Yes - unfortunately - it is normal - No it's not useful

It's a particularly slow Zebra

It's long overdue an overhaul - Which I'm sure by now is getting close to the top of Tim's list !?

Zebra does look very neglected in comparison with Rhino and it does not allow dynamic feedback the way it stripes per axis.....hmmmmmmm :confused:

Im also looking to use the surfacing capabilities extensively as well as solids and this type of 'quick' feedback is critical when building and matching etc..Is this likely to get attention anytime soon...developer?

--Paul--

Hi Paul,

It is certainly IMHO not usable.

Did you see my "match" thread? Please comment (post) on that thread.

Regards,

- Steve(manz)

I should jolly well think so- especially at the rate Tim's been running around lately!! I gotta give it to Tim though, he's kept the Shark alive and in water for all these years. I know how complex CAD software is. Yes I know Shark has had some bugs left there lurking, but I really feel this Punch injection is really going to do this jewel some good. It is also up to us to help spread the gospel in these shark invested waters (a bad shark or two?? :eek: ;) )

We could all start by finding those ads scattered around on the Apple website for one, and leaving some shit hot feedback. At the moment, I believe there is none. (Actually I've just left my mark there- pending approval!) The more seats of Shark that Punch sell, the faster the chances are that this software is going to get updated! :cool:

Hello Paul.



Thank you mate. But as a PC 'kind of guy', I suppose you may have misunderstood why I am so passionate about this software?




Well of course, I generally wholeheartedly agree with you, but imo, Shark needs both, because there is little incentive to improve a product if sales are low. This is one of the very reasons I like Tim and want to do everything I can to support his software. Tim has stuck with this through thick and thin. How many other companies can you name me who have shown so much devotion?.

However, what really puts Shark such a strong position at this very moment, is that for Macintosh and Mac OS X, there is NOTHING out there (ACIS-based), at present to touch Shark. As a windows user, I would imagine that you have never even considered that?



Paul, the funny thing is that you are already in the Apple camp whether you like it or not! :D I'm also curious to know why you were drawn to the Shark line, because Shark's interface (especially compared to many other PC-based CAD packages), is 100% Macintosh. As a Windows user, you are open to a plethora of CAD packages and applications, and with these existing 'quirks' being part of the current build of VC/ Shark, why have you chosen Shark over other Windows-based packages?

I am a designer, because I like good functional design. I bought my first Mac 15 or so years ago. Before that I was using ones in the graphics departments at work. I have seen Windows go from a DOS based machine to ripping off every single function of the Macintosh (even lately Microsoft have now ripped off Apple's Expose f9 function- I found that one hidden in a Microsoft notebook mouse driver the other day). Microsoft keep at it, ripping off other people ideas- and never quite getting it right, but still people buy this rubbish- and accept it as 'just another virus' or whatever when it all goes wrong, which of course, it is not. I'm ranting now!

I don't want to start a PC vs Mac debate, because they never really go anywhere (and get really boring too), but I will state that I loathe bad design, and I especially loathe windose (but I am forced to use it, because as an engineer, windows is rife- especially in the UK). Now Steve Bullmer is MS CEO (heavens forbid), I'm going to fight this horrible standard dropping platform, until I drop dead! ;)

However, I will end by saying that every hardened PC user I've ever met, or had an acquaintance with, once they have realised how much simpler and more powerful Macs are, have never switched back to Windows. That's a fact. :D

LOL!

I too would think this would be unlikely, because I don't ever see one of those beautiful Apple machines ending up in a dusty, greasy old milling room!! :eek: lol!! However, you never know..... ;)

:eek: OMG! Freddy Flintstone?? That's so cruel!!!! LOL!

Poor old Tim! :eek:

I realize that you're being facetious, but I can state for a fact that I ran GibbsCAM 5.1, last on a Performa 6115, under OS 9 in conditions that you speak of. Only problems that I ever had were reduced life of the power supply and need to blow off everything with an air gun now and then. I still have that machine, but haven't actually used it since 2004 when I switched to the windows version of GibbsCAM.

One of my Pentium IV PC's, and my Mac Mini is running in the same conditions today, on pretty much 20 hours a day, and barring major issues, will be running until replaced with a Nehalem MacPro running BootCamp and Vista 64 early next year. Only difference for the MacPro is that I will probably rig up a manifold, fan and HEPA filter to provide clean air for it.

Still, I doubt that there will ever be a CAM package available for OSX.

tom

I dunno- don't speak too soon!;

http://www.atelierrobin.net/p41.htm

:D

We do, most certainly, but I think it's gonna have to be one thing at a time, because I thought one of the next things to do is to take a look at the history tree?