Posted by Rod Ashton on 30/09/2012 06:54:27:
The thread has morphed away from the original question.
How then, about the future for further Mach3 articles!!!!
Rod,
You are right, of course; albeit the diversion has been rather interesting.
As I see it, the editorial problem is to find the right balance.
David's original series was exactly what you wanted at the time, but was despised by some others [whether a majority, or a vociferous minority, I know not].
I genuinely believe that we all should have some interest in CNC, whether we intend to use it in our own workshop or not. I am, however, less convinced that we need step-by-step instruction in the use of a particular piece of software.
In the magazine; let's have articles about the underlying principles, not "painting-by-numbers". Mach 3 may be a de facto standard for the model engineering community, but it is certainly not the only tool for the job.
Whilst hoping not to throw the thread off course again … the same applies to articles about [say] wiring-up a static inverter, or using an LED as an indicator lamp, etc. etc. There are too many pages of MEW wasted on big pictures of trivial things.
Chorus: An Editor's job is not a happy one !
Paul' suggestion of posting code to a specific area this forum is excellent, and I think the same should apply to screenshots of the software. There may be an exception who proves-the-rule; but it's a good bet that anyone that is interested in running Mach 3 already has access to the internet.
So … Let's have articles that explain CNC and how to use it; but don't fill the magazine with a serialized version of the instruction book for a specific product.
MichaelG.
Edited By Michael Gilligan on 30/09/2012 09:22:53