On 02/19/2012 08:53 PM, Steve Blackmore wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 22:26:49 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>> I really haven't noticed any differences between Mach3 and EMC when it
>> comes to LPT port pulsing. Mach3 might be a little faster via the LPT
>> port, but EMC2/LinuxCNC has a number of good hardware step generation
>> solutions at reasonable costs if the LPT port isn't
>> fast enough.
>>
>> I haven't see any issues at all with CV on EMC2.. I put EMC2 on a large
>> waterjet and we used EMC2 pulsing via the LPT port to control Servo
>> drives. It is a large gantry machine. Running step and direction to the
>> servos made gantry homing simple due to the mechanics of the system.
>> But the machine is not underpowered, there are 2- 1 KW (continuous)
>> servo drives on the Y axis and a single 1 KW drive on the X axis.
>>
> There's the rub - seems EMC is good with servos. Everybody who says
> there is no problem with CV in EMC is using servos. It's crap with
> steppers compared to Mach.
>
> I've posted code, videos and files highlighting the problems and there
> has still been a total lack of response from the guys on the committee,
> I mean total lack!! - I've been on IRC, posted in the group, asked nice,
> insulted them - f**k all response. I'm still of the opinion that if it
> doesn't affect one of them personally - they don't give a shit.
>
> Last time I voted for one particular person who was vociferous in the
> emc group. Soon as he got in - silence... You know who you are
> spadnos...
>
> Talking about voting - isn't it well past the next election, or has it
> just become a dictatorship?
>
> Steve Blackmore
>

Oh I dunno, I have a stepper machine, and EMC works just fine, and has
for the last five years.

I think from your post above it's pretty obvious why they stopped
responding to you.

Mark