-2018, 09:52 AM

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

10-10-2018, 10:58 PM

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

10-11-2018, 07:59 AM

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

10-11-2018, 10:22 AM

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

10-11-2018, 11:51 AM

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

10-11-2018, 12:03 PM

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

10-11-2018, 12:08 PM

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

10-11-2018, 12:37 PM

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

10-11-2018, 12:55 PM

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

10-11-2018, 01:04 PM

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.

Gary Campbell

10-11-2018, 01:24 PM

Brian...
Please understand that I was not questioning ShopBot's commitment to education. I was referring to your defense of that position. SB is to be commended for their commitment to educators. A natural thing, as most of the company principals, as I know of them, had their roots in academia. Sadly not more CNC mfgr's devote as much effort to education.

I agree with getting Handybot to kids as early as possible. Your comments about being successful with the elementary level make sense. I would propose "Little Tykes" brand recognition evolved into a science project. (Sorry, had to do that!)

You have, as most SB employees do, have the ability to recognize shortcomings. Both personally and those of the company. It seems that is universal among all the SB employees I have known, with 1 exception. It is an admirable trait. That said, don't you think that the ability to take charge and fix some of that **** would be desirable too?

A quote from Mr. Einstein:
"
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Think about it, …..please

brian.owen

10-11-2018, 02:34 PM

Gary,

I'd say that the last three years for me personally have been one long exercise in recognizing my and my product's shortcomings--from trying to manage people and production schedules to quality control and support to documentation and software issues--so I'm coming back to ShopBot in the right frame of mind to be honest with myself. Around me here, I see a group of young guys like Tom who are ready to take charge and fix shit -- and they're starting to get traction as they get experience. We should do a better job discussing some of the stuff we're doing with the crowd on here--I'll encourage other people to do so--and in a thread with a more interesting title than "post processor modification"

jerry_stanek

10-11-2018, 05:28 PM

If only Shopbot would put enough memory on the controller to just send the job to it and then let it run from there.

brian.owen

10-11-2018, 05:45 PM

That’s exactly how it works on the handibot right now. You send the job and once it is started you could turn off your laptop, pack up and go home and the tool would still be able to run the job. The connection issues that we’ve had there are the result of some poor choices on hardware, relying on a WiFi connection to send files and talk to the tool. There is the option for a hard-wired connection over an Ethernet cable to the tool and that is likely how it will be used on any tool other than a handibot.
For the handibot I’m making a small computer that will stay with the tool like a control pendant—just so that a computer with Ethernet port is not required to run the tool.

JimmyD

10-11-2018, 11:11 PM

As the originator of this thread, I have watched and watched the posts hoping that there would be a solution for the ever present communication issues. I don't even see a light at the end of the tunnel.

I have never been bashful about sharing my opinion of the PRSAlpha I purchased in 2014. Read some of my posts if you're interested. I made my purchase, thinking I was getting a great machine, and then reality set in when not one, but three machines had to be shipped to me in order to receive one undamaged functional machine. It's working, most of the time, not because of shopbot support (which was usually unavailable when I called during working hours), but because of my own tenacity to problem solve and the assistance of a few people on this forum. I'm an engineer, over 30 years experience in the aerospace industry designing and developing state of the art weapon systems. I understand design, development, early production, user feedback, production and on-going production support of high-tech electronics and systems which are highly reliable. Most of that doesn't appear to happen at ShopBot.

The view that users of the HandiBot are the ones that will educate you as to what users, current owners, potential owners want, need or desire is ill-fated. If you want to sell only hobby level machines, keep believing that. As has been written multiple times in the thread, reliability of the machine/controller communication is the number one issue. There are others, but why spend any time solving them if you can't solve Issue Number 1?

If I could sell my current machine and recover even 50% of what I spent I would do that and move on, but I can't. So my question is....can anyone at ShopBot, in a position for their opinion to be meaningful, state when a reliable replacement for our unreliable controllers be designed, reliability tested, beta user tested and available for purchase at an affordable price? Not we're trying, we're planning, we're blah, blah, blah. Tell me a date.

If ShopBot can't answer this question, then the answer is plainly clear to me as to what the future is for these blue machines that come in a box.

coryatjohn

10-12-2018, 12:48 AM

JimmyD

10-12-2018, 01:54 AM

>>
After reading this forum for the last five years, I feel I must be one of the lucky ones. I've never had any problems with my PRS Alpha and it continues to this day to do exactly what it is told to do, when it is told to do it, without nary a problem, ever.

Statistically, it has to happen once in a while. I'm very happy for you.

jerry_stanek

10-12-2018, 06:11 AM

I have owned 3 different Shopbots and have had very good luck with them. The only big problem came from a lighting strike that not only took out the shopbot but my welder, air compressor and some other stuff. I thought I was safe from that but it came used the ground wire as all the grounds were burnt and the shopbot was unplugged

scottp55

10-12-2018, 06:27 AM

Add 2 more Desktops, that once UPS was used to even out country power,cut protos and then production for a year and a half perfectly. Only operator malfunction caused problems.
Looking forward to the proto Desktop that TJ mentioned with the new system though...TJ said it cut the same exact files 20% faster than the current Desktop in side by side test.
Hope it will wok with our 2 2013 Desktops!

brian.owen

10-12-2018, 09:53 AM

Jim,

I can give you my opinion--I sometimes think mine is meaningful! Based on my experience with Handibots running FabMo, the new control software--the new control system will not be reliable until a monitor can be connected directly to the control card -- not a computer over a wireless or ethernet or usb connection. The control card needs to be where the files are stored and where they're run from--and manual control needs to be responsive in a way that no over-wire connection has been able to provide for Handibot so far.

So far we have: a control card that runs the control software locally and stores and runs files from its own memory. A monitor connection is not an option with the current control card (the one that was built around the now discontinued Intel Edison). A new board has been designed and prototypes ordered. This board will have a video-out for monitor connection. I do not expect this to be ready before the end of 2019. There are too many things that the current SB3 software does better than FabMo (crazy I know!) FabMo should be everything that is good about SB3 + + + .

In the meantime, for my part I'm trying to limit the number of variables that go into connecting to and running handibots. The range of varied accounts of reliability in the last few posts are very familiar to anyone who has talked to a lot of ShopBot users. Discussing them internally usually sounds something like this: "connection issues aren't a problem if x and y and z are true. If a and b and c happen then we tend to run into problems". Some people are going to be xyz and their tool will work fine, others are abc and have trouble, most are a mix. Either through the creation of better hardware and software or including more of the equipment needed to run a tool optimally we need to guarantee xyz and prevent abc.

Using the example of my Handibot tablet again--we are guaranteeing that the device used to control the tool has a compatible OS, network configuration and internet browser (the control software runs in a browser). By having the tablet boot directly to the control interface when the tool is powered on, we're preventing the issues that people have with finding their tool on a network and getting to the right address in their browser. That will all work even better when I can just plug a touch-screen into the actual control card.

As Scott mentioned, FabMo can run faster than SB3 because the ramping action is tuned to allow faster acceleration and deceleration around corners, keeping the speed more consistent and spending more time at top speed.

One last bit that bears repeating about Handibot--It is most definitely not the vision that ShopBot has for the future of CNC. It is a vision of how ShopBot might maintain a presence in a newer (and very real) market. Not just so that we can expand our customer base, but so that we can do our part to give CNC a good reputation in schools that don't have the budget for a big tool. It only took a few bad eggs in the low end 3D printer market to tank the whole thing a few years back. I feel confident in the quality of the design of Handibot but think that its use as a normal tabletop milling machine needs to be made more obvious. It is harder to use than it needs to be at the moment because of work that still must be done on the control software. But my experience supporting customers has given me plenty of ideas that I pass along to the guys developing the control system and software--but that is all tempered with opinions of more old-school CNC users inside and outside ShopBot.

Brady Watson

10-12-2018, 10:16 AM

ANY other non-USB based controller on the market will make ANY ShopBot run faster. I say this from direct experiential knowledge trying out various controllers and configurations myself. Saying that the SB controller is the slowest, oldest tech and most unreliable of the lot is not a dig - it is a proven fact. Science trumps belief.

Brian,
When can we expect someone focused on non-HandiBot machine development to chime in regarding what is in store for full sized tools, and when we can expect a reliable controller to replace ailing legacy controls? Where's Sturmer? Where's Tom? Where's Ted? What could be more important than offering clarity around the issues posted in this thread? I know you people are talking about this thread in the office...enough games. What's up?

32129

ron_moorehead

10-12-2018, 01:18 PM

This has been a good thread to following and I thought I would add my two cents in.

SB Control code vs Gcode I don’t really care which one, I care about how to use the software CAD/CAM to design my project and create the cut files to get it made. I have a ShopBot PRS Alpha, a 3D printer, and two laser cutter/engravers. I use Aspire, Corel Draw, and Fusion 360 to design and generate the code needed to run the machines. I don’t care if it is gcode or some other code, I just want it to communicate and work.

The only machine I have out of the four that needs to have the computer connected to it at all times is the ShopBot. My question is why?

Seems ShopBot has not keep up with current or even past current technologies. Now I hear it will be even farther out beyond 2019 before we get any new interface. Wow.
By then we should have VR interface to the equipment by the CNC companies that have keep up with current tec.

My wife has a Statler/Gammill quilt machine she has had for 5 years and the company has been making them longer than ShopBot, if you don’t know what a Statler is it is a CNC machine for quilters. It moves the sewing machine back and forth X and Y and controls the speed of the stitch.

They sell the machines to women that have no idea what a CNC machine or gcode is and most of the ladies are older and not that technology inclined.

They have recently updated the software and now requires you to have a Gammill approved computer and the cost for a new one is around $1500.00 is has all the preloaded software and configured to run the machine. You order it from Gammill but it is shipped by HP to you. Why can’t ShopBot do this?

My wife Statler has some great features I would love to see on ShopBot, her software allows her to design in the program and she is also able to see the location of the sewing machine on her screen in real time during the stitching. A online web portal to store your designs, and purchase new ones.

Sometimes we get so focused on just our world of CNC routers that we don’t see what the rest of the world is doing. You can download the new software for free and run it in a demo mode. http://gammill.com/creativestudio7/

I would just love to get a replacement for the USB connection and I only have problems if I shut down at night wrong. If I shut off the dust collector before shutting down the control software I get a communication lost error. Other wise my setup works great.

By the way I think we should start a were in the world is Ted, just like Waldo.

Gary Campbell

10-12-2018, 02:16 PM

Brian...
I think you are missing the point. We like all the folks at ShopBot. The problem is that while the group in Durham was once the providers of low cost and usually cutting edge products (remember the low cost interrupter?) in the small CNC world, they no longer are. No longer low cost and surely no longer anywhere near cutting edge. This has happened over the last 15 years. The first half of which SB was on an uphill climb and the second going in the opposite direction. Unfortunately, during that time, ShopBot has actually promoted or marketed their products and technology far beyond what they have been able to deliver.

The promises of "what's coming in the next version" has been repeated over and over and over again for the last decade. And there still is no solution to any of the control issues. And those comments are falling on deaf ears. And those deaf ears are not reaching for their wallets either. And those deaf ears steer their friends in other directions. If you do not succeed, you fail.

There is far to much acceptance of mediocrity at the company. This is a capitalistic society. Just because you, or your peers, or employer, for that matter feels you are doing your best means absolutely freaking nothing. It is how your products compare with others offered in the rest of the world that matters. Your results matter. Individually and collectively. An individual and the company as a whole should be able to deliver the goods, in a timely manner, or step aside to allow their replacements to do it.

The thousands of existing machine owners are not interested in hearing what you kids think you should do, how you are doing it, or what kind of cutesy little apps you play with in your spare time. Most also could not give a rats a$$ about ANYTHING Handybot. And just so you know, I took a survey on the forum about 6 months ago. One of the questions was: If you were to purchase a new CNC this year, would you consider ShopBot? Owners of Handybots replied a resounding 100% NO. Compare this to 42% of general forum users that responded no and 80% of advanced users that said the same. The primary difference between these groups was "have you used other CNC control systems?"

Lets use John's riding lawn mower purchase experience from above as an analogy to the machines these survey respondents have purchased.
Only 58% of those that have never used another riding lawn mower would purchase that same brand. 42% negative is an extremely low "brand loyalty" number compared to similar surveys for other OEM's. What's really sad is that 80% of purchasers that have "ridden" another brand would NOT purchase that same brand. The highest I've seen before this is 33% negative, and that was mostly related to the OEM not offering machines larger than tabletops.

I understand that it is generally accepted that there is a small number of users experiencing problems, mostly comm, and they are a vocal minority. Maybe so, but they didn't respond in that manner. Below is a cut of one category's response. There were 15 categories that returned similar results. From ~100 forum users:

http://www.talkshopbot.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=32130&stc=1

JimmyD

10-12-2018, 06:37 PM

>> If I could sell my current machine and recover even 50% of what I spent I would do that and move on, but I can't.

It's silly to let a few thousand dollars stand between you and happiness. Dump the machine if you hate it that much. You're never going to get 50% of what you paid for a five year old highly customized machine no matter what the condition. Put it up for sale and get rid of it and move on. You'll feel better. Isn't reducing your anxiety, anger and frustration level worth a few grand?

I had a similar frustration with a supposed top of the line consumer level $5,000 lawn tractor a number of years ago. One day, I drove it to the curb, placed a "Free" sign on it and went down to the John Deere dealer and bought a $10,000 professional grade ZTR. It was the best feeling. Months of frustration and anger were simply gone. I don't know who took my old mower away but it was gone and good riddance. Sometimes it's best just to cut your losses and move on. We eventually moved to a smaller lot in the city and I sold that ZTR for 85% of what I paid for it. That was one great piece of equipment.

After reading this forum for the last five years, I feel I must be one of the lucky ones. I've never had any problems with my PRS Alpha and it continues to this day to do exactly what it is told to do, when it is told to do it, without nary a problem, ever.

Mr. Coryat,

I'm curious.

If a car that you paid $25,000 for was unreliable, frequently stopped running while you were driving, perhaps while making an important trip and stalled, would you put it on the curb and give it away? I doubt it.

If you're lesser cost big screen tv, computer, or any of your other expensive items that use a computer to operate stuttered and couldn't complete its' given task would you give it away?

I applaud everyone that is happy with their shopbot and its communication abilities. I have empathy for everyone who has issues with their machine.

I imagine that if it were your car that was having these problems and there was a forum for that product lots of people would be complaining and sharing their experiences in an attempt to find a solution or at least someone who would listen because they share the same pain. Perhaps there would be those on that forum defending the automaker because they were happy with their car, although I doubt that would happen when it's the car instead of the CNC machine.

Which group would you be in?

coryatjohn

10-12-2018, 08:29 PM

>> If a car that you paid $25,000 for was unreliable, frequently stopped running while you were driving, perhaps while making an important trip and stalled, would you put it on the curb and give it away? I doubt it.

I had that car. It was a Porsche 911. The last straw for me was driving through Stamford CT on my way from Vermont to Florida and the clutch self-destructed. I drove the rest of the way without a clutch. Tricky. I traded it in and disposed of the unreliable trozo de mierda. To me, money is not as important as happiness. Everyone has their pain point, mine is rather low.

brian.owen

10-12-2018, 09:36 PM

Brady and Gary,

I think you've missed what I've been trying to say in the last few posts--the "kids" are the people at ShopBot who are developing the new tools and the new software. We've been here between 6 and 3 years. There's Kevin, who designed the Desktop Max and the revised DT 2418--there's Sturmer who is leading the R&D team and writing the code and designing the electronics for FabMo--there's Brendan who designs the GUI for FabMo--there's me who designs the tools and accessories for Handibot and works daily with our tools in a production environment--Ryan Patterson has been around a while longer but is still working on improvements to the gantry tools and desktops--including the change over to linear rails on the gantry last year...these are the people who are going to solve your problems...or not. Ted is not going to be the one who works out the details of these solutions. He's assembled a team of individuals who hold the core values of ShopBot close at heart--but who differ in opinion about most other things. I'm sure that a few of them would even agree that they don't give a rat's ass about anything having to do with Handibot.

We're either going to get it right--and ShopBot survives for another generation...or we won't--and ShopBot fades into obscurity as you're predicting. The bottom line is: we're what you've got--and calling on Ted or anyone else to respond to this thread doesn't change the makeup of the team that is ultimately responsible for pulling ShopBot out of the past. You might not care about every project we take on--but we're not doing it because it makes us feel good to be doing our best on something--it's because we're responding to a need expressed by our customer base--a group whose makeup is changing faster now than it ever has.

Your opinions are important--and you are both correct; ShopBot is not keeping up with the competition...we made an excellent tool 15 years ago and again 9 years ago--and have been surviving on the merits of that work for far too long. It has been so much safer and easier to stick to what we know best. However I disagree that our excursions into lower-cost CNC tools indicate a loss of interest in serious, entrepreneurial users. Sorry Gary, but I'm going to mention Handibot again--plug your ears...Not only does Handibot put us in contact with a group of users that widely lack the "common" CNC knowledge--forcing us to reconsider how someone can encounter a tool for the first time--and get things to work the first time...it also keeps us in step with the serious crowd by forcing us to work out the best way to run the production of a high-tech product using our own tools to make the parts.

Ron,

I really like your example of the quilting machine. For a tool that costs $20k...a $500 computer that cuts problems in half is an obvious win. This is something that has come up frequently at ShopBot and one of our Tech Support guys has stepped up and taken on the problem and is testing a few different options. I'll point him to this comment and hopefully it'll push him to keep the idea moving along and finish it. With FabMo still a ways off, it should be time to push out some improvements to the SB3 experience--regardless of how much we want a new control system to be the answer.

All,

I'm sure that other people from ShopBot will chime in from time to time--though I suspect they're enjoying watching me be put through the ringer this week. So thanks for humoring the plastic tool guy and giving so many strong opinions.

For Gary--here's one more survey: https://www.cnccookbook.com/cnc-machine-customer-satisfaction-and-reliability/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Reliability+and+Customer+Satisfaction+ for+CNC+Machines+%5B+Survey+Results+%5D&utm_campaign=Newsletter+08152018

Gary Campbell

10-12-2018, 10:27 PM

Brian...
I understand the current structure as you, TomH and Sturmer have posted that multiple times in this thread. I have seen their work and respect all you have listed with only one exception. Had some good conversations with RyanS and Kevin in SC earlier this year. I like all the ideas. For the most part, and as it relates to the larger format tools, I mostly always have. That's why I am sad, even tho I do not have a dog in this fight.

What you need to understand is that there is a few hundred, maybe a few thousand of us ol farts out here that have been around a decade and longer. We have heard this before from "the original 4", "the next generation", "the future" and now from you. I don't question your motives, I don't question your talent, I do question the companies long standing tradition of lacking in its ability to deliver on any of its promises in a timely fashion. Perhaps you missed above where I stated that I was working with RyanP on the linear rail prototype in 2012. My God man that was 6 years ago.

Son, we don't care what you say. We only care on what you deliver.
We know that you are "the sacrificial lamb du jour". We have seen those before you. And when its all said and done, it seems that yet again 2018, there is still much more said, than ever gets done.

Good luck and Godspeed, and I mean that most sincerely.

Brady Watson

10-13-2018, 10:49 AM

Brian,
I guess it must be nice to have such a cavalier attitude towards the success of the company you work for. Historically, the president of the company or one of his lieutenants, would have addressed the existing base of customers and enrolled us into the company's vision going forward, assuring us with the company line that, "No ShopBot should ever become obsolete." This is why many of us were waiting for someone with response ability to address the proverbial elephant in the room.

Just like any other company that addresses its stockholders, we, the loyal base of ShopBot owners, enthusiasts and word of mouth advertisers are not only kept in the dark, but patronized through agreement, that the company has and is making poor decisions & clearly, does not care about existing or future gantry tool customers. "We're going to focus on making toys & that's that."

Several of us, including Gary & me, know that there are logical, definite and reliable solutions to the issues that have plagued ShopBot for so many years. We have throughout the years, shared and presented solutions, ideas and information to the 'powers that be', in order to give them an edge in the market & because we want them to come out on top, to no avail. It seems that against all statistical probability that ShopBot continues to make the wrong decisions, when presented with a choice, nearly 100% of the time. I think ego and outright defiance of logic have thrown ShopBot off track and out of the market that they pretty much owned in the resent past.

It doesn't take a genius to read between the lines. It's sad. It's just so sad. It's like finding out your good friend of nearly 20 years has just gone off the deep end. There's no coming back from that.

ron_moorehead

10-13-2018, 12:30 PM

I have owned and operated a ShopBot for over 9 years now. The day I got my first one up and running was the day my USB communication issues started. In looking at the forum 9 years ago this was a known issue at that time. 9 years later it is still a major issue and now maybe you are working on it and that fix could be out by more than a year.

The question about were Ted is, is he still the owner/president of the company? If I owned ShopBot years ago I would have said “Fix the USB communication problem, I don’t want hear about another problem”.

Sad to say when I down size machines in two years my next CNC machine may not be a ShopBot.

gerald_martin

10-13-2018, 01:16 PM

I've been watching this thread - perhaps many others are too - for some time. I, too, am loosing patience with the solution to the USB comm issues that is always just around the next corner. I have had some correspondence with Ted - I recently sent him an email with a link to this thread and asked him to consider responding here. So we'll see.

Gerald Martin

brian.owen

10-13-2018, 02:16 PM

JimmyD

10-13-2018, 06:10 PM

So my question is....can anyone at ShopBot, in a position for their opinion to be meaningful, state when a reliable replacement for our unreliable controllers be designed, reliability tested, beta user tested and available for purchase at an affordable price? Not we're trying, we're planning, we're blah, blah, blah. Tell me a date.

Brian,

I applaud you for sticking it out and continuing to show a presence on this forum. I hope they're giving you a bonus for doing it when no one else will.

You just wrote to Brady that "I can answer questions...", well I will ask my question again. You didn't answer it before, so I'll try one last time.

Please tell me a date when Shopbot will have a proven reliable solution to the comms issues. I don't care about what you're doing, what you're trying to do, what the issues are, those should be internal discussions and not aired on this forum. Just tell us, the customers, who paid good money and who recommend or not recommend to others, when the date is.

If you had purchased a new car, computer, stereo, camera, drone, etc., and it continually had problems, would you really care about the issues surrounding solving it or just want to know when your stuff is going to be fixed??

What is the date?

P.S. Can anyone point me in the direction of purchasing one of the many existing controllers that function without these issues and will integrate into my machine?

mezalick

10-13-2018, 06:17 PM

Brian,

P.S. Can anyone point me in the direction of purchasing one of the many existing controllers that function without these issues and will integrate into my machine?

Contact Gary Campbell..

Michael

Gary Campbell

10-13-2018, 07:06 PM

Ron, Gerald, Jimmy, et al....
You don't have to worry, or wait for that matter. I have been providing replacement and upgrade control boxes for ShopBot and other controllers for over 4 years now. In late 2016 I reached an agreement with SB to provide replacement control boxes using the SB RBK I/O board (as currently shipping on standard models) and new SB controller cards. A good number of these were sold, but at the end of 2017 I was forced to remove that product from our offerings due to connection issues and the pain that my customers went thru. Not all, but about a quarter of them. Eventually (to me a week or so is an eternity) they all did connect and are cutting well.

There have been a number of those users here that will bear out the improvement those systems made over the original. 2015 technology compared to 2003 technology, there should be no question. Since the end of 2017 when I stopped providing the "approved" controller I have been building replacements with a number of other controllers.

Currently my favorite for budget replacement systems is the Centroid Acorn. Put out as a replacement controller for most any smaller (non ATC) CNC by one of the premier US control mfgr's and at a very attractive price point, hundreds less than the SB parts. That attractive price allows me to provide a controller, and a PC to run it for less than the "approved" version that ran on SB control. Those systems use an ethernet connection and have capability of 400K Htz comm rate. Current SB users that are running them have commented on the how quiet they are, how much faster they are, how well the machine and user coordinates work together including soft limits that will not allow you to hit the hard stops, decelerating before the stops.

This system allows the alpha drives to be reprogrammed to eliminate the resolution multiplier that cuts unit values by 5. They also allow more than appropriate rapids with resolution over 10K steps per inch. Alpha drives are connected to discreet pins allowing screen messages that if the X trips, it says the X is tripped on the screen. Same for estop and all limit and homing switches.

Of course since they do not include SB components, they will never be approved by SB, nor will they allow them to be advertised on this forum. They are advertised for sale on the Centroid User forum, Sawmill Creek and a number of other places I frequent. These are commercial grade controllers with features far beyond SB's current offerings and cost less. Each unit is assembled, tested with its own dedicated Lenovo Windows10Pro i5 computer and if you send an "SBC" custom settings file I will set the unit up so that all a user has to do is plug in the motor cables, verify direction is correct, verify the step resolution is accurate and most users are up and running in an hour. I do not ship them without a PC. A widescreen monitor (16:9) is required and a touchscreen is recommended. With a touchscreen keyboard and mouse are optional.

Brady Watson

10-13-2018, 09:21 PM

So, Brady, you’ve got questions, you don’t want to be left in the dark. I can answer questions—I’m not clear on your vision of how ShopBot is arranged as an organization—but even the guy who works on the plastic tool gets to participate in development and planning throughout the company.

The same question has been asked over and over again by myself & others. No answer that satisfies the question has been given.

Neither me nor You nor Ted can snap his fingers and skip over the work that needs to be done to fix these problems. You'd do well to try to have an actual conversation with the people that are doing the work to address the problems you see.

We have been ready to have the conversation for 6-months now. There appears to be a high interest in answers, given the fact that the number of views of this 6-month old thread has DOUBLED in only the past week. Please tell your workmates to talk to us. No need to skip over work - instead, tell the customer base what the plan is going forward. IS there a plan? When can customers expect a controller that just works? It's like they are begging you to take their money to fix what should have been good to begin with.

Try to understand, it's one thing to have a $3k HandiBot that won't connect and something entirely different for a $40k machine that needs to be cranking out product that doesn't connect - Do you get that? Really think about that - pretend you're the guy who's on the hook to produce and he can't. THAT'S they kind of situation that is going on. That's the frustration you hear in people's posts.

Is SB getting out of the production tool business by focusing on HandiBot because nobody relies on them to make a living? If it's just a toy/hobby thing, then it doesn't matter as much right? They can just go inside and watch TV or maybe shelf it and never mess with it again. You said yourself that many are never even used. Maybe you ARE onto something after all...

It sounds like you’ve got a question about backward compatibility. As you’re aware—ShopBot control cards use a large D-sub connector to connect to the interface board. This connector is totally out of date and problematic from a reliability standpoint—but has been maintained as a standard so that all future controller cards can be plugged into old ShopBot tools. This may be changing—we would like to move to a better connector from a reliability and price perspective. However, that does not preclude the option to connect to old boards through an adapter. That is the current opinion on how best to move forward with the board design while not abandoning long time users. The current versions of the FabMo control card use the D-sub and there will be plenty of these designated for upgrades when the time comes as well.

I think you misinterpreted what you were told. A D-sub connector is just a connector. The SB controller card - now that's way outdated - not because of the connector but the components on the board and USB. There are plenty of controllers (incl. CNC, automotive, PLC etc) on the market using DB25s, DB37s et al without issue. It is simply a means to interface hardware in a convenient way - nothing more. In this case, it carries step & direction + GPIO, just like any other controller out there. If so inclined, one could plug just about any controller on the market into a ShopBot I/O board using a simple in-line breakout to match the pin config and run a tool on non-USB COM protocol. It's easy. It's cheap. It's already being done by some of us.

The question of compatibility should be answered for the benefit of your customers reading this thread, as well as those who ask me directly. Right now, I don't know what to tell them. In several cases they didn't get a solution by calling SB support, and they are frustrated. What would you suggest that I tell your customers regarding COM problems on legacy 4G+/Alpha machines? What should they do? What would YOU do?

If you have other questions, I'm sure I can give a reasonable answer--If I don't have the answer, I can probably get someone here who does.

Again...many have asked the same question, but have received no satisfactory answer.

If you just want someone to berate...

Brian - no one is berating anyone. Nobody wants that. They just want answers. 6 months ago it was going to be 'later this year'....well, it's later, now. What has been done? When is a new reliable controller going to be available? A smidgen of accountability isn't too much to ask, is it?

You need to realize that SB has all kinds of blogs, news areas etc, but there has been NOTHING on most of them for YEARS - Dude....YEARS!!! So most have already 'done the waiting' in good faith, but now they want answers. I think they have a right to know, especially if a ShopBot is an integral part of the way they make a living. Wouldn't you agree?

Throughout the years, ShopBot always prized itself on being open and transparent - and yet, there seems to be an extreme reluctance to answer a simple, reoccurring question posed by customers with a vested interest in the answer. Why no answer has been given yet just seems fishy & my hunch is that no answer will be given to the satisfaction of those who want to know.

brian.owen

10-14-2018, 10:51 AM

JuniorLee

10-14-2018, 08:45 PM

Brian I am in the process of building a CNC router and planning to use a Shopbot controller in order to continue to use eCabinets software that I have 11 years experience with. Can you tell me if this new controller will be able to use the the Shopbot link from Thermwood? Thanks
Jr Lee

brian.owen

10-14-2018, 09:50 PM

I have not personally used eCabinets--but from everything I am reading about the ShopBot Link right now--it looks like it outputs directly to the ShopBot control software--similar to the options in VCarve to send directly to tool. The new control system will run both GCode and SBP code--but do not currently have the ability to link directly to CAM software.

Once I can talk to some of the cabinet makers at the office tomorrow I'll give a more thorough answer.

ron_moorehead

10-15-2018, 12:01 PM

I would like to thank Brian for sharing with us. I like and I hope most of the forum followers appreciate the communication from someone at ShopBot.

In my past life I was the project manager on a lot of projects, the best thing I ever learned was communication, even over communication. What I have seen with ShopBot and I think Brady already brought it up was the lack of communication from ShopBot. We the people on the forum seem to be able to share and help each other, but unless you call ShopBot yourself we can’t seem to get any information. I my case I had an older PRT Alpha that the rails were wearing out, I found on the forum a post talking about harden replacement rails I could purchase from ShopBot, nowhere on the ShopBot web site could I find any information about them. Makes me wonder what other cool toys I maybe missing for my machine.

Communication, if you set a date and the date slips because of problems I don’t care if you told me that it is going to be later at least I know that now. But to be in the dark and not know anything going on that’s bad communication and you lose the trust of people.

Reliability, I have two laser/engravers and a 3D printer, on the laser/engravers I can run jobs that are one to two hour long and know when I start they will work and be finished with out any problems. My 3D printer runs 5 to 8 hours prints all the time and I also know that it will work and finished without any problems. My PRS Alpha ShopBot any job I run 10 minutes to 8 hours I always think when I press the button to start will this be the time that it crashes again.

Again Brian, thank you for the information and communication.

brian.owen

10-15-2018, 12:53 PM

So Jr Lee--Just confirmed that the ShopBot Link is definitely a Windows/SB3 thing.

Ron--I'm doing my rounds this week to get more full information about the development schedule on FabMo. The release on Desktop tools has been "imminent" for a while now. The most recent software release was a big step forward from where it was (GUI-wise)--and we have been trying to get Tech Support familiar enough with the new interface that they'll be able to help new customers. The release on larger tools will be farther off--we're working in order of complexity. I'll update here.

dlcw

10-15-2018, 03:31 PM

Brian,

Quick question - is there, or will there ever be, a ShopBot hardware upgrade path for my 2009 PRS/Alpha? Controller, drivers, rails, etc. to make it more stable and eliminate the comms errors that plague so many of us. Thanks! I know the software upgrade path, right now, has me locked in to 3.6 version because I use SBLink A LOT in my business.

brian.owen

10-15-2018, 04:01 PM

The new gantry (with ground linear rails/bearings instead of V-wheels) is available as an upgrade to your tool. You'd receive a new gantry and new YZ car. It would drop onto the table that you already have for your tool. The alpha control box that we sell right now is essentially the same as your control box--however when a new control card is released for alpha tools, it will be able to plug into your interface board--which would let you make use of the new software (you'd even be able to swap back and forth by swapping the card if you needed the SBLink support...as mentioned above there has not be any work done with Thermwood to make SBLink more than a windows/sb3 exclusive program.)

dlcw

10-15-2018, 04:17 PM

brian.owen

10-15-2018, 04:27 PM

It'd be around $4600 plus shipping.

brian.owen

10-15-2018, 04:29 PM

Also some extra clarification for Jr Lee's question about SBLink--part of the deal that with Thermwood was that SBLink would only work with SB Control boxes that were sold with SB tools. If you're taking the control box off of your SB and putting it on another tool--it should work fine. A new control box purchased on its own would not work.

pdauby

10-15-2018, 04:54 PM

Hello, I just wanted to let everyone know that we at Thermwood have decided to discontinue the Shopbot link. We are selling our remaining links at half price, there will be no additional updates or support for these discounted links.

Patrick Dauby
THERMWOOD
Manager of Demonstrations and Software Sales

srwtlc

10-15-2018, 06:14 PM

I've been keeping up with this thread from the beginning and have thought about what I would have to say on the whole subject. I'm not anywhere near as eloquent as Gary and Brady (thus my tardiness/reluctance), but I would echo all that has been said so far. SB was my "first love" as well and without them I would likely have not gotten into CNC as soon as I did or possibly not at all (blame them for the addiction ;-). I've been driving one around and been a member of the SB community for 18 years now. I started with a '00 PRT 4896 and now have a '07 PRSAlpha 4896. Over that time, I have had my share of issues, but have always worked through them in one way or another. I have ran/tested just about every version over that time. Sad to say, the old DOS version was the one that probably worked the best from a reliability standpoint. I've had times with SB3 where comm issues were non existent and times where they were a daily issue. SB3 is old and bloated, has always had connection issues, handling of motion control could be greatly improved, and then there's the GUI. I can understand taking pride in having your own control software, but there's a point where it has become your greatest hindrance and is crippling the brand. As has been stated, there are solutions by capable companies that specialize in providing what is needed while new and improved products could be focused on. Yeah, it won't run SB code, but that's a minor hurdle that only affects current users and many of those likely never dig into the code to do any special edits to it and those that do are likely to be more than capable to switch over to G-code and do the same. Pretty simple to start using a different Post Processor these day's. I currently run 3 different ones, one for SB, one for UCCNC, and one for FabMo (actually two for FabMo, one legacy SB and one G-code).

On the subject of FabMo, I have been working with it since it was first able to be used and was initially kind of excited about it and as it was updated, it got better and more usable. The new G2 motion control with FabMo is great, that's one good thing. Over the last 3-4 years though, the GUI has gone from usable but quirky to kind of nice and usable to as of the most recently released version being one of the worst so far. So, Brian, when you say... "The most recent software release was a big step forward from where it was (GUI-wise)" ...you must be using something different than what I'm seeing! A keypad that still doesn't work right and useless DRO's that are either to small or cover other elements when expanded. The need to click twice to activate other items or menus. Keypad motion that stutters. No ability for hotkeys.....

Input/suggestions as to GUI improvements on the GitHub site have seemingly gone ignored or whatever. It's leaning more mobile app than usable desktop/PC interface, which is a mistake when it comes to production use in a shop. It might be fine on a handibot or possibly on a desktop unit, but I just can't take it seriously for use on a larger gantry tool. Fine and dandy if you want to use a browser based app GUI with a phone or tablet, but you need to have a version that is PC/desktop friendly that is full featured. Much in the way that you see 'Use mobile site or desktop site".

It has gone on for so long now and the initial hardware used has become obsolete (so much for that stock pile of Edisons) that at the moment, I have pretty much lost interest in FabMo. I keep checking GitHub and plugging it in to check for updates to see if the GUI has improved and any bugs fixed, but then move on.

It would be nice for once to see a sense of urgency to address the controller/comm issues and do the right thing, but I'm not holding my breath.

On the SBlink situation....There ya go, more deadware. And oh, bet SB3/controller/support issues were part of that problem too. ?

On the hardware upgrade, does that include linear rails for the X or just YZ? Might want to clarify that.

brian.owen

10-15-2018, 06:25 PM

Scott,

The current Gantry tool still uses V-Rails for the X Axis. The greatest benefit from implementing linear rails was seen in the gantry and z axis--so that was what we chose to focus on. Upgrades are to the Y and Z axes.

FabMo GUI--Yes, I like the original manual control pad better...except for the fact that you couldn't pull it up mid-file for tool changes and there was no way to adjust the speed without digging into the config menu. The current control pad has that move speed slider which I've actually found really helpful--I can run the Z down at full speed to within 1/4" of my material and quickly shift the speed from 3ips to 0.25ips for fine adjustments...more useful than fixed move mode IMO. I don't like the DRO changes and I think that needs to go back to something like the previous version's display. I was pestering the software guys today about a minimalist interface for the tablet I'm putting on handibots--a DRO and manual keypad that is always up (and usable without hitting a "keypad" button first), along with a few canned homing routine buttons and a job queue on the side. For people who just wanna run the tool from their control pad and not mess with apps, I think it works better.

dlcw

10-15-2018, 08:51 PM

Gary Campbell

10-15-2018, 09:29 PM

Oh man that sucks! I use SBLink regularly in my business. Now what?

Start it up and use it just like you have every time prior to today. They didn't say they were going to repossess them.

dlcw

10-16-2018, 02:41 PM

I understand that Gary. I'm just worried there won't be any more support for SBLink.

Gary Campbell

10-16-2018, 04:25 PM

It appears to have been clearly stated: They are not providing updates or support for the discounted Links. You don't have one. Unless I don't understand what your definition of support is, enlighten me.

JimmyD

10-20-2018, 11:28 PM

Date for comm issue fix--I will need to have a conversation with Sturmer if I'm going to try to provide a date, I know what he is working on and which obstacles he has to overcome, but I can't put a date on the conclusion of that work. I will find out.
more detail...the plan for fixing comm issues is a controller that 1. does not rely on USB connection, and 2. does not stream moves to the machine from some other device. The controller we have been working on is Linux based, it was not going to be able to run SB3 in its current form--so we have a few choices, revise SB3 to run on linux, adopt 3rd part software, start from scratch building something of our own. SB3 is far from perfect and I don't think anyone felt that it would be a good use of time just to port over a piece of software that is already past its prime. So we opted to develop a new interface from scratch. I know this is the same story you've heard over and over--I just wanted to repeat it for anyone that hasn't followed along for the last 4-5 years. All this is to say--the fix for comm issues is tied up in the development of a new interface. We chose the path that we thought would be best for customers but it has taken too long to get the software up and running. However, that is the current state of things and the people working on the problem are still dedicated and interested in making it work. It is the number one goal for the development team until it is available on all tools. It is not something we can all directly impact, but I think putting it through as many use cases as possible will help it be better--I use FabMo on all of my production tools that cut plastic and metal parts for HB and SB--I need those tools to run all day without interruption, so any problem that prevents me from doing that is reported to the development team.

Since Handibot keeps coming up as an example of ShopBot not caring about customer needs--I think this bears repeating: When a Handibot customer loses a weekend of work due to issues with software (or hardware) I am furious. I have written more support documentation for Handibot than we have for any other recent product. I will drop what I'm doing and drive across states to fix things in person that can't be fixed over the phone. I fume at the thought of someone who has retired and has limited income, purchasing a $3k Handibot expecting to fill his or her time with an enjoyable hobby--only to be confused and frustrated. I think that is just as bad as someone who relies on a tool for business spending $40k and having a bad experience. So please, don't conflate the Handibot's cheerful blue and gold exterior with a lack of seriousness about quality and support--also realize that it is a tiny part of what ShopBot is focused on day to day.

So I'll dig around for more information on dates for Big Tool releases of FabMo on Monday and report back here. Obviously by setting a date, we'll be setting ourselves up for another repeat of this whole thread in 6 months or whatever--but I figure it is better to say what we know and communicate what we're facing if we don't meet a deadline.

So, it's been a week since I last asked "What is the date? " and there has been zero response other than Brian stating that he needed to ask someone named Sturmer to provide a date.

Does Sturmer or Mr. Sturmer, whatever his name is, have an account on the forum? Can he answer the question directly? Is he on vacation on a remote island and can't be reached? Does he have an actual plan to achieve the task of solving the communication problem? Does anyone know where he is? Does anyone else have a plan? Can anyone, I mean anyone, including the custodial staff, guess at a solution and give a date?

I don't care about Fatmo, Handibot or any of the other toys being played with. I want to know what is happening that will solve the problems with PRS Alpha machine, not a toy machine. If you guys and girls at shopbot view anything about handibot that is relevant to fixing the communication issues with my machine, then the answer is obvious to me......there will not be a real fix, just a toy fix.

How about someone at shopbot guessing how long it will be before someone from shopbot will respond on this forum and give a date when the communication problem will be solved.

I am guessing no answer will be given to any of the questions above.

What really, really amazes me is that nobody at shopbot appears to even fathom how much damage to customer loyalty the continuation of this thread is doing. If I were in charge at shopbot and had no idea how or when this problem would be solved, I would've either stepped in and made some kind of conciliatory / rally the troops posting on the forum and then closed the thread or just close the thread.

Do you guys really think that potential customers looking to purchase a CNC machine don't read the postings on your forum? Do you think the rhetoric gives them confidence in a purchase?

Do you really think that competitors aren't reading the postings on your forum?

There have been 8,000 views of this thread, obviously somebody is reading it.

I invested a lot of money in the blue whale sitting in my shop and would much rather that you guys come up with a fix for it so that I don't have to changeover my complete control box, but that's looking like something with a very low probability.

Is anyone at shopbot listening?????? Hello........