BobCAD Sucks - Review

comment

"Interface was different, but it appeared that the software had all the tools one would expect to find in a CAM program"

involved

Dave, Aaron, Octavian, Ben

comment

Demo looked good - interface looked user friendly - based on group's positive reaction, Al approved purchase

involved

Dave, Aaron, Octavian, Ben

comment

VISA credit card - Included One Year Premium Tech Support and 2 hours 1:1 on-line training

involved

Aaron, Dave

involved

Dave, Octavian, Ben

comment

Caused by a known bug - had to downgrade to previous version to fix

involved

Dave

comment

Training session went well and everything was very positive - Aaron on jury duty did not attend

involved

Dave, Octavian, Ben

comment

This effort was via BobCAD phone support

involved

Dave, Walter Czyrsky @ BobCAD

comment

This was first reported bad cut

involved

Dave

comment

Sent Print-Screen shots of BobCAD software settings

involved

Dave, Walter @ BobCAD

involved

Dave, Walter @ BobCAD

comment

BobCAD Support asked for pictures but bad part had been scrapped & was not available

involved

Dave, Walter @ BobCAD

comment

"... refund for BobCAD-CAD software and Predator for BobCAD-CAM. This corresponds to the refund policy as the claim that the SLICE PLANAR and EQUIDISTANT OFFSET CONTOUR listed in the features of Mill 3X are not working properly (see attached pictures). Attempts have been made with support to fix this issue with no resolution.

involved

Dave

comment

Objective was to have Walter remote into Octavian's computer to demonstrate how to use the software to create a part with acceptable finish

involved

Dave, Aaron, Octavian, Walter @ BobCAD

comment

Code and instructions did not work to produce an acceptable part

involved

Octavian, Aaron, Dave

involved

Dave

comment

Point made that CCF was a production job shop and could not work with a software company which took weeks to set up solutions & which did not seem to understand the specific problem. The problem-solving that was covered over a 4-6 week period should have happened in days. Walter said he would finish his notes and send to Customer Service Dept who had final say.

involved

Aaron, Walter @ BobCAD

comment

CCF did not re-run the part using Slice Tool path because it felt BobCAD had been given ample opportunity to understand the problem & the tooling/approach being used by CCF. To suggest a different feature of the software weeks after originally instructing CCF how to proceed was not helpful.

involved

Walter , Dave, Aaron

comment

"... Unable to approve a refund. We have made this decision based on the reason for your request. Upi are requesting a refund due to your accusation that our software did not function properly. After referring your request to our Technician, Walter, he found that the software was indeed working properly. Walter even suggested other tool-paths that would be better for your type of cut...."

involved

"Refund Dept", Dave

comment

Claimed refusal to work with Support Dept = automatic denial

involved

Elainea Perez (Customer Service Mgr), Dave

comment

Disputed the classification of problem as "machine case" and requested meeting w/ Manager, Mr. Owen. Indicated "disappointment" that Mr. Owen continue to refuse to talk to CCF

involved

Dave, Elainea

comment

"... BobCAD-CAM advertises that we offer a planar tool path. The software that you are comparing to offers more than just a planar option but also describes methods for handling a constant cusp height. This is something we do not offer. Here is a non-partial scientific article that describe the issue that you are encountering... The iso-planar (Cartesian) tool path generation method has been used for several decades. However, it suffers an inherent drawback: in the region where the direction of the surface normal is close to that of the parallel intersecting planes, the intersecting plane intervals have to be reduced because of the influence of surface slopes. This causes redundant tool paths in the associated flatter regions and results in lower machining efficiency. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010448502000489). As you can see, this is a known shortcoming of the iso-planar tool path. There are recent better methods to handle these shortcomings . . . What we can do for you is get more details on what you would like the software to do and forward this to our development department to enhance the software. This however by policy and end users license agreement, which had been agreed to, does not justify a refund...."

involved

Elainea, Dave

involved

Dave, Sean

comment

December 5, 2013, Mr. Lawrence Pendleton, President/Executive Director, BobCAD-CAM, 28200 US Highway 19 N., Suite E, Clearwater, FL 33761, RE: [#UIM-273-90648 10/15/13] Refund Denial, REF: a. E-Mail from Dave Cassel to Sean Owen dated 12/02/13, same subject, b. E-Mail from Sean Owen to Dave Cassel dated 12/02/13, same subject, c. Notice from bobCAD-CAM Refund Department to Dave Cassel dated 11/26/13, d. E-Mail from Elainea Perez to Dave Cassel dated 11/29/13, same subject, e. E-Mail from Dave Cassel to refund@bobcad.com, dated 11/15/13 requesting a refund based on fairness. Dear Mr. Pendleton: This is more of a gross disappointment and total frustration complaint than anything else. As you can see from the attached e-mail correspondence, we have tried to work with your technical staff to make the purchased software work. When it became obvious that it could not work, we requested a refund – which was denied because of lateness of request (not true) and a cessation of work with your technicians (true, but only because of frustration with the poor quality of support being provided). After over three weeks of time-consuming and expensive trial-and-error testing and “fixes” as suggested by your technical support people, the results were still unacceptable. As a last resort, they were allowed to access our CAD/CAM system and watch the virtual performance of the software with the suggested changes included. At that time, the suggestion was that the software we were using could not do what we were trying to do and that we should try using the finishing tool path function to cut the part. Our last e-mail back to Sean wondered why it took more than three weeks for your technical people to “discover” that the software we were using did not have the capability to perform the work desired? Shouldn’t they have immediately seen that “problem” as soon as we sent them the technical description of the problems and copies of our own (successful) coding efforts on Keycreator software? Also, we just received V26 upgrade to the software which purports to “solve” the problem we were struggling to solve with the prior version. Shouldn’t your technical support people have known that upgrade was forthcoming (in a matter of days) and advised us to wait to implement it? The impression that we have received is that they are expert at dodging technical issues and not in high-level customer service. Sean’s e-mail was the first intelligible and useful response to all of our verbal and written requests for help concluding for a request for a refund. There were no explanatory e-mails, no response to our last e-mail, and no recognition that we are a production shop that must ship finished parts – not excuses. Now you may ask, “What difference does all of that make?” As was pointed out previously, we selected BobCAD-CAM on the basis of your web site representations and the assurances we received from the people in sales especially relating to the 45 day trial period. We chose not to go to one of the well-known branded companies because we thought we would get better service dealing with a small technology company that was trying to make its mark in the industry. To say the least, we were sadly disappointed! If you had clearly identified the limits of your software and told us that a “fix” was in process, we would have been impressed. However, we are not interested in proceeding with you because we have found your technical and customer support sadly lacking and not even up to the poor standards of the big software houses. To not even answer our last e-mail is damning, in and of itself – it shows how little you expect repeat business or on-going relationships. Once and done” is not acceptable to us since we are constantly pushing the boundaries of machining and welding components and assemblies. We also were shocked to discover the number of copies of your software available for sale on the Internet, which would indicate that we are not alone in having problems with your software. All of that being said, we again request that you refund our purchase price so that we can get on with our technical and business lives with a feeling that we were fairly treated and not harbor ill will towards BobCAD-CAM with respect to future business or referrals. As President of CompuCraft, I would be concerned about receiving this kind of feed-back from one of our customers and am providing it (over and above the value of a refund) as a courtesy to you. I am looking forward to hearing back from you. Sincerely, Alfred C. Erpel, President & CEO, Cc: David Cassel, CompuCraft Fabricators, Inc., David Koehn, BobCAD-CAM Director of Sales, Sean Owen, BobCAD-CAM

involved

Al, Dave, Sean Owen, Dave Koehn (Dir of Sales)

comment

Seems to have addressed the problem we had been having - "... Equidistant Rest Finishing (for 3 Axis MILL PRO and 4&5 Axis versions) - also known as constant cusp or constant scallop - Users can enter a previous tool diameter and the software automatically finds the areas that the previous tool could not reach, which creates an optimized finishing tool path for only the left over material..."

involved

Dave

comment

Mr. Cassel, To address your concerns, we do not offer a 45 day satisfaction guarantee nor do we offer a 45 day trial period. The refund was denied due to the fact that the request for refund was for a feature that we do not offer (Adaptive Planer Tool path). During your conversations with our technicians they had suggested the use of other tool paths (equidistant offset) or the use of smaller step overs multiple times. Any trouble our technicians had finding a problem with the tool path because it is behaving as expected. As for an update being released and our technicians informing you of its pending arrival, no final release date is not known by them as it is tested and rebuilt by development until completion and release dates vary based on urgency or reported issues. None of our technicians have “dodged” your issues nor made excuses, from what was discussed they were under the impression that your part was “gouged” due to no evidence of gouging they requested further information from your company, pictures, files and what software you were comparing to. It was not until reviewing a product that you own that we had found a probable option that you were comparing to. After discovery of the software you are using and careful review of the product we found that the comparison software has more options / features than we currently offer. As for clearly identifying “limits” we do not list every item and function that is not included with our software however, we do clearly list all available options that are available. We offer both a downloadable free demo for review and we also offer one on one live demos of the software to review the product prior to its purchase both of which you had taken advantage of… You had downloaded the product for review prior to making the purchase. Downloaded V26 3 Axis @ 2013-10-12 06:46:46 Phone 2156547778 Name: David Cassel Company: Compucraft Fabricators, Inc. We had also provided a live demonstration of the software on 10/14/13 at 1pm est. with one of our technicians to answer any questions about the software that you may have had. The purchase was then later made on 2013-10-15. During the installation of the software you had agreed to the terms of our end users license agreement that clearly states… YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR USING THE LICENSED SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE LICENSED SOFTWARE; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND, IF APPLICABLE. If the BobCAD-CAM software fails to perform any of the advertised features listed in BobCAD-CAM’s website, www.bobcad.com (“Official Website”), you shall be eligible for a refund. The refund request must be received by BobCAD-CAM within 45 days from the date of your purchase. You will not qualify for a refund based on changes, modifications and updates to the functions advertised of the BobCAD-CAM software. After your purchase of the software, such changes modifications and updates are not covered under the Refund Policy. If you are eligible for a refund, you must submit a refund request pursuant to the Service and Software Refund Guidelines. Furthermore, if the BobCAD-CAM software does not generate ISO G-Code accepted by your machine control, you may submit a refund request pursuant to the Service and Software Refund Guidelines. Third party software sold by BobCAD-CAM other than Predator Software©, is excluded from this Refund Policy such software is nonrefundable and all sales are final, this exclusion includes but is not limited to Solidworks™, Celeritive Technologies© HSP, Mach3©, Machinist Tool Box™ and any other 3rd party products offered by BobCAD-CAM. All refunds are subject to a 20% of the Purchase Price restocking fee. -End Users License Agreement – With many CAD/CAM software companies in existence and many specific features and options available we cannot and do not state that our software offers every available option and feature. We do only state what options and features that we do offer and provide. To address the “shock” of finding so many copies of our software for sale on the internet, this is due to the fact that we offer a transferrable license, often our customers when upgrading to a newer version will sell the older version to another user. We allow this to help smaller shops stay on current technologies. On our end we have been forthcoming and our technical staff has tried to help and assist you in every way possible including reviewing other CAD/CAM software to help determine exactly what it is that your expectations are. I do apologize that you are not satisfied with the software that you purchased due to a lacking of a feature that is offered in a competitor’s product we will do our best to remedy this by making a future addition to our software to include this requested functionality this however, does not warrant a refund of the product. Sincerely, Sean Owen, Support & Services Executive, BobCAD-CAM Inc., 727-489-0003 Ext, 140, Regards, Sean Owen, Support & Services Exec., BobCAD-CAM Inc., Phone: (727) 489-0003, Fax: (727) 734-8239

involved

Sean Owen (Support & Services Executive)

comment

Mr. Cassel, To address your concerns, we do not offer a 45 day satisfaction guarantee nor do we offer a 45 day trial period. The refund was denied due to the fact that the request for refund was for a feature that we do not offer (Adaptive Planer Tool path). During your conversations with our technicians they had suggested the use of other tool paths (equidistant offset) or the use of smaller step-overs multiple times. Any trouble our technicians had finding a problem with the tool path because it is behaving as expected. As for an update being released and our technicians informing you of its pending arrival, no final release date is not known by them as it is tested and rebuilt by development until completion... None of our technicians have "dodged" your issues nor made excuses, from what was discussed they were under the impression that your part was "gouged" due to no evidence of gouging they requested further information from your company, pictures, files, and what software you were comparing to. It was not until reviewing a product that you own that we had found a probable option that you were comparing to. After discovery of the soft ware you are using and careful review of the product we found that the comparison software has more options/features than we currently offer. As for clearly identifying limits" we do not list every items and function that is not included with our software however, we do clearly list all available options that are available. We offer both a downloadable free demo for review and we also offer one-on-one live demos of the software to review the product prior to its purchase both of which you had taken advantage of.... We had also provided a live demonstration of thae software on 10/14/13... the purchase was then made on 10/15/13. During the installation of the software you had agreed to the terms of our end users license agreement... On our end we have been forthcoming and our technical staff has tried to help and assist you in every way possible including reviewing other CAD/CAM software to help determine exactly what it is that your expectations are. I do apologize that you are not satisfied with the software that you purchased due to a lacking of a feature that is offered in a competitor's product. We will do our best to remedy this by making a future addition to our software to include this requested functionality. This however does not warrant a refund of the product. Sincerely, Sean Owens, Support & Services Executive, BobCAD-CAM, Inc.

involved

Sean Owen @ BobCAD, Dave

comment

Mr. Owen: I have reviewed your post and have only two points to make: 1) we understand and do not question your legalisms and policies and we made that position clear in our last letter to Mr. Lawrence Pendleton, your President; and 2) we were very unhappy with your poor customer service and lack of common courtesy and have chosen not to do business with a company that does not seem to want to develop long-term relationships or repeat business through joint problem-solving. Case in point is your use of the log-in complaint post to "hide" from personal contact or any personal responsibility. You have not responded to our requests to talk to you personally via phone calls and neither you nor Mr. Pendleton has deigned to respond to our formal correspondence but rather made an impersonal "post". You may think that your customer and technical service is wonderful, but, as actual customers, we do not share that opinion. Instead of working with you to see if your recently upgraded software will do what we need to have done, which is what we were hoping to "push" you into doing with our refund request, we now think we must "cut our losses" and find another vendor. If contacted, we will advise others in our industry to avoid dealing with BobCAD-CAM if they want or need competent technical or customer support services, which in our opinion, you do not provide. Dave Cassel

involved

Dave, Martin

comment

Al & Victor: I had a long and good session with Aaron on Thursday afternoon and drafted a first pass at my report that evening, which I sent to Aaron this morning (Friday) to review. He responded with his comments and suggestions so I am comfortable that I have his input. We decided to do it in a "table format" with the headings being: "No." "Recommended Action" "BobCAD Project" and "Comments". That way we can frame it as to what should have been done vs. what was actually done and have a clear-cut idea about how to proceed in the future to get a better result. I have to say it is not a pretty picture from any angle although I'm trying to keep it non-blaming in tone to encourage "full-disclosure" and to stay out of the "who shot john?" emotions. I will run the draft past Dave and Octavian on Monday since they both played a major part in the drama, each somewhat independent of Aaron. I want to be sure that I have the full picture although I think Aaron went out of his way to cover all the bases. I will try to get my report to the two of you on Tuesday. I suggest that, after you've had time to digest it, we get the software group together to discuss it and lay out the "plan" to locate and purchase the 5-Axix software for the new machine(s) - unless that has already been accomplished. Martin

involved

Martin, Al, Victor

comment

Table of "Recommended Action", "BobCAD Actual Actions", "Comments"

involved

Martin, Al, Victor, Aaron, Dave

comment

Worked at reviewing the features of "Finishing Tool path" to see if could install & use without help - could not - decided to e-mail BobCAD for instructions & support to see if could be made to work

involved

Aaron, Dave, Octavian

comment

Aaron designated as being the point of contact for this round of tests

involved

Dave, Aaron

comment

Thank you for contacting us. This is an automated response confirming the receipt of your ticket. One of our agents will get back to you as soon as possible. For your records, the details of the ticket are listed below. When replying, please make sure that the ticket ID is kept in the subject line to ensure that your replies are tracked appropriately. ID: HPF-831-29988; Subject; 353064, Find a way to make part #7090-20-0110; Type: Issue; Status: Open; Priority: Routine/Standard Support

involved

Dave, Aaron

involved

Dave

comment

BobCAD stated: "... Typically we don't walk through parts with customers in Technical Support, that is reserved for Training, but given the circumstances I would like to get you up and running with this part as soon as possible...."

involved

Walter Czyrsky (Technical Support Mgr), Dave

comment

The purpose of the call is "... To walk him/us through the steps required to get the best possible finish on our part number 7090-20-0110 ..."

involved

Dave, Martin

comment

Coordinated w/ Victor on Octavian's availability & responded to open ticket: "Our apologies for the delay in responding to this ticket. The machinist who is working on this ticket with Dave and me has been rotated to second shift. If he can come in early tomorrow would it be possible to schedule a conference call for 3:00 PM tomorrow (Friday 01/17) afternoon. The purpose of the call is to walk him/us through the steps required to get the best possible finish on our part number 7090-20-0110. We understand that the very end of the day on a Friday may not be the best time to d this, so if this time is not good for you, then we would propose 3:00 PM on Monday (01/20). Please advise which time is more convenient for you.

involved

Dave, Martin

comment

Ticket ID: HPF=831-29988

involved

Walter Czyrsky (Technical Support Mgr), Dave

involved

Sean, Dave, Octavian

comment

Results still no good.

involved

Octavian

comment

Pictures on file w/ Aaron - parts not acceptable.

involved

Octavian, Aaron, Dave

comment

BobCAD not specifically asked to respond.

involved

Aaron

involved

Aaron

comment

BobCAD responded on 02/03/14 w/ another program to try. His solution was to set the tolerance for the tool path to 0.000005". However, the field where this tolerance would be input only displays four decimal places & would not be visible to the CAM operator in the field - who would not think of using a value not displayed by the field.

involved

comment

New program produced an acceptable part (stored in Aaron's office)

involved

Octavian, Aaron, Dave