This is an option I've used before, maybe not 'soft', but it looks clean and easy to break out different wires at different points: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07JQ1QHVF/
Other thing I've used is paracord sleeving, something like this: https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/5175/case-smithing-getting-started-with-diy-cable-sleeving/index.html
Paracord is a little softer than the expanding nylon sleeving and looks better IMO, also has a large color selection.
I'm surprised they won't send at least a binary... it's not like anybody is gonna spend the time to reverse engineer and steal their super valuable corporate top secret 3d printer touch screen firmware specific to their machines 
.
If their version uses elements of the original PanelDueFirmware then they should provide the code per GPL as they are redistributing the code inside their physical product. But if they rolled their own firmware I suppose they can sit on it.
Maybe you could implement zones using G10 workplace coordinate offsets? It should work well for mutually exclusive fixed size zones. Trickier bit would be a way to track which zones are ready to go and which are already used.
I know Ultimaker has a print queue already implemented, you can enqueue several jobs, and the only user interaction after is a confirmation that the print area is ready to go (i.e. print removed, bed prepped between jobs). iirc It even supports multiple printers so you can just send all your jobs to a central queue from which they are dispatched to any available machine. Pretty nice.
The socketed drivers can also give out from time to time, so it may be worth checking those to see if they are still good on the ramps.
I have used both old and new machines but I have not upgraded 1000 to duet. Most of the base hardware is common (motors, extruders, &c), the main challenge will be changing / modifying the old wiring harness to work with the new box.
Some suggestions:
Route the 48V power for the drive motors through individual cables to each motor, rather than inside the controls wiring (prevents future problems).
See if their support is willing to give you a wiring schematic for the old unit. If not, start your own documenting for which wire goes where. The 3dp1000 units have pretty well labeled harnesses, so this should not be too difficult if you have to start from scratch.
The machine is pretty standard outside the mechanics, with motors, extruders, etc. as on every other printer, so don't overthink it.
@jzagaja Yep I am familiar with those machines although it's been a while since I have touched any of them. What's up? May want to start a new topic as this one is p old.
If you wanted to confirm, you could always run the M143 H0 command manually from the console once the machine is already on, it will read out the max temp settings.
Also note that if you want temps of 180, you should set the max temp to a bit higher than 180, else it may throw an error every time it goes slightly above the setpoint, which would get annoying to deal with.
Try logging periodically with M573 to see what PWM the heater is running at under full load. This should give you an idea of whether you can tune the control values up.
For example, if it's constantly running a PWM of 1 (full power) then you are just running too fast for your heater power. At that point your decisions will be either print slower, substitute a more powerful heater, tune the voltage up as high as possible if you have adjustable output, or cut wasted heat by insulating better or something like that.
If it's running a lower PWM value, say 80-90%, or it oscillates around, then you should still be able to tune it up, maybe by aggressively increasing the gain? I prefer just using overpowered heaters, although there's some safety things to consider here.
Could you just locally cache and display the babystep request on the paneldue, until the object model updates it for real? Kinda hacky but it might help smooth out the user experience if you can't get the update rate up enough.
@chris974M Yes, the PT100 or thermocouple should work well between 200-450C.
If you have questions on the temperature sensor components you can also check with Dyze Design. They are in Montreal, so they can help you in French as well 
@Phaedrux I'm guessing just to maximize compatibility with the greatest number of control boards. Some customers might not have good amplifier options for their systems? Or a lack of general 'industry' knowledge about other options for temp feedback.
I've used the dyze 500C thermistor before and it worked ok at high temps, on a ramps + marlin board. Haven't tried on the Duet.
These days I just use PT1000s because they works with the thermistor inputs on the duet without an addon board, and they're good enough for what I do.
For Dyzend Pro you could upgrade to something like this and this, or this and this (may want to double check compatibility). Some added cost, to be sure, but much better performance. PT sensors and thermocouples are much more linear so they avoid the adc resolution issues David is talking about.
You should expect step/mm error to be proportional to the print height. If you're getting the same overall error regardless of the print size it's likely due to something else.
Could be backlash or something mechanical, particularly if the first layer Z plane was approached from the opposite direction of subsequent layers. Most cheap stepper gearboxes have quite a bit of backlash, usually they're quoted at 1.5 to 3 degrees, which would be up to .33mm with a 20t 2mm pulley (40mm/rev).
Steps/mm numbers look correct, my calc gives out 414.545455 steps/mm. Assuming 200 steps/mm motor, 20t drive gear, 5 2/11 gearbox, 2mm belt pitch.
Have you seen this article yet? https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/Calibrating_thermistor_and_PT1000_readings
Also, I'm assuming you are getting "actual" temp values with a pretty accurate sensor like a thermocouple?
Hello Chris,
You will want to set motor current to 85% of rated current.
Your nema 23 rated current is 2.80A/phase, so set motor current to 2400mA
Your nema 17 rated current is 2.00A/phase, so set motor current to 1700mA
@MJLew Great! Thinking about it a bit more, as long as the center was specified correctly you would still get cylindrical motion with either CW or CCW command, just a matter of whether it goes the 'long way around' or not.
Now we just wait for radius mode to be fixed.
@MJLew If it's centered around (50,50) and you're starting at (55,50),
you could try something like this:
; Quarter arc, starting (55,50), moving CW to (50,45).
G1 X55 Y50
G2 X53.535534 Y46.464466 I-5.000000 J+0.000000
G2 X50.000000 Y45.000000 I-3.535533 J+3.535533
It looks like in your example, you might have CCW coordinates specified for a G2 CW arc move, which might be causing the spiral weirdness. Additionally it looks like your center point is defined relative to the destination point, rather than the start point. I think defining center relative to start point of the move is the intended usage.
In this case your formula would be something like:
I = Xcenter - X(start of move)
J = Ycenter - Y(start of move)
which should work for both G2(CW) and G3 (CCW) moves
The only hardcoded limits are -10.0C < temp_limit < 2000.0C, at least in rrf v3.2. Default limit is 125C I think for the bed, but it shouldn't reject higher values.
More likely to be some weirdness with command ordering or initialization timings.
Technical limits are a perfectly fine reason, in this case there's really not much to be upset about, particularly as the existing products will still work well, just without newer features.
Planned obsolescence doesn't really apply here. That term is usually reserved for unethical techniques to ensure products will break, slow down, or become impossible to repair to necessitate replacement.
It's a bit laughable that a product with fully published specifications including every individual component potentially needed for repair, along with open source firmware could be accused of 'planned obsolescence'. It's just normal obsolescence 