HSM 2018 - Editor and Backplot

[jeff.pek]

Hi all -

We've been watching the feedback regarding the elimination of the backplotting capabilities in the version of the CIMCO Editor that ships with Inventor HSM and HSMWorks. It's clear that this is a capability that many of you are genuinely missing. We'd like to give you a little background on what happened here, and what we're planning to do about it.

For the past few years, we have had a technology sharing agreement in place where we could redistribute the Professional version of the editor, in exchange for access to the HSM CAM kernel. This agreement expired at the end of last year, so we had to renegotiate the arrangement.

The arrangement we reached, at considerable increased cost to Autodesk, was to redistribute only the Standard version of the editor, with a corresponding reseller agreement, where we can provide access to the Pro-level features at an extra cost.

We are considering an amendment to the agreement with CIMCO that would allow us to include the Professional version with certain levels of the Autodesk HSM product. This is still under discussion, and we have no firm plans to do this.

We apologize for the inconvenience, and truly regret that we weren't able to provide advance notice of the change.

We'll keep you posted about what, if any, adjustments we are able to make in this area. As has been noted in various forum posts, those of you with access to prior releases are still able to use the older version of the editor, with backplot capabilities.

Thank you very much for your feedback concerning how much you value the backplot feature.

Best Regards,

  Jeff Pek, Sr. Manager, Autodesk HSM

  Al Whatmough, Product Manager, Autodesk HSM

[LibertyMachine]

Jeff, Thank you very much for posting what has gone down with Cimco. It was as some suspected.

Now, a simple question, with a less simple answer (I'm sure); Why doesn't Autodesk develop or buy out a smaller editor with backplot functions? I mean, even the work that Xander is doing has more value it seems...

[jeff.pek]

Hi Seth -

This is something we talk (a lot) about.

One one hand, we think there's value in staying at a bit of an arm's length from G-Code verification. After all, if we're checking our own work, who's to keep us honest? So that's why we like people to have a choice in the validation tool they choose to use. 

There are a number of free, and not free, editors/backplotters out there. Many have been mentioned in the threads on the subject. I won't make any attempt to recommend or comment on any of them in particular.

We are very interested in the work that Xander has started, and may decide to package something up to make it more "official", but it's still early days there. I'm very interested in people's feedback on its capabilities.

Jeff

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

First of al. Thank you for the explanation. I think this will clarify a lot for a lot of users.

And like @LibertyMachine said is along what a couple of long time users already thought.

It's good to know it hasn't just been dropped for the sake of profit. 

---

@jeff.pek wrote:

One one hand, we think there's value in staying at a bit of an arm's length from G-Code verification. After all, if we're checking our own work, who's to keep us honest? So that's why we like people to have a choice in the validation tool they choose to use. 

---

I have to agree and disagree with this. I mean I would love to have some form of simulation of the path that has been generated with the post built into the software. Best would be some form of add-in/Plugin from another company indeed. 

The gunner to his linstock, and the steersman to the helm.

[ArjanDijk]

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for clearing this up. I can't imagine that with a guy as @XanderLuciano in your team that creates his own backplotter in a few days an alternative can't be to far away. Still a shame that the cimco product will be stopped, because I and my customers like it a lot.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

---

@ArjanDijk wrote:

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for clearing this up. I can't imagine that with a guy as @XanderLuciano in your team that creates his own backplotter in a few days an alternative can't be to far away. Still a shame that the cimco product will be stopped, because I and my customers like it a lot.

---

Actually, it will not be.

Because I'm pretty sure Jeff, just explained that Autodesk has become re-seller of CIMCO to be able to sell the Pro version at an extra cost.

And is even looking at supplying it with certain HSM levels.

So CIMCO Edit will not be stopped, nor will they stop providing it.(Only a different version will be provided as standard now.)

[Greg_Haisley]

@jeff.pek Thanks for clearing this up a bit.

As I suspected - if one follows the money they will always find the root cause of the problem. Usually it is a money driven issue that decides the direction of a product. This is another example of the developer knows what is best for the user base. No different than any other software developer CAM CAD word processing, spreadsheet ect....... The developers always think they are the smart ones. Funny thing - does any developer at ADSK earn a living with the code they develop? Of course not. If they did they would know how important the backplot function is. 

I would have thought ADSK would have taken the high road this time and let the user base know what was going on. But as usual, the powers to be - elected to take the "head in the sand" approach. Let the chips fall where they fall and deal with it when an up rising takes place. Which is exactly what has happened here again. When will ADSK learn this lesson is anybody's guess.

This ends my Wednesday's rant.

Have a great day everyone.

[joshg]

In the long run I'm sure it will work out for the best... No reason Autodesk shouldn't develop backplot for HSM products going forward, if Cimco can't make an affordable agreement. Using the previous versions of the editor is a fine workaround (for those that don't have a backup: it's included in HSM Express). Buying Cimco licenses for your business is also an option (we have several).

Thanks for the insight Jeff!

[keith.clausen]

While I know this is a lofty idea and to a large part steps away from the back plotter subject I will throw it out there.

The current editor (Cimco Edit) is a great useful tool and truly is the editor of choice for me and has been for years (more years than I care to admit). With that said there is so much more to Cimco than just the editor that most people are familiar with. Solid DNC solutions are an inherent part of many shops and despite the onset of newer machines now being part of internal networks there is still a substantial need for DNC solutions.

Has ADSK considered acquiring Cimco?

[sweetpimft]

Now, a simple question, with a less simple answer (I'm sure); Why doesn't Autodesk develop or buy out a smaller editor with backplot functions? I mean, even the work that Xander is doing has more value it seems...

maxbet มือถือ

[Fieldweld]

OK I know this is a bit snarky but help me out here. It is not OK for Cimco to arbitrarily raise costs to Autodesk but it is OK for Autodesk to do it to us. Am I reading this right? I can't help but think of being hoist by ones own petard.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

---

@Fieldweld wrote:

OK I know this is a bit snarky but help me out here. It is not OK for Cimco to arbitrarily raise costs to Autodesk but it is OK for Autodesk to do it to us. Am I reading this right? I can't help but think of being hoist by ones own petard.

---

As far as I know, the users and Autodesk are sharing the loss. As in Autodesk has to pay more for the standard version than previously for the professional, and we lose functionality for the same price. While I'm all for getting it back, since I think it was an essential part of the software, I do kind of understand they can only minimize the user's pain to a certain level if they have no control over the software and price from an external developer/company.

[Fieldweld]

Well Jeff said it was because they would not share code with CIMCO any
more. It is nothing to do with sharing burdens and another side of this
is why the sneaky way they did it to begin with. If I remember right it
was discovered to be gone by users and not announced ahead of time. Like
buy up all the perpetual seats so you are covered for the future and
then Anagnost goes to shareholder meetings where he states that their
intent is to end perpetual. This is the same company that is cutting R&D
from what I read too. HSM is good and I am sorry Autodesk ever bought
them now. I would REALLY hate to be a Delcam user at multiples of cost
over HSM looking at their stark future. They were made promises that
Autodesk would not interfere with Delcam and one year later poof they go.

  Considering all the promises and smoke screens and obfuscation this
past year and a half what is there to trust?

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

I read it as that CIMCO wasn't interested in using the Kernel anymore. That would mean Autodesk needed to pay for the part that used to be paid for with the kernel access. But that was an assumption of course. That's what it felt like to me.

Some pre-communication would have been great indeed.

[scottmoyse]

Aren't you tired of moaning Dave?

[scottmoyse]

I mean I just get so beaten down when I moan too much. It's exhausting. It must be exhausting for you.

[Fieldweld]

Hi Scott,

  Yes I do get tired and after a campaign to fix things that I think are wrong I do have a cut off point. I decide at some point in time things I don't like will not be fixed and leave. Or in the case of things going right renew as I did for two more years with Solid Edge. 12-15-17 will see the end of my financial involvement with Autodesk and at that time I join the legion of whiners and moaners who may still complain at times but no longer contribute to the problem. 

  Do you see any reason to put on a happy face and pretend you like something when you don't? Does a happy face or a frowning face get things changed?

 Fortunately the last Inventor HSM update seems to be working well and I can use it for years and not feed the beast another dime.

[lenny_1962]

Dave, at least you one of the lucky perpetual license owners that allows you to use Inventor HSM until your PC dies, some are not as lucky.

[Fieldweld]

Hi Len,
  No it was not luck it was choice and planning. I would and will never
buy subscription for CAD CAM for a variety of reasons. #1 way to keep
software companies honest is to make them earn their customers loyalty.
Subscriptions remove the ability to protest since they simply shut you
down if you quit paying. Today if I was shopping around Inventor HSM and
Fusion are not programs I would ever consider because of their
subscription pay to play paradigm. You are simply foolish to put your
production tools and livelyhood into something that can and will be
changed on you. I can work for the next five or six years and not pay
another dime and not lose sleep over what silly thing they are going to
do next like Cimco.

[lenny_1962]

Dave,

I agree, but I cannot pass up the deal we get for education, free!

if it was my own company I would still be using put software name here and Solidworks\HSMXpress for the quick 2D stuff.

as mainly prototyping once the part is made never make it again, so if I lost HSMWorks wouldn't faze us to much.  

EDIT: as for the CIMCO thing I never use the backplot so it never bothered me, even my old CAM which I have used for 25+ years don't backplot.