[broby]

hey broby make the pc igf ( or whatever else ) to suit whatever machine, then send the program to it

even on a newer controller, is way faster to send from a pc, rather than between machines, and by fast i don't reffer to conection speed, but more to cnc panel operations

once there is conection, stuff can be centralized

You are totally missing the point that this control is nearing on 40+ years old!
Back when I worked on them, (Yes I am an old dinosaur) the only information you could transmit was plain text files.

igf files may not be transferable ( not because of conection, but compatibility issues ), but even if they would, there may be an alternative, as to overcome igf's limitations

another aproach is to enable the igf on the lb25, and avoid the 232 between lathes / kindly

The cost of enabling software options on these OLD machines would be, if possible at all, very expensive!
Highly unlikely that you would be able to upgrade the old machine with out IGF.

However, if the user has a suitable post for what ever CAM desktop program they have, then they will still need to connect to the machine via RS232 as there is no network connection available on these OLD machines!

Please keep in mind, Kitty, that you need to make sure your advice is relevant to the control system specified by the original poster, In this case, they have stated OSP5020!

You have lots of good advice to give, but it does not apply to the older generation of machines such as the OSP5020 controllers.

[deadlykitten]

if all enabling software methods fails, then, as long as both machines have 232, is faster to consider sending files from a pc, rather than between them

on machine igf is less important than having the 232

Back when I worked on them, (Yes I am an old dinosaur) the only information you could transmit was plain text files.

even today, there is not actually much need to send something else besides the program file; what changed is what kind of data can be recorded at the cnc , and transmitted back to the pc thus there is more acces to the blackbox

if the user has a suitable post for what ever CAM desktop program they have

with simple lathe parts, the cam will make it harder; best combo is pc-igf and 232 otherwise, the cam, being slow, will make one loose the advantage of conectivity, thus on machine igf will beat it

ps : you are not dino, you are an aussie

[Superman]

ps : you are not dino, you are an aussie

Why do I feel like I've just been slap across the face ??

Kitty.... read the 1st post again.... he doesn't have IGF on a PC, he wants the machines to talk to each other

If you can't add any constructive comment... DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL.... EVER

Hi bri.. how's retirement?? LOL

[deadlykitten]

he doesn't have IGF on a PC, he wants the machines to talk to each other

besides what he wishes for, there are better solutions, which won't blow his wallet

his idea is pretty cool, but there is room for more ...

[Superman]

besides what he wishes for, there are better solutions, which won't blow his wallet

his idea is pretty cool, but there is room for more ...

But you are telling him to fork out BIG $$$ to get IGF on his PC
Why can't you just answer his query to what he wants, not what YOU think he needs.

[deadlykitten]

Why can't you just answer his query to what he wants, not what YOU think he needs.

i have been in similar situation, needing to transmit from one igf machine to another that does not have it; i understand the struggle

i 1st solved this a few years ago, and meanwhile, things developed, different methods can deliver same results, and by so, even older or non okuma machines, can benefit

But you are telling him to fork out BIG $$$ to get IGF on his PC

The cost of enabling software options on these OLD machines would be, if possible at all, very expensive!

leaving in antarctica, i know that not all roads lead to rome

and i also know that "brave mean create their own path" is not working, as that path will soon be covered in snow