Alternative to DWC with R.R.F. ?

deckingman

@fcwilt That is a joke isn't it? Suggesting I buy a larger screen to compensate for the deficiencies of DWC. That's about as crazy as removing my additional axes and reducing the number of tools to compensate for the extra padding.

fcwilt

@deckingman

No it is not a joke.

Having a larger screen with high resolution brings many benefits.

1920 x 1080 is rather "out-of-date", so to speak.

Just as TVs have gone from "1K" to 2K to 4K to 8K, computer monitors have also advanced.

It's obviously your choice.

Frederick

deckingman

@fcwilt I have a pair of 24 inch Dell monitors which gives me the real estate I need. So arguably I have 48 inches at 3840 x 1080. I also have age related failing eye sight so having a screen with more pixels than my eyeballs is pointless. And I'm trying to subsist on a very small pension. If I had the money to buy new monitors, I'd rather spend it on turning up the thermostat on my heating a degree or two.

fcwilt

@deckingman said in Alternative to DWC with R.R.F. ?:

I have a pair of 24 inch Dell monitors which gives me the real estate I need. So arguably I have 48 inches at 3840 x 1080. I also have age related failing eye sight so having a screen with more pixels than my eyeballs is pointless. And I'm trying to subsist on a very small pension. If I had the money to buy new monitors, I'd rather spend it on turning up the thermostat on my heating a degree or two.

I can related to the vision issues being 73.

But I pretty sure you know that the issue with vision is related to the pixels-per-inch spec. If you just keep the same physical screen size and up the resolution everything gets smaller and harder to see.

Which is why if you go to a higher res screen you likely want to get a larger screen as well to keep the pixels-per-inch near to what you are comfortable with.

Frederick

infiniteloop

@fcwilt said in Alternative to DWC with R.R.F. ?:

1920 x 1080 is rather "out-of-date", so to speak.

Sorry to disagree, but we want to control one or more 3D printers, not a nuclear power plant. Ideally, a modest screen should be sufficient to control a single printer. The PanelDue was intended to do just that. As it has shown to be not flexible enough for all purposes, the SBC configuration was introduced. This gives us a variety of options, larger screens using DWC among them.

DWC can adapt to different screen sizes and tries to reflect the properties of the underlying hardware, from a simple bed slinger to a CNC mill, from a tool changer to a multi-axis special device, but there’s the problem: you simply can’t accommodate this whole zoo with a single GUI without compromises, not to mention the individual requirements of the users.

I don’t want to blame DWC on this, it does a damn good job to integrate all controls in a single web app. To overcome the inherent shortcomings, we would need to take a different approach: a fully user-configurable interface, aimed at exactly one instance of the hardware it shall control. That’s the only way to keep the screen size within reasonable limits.

However, this is a major task which many developers have already failed to implement - especially if you were to aim multiple platforms and wanted to run multiple instances of the GUI. OTOH, the preconditions for such an undertaking have been laid: the RRF object model it offers most of what a web programmer needs to build a fully customised interface to the 3D printer he owns.

fcwilt

@infiniteloop said in Alternative to DWC with R.R.F. ?:

Sorry to disagree, but we want to control one or more 3D printers, not a nuclear power plant. Ideally, a modest screen should be sufficient to control a single printer. The PanelDue was intended to do just that. As it has shown to be not flexible enough for all purposes, the SBC configuration was introduced. This gives us a variety of options, larger screens using DWC among them.

I use my computers to do far more than control my printers. I find having lots of screen "real-estate" is very helpful for many tasks.

As to controlling my printers there are times when being able to display all four at once is useful.

Even cheap graphics cards are supporting 4K - so, yes, 1920 x 1080 is somewhat out-of-date.

If you are happy with a low-res monitor that is fine.

Frederick

deckingman

@fcwilt As I said in the post I linked to, by renaming my tool heaters, I removed 12 lines of text from the display. But instead of condensing what was on screen, DWC added extra padding to replace those 12 lines. I'm not a programmer but why is that so hard to fix? TBH, it's a bit of an insult to tell me I need to get a high screen so that all this extra padding can be displayed better.

infiniteloop

@fcwilt:

I use my computers to do far more than control my printers.

So do I, but this „many more“ happens to live in windows. Talking about DWC, it often equires too much space on its own - at least compared with a dedicated control interface (on the PanelDue or a tablet) for a specific RRF machine.

I find having lots of screen "real-estate" is very helpful for many tasks.

Me too, but who am I to tell @deckingman what screen fits his needs? I don’t even know what tasks he performs on his computer (other than managing his printer). On this forum, I’m focussed on a single task: to control a 3D printer or CNC mill.

For this purpose, it is hilarious to require an XXL screen - which in turn must be attached to some powerful PC hardware capable to drive such high resolutions.

fcwilt

@infiniteloop

As I mentioned even low-end graphics card support 4K. For displaying web pages at hi-res you need next-to-no computer "horsepower", the GPU does all the work.

I was merely pointing out that when the "preferred" solution (an updated DWC) is not going to happen anytime soon a "workaround" is more screen real-estate - which has many other benefits.

Frederick

I will mark this as Solved

I have sadly become very disenchanted with D.W.C. and its ongoing issues which have spanned over a number of years now (as others have mentioned/posted about) with no evident solution pending from the Duet team.

So I have been left with no option but to take matters into my own hands and do the unthinkable (I have been a staunch supporter of both Duet hardware & and R.R.F. over the years) So it pains me greatly to be forced to switch my printers over to Klipper with the Fluidd web interface which is much cleaner, lean and configurable.

Its been a learning curve for sure but once you get it you get it. I have managed to get the exact same functionality in klipper as i had in R.R.F.

My final hurdle was to get my 6HC's & 1LC Tool boards to play nicely together with klipper which required a bit of lateral thought to get the Tool boards flashed with klipper compiled firmware.

I managed to set up my Rpi's to each run two instances reducing the hardware cost required to use Rpi's

So now D.W.C can be left to be as geriatric as it wants and it wont get on my ti** any more

Au revoir Duet3D

Solved Alternative to DWC with R.R.F. ?