4.2 What's the verdict

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 4.2 What's the verdict

    I just loaded 4.2 two days ago. I going to re-load 3.7mr2. Does anyone else think this is cumbersome and too complicated. Maybe I haven't given it enough time yet. Parts still have to get out the door and I have lost my patience with this version. Comments or suggestions?

  • #2
    Well, you SHOULDN'T have to re-load your old version, see link:

    http://cmmprogrammer.19.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=101

    Next, I would suggest that you install V3.7 MR3.

    Yes, it is a LOT to learn just to get back to where you were (or so I have heard). Not a good version (none of the 4+ are) to install when you are under a steady to heavy work load.
    sigpic
    Originally posted by AndersI
    I've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.

    Comment


    • #3
      I have been using some version of 4+ since the beta of 4.0.

      I am running 4.2 and wouldn't go back for the life of me. Yes, it takes a little getting used to, but so did going from 3.25 to 3.5. I think it is as good as 3.7mr3.

      Speaking of 3.7 why are you moving back to 3.7mr2? If anything go back to 3.7mr3.
      sigpic

      James Mannes

      Comment


      • #4
        James is THE authority on new versions IMNSHO. He says 4.2 is as good as 3.7MR3. So I am sure it is just as stable and no more buggy, but it will be different. I have not joined the 4heads yet because 4.2 has not been out long enough for me to consider it proven. A few months from now I will probably take that leap. 3.7MR2 has problems. Use 3.7MR3 or bite the bullet and go to 4.2.
        sigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery

        Comment


        • #5
          I stand corrected. 3.7mr3. Has anyone been using 4.2. I know what the perception is of new versions. I'm asking that if we pretend there are no bugs, as far as function goes is it a bear or am I just looking at the same old with a new wrapper? I like your picture of Bert.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Louis Krickeberg View Post
            Does anyone else think this is cumbersome and too complicated.
            I for one dont like the Probe Toolbox in v4.2. It might not be quite as bad if it didnt constantly dock itself to the app. What a nussiance.

            I think the latest 4.2 patch will fix some of the other bugs that I dont like.
            Mr. Comment
            SCIROCCO-NT 13-20-10
            B3C-LC Controller (Leitz Protocol), SP600M, TP200
            PCDMIS CAD++ v4.3 MR1(Build: 12/11/08)
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Louis Krickeberg View Post
              I stand corrected. 3.7mr3. Has anyone been using 4.2. I know what the perception is of new versions. I'm asking that if we pretend there are no bugs, as far as function goes is it a bear or am I just looking at the same old with a new wrapper? I like your picture of Bert.
              Well James is, and about a dozen others that I know of. From my discussions with James, the big advances in 4.x from 3.7MR3 are in dealing with CAD files. So if you are like me and almost never get CAD files it might seem like the same old in a new wrapper, but as I said, James is THE authority and if he says there is no way he would go back then I am sure he is seeing some solid, functional improvements.

              That ought to RESOLVE this, so even though I am not the thread starter. . .


              WHISKEY!

              WHISKEY!!

              WHISKEY!!!


              sigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Louis Krickeberg View Post
                I stand corrected. 3.7mr3. Has anyone been using 4.2. I know what the perception is of new versions. I'm asking that if we pretend there are no bugs, as far as function goes is it a bear or am I just looking at the same old with a new wrapper? I like your picture of Bert.
                Yes, I am using 4.2. It has some nice additions. CAD transform is nice. Also, the ability to bring in any CAD file in any units is nice. It is a little bit of a burden to get used to some of the new trappings, but, like I said before, I have been using the 4+ stuff since it was downloadable.
                sigpic

                James Mannes

                Comment


                • #9
                  I also use 4.2. You get used to it fairly quick. we do 90+% offline cad programming, so I'm with James. It is much nicer than 3.7 for cad users. I also would not go back to pre-4.2. The reporting can be very useful also, it just takes time to learn the new quirks.
                  Mike
                  Global FX 7-10-7
                  Global Silver 7-10-7
                  Microval PFX
                  PC-DMIS 2012 mr1

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Ditto James and Mike
                    If I have offended anyone with this post, I'd like to take this opportunity to say BOLLOCKS
                    Dry your eyes Princess and man up.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I did the 4.2 switch and went back to 3.73. Just some notes IF you decide to stay with 4.2.
                      1) Do NOT convert programs or probe files. 4.2 evaluates some features differently and will crash (vector problems), report bad numbers (calculation method issues such as changing from MaX Inscribe to MIN Circ automatically). Watch EVERY program VERY closely the first time through (even 2nd and 3rd in some cases as it appears intermittent). I am sure it behaves differently with programs written from scratch in 4.2 and is much more stable.
                      2) Get used to SLOW printing if you use Legacy Reporting while you learn the new report system.
                      3) Do NOT try to use the same programs in Both Versions. Make copies. Move them. Store them. Then convert IF you want. But, do NOT convert your Probe files until you are ready for a CLEAN break. Once you do that going back is a royal pain in the butt!
                      With that said, yes it still crashes.
                      But, there are some very COOL features even if you do not use CAD. I personally liked the GD&T Changes. I also liked the changes in the Auto Feature Format allowing much more flexibility and control. I didn't particularly like the generic looking program window when running a program but it was certainly better than the current version where you don't get that. Neither did I particularly like the juggling of Graphic Display and Report Window while running but you get used to it.
                      Overall, the reporting looked cool and was 'almost' just right. You will need to customize (learn) it to get what you want (most likely). None of the canned reports give you the amount of data you can get with 3.73 in as small a space except the legacy reporting which is RIDICULOUSLY slow.
                      The part that bothered me about it most was the lack of compatability between older versions and 4.2. Really a weak link if you ask me.
                      Bill Jarrells
                      A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. - Mark Twain

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Hi Wingman... Thanks for your balanced opinion. It's nice when some points out the good things instead of just the problems.

                        In regards to importing of old programs... Thank you for the report about the Circle/Cylinder calculation method not being imported correctly. This was the first report we've received on that. I've filed a problem report on it and will be taking a look. If you have some other examples of something not being imported/exported properly to the autofeatures, can you let me know? (Possibly via PM?) Thanks,
                        -Glenn

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The issue that Wingman reports:

                          248716: AutoCircle/Cylinder BestFit Math Type not brought in from Legacy programs

                          has been fixed and is available for download. See the 4.2 Auotofeature patch thread.
                          Thanks,
                          -Glenn

                          Comment

                          Related Topics

                          Collapse

                          Working...
                          X