On 22 October 2014 15:00, Stuart Stevenson <stus...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am at a loss as to why the LinuxCNC community cares about > Mach(whatever)'s market share or usability or capabilities.
It doesn't bother me at all, except in one particular situation. On (for example) CNCzone someone arrives and says "I need to retrofit my mill, I need it to be making money in 2 weeks, it has DC servos and resolvers". I reply "It is unlikely you will have that going in 2 weeks", The Mach3 yahoos (a small subset of Mach3 enthusiasts) say "no problem, that's easy". So the guy goes with Mach and 6 months later is still struggling with Granite drives and Smoothsteppers and has completely changed his motors to get encoders, and his power supply and nigh-on every other electrical part. I think that Mach probably _is_ easier to configure, but then it has a much smaller configuration space to cover. My mill uses resolvers and brushless servos, with commutation in software and drives that take current and position down a serial link. I suspect that would be difficult in Mach. I can't claim it was easy in LinuxCNC, I had to write the drivers for the resolver cards, the serial link and the commutation module. But it was possible for me to do that. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
