What if all the stuff that has been invented ,created for Mach3 over the years was rolled into one master version of Mach3.

What would it be like

I was pondering this after coming to the conclusion that I could NOT think of anything new to work on for mach3. My list is empty.

Has Mach3 reached End of Life as to further development  by the masses ??

Just a thought, (;-) TP

i Feel we need to gather all the Wizards, Screens, Macros etc etc. and place them in a files section. then remove them from the forum.
Why you ask? Well I have on occasion looked around for a solution to a problem I'm having with a wizard, macro etc and have come across a file which offers a solution, only to find several files of the same name or item, with no way of knowing what is the latest or  the one relevant to what I'm doing or (even Worse) which versions of Mach3 it will work with!. The forum is good in it allows us to connect on issues, however the file delivery side of it gets lost in the conversations.
And yes I believe that an all encompassing version of Mach3 would be great. There would be the issue of Licensing, however I think we could navigate that issue with a little common sense
Things like USB integration, MPGs, and serial, and XBOX controllers etc etc all in the file ready to go. Documentation supplied in the package for each unit. It could be done.

Anyway my two cents worth.
Wes

Terry,
Maybe it would be one supper dupper screen set for each module if there is such a thing.
The user removes what they don't want.
I sometimes get the feeling that is what I am doing with the lathe screen, but know that it will be lacking some things....namely the things I don't use.

I'll find something for ya to do............just  currently tied up with other things.

Rich

I see lots of problems with the idea.

1) Mach is so flexible you have to limit the available options that go out with the installer if you intend to provide any level of tech support. Also, you have to think about how big the file would be. Not everyone needs an additional 25 screens, 1000 macros, 687 brains, etc.  

2) Which version of the different additions that have multiple versions available would you include? Who would decide this? Auto touch routines for example. No telling how many are available and there is not a one size fits all for it.

3) Documentation, who would provide all of the documentation?

4) If you could provide documentation who would read it? Who would take the time to explain all of it to those who do not read the documentation (if the documentation existed)?

5) I think a better idea would be to put it all in a very clean repository, maybe its own board, with nothing but the latest version and any instructions or information the creator considers essential. I tried this years back with the members docs board and think it has worked pretty well just needs more participation I think. It is a lot to look through, find, sort and try to choose the best I know. I don't think we can eliminate all of it but we could certainly make it a lot better.

Brett

A very interesting thought indeed Terry.

My opinion is that because all our machines and potential applications are different we all use Mach3 in a different way – for my part I only ever use a fraction of the available resources provided by Mach3 yet it does all (mostly all) that I want it to do.

I certainly like Rich’s idea of a super-duper screen set where we could just dump all the screens that were not of interest or use in a particular profile.

Tweakie.

I like Bretts Idea of collecting all of the extra scipting and place it in a single spot. Then as we worked to check each script place it in the Mach Tool Box with a description of what it does.

Screens could be done that way as well as wizards.

Make a master depository of all the files.

A master screens set would be about 200 pages long (;-) Rich is already up to about 50.

(;-) TP

(;-) TP