It’s sure to be an unpopular opinion, but I think this forum’s ongoing support of closed-source and machine-locked software does a disservice to an otherwise great open-source platform and we should organize a solution to this problem either through the Estlcam author or some other project. What amount would need to be raised for this author to take Estlcam fully open source?
If it’s not to be that Etslcam will be open-sourced, then I would rather put some money toward an existing open-source project to bring it up to the level we need and want.
As attractive as the $60 price is for a decent CAM package like Etslcam, I’m very reluctant to put it toward a program that could vanish with a hardware failure and subsequent loss (or unavailability) of the individual author to update the license on a new machine (if that’s even a possibility now with the author still available).
Selfishly, I would prefer an option that was not windows based (although I run mine in wine), and something that was FOSS. I know there are open source CAM packages out there, but I haven’t really tried them. It would make sense to start by looking at what’s available now, and if any of them are actively maintained. There’s been a lot of free work done to make a post processor for fusion, which a lot of people like (which is the opposite Linux friendly or open source).
There are a lot of people using windows and some macs, if the arduino troubleshooting posts are any indication. So it would make sense to me that whatever the solution, it would be web based. That’s a big reason I chose javascript and github.io for sandify.
I would also say that even though estlcam lays out simple operations, the CAM geometry is more tricky that it seems and writing geometric algorithms is always harder than it looks, because there are always corner cases you never think of originally. That is just to say that it’s not as easy as some other FOSS problems that have been solved.
I would also rather spend $60 towards and open source software package than a closed source one, but it will take a lot of $60 to build a CAM software package unless someone is really willing to do most of the grunt work on their own, and since there isn’t a requirement to spend the $60, it would be hard to get as many users as EstlCAM.
Are you a software engineer? Do you have the background to take on a task like this?
I am not sure this I am understanding this. Estlcam works fine on multiple computers with a license and multiple control boards.
I agree the price has doubled on this since we started and new version licensing cost every so often is a new concept for me and might start to sway things towards other packages a some point. There are tons of projects out there but I am a hardware guy. For me, I found what I believe to be the best deal in terms of cost, functionality, and ease of use. I originally tried many many options, nothing WAS remotely close back then. I still feel $60 for estlcam is better than Free for Fusion CAM. That said, if we found something decent, I would love to try and bring some attention to it. I am not sure I could do much in terms of programming but testing…we got that covered.
Developer, yes, but not one with much time. I’d pledge up to $500 or more of matched donation though to take Etslcam open and free. It really is a good product and the author deserves to be paid.
Also, yes, the licence is locked to a machine and that’s a problem for me. I upgrade/swap machines frequently. Also that it likes to phone home for licensing purposes, or needs direct interaction with the author to bypass that activation. I work entirely offline or firewall egress. So my PC dies and I need to reactivate but the author has shut down for whatever reason. What happens then?
I would also like to add a standalone CAM package interests me the most. I am not fond of a CAD or control software built in. I feel it makes things much more difficult to use.
I am not sure this I am understanding this. Estlcam works fine on multiple computers with a license and multiple control boards.
It does if you allow internet activation and that will be at the descretion of the author. If that server goes offline or the author changes those limits, it will not activate.
You can’t enforce an author of any software to look at things the same way as you expect. How to share and/or sell his software it only decision of the author.
If you don’t like the software or policy of the author the only thing you can do is just don’t use the application. And if you bought it and it has warranty - take money back.
If you don’t like the software or policy of the author the only thing you can do is just don’t use the application. And if you bought it and it has warranty – take money back.
Obviously. It's a proposal, not a demand, and contingent upon the author's acceptance and the community's support. Lots of moving parts with something like that, and gauging interest (of both sides) is the first step.
Depending on the numbers, it might beat the hell out of starting from scratch or propping up a crappy existing FOSS product.
I guess that Christian will not agree to do that. When his bussiness going not bad – why he has to change something?
A bucket of gold coins? Pile of cash? Community respect? Altruism? Seeing the writing on the wall where people of sufficient motivation and resources could eventually, sooner or later make Estlcam obsolete?
Some or all of the above or any number of other reasons or none at all?
You don’t know, I don’t know, only he knows and can decide to or not and for how much if so. That’s the nature of business…
The way I think of it, Estlcam supports V1/MPCNC as much as the other way around. It’s great that there are options for creating gcode, and it’s also great that it is easy to get Estlcam to work with MPCNC so easily. We each get to weigh the trade-offs and decide what to use.
There’s nothing stopping someone from doing the work to create an alternative. It’s an awesome time to be a creator, whether it’s code, hardware, using these tools to make other creations, etc.
[quote="jeffeb3,post:15,topic:10266"]
jscut hasn’t had a commit in a few years :'(.
LaserWeb is accepting PRs.
[/quote]
As I said, we can start with that. As mentioned above, OP is concerned if ESTLcam’s servers shut down, or there’s no internet to authenticate, the program is effectively dead, and here’s a free, open source project that can be developed further, despite the original programmer being gone or having dropped the project completely.
The open builds cam software is also on GitHub and improving fairly quickly.
FreeCAD has CAM built in, is open source and cross platform. It works but Fusion 360 is better in every way. FreeCAD has so much potential but it has a lot of bugs, lacks many usability features, lacks a decent way to assembly parts, etc. There’s nothing wrong with it for simple things though.
I think Estlcam’s main benefit over Free CAD or Fusion 360 is how easy it is to use. I was able to watch about 15 minutes of youtube video instruction and get up and running with no CAM experience. Fusion 360 may be much more powerful, but it’s just too much for a new user in my opinion.