New thinking in SW....

Just one more poster to alt.machines.cnc who has had enough of your bullshit and your games, Cliffy.

jon

From: Michael ( snipped-for-privacy@frontiernet.net) Subject: Re: ONECNC Software bogus or what? Newsgroups: alt.machines.cnc Date: 2003-07-08 13:14:02 PST

Cliff,

You are just here to bitch, piss, and moan. Some guy asks a general question, which you have NO answer for and all you do is distract from this newsgroup.

Take your trolling elsewhere, no wonder you are unemployed. Nobody can stand to be near you for over 2 minutes. FWIW, you are a broken record of whining about the job you got fired from and too many years of being unemployed.

Go troll somewhere else Cliff.

Michael

Cliffy,

What excuses will you make about yet more posters to alt.machines.cnc who are totally sick of your endless lies and games ???

jon

From: Mark Winlund ( snipped-for-privacy@maxmachine.com) Subject: Re: ONECNC Software bogus or what? Newsgroups: alt.machines.cnc Date: 2003-07-09 10:17:20 PST

Most of the regulars have killfiled him. Too much garbage, very little substance.

Mark

Who, exactly, did you get that *old* DOS BobCad from? That you use for 2D arc & line dimensions for your (claimed) MDI CNC program edits?

Legal copy, right? LOL ... I gather they stopped answering your "how to use" questions at the BobCad support place after the first few ....

Now go get some clues someplace else.

But I'm about the only one that does not have you killfiled . To be fair about it I suppose we should repost those thousands posts showing how clueless you are, right?

Take the Lithium today ..... it's never too late I understand.

Now, again, leave the poor Solidworks folks alone UNLESS YOU KNOW SOMETHING . I suppose I could repost those posts from your wife & kiddies again .... Still abandoned in Florida are they? On welfare?

You won't be the first. God only knows how many posters to alt.machines.cnc got sick of Cliffy and his buddies and the result is a very successful Web Forum where Cliffy's stalking tactics are not welcome and won't be tolerated. That Web Forum is:

Lets deal with the FACTS:

Where in this thread has Cliffy addressed the problems with SolidWorks surfacing or made *any suggestions* on how to improve it ??? Tell me, please... where ??? Cliffy can't as he has never used SolidWorks.

No it doesn't. If you don't have the right tool for the job many times you can't get the job done period. What your saying is that you can and in many cases this is not true.

If you show up to race at the Indy 500 in say a shiny new Corvette how well do you think you would do ???

It is a moot point for you and for many others in this newsgroup who really don't understand what the issues are and why the problems exist in SolidWorks as the product tries to transition for a solid only modeling concept. The fact is that the solid only modeling concept does not work for many users. Frankly, I don't give a f*ck what you or any one else buys. What I do care about is that they understand the technology. I see *very little effort on your part* to understand the approach taken by competing products. Without this effort, you really have *no idea* how to fix the problems with SolidWorks.... and when it comes to surfacing SolidWorks has *lots* of problems.

Cliffy has NEVER used Solidworks. EVER. How in the world would Cliffy know ??? Cliffy is not in favor of mid-priced CAD/CAM and has said so numerous times. He feels companies are better off laying out large dollars for Unigraphics and I'm happy to put up the posts where Cliffy has said as much.

I'm on topic discussing SolidWorks attempt to get better at surfacing. Please point out where Cliffy has done the same.

jon

Does clueless think that if he splutters the same thing N times it's N times as good?

The prior copy was Message-ID:

Is this called flooding? Something similar? I'll admit that the first copy had one more line though. But I'm not about to find out what was deleted.

Just a brief comment on this one .... . I doubt I've ever posted any such claims, here or anyplace else.

I do sometimes object to someone claiming that their latest color of wax apple is better than something with more or different capabilities and functionality. Too much depends on too many (undisclosed) factors. So if clueless claims that 2D AutoCad is better than MasterCam in a machining thread a red flag goes up ... not that he actually *uses* either to work his broom.

You won't be the first. God only knows how many posters to alt.machines.cnc got sick of Cliffy and his buddies and the result is a very successful Web Forum where Cliffy's stalking tactics are not welcome and won't be tolerated. That Web Forum is:

Lets deal with the FACTS:

Where in this thread has Cliffy addressed the problems with SolidWorks surfacing or made *any suggestions* on how to improve it ??? Tell me, please... where ??? Cliffy can't as he has never used SolidWorks.

No it doesn't. If you don't have the right tool for the job many times you can't get the job done period. What your saying is that you can and in many cases this is not true.

If you show up to race at the Indy 500 in say a shiny new Corvette how well do you think you would do ???

It is a moot point for you and for many others in this newsgroup who really don't understand what the issues are and why the problems exist in SolidWorks as the product tries to transition for a solid only modeling concept. The fact is that the solid only modeling concept does not work for many users. Frankly, I don't give a f*ck what you or any one else buys. What I do care about is that they understand the technology. I see *very little effort on your part* to understand the approach taken by competing products. Without this effort, you really have *no idea* how to fix the problems with SolidWorks.... and when it comes to surfacing SolidWorks has *lots* of problems.

Cliffy has NEVER used Solidworks. EVER. How in the world would Cliffy know ??? Cliffy is not in favor of mid-priced CAD/CAM and has said so numerous times. He feels companies are better off laying out large dollars for Unigraphics and I'm happy to put up the posts where Cliffy has said as much.

I'm on topic discussing SolidWorks attempt to get better at surfacing. Please point out where Cliffy has done the same.

jon

Clueless clearly still does not know what either a surface or a solid is.

I expect that he thinks that the colored picture on the screen is a solid.

Tell us which is which and exactly why. In your own words ... .

Perhaps these companies can see something that you and plenty of others in this newsgroup don't want to see or acknowledge. One of these companies is right in both your and SolidWorks Corp's own backyard.

The think3 strategy is to go after larger companies with

*much better technology* and focus ALL their efforts on that. Check out the employees that think3 has hired to get this job done. Check out what their background is and who they use to do the same thing for.

Wait till you see what company makes the move to thinkdesign with Global Shape Modeling next. ;>)

Do you use what Maytag now uses ???

Do you use what Bose now uses ???

Do you like Audi's or VW's ???

How soon before it's recognized that SolidWorks has no one at the level that Alain Massabo is. He's the best in the business by far, Mark.

jon

I guess that I'm going to enjoy the company of some of the most noted consumer products manufactors who can see what you and many other in this newsgroup can't see :

"For companies like Maytag and Bose, competitiveness and profitability are directly tied to the effectiveness of their product development process. think3 offers these companies an advantage they can't get anywhere else - advanced design solutions that put product innovation at the center of their businesses and accelerate time-to-benefits."

"Global Shape Modeling (GSM) technology, offers advanced shape design capabilities and unparalleled surface/solid interoperability, giving industrial designers the levels of freedom and power they need to bring superior, innovative products to market faster. Developed by Alain Massabo, think3 GSM technology provides unmatched flexibility and control over design modifications, dramatically accelerating project turnaround time."

"As a company, think3 provides a world-class development environment - this has enabled us to attract and retain the highest caliber of experience and talent in R&D and industrial design," said Massabo, vice president of advance research and development. "think3's commitment to driving innovation in the product development industry is felt throughout the organization, and especially among the research and engineering teams. Our kernel and product architecture are enabling us to create technology never thought possible in this lifetime." "

Perhaps it's time to change the title of this thread to:

Old Thinking In SolidWorks And What Can Be Done To Change It.

First, however, more posters to this newsgroup will have to ask themselves why companies like California Design Center VW/Audi, Maytag and Bose are right now switching to think3's thinkdesign.

jon (If recognizing, admitting and acknowledging superior technology means I'm groveling then so be it. If someone is totally incapable of doing this... what does that make them ? How about : a totally blind loyalist.)

They would like you to leave again, jb. It was a gentle hint. You go away, back to the white room, problem solved, as usual.

This reminds me of some crazy nutcase that stated that you must use 3dinkies (from Italy?) and then license the following add-ons from third party vendors to make things actually work:

HyperMill + HyperMill 5 axes add-on from Germany.

K-mold & K-Dieface from Korea GlobalSpec for your part libraries, nuts, bolts, etc. ANSYS for third-party FEM GeoMagic for "reverse-engineering" IIRC With HyperMill only a subset of European machine tools are supported so count on replacing most of your CNC machine tools or controls as well.

In addition, with 3dinkies you are probably assured of NEVER being able to use the current release as all the third-party vendors are probably at least one release level behind. And any of the entire group may cease business at any time I suppose .... and you must pay for each every year or they quit working and your old parts are useless.

For less than that price over 5 years you could probably get *several* seats of full UG or Catia or ..... .... clearly this guy knows nothing about small shops. What is it he actually uses again? IIRC He still has not bought that calculator .... but he starts a thread on shopping for one each year. Last time he did not buy because none of the manuals had colored pictures showing how to solve triangles using sines & cosines IIRC .... it was a riot. The buttons were not pictured in the step-by-step instructions either ... IIRC ...

"Offers" seems to be a key word here. Maytag seems to mostly use Pro-E. Bose seems to like AutoCad.

Usually, in a large (or some small) firm many systems of various natures are in use. I'd wager that all of the ones you listed also use COBOL somewhere.

Should these good people in comp.cad.solidworks then junk their SW & get COBOL?

Hires in styling, animation and advertising often use Macs as well ... should they use a Mac for their COBOL?

LMAO.

Dear clueless, Press releases got you confused again? Rubber undies in a knot again?

Do YOU have any clue which systems they *actually* use and for exactly what purpose? Clearly not. OTOH *I* did a little research ..

3dinkies is pretty good at CAM is it? Good at sheetmetal?

LOL ... now go back to your private BBSs unless you have already been banned again. In which case go away anyway. As has been

*repeatedly* pointed out you know next to nothing about SW and less than that about CAD/CAM in general.

Your welcome :) Barn

Yawn,

jon

This is, no doubt, in response to the question about solids & surfaces or similar. Not clue one.

Perhaps he added graphite dust to his undies.