Tom Brewer A World Class CADCAM Moron

[jon_banquer]

Here is a video that shows why SolidWorks Move Face tool doesn't cut it and why real direct modeling tools are so much better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iXwFs-nivQ&feature=share&list=UUEI8mxEigB4qNHykqlAGwNg

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 13, 3:30 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

Here is a video that shows why SolidWorks Move Face tool doesn't cut it and why real direct modeling tools are so much better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iXwFs-nivQ&feature=share&list=UUEI8mx...

You're supposed to be a Machinist, you shouldn't be fucking up or fucking with customer supplied models (controlled documents). As a machinist you just need follow one simple Mil-Spec:

MIL-TF-P41

(Make It Like The Fucking Print For Once)

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 18, 10:32 pm, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 13, 3:30 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> Here is a video that shows why SolidWorks Move Face tool doesn't cut
> it and why real direct modeling tools are so much better:

>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iXwFs-nivQ&feature=share&list=UUEI8mx...

You're supposed to be a Machinist, you shouldn't be fucking up or fucking with customer supplied models (controlled documents). As a machinist you just need follow one simple Mil-Spec:

       MIL-TF-P41
...

As I've frequently told you often times an engineer wants / expects me to change their solid model. This was certainly the case at Qualcomm. As per usual you're too fucking stupid to understand this and you think there is only one way that things should be done. You're level of stupidity easily rivals what Huprich use to exhibit.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 19, 12:57 am, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 18, 10:32 pm, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 13, 3:30 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> > Here is a video that shows why SolidWorks Move Face tool doesn't cut
> > it and why real direct modeling tools are so much better:

> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iXwFs-nivQ&feature=share&list=UUEI8mx...

> You're supposed to be a Machinist, you shouldn't be fucking up or
> fucking with customer supplied models (controlled documents). As a
> machinist you just need follow one simple Mil-Spec:
...

Why?

This was certainly the case at Qualcomm.
As per usual you're too fucking stupid to understand this and you think there is only one way that things should be done. You're level of stupidity easily rivals what Huprich use to exhibit.

So they have no receiving inspection and they don't document or track engineering changes?

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 20, 9:11 pm, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 19, 12:57 am, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 18, 10:32 pm, brewertr wrote:

...

"Why?"

Who gives a **** why. If the customer wants it and is willing to pay for it you do whatever to keep them happy.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 20, 9:32 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 20, 9:11 pm, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 19, 12:57 am, jon_banquer wrote:

...

So wouldn't be making this all up now would you, Jon?

You've spent years claiming your need to "often" change customer models to "make them manufacturable". In all that time now is the first time I can recall you making the claim YOU'RE being PAID to make changes to customer supplied models.

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 22, 10:50 am, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 20, 9:32 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 20, 9:11 pm, brewertr wrote:

...

The only person making stuff up is you, Brewer. You're a complete idiot and you have no clues about how many machining job shops operate or about how they use CADCAM.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 22, 11:52 am, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 22, 10:50 am, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 20, 9:32 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

...

You're the one that can't keep his story straight which is a good indicator you're being disingenuous.

You're a complete
idiot and you have no clues about how many machining job shops operate or about how they use CADCAM.

Exactly what type of changes are "THEY" making to customer supplied models "to make them manufacturable"?

Tom

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 22, 11:18 pm, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 22, 11:52 am, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 22, 10:50 am, brewertr wrote:

...

Brewer, you're a lying piece of shit who has constantly been wrong on CADCAM and many other issues related to machining. Your posting track record on Usenet shows how stupid you truly are.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 23, 7:09 am, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 22, 11:18 pm, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 22, 11:52 am, jon_banquer wrote:

...

So you can't answer, big surprise..............LOL

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 25, 9:21 pm, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 23, 7:09 am, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 22, 11:18 pm, brewertr wrote:

...

It's no surprise to me that you're a clueless idiot who for years has been constantly wrong about history based CAD and pretty much anything CADCAM related.

 

[jonny bonkers]

Nuff Said !

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 25, 10:31 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 25, 9:21 pm, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 23, 7:09 am, jon_banquer wrote:

...

The truth.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 26, 3:57 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 25, 10:31 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 25, 9:21 pm, brewertr wrote:

...

For years now, it's your claim, that you, a machinist needs to constantly change customer supplied models to "make them manufacturable".

So why over all these years can't you explain exactly what type of changes YOU have to make?

Simple on topic question, the only logical reason you won't answer:
You can't back it up cause you made it up.

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 26, 6:53 pm, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 26, 3:57 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 25, 10:31 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

...

Not only do I claim it but I've worked for many shops who expect it. Unfortunately you don't have the needed diversified CADCAM experience to understand this. I've said many times what kinds of changes I make to customer models. You miss it because you're too busy focused on what idiots like Franco Folini or have to say. Folini has lost the ability to represent many CADCAM companies like SpaceClaim, ZW3D, etc but you're just to stupid to understand why this has happened. You're a fool, a fake, a liar and a phony, Brewer. You're posting track record to this newsgroup shows just how dumb and how stupid you truly are.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 26, 9:48 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

I've said many times what kinds of changes I make
to customer models.

Give me a thread or two, post or two where you state [specifically] what type of changes you as a machinist are required/expected to make to customer supplied models on a regular basis "to make them manufacturable".

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 27, 4:22 am, brewertr wrote:

On Sep 26, 9:48 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> I've said many times what kinds of changes I make
> to customer models.

Give me a thread or two, post or two where you state [specifically] what type of changes you as a machinist are required/expected to make to customer supplied models on a regular basis "to make them manufacturable".

You're a fool, a fake, a liar and a phony, Brewer. You're posting track record to this newsgroup shows just how dumb and how stupid you truly are.

 

[jon_banquer]

On Sep 27, 5:12 am, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 27, 4:22 am, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 26, 9:48 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> > I've said many times what kinds of changes I make
> > to customer models.

> Give me a thread or two, post or two where you state [specifically]
> what type of changes you as a machinist are required/expected to make
> to customer supplied models on a regular basis "to make them
> manufacturable".

...

Brewer has no blog of his own because he has nothing to say.

Brewer doesn't post comments to any major CADCAM blog because he has nothing to say.

Brewer is too stupid to figure out that Folini is a major liar. Many others have figured this out and have removed Folini's ability to sell their CADCAM software.

Brewer worships lying idiots like Folini because he's too stupid to know when someone is full of shit.

Brewer has no You Tube videos he's done on CADCAM.

No one I know in San Diego, CA has ever heard of Tom Brewer.

Brewer is too stupid to understand the power of Siemens NX CADCAM.

Brewer has been wrong about history based CAD for years and even his SolidWorks mentor / hero has now admitted that history based CAD is plagued with major problems. Brewer continues to deny that major problems in history based CAD even exist! In the past he's claimed the problems that are now finally being discussed were mine when he claimed I was a novice SolidWorks user. The truth is Brewer is a novice SolidWorks user with a very poor understanding of history based CAD.

Brewer's posting track record to this newsgroup shows just how dumb and how stupid he truly is.

Brewer is a fool, a fake, a liar and a phony.

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 27, 5:12 am, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 27, 4:22 am, brewertr wrote:

> On Sep 26, 9:48 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> > I've said many times what kinds of changes I make
> > to customer models.

> Give me a thread or two, post or two where you state [specifically]
> what type of changes you as a machinist are required/expected to make
> to customer supplied models on a regular basis "to make them
> manufacturable".

...

Jon, 2nd request;

Give me a thread or two, post or two where you state specifically what type of changes YOU as a machinist are required/expected to make to customer supplied models on a regular basis "to make them manufacturable."

 

[brewertr]

On Sep 27, 5:31 am, jon_banquer wrote:

On Sep 27, 5:12 am, jon_banquer wrote:

> On Sep 27, 4:22 am, brewertr wrote:

...

Jon, 3rd request;

Give me a thread or two, post or two where you state specifically what type of changes YOU as a machinist are required/expected to make to customer supplied models on a regular basis "to make them manufacturable."