In theory, this should be true, but in practice I wonder. See, for example, the thread about creating dashed lines that will cut as dashed lines rather than as a series of tiny rectangles. It would be nice if every new user didn’t have to learn those kinds of lessons by wondering why their pieces didn’t cut the way they appeared to look on the screen.
But maybe it’s easier to just burn up some test stock.
I don’t know how the workflow at GF HQ is, but IF there is a dedicated workstation that the final prints are run from. Would it be possible to have a screenshare of some sort set up where we could click a link, and just see what is on the screen. We couldn’t play with anything, click on anything, change anything. But we could watch whenever someone drops materiel into the GF and then does the software magic to get the image aligned and cut, raster, engrave, etc.
Either that, or perhaps someone would be willing to share their screen for a day and as they do various projects on the GF, we can watch their screen, or set up a static camera “over the shoulder” to just watch as they do things.
Nothing formal, no one needs to “talk to” us, but when we have time we can watch the workflow as it happens.
I never did read too closely on those threads to figure out precisely what was attempted first, and what the result was in each of the two cases.
If they wanted to sew leather, then a series of rectangles should be precisely what they do want.
But if they wanted to score a cut line, then a dashed line of kerf thickness is what you would want.
So, assuming they were trying for the later… then most likely they sent a filled object to the laser, and it proceeded to cut the numerous small outlines of each individual rectangle. This is something that the software already would have shown them was coming if they had gone into the appropriate view mode.
So, quite likely the same problem would have come up with a preview of results. Zoomed out it looked like they got the dashed line they wanted to get, and either they happen to think to zoom in and inspect, or they wait to see the problem post-cut as usual.
Still hoping to try out the software that was scheduled to be available more than a month ago.
Guys?
I seriously doubt that is going to happen unless you get a beta invite. I cant tell you for sure, but I wouldnt hold your breath. It took ages for them to even upload a screenshot of it…
They want to be first to market, and not have anyone steal their functionality before then. Releasing their software in a manner anything less than heavily NDA’d would leave them open to being 1-upped before they get their machine done by the companies who already have machines on the market, losing the one selling point they have over other manufacturers at this point - along with a alot of the customers they have waiting for it…
i don’t recall seeing anything about that.
the original june ship date
The June ship date was delayed because of a power supply issue. I don’t see how that has much, if anything, to do with a cloud-based web UI.
I agree
Not fully buying the “official” reasons for all of the information control… But that said, not sure what we would get with access to an open loop user interface. The only drag, drop, rotate, capabilities that have been formally announced are so simplistic that it would take 2 and a half minutes to become bored with it without the use of the laser or laser simulator. Other, only hinted at functionality, history has shown would not be provided. I guess we could critique the most basic interface but it seems that the company is taking great pains not to have public evaluations. So I don’t see anything worth playing with by itself.
We’re prioritizing activities that will get your Glowforge to you faster. Providing access to the UI would take a fair amount of work (to make it useful sans Glowforge). It would also, as @takitus points out, inspire some of our customers who may in fact be laser manufacturers themselves. 