nallath

If you didn't press the monitor tab, it shouldn't be accessing the camera. It does try to request the status of the printer every 2 seconds, but that shouldn't cause a massive load on network on CPU (we're talking about a few kb's tops)

Cura is loading the stream if you try to monitor the printer, but should close it when you aren't looking at it. But yeah, that's not something it does over the internet but the local network (hence me asking about the update, as that's the thing that actually connects with the internet)

Cura only tries to get a single network request; trying to find the latest version. But that runs in a seperate thread, so that shouldn't be an issue. Could you try to disable the "update checker" plugin?

Preferably on github, as that's the place where we get all of them, but sending them directly (provided that you also include a proper bug report that includes things like your system, what were you doing, what did yo expect was going to happen, what actually happend)

I understand the frustration, but comparing one application to another proves nothing. Looking at slicer, or any other program, won't provide us any information what is going wrong, because the software is fundamentally different. This is the equalivant of saying; "Hey, my android phone is slow and it does run fast on my iphone. You guys might want to port the iphone software to the nokia!". Yes, it should be possible, no-one is disagreeing. Simply put; None of our developers can reproduce it. That makes it orders of magnitude harder to figure ougt what is happening, which is something you need in order to fix it (and of course, test any fixes). All that being said; How fast is it if you put the layer view in legacy mode? Did you recently update drivers?

The first startup you did with 3.1; that's the moment where it tries (and by the looks of it, fails) to upgrade the files. More info on what info we need for issues can be found on https://github.com/ultimaker/cura#logging-issues

Without logs, there is nothing we can do to help.

You need to change the values of the Extruder prime x position.

We made some rudimentary support for it, but i think it wasn't merged yet. But pull requests are always welcome

Without logs, there is nothing we can do to help.

The layerview should be 2x as fast next release. We didn't enable backface culling. Whoops. Rotation is around a point in space. By default it's the last object you selected. I personally dislike the "normal" cad program style of doing it, especially for 3D printing. A normal cad program gives you a "free cam" because you tend to work with more objects and want to view them in very specific angles. As for the zooming; this is the only way to get zooming onto a point working. But this happens if you view a few cm at the time. As for mixing the python, it doesn't slow the 3D view down that much. Most of the 3D view is handled outside of python anyway.

You would have to ask the guys from make printable. We didn't make the plugin.

Logs please?

Look at setting up octoprint. That is the only non-ultimaker network control that is supported right now.

Share the logs please

I don't know how to make solidworks do that. I've never used it.

Yup. It's based on work done by one of our engineers for the research sprint. It can also create bill of materials.

Yeah, shouldn't be too hard. You can use the custom machine in the new Cura to set it up with the right sizes.

Cura uses the origin of the file to figure out how to merge them. It could well be that solidworks is doing something to offset it. There is no way that Cura can figure out how two models that don't share an origin should fit together. So even though the answer is frustrating, it's the only one we can give.

Well, you seem to be using legacy Cura, which we stopped developing about +- 3 years ago. Have you tried using the latest Cura version?

You are using gcc-4.9. I just checked, but i'm building the engine with gcc 6.4.1

You can just build libArcus without python.

It is looping through removable drives. We use pretty much the same code as the SO question.

Nope. That actually doesn't add that much load. Again a nope. Settings can depend on other settings. So certain changes can trigger a large number of other updates. For some reason not all machines handle that as gracefully. Hiding some settings that you don't use should speed this up.

As i never heard of the Windows\CSC combi before (and I'm pretty sure that this isn't something that we hardcoded), i just googled this. So yeah, ahoeben seems to be onto something, as it's about the offline files functionality from windows itself.