[Wo...] Posted September 23 Author Share Posted September 23 Please sign in to view this quote. From what I've seen so far it fixes the issue of automatic feature recognition when manually probing (used to be minutes before the hit registered), but the slow running of the plans is still there. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Wo...] Posted September 30 Author Share Posted September 30 Downloading with fingers crossed: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Wo...] Posted September 30 Author Share Posted September 30 (edited) Please sign in to view this quote. FYI no difference in simulation. EDIT - why only some posts can be edited? I couldn't add info to the above post. Edited September 30 Can't edit other post 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[No...] Posted September 30 Share Posted September 30 Please sign in to view this quote. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ch...] Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 Can the new Calypso already be used productively, or should one wait a little longer? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Wo...] Posted October 1 Author Share Posted October 1 VAST XT has no issues AFAIK, it's the rotational systems that are problematic. In retrospect, I would probably be better of staying at 7.8. My biggest issue with 7.8 is that the XTR doesn't rotate in simulation. It does rotate in 8.0, but the whole simulation is broken so it doesn't really help 😉 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ch...] Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 Hasn't this problem been known for a long time? Isn't Zeiss doing anything about it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[No...] Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 (edited) I always wonder how major bugs like this make it into a release version unnoticed (or are they? 🤔). It's starting to feel like the game market: Years of development and postponed release dates, but the final product still s*cks. Edited October 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Lu...] Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 Is simulation the main issue with 8.0 or are there other issues? I am in the process of updating 2 cmms to 2025 and am wondering if i should go a version down instead. We don't use simulation on these cmms so if that is the main issue then it would still work for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cr...] Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 There is still serious lag time between measured features. It almost doubled the measuring time on a few tests we've done. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ka...] Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 We will receive another DuraMax at the beginning of December, this time with CALYPSO 8.0. Neither the sales department nor the technical sales department is aware of any problems with CALYPSO 8.0. We are developing on 7.4.24, which should be 100% compatible with 8.0. they say. Only the local PiWeb data will not be compatible. I am very concerned about receiving a version that belongs in intensive care rather than in production. Fingers crossed that a usable service pack will be released by December. I am speechless about the poor quality of 8.0. Probably tested at the last Oktoberfest by ZEISS... Regards Karsten 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 I've been using 8.0 for a while, and other than the simulation issue I haven't really experienced any other issues. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Je...] Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Please sign in to view this username. , I echo Richard. Other than the simulation issue, I have not experienced major problems in 8.0. To the contrary, I've been delighted by quite a few noteworthy improvements and new capabilities. The simulation issue, however, is a major problem, and not just because of the functional inadequacy. Zeiss's silence and lack of customer care on the issue is perhaps even more problematic. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ka...] Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 @Jeff & @Richard Thanks for your information that reassures me somewhat. Yesterday, I ordered a trial licence to get an impression for myself. Unfortunately, it cannot be used productively on a CMM, and the simulation does not seem to work at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Sv...] Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 I can only agree with Jeff and Richard. I don't have any problems with 8.0 either; in fact, I'm very satisfied. Since I don't have a Planner seat, I'm not familiar with the simulation issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Wo...] Posted October 15 Author Share Posted October 15 Please sign in to view this quote. Please sign in to view this quote. Please sign in to view this quote. I'm curious, what probe head are you using? VAST XT, XTR, RDS? In our case, VAST XT has no issues, but the RDS and XTR are waaay slower than usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 We utilize the RDS/XXT; RDS/DotScan, XXT Direct, XTR, and Vast Gold. The only lag I would say Calypso has is when doing a lot of Simultaneous Evaluations, but this has been an issue since 2023 with the introduction of the new GD&T engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Sv...] Posted October 16 Share Posted October 16 We use RDS XXT and I can not detect any delay in the measurements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted October 16 Share Posted October 16 Please sign in to view this quote. Ive noticed this recently when doing programs without a CAD model. Evaluating GDT position takes like 5 seconds per feature element. But on programs that have a cad model, its instantaneous. Cant figure out why that would matter! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Wo...] Posted October 17 Author Share Posted October 17 Please sign in to view this quote. I wonder if there is a specific setting that affects the performance of articulating probes on 8.0. Our programs are running about 30% longer. There is usually a delay of 5-10 seconds between measurements. On XT there is no issue. For a couple of weeks I've two machines on 8.0 and two on 7.8 and the same plan would take much longer on 8.0. Curiously, yesterday I've had a XT adapter plate with "Z-" only probe in XTR and there was no delay. So for anyone thinking about upgrading to 8.0 - your programs might run slower - or they might not - who knows? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ka...] Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 There seems to be a significant, albeit undefined, difference in the performance of individual metrics compared to previous versions. A 30% slowdown would be a definite ‘no-go’ of Version 8.0 for us. What is needed here is a clear statement from Zeiss that clearly shows under what conditions performance losses (still) occur. Or perhaps ZEISS has really aligned itself with the gaming sector in terms of software development and is letting users test half-finished software at their expense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted 7 hours ago Share Posted 7 hours ago Please sign in to view this quote. I can confirm a slowdown too in running programs in version 8 compared to version 7 on my machine with XXT head 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in