Universal vs Trotec

[Keith Winter]

Hi guys,

Considering a ILS series Universal. Please talk me down from the ledge... ;)

Seriously though, anyone with a Universal laser (regardless of model) built in the last 8 years how do you like it? Any issues with the side mirrors getting smokey when cutting/engraving or does the air on them keep them clean? Have you had to replace any parts or had any downtime?

[Scott Shepherd]

Keith, we've had our ULS for 8 years now, I think. Would I buy another one? Yes, if Trotec stopped making lasers :D In my opinion, they are painfully slow, and the cost to operate is high. We were doing a belt/bearing/rollers replacement kit about once a year at the tune of about $500 per pop. When you don't do it, you see detail quality slipping and mismatches in vector cutting.

The belts on it are about 1/4" wide, where the Trotec's are about 1" wide. To me, that would be like trading in your sports car for a mini van.

I don't know specifically what issues that are driving you there, but I suspect it's the same frustration many of us have, and that's that we have no input to Austria and nothing we suggest ever makes it into any future versions. I've turned in bug reports for more than 3 years and most of them aren't fixed yet.

Universal is a decent company to work with and they have some top notch software people. I just don't think it's even remotely close to being the same quality machine.

Maybe a CO2 galvo would be a better fit for some of your work?

[Gary Hair]

One word - Glowforge! Oh wait, is that two words??? Anyway, that's my advice and I'm sticking with it.

[Paul Phillips]

Hi Keith, I've had my Professional series for almost 6 years now, I wanted a Trotec but they were that much more expensive at the time. I chose my machine after I went to a sign convention in Las Vegas and saw all the machines in action and I was most drawn to the Universals based mostly on the ease of use of the software as well as the price as I was able to get a good deal on one.

I would agree with Steve's opinion though that the belts and bearings need to be replaced too frequently, we do more cutting than engraving though so we replace ours about every two years. On the bright side, any problems I have had, their tech support has been very helpful with diagnosing problems and overnighting parts and or throwing in parts for free when needed. I do wish their website was a bit more user friendly like Epilogs with sample files and FAQs.

FWIW though, they came out with the new XLS series which appears to be the top of the line above the ILS?. They claim it's the fastest but I haven't seen any hard #s on that, I would like to see one in action and see how it compares to the rest. If anyone on here has one maybe they can let us know what the specs are and how they like it? I think my next machine will be a Trotec though.

[Scott Shepherd]

I know this is 3rd hand information, but I had an interesting discussion with someone that knew a lot about the industry and I asked why the ULS machines were so slow in their movement. His response to me was that that's where their patents were. So the things that made their stuff patentable was in that sweet spot where they operate. That's way over my head, and that discussion was a couple of years ago now, so who knows. It did make me think about part of it that I never thought about before, in that some patents might be tied to very specific features/speeds.

My personal thoughts were always that Universal had the horsepower in it's personnel to develop a smoking fast machine. I just never understood why they didn't.

They used to brag about having the lowest cost tube recharging in the business. I think a 45W was like $1,100 or $1,200. Recently, it's been said they that has doubled, meaning that's no longer a good strong selling point.

[Ross Moshinsky]

I would not recommend buying one new. Picking one up used for cheap isn't the worst idea in the world. Generally speaking, the machine's rails, bearings, and belts are way under engineers and the beam quality is satisfactory and that's it. I can tell you my little LS100 is a much better machine.

[Ali Kemp]

I'm a very happy Speedy 400 owner. I have to say between the software and the engineering that went into the machine I think its worth every penny. I come from an engineering product development background and have developed a few gantry systems myself. The detail that goes into the Trotec machines is well worth the money.

At the end of the day though any tool is only as good as its operator, and how well you take care of it =)

[Mark Sipes]

If your talking about a Universal, you must be putting your Trotecs (2) up for sale..... ? I'll be right over........... It's just a dream. get off the curb and quit thinking about jumping into another system/software/parts/settings dilemma..


JMT

.

[Keith Winter]

I don't know specifically what issues that are driving you there, but I suspect it's the same frustration many of us have, and that's that we have no input to Austria and nothing we suggest ever makes it into any future versions. I've turned in bug reports for more than 3 years and most of them aren't fixed yet.

Yes this and the lack of support. Plus I liked some of what I saw on the Universals in regards to cutting. Having had a couple different lasers now including the one Chinese, I can confidently say the Trotec is an engraving champion, but the cutting performance is lacking. Design of the Trotec forces the smoke near and on the lens and the surface of the substrate. The Universal does not appear to suffer from this, they have more suction (2 x 4" ports vs a single 4" and one 2" on the Trotec) and you can divert the air suction more heavily to the bottom which gives you a cleaner cut and less mess on the top of the substrate. This is all theory of course as I don't have a Universal, but examining their downdraft table vs the Trotec's I was very impressed, and I was also impressed with the extra features their software had.

[Keith Winter]

If your talking about a Universal, you must be putting your Trotecs (2) up for sale..... ? I'll be right over........... It's just a dream. get off the curb and quit thinking about jumping into another system/software/parts/settings dilemma..


Haha you're probably right, the Trotecs have had a few issues, but been great machines overall.

I just wish they would just get back on the support train...

Feels like they have only a couple more people in support but 10x the install base they did 3 years ago. Plus the we're never going to send a tech and we're going to send all parts via ground shipping (arrives 5 days later) is killer for a business. When we started they overnighted parts and came up the two times we had issues. Not that way when we had issues last year, it was very hands off and we were left out in the cold for over a month. Then, when my x axis motor went out in January it took them 7 days to ship the part to us, not a good experience.

[David Somers]

Keith, I wonder if the other Trotec owners like Scott have experienced the same issues you are mentioning and how they have dealt with it. Scott is inventive for example and if a feature bugged him and resolving it wouldnt toast his warrantee I am sure he would find a way to fix it. Perhaps he and the other Trotec owners could give you some insights that might help?

[Mike Null]

My first machine was a ULS which performed quite nicely. I liked the software at the time--nearly 20 years ago. But the comments on belts and bearings is right on. The fact is, Trotec is a far more robust machine than ULS or Epilog. I have had no issues with tech support but they are slow to respond to suggestions for improvements to Job Control.

My business requires a lot of rastering and a moderate amount of cutting--nothing complex--so the cutting issue hasn't been a complaint of mine.

[Scott Shepherd]

I uploaded this 4 years ago. I don't see much having changed in the motion speed....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUHY5Km8Ekk

[Neville Stewart]

Yes this and the lack of support. Plus I liked some of what I saw on the Universals in regards to cutting. Having had a couple different lasers now including the one Chinese, I can confidently say the Trotec is an engraving champion, but the cutting performance is lacking. Design of the Trotec forces the smoke near and on the lens and the surface of the substrate. The Universal does not appear to suffer from this, they have more suction (2 x 4" ports vs a single 4" and one 2" on the Trotec) and you can divert the air suction more heavily to the bottom which gives you a cleaner cut and less mess on the top of the substrate. This is all theory of course as I don't have a Universal, but examining their downdraft table vs the Trotec's I was very impressed, and I was also impressed with the extra features their software had.
I don't do a lot of cutting and haven't ever hooked up the additional 2'' hose that ports under the table, would that make a difference in smoke evacuation?

[Paul Phillips]

Wow, Steve, that video says it all, thanks for posting it!

No machine or company is perfect, they all have their strengths and weaknesses but at the end of they day Trotec always seems to rise to the top.

[Scott Shepherd]

What I'm really confused by is Universal's new sales pitch of 210 inches per second engraving by doubling the beam. To me, that sounds like someone bending the truth, but maybe I'm not understanding it right. They are combining two beams into two dots, side by side, and then calling that 210 ips, when, I suspect, they are really moving at 105 ips. If that's their plan or how it works, it would be the same as doubling the beam diameter by using a 4" lens, from a practical standpoint. You aren't actually moving at 210 ips. But your engraving results are "like" you were moving 210 ips.

I'm not sure I'm buying it. I guess I'll have to check it out for myself at a show.

[Keith Winter]

A lot more clunky. Thanks everyone for talking me down off the ledge :)

Out of curiosity if this was engraving on something that took more power, wood for instance. Where I have to run my Trotec at 50% of speed to mark the wood properly, would the Universal roughly run at the same speed as the Trotec with the universal turned up to 100% speed or would it still be slower?



I uploaded this 4 years ago. I don't see much having changed in the motion speed....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUHY5Km8Ekk

[Paul Phillips]

What I'm really confused by is Universal's new sales pitch of 210 inches per second engraving by doubling the beam. To me, that sounds like someone bending the truth, but maybe I'm not understanding it right. They are combining two beams into two dots, side by side, and then calling that 210 ips, when, I suspect, they are really moving at 105 ips. If that's their plan or how it works, it would be the same as doubling the beam diameter by using a 4" lens, from a practical standpoint. You aren't actually moving at 210 ips. But your engraving results are "like" you were moving 210 ips.

I'm not sure I'm buying it. I guess I'll have to check it out for myself at a show.

Steve, I don't think they are trying to use deceptive marketing, but they could be more clear on what they are saying and I believe you have it right based on what I've read, it is traveling at the same old 105 ips but the trick seems to be in the way that they use the two beams, it's not as simple as just firing two beams simultaneously or side by side but seems to be a patented method for varying the pulses in just the right way that they are able to achieve what is effectively double the speed.


A lot more clunky. Thanks everyone for talking me down off the ledge :)

Out of curiosity if this was engraving on something that took more power, wood for instance. Where I have to run my Trotec at 50% of speed to mark the wood properly, would the Universal roughly run at the same speed as the Trotec with the universal turned up to 100% speed or would it still be slower?
Keith, I think in that scenario you would have to have the ULS with twice the power of the Trotec, then you might see a slight increase but not as much as if you were running them at the same speed which is evidenced by Steve's video.

[Lee DeRaud]

I uploaded this 4 years ago. I don't see much having changed in the motion speed...That video vividly demonstrates my only complaint about the ULS software: the guy that wrote the vector optimization algorithm must have been doing some very heavy drugs.

[Kev Williams]

About the 210" per second, I just look at it 'literally', which is, since 2 separate beams are firing in the X path @ 105" in one second, then the total measurable beam path put down in one second IS 210" If the machine held 5 tubes, then we're up to 525" per second. Nothing deceptive IMO... I've tried in vain many times to run long-winded jobs at 300 lines per inch and even 400 only to be disappointed in the results, and this machine will run a quality 500 line per inch job in the same time as if it was running a 250 LPI job-- THAT is a very usable speed enhancement!

As for Universal in general- My first laser was my 1997 (bought in 2001) 25w New Hermes Optima, built by ULS. Yup it was slow, but know this: I've now had experience with 4 very different machines, and both the quality of raster engraving and vector path engraving/cutting was the best of all my machines. (note the vector cutting was better before a driver and firmware change). Where I've been plagued with banding issues engraving large expanses with every other machine, I couldn't make the ULS put down bands if I wanted to. I could literally raster the entire surface of a 12" x 18" piece of cast plex and you'd swear it was bead blasted when it was done. It engraved leather better than my other machines ever have. My ONLY complaint with the machine, aside from the speed, was the beam spot diameter was noticeably larger than my other 2 Synrad machines. But it would still put down fantastic .050" tall lettering on Rowmark. And in the nearly 15 years I owned it, I replaced the X belt twice, the head bearings once, and put in a replacement X stepper and tube, neither of which were necessary. Still have the original stepper...

...And I sold to my BIL! Ever since he took it, I've missed it!

[Paul Phillips]

What would really be awesome is if an actual company Representative where to get on here and actually answer some questions, I don't think they realize how absolutely invaluable it would be (for them) towards creating a positive image and end user respect for their company. I'm not sure what they fear they would have to lose by being open, honest, transparent and supportive to end users by building goodwill, trust and respect!? Just my opinion!

[Dan Hintz]

What I'm really confused by is Universal's new sales pitch of 210 inches per second engraving by doubling the beam. To me, that sounds like someone bending the truth, but maybe I'm not understanding it right. They are combining two beams into two dots, side by side, and then calling that 210 ips, when, I suspect, they are really moving at 105 ips. If that's their plan or how it works, it would be the same as doubling the beam diameter by using a 4" lens, from a practical standpoint. You aren't actually moving at 210 ips. But your engraving results are "like" you were moving 210 ips.

I would want to see what they're actually doing, too, before falling to the marketing.

BUT, I can certainly see a way it could be done that accomplishes the equivalent of doubling the speed... if the two beams are offset in the Y-axis. Every run across the X-axis lays down two stripes of burn. Therefore, every shift of the carriage in the Y-axis is twice as large as it was before. Of course, such a method takes a hit on focused beam quality or requires a motorized/deflected final-lens assembly (which adds a LOT of cost, and in the end will still not be as accurate as running two separate stripes).

If your newspaper delivery truck is only capable of 105mph, the only way to get more papers out is to add more newspaper throwers.

[Scott Shepherd]

I would want to see what they're actually doing, too, before falling to the marketing.

BUT, I can certainly see a way it could be done that accomplishes the equivalent of doubling the speed... if the two beams are offset in the Y-axis. Every run across the X-axis lays down two stripes of burn. Therefore, every shift of the carriage in the Y-axis is twice as large as it was before. Of course, such a method takes a hit on focused beam quality or requires a motorized/deflected final-lens assembly (which adds a LOT of cost, and in the end will still not be as accurate as running two separate stripes).

If your newspaper delivery truck is only capable of 105mph, the only way to get more papers out is to add more newspaper throwers.

That's my point. If you are running at 500 dpi and you do that, then you are essentially engraving 500 dpi at 250 dpi motion. If you put a 4" lens in and sent it over at 250 dpi, then you've come close to doing the same thing, so by adding a 4" lens, can you now say that you're running 210 ips? I don't see it that way.

[Bill George]

It also looks like ULS has got a dual purpose machine, standard CO2 and fiber on a gantry. Looks interesting.

[Keith Outten]

What would really be awesome is if an actual company Representative where to get on here and actually answer some questions, I don't think they realize how absolutely invaluable it would be (for them) towards creating a positive image and end user respect for their company. I'm not sure what they fear they would have to lose by being open, honest, transparent and supportive to end users by building goodwill, trust and respect!? Just my opinion!


Paul,

We don't allow anyone who has a financial interest in any company to participate in any discussion that involves their company. Its unfortunate that it has to be that way but necessary to keep blatant advertising out of our forums. The exception to this rule is SawMill Creek Advertisers, they are allowed to use any of our announcement sub-forums. Even then we can't allow any company representative to make comments about their competitors. The last time this happened we received a subpoena from a lawyer for copies of thousands of threads and posts.

[Keith Winter]

That's my point. If you are running at 500 dpi and you do that, then you are essentially engraving 500 dpi at 250 dpi motion. If you put a 4" lens in and sent it over at 250 dpi, then you've come close to doing the same thing, so by adding a 4" lens, can you now say that you're running 210 ips? I don't see it that way.

I think the difference here is when you use a 4" beam yes it might be wider than a 2", but you are still only 75 watts. According to the Universal brochure I was looking at each beam is powered by a separate 75 watt tube. So you get 75watt per beam path not a divided 75 watt beam. I would love to see one in person, but I didn't see any in person at the last show.

[Scott Shepherd]

I think the difference here is when you use a 4" beam yes it might be wider than a 2", but you are still only 75 watts. According to the Universal brochure I was looking at each beam is powered by a separate 75 watt tube. So you get 75watt per beam path not a divided 75 watt beam.

I still don't get it :) My point is that their motion system probably isn't running at 210 ips. It's probably running at 105 ips, which seems to be where they have been for years. Now, through some clever 2 beam delivery, they are saying that their 105 ips motion system is producing 210 ips results. I still say you'd achieve the same speed increase by putting a 4" lens on and running at 250 dpi.

[Keith Winter]

I still don't get it :) My point is that their motion system probably isn't running at 210 ips. It's probably running at 105 ips, which seems to be where they have been for years. Now, through some clever 2 beam delivery, they are saying that their 105 ips motion system is producing 210 ips results. I still say you'd achieve the same speed increase by putting a 4" lens on and running at 250 dpi.

Technically you are correct of coarse ;), it's still moving at the same speed. However the double wide y-axis powered by two different tubes would on substrates that require more power, such as wood, double your efficiency. In effect doubling your ips, on a practical level but as you said not changing the head moving speed. Sounds pretty amazing but my concern is what happens if the tubes aren't exactly matched in power, or the power lessens on one tube over time. Also, the 2nd laser has to run through something like 6 or 7 mirrors and runs through at least one mirror with a micro motor adjustment. How the heck would you even align that, and how would you keep it in alignment over time is also a concern for me? Being off even a fraction of a millimeter would cause the beam paths to overlap or have a gap, it would have to stay perfect with very little room for error.... Maybe they've figured that out, but I'd love to hear a in the field over 3 years use case.

[Don Corbeil]

Haha you're probably right, the Trotecs have had a few issues, but been great machines overall.

I just wish they would just get back on the support train...

Feels like they have only a couple more people in support but 10x the install base they did 3 years ago. Plus the we're never going to send a tech and we're going to send all parts via ground shipping (arrives 5 days later) is killer for a business. When we started they overnighted parts and came up the two times we had issues. Not that way when we had issues last year, it was very hands off and we were left out in the cold for over a month. Then, when my x axis motor went out in January it took them 7 days to ship the part to us, not a good experience.


I've only owned a trotec speedy 300 for a couple of years. No major issues, which is what I expect from the price of their machines. However, in my (fortunately) limited experience with tech support the quality of service feels somewhat 'uneven'. I've had a few minor issues that I've called for, and sometimes it appears they are too busy to give it much attention. I'm just a sole proprietor and I often wonder if the bigger guys get more attention, because I'm not buying/upgrading more than one machine. Also, I have to add that the experienced folks there who really know the product seem to move out of the phone support role in short order, probably up the ladder I suppose. Somebody who I was working with a 18 monhs ago who was really helpful in teasing out some of the subtleties of my system went away and the new guys are starting from scratch.

[Paul Phillips]

Paul,

We don't allow anyone who has a financial interest in any company to participate in any discussion that involves their company. Its unfortunate that it has to be that way but necessary to keep blatant advertising out of our forums. The exception to this rule is SawMill Creek Advertisers, they are allowed to use any of our announcement sub-forums. Even then we can't allow any company representative to make comments about their competitors. The last time this happened we received a subpoena from a lawyer for copies of thousands of threads and posts.
Keith, thanks for the explanation, that makes sense.


That's my point. If you are running at 500 dpi and you do that, then you are essentially engraving 500 dpi at 250 dpi motion. If you put a 4" lens in and sent it over at 250 dpi, then you've come close to doing the same thing, so by adding a 4" lens, can you now say that you're running 210 ips? I don't see it that way.
Steve, have a look at the website, it explains the process in detail, it takes advantage of the dual laser cartridge set-up and uses them both allowing it to use two separate beams at the same time, and as far as the slow speed goes, they justify that as well. How much of it is marketing hype you'll have to decide but it does bring up and interesting point, at what point does the laser become too fast and starts causing quality issues? Here's a quote-
"Over the past several years, manufacturers have been competing with one another for faster and faster raster speeds. On the surface, this seems like a logical progression – faster raster speed means higher throughput, right? In reality, the situation is much more complex and often neglects the quality repercussions of higher top speeds.

All CO2 lasers are limited by the rate at which pulses can be dispensed. At high raster speeds, CO2 lasers have a difficult time keeping up with the motion leading to laser pulses, which are spread over the x-axis lowering the energy density. This substantially decreases the quality of raster processes by producing an artificial blurring effect."
http://www.ulsinc.com/imgs/features/details/ss_comparepulse.jpg

SuperSpeed allows the laser system to have very high throughput without this blurring effect, resulting in images that can be produced rapidly while maintaining a high degree of quality.

[Dan Hintz]

I still say you'd achieve the same speed increase by putting a 4" lens on and running at 250 dpi.

The possible resolution drops with a 4" lens. Imagine a 4 dots in a square. Either one laser makes all four dots, one at a time, or two lasers makes two dots at a time. Jumping to a long FL lens means those four dots are now much bigger and kinda mush into one, lowering resolution... not good for the overall product if detail is what you're after.

I recall some mention elsewhere of a high speed motor... probably some piezo-type that wiggles the final beam back and forth. That aligns with what I was talking about earlier... but as that speed goes up, you start to run into the issue shown by Paul's pictures (one of the other issues I briefly mentioned).

It would just be really nice if we had some more detail on how the system actually accomplishes the job so we can put this one to bed without guessing.

[Scott Shepherd]

The possible resolution drops with a 4" lens. Imagine a 4 dots in a square. Either one laser makes all four dots, one at a time, or two lasers makes two dots at a time. Jumping to a long FL lens means those four dots are now much bigger and kinda mush into one, lowering resolution... not good for the overall product if detail is what you're after.

I recall some mention elsewhere of a high speed motor... probably some piezo-type that wiggles the final beam back and forth. That aligns with what I was talking about earlier... but as that speed goes up, you start to run into the issue shown by Paul's pictures (one of the other issues I briefly mentioned).

It would just be really nice if we had some more detail on how the system actually accomplishes the job so we can put this one to bed without guessing.

Yeah, I get that you lose the smaller dot, I was only using that as an example of being able to suddenly, with a larger dot, say "We engrave twice as fast".

[Paul Phillips]

It would just be really nice if we had some more detail on how the system actually accomplishes the job so we can put this one to bed without guessing.
Dan, from the website-
SuperSpeed - How It Works
When a laser platform is equipped with two CO2 lasers of the same power, the combining optics result in one S-polarized beam and the other P-polarized. The SuperSpeed attachment uses this difference in polarization to independently control the focusing location of each laser. This is accomplished by placing an optical system containing a Thin Film Polarizer (TFP) in the beam path. The TFP allows the P-polarized laser to pass through transparently, while reflecting the S-polarized beam. A precision actuator is attached to a mechanical linkage, which controls the angle between the two beams. The focusing optics in the carriage focuses each of these beams to a slightly different location within the processing field.
http://www.ulsinc.com/imgs/features/details/ss_2.jpg
In raster mode, the carriage is moved bi-directionally along the x-axis while the laser is modulated to mark and engrave on the material. Typical systems focus the laser energy to a single point, causing the material to be processed one line at a time. This is also true for single beam systems that use multiple lasers – all of the laser’s energy is limited to focusing on a single point. The SuperSpeed module overcomes this limitation by producing two focal spots – one for each laser beam. This means that the system can deliver two raster lines at a time, dramatically improving system productivity.

[Don Corbeil]

Here's my latest experience with trotec tech support. This morning I had a lull in some projects so I decided to update both job control and firmware for my speedy 300. Went to ftp site, downloaded both files. Updated job control, no problem. Firmware, I call the tech support and ask them to give some good instructions on how to update. He sends me an email that basically says open up hood, turn on, then update. So, wanting to be very precise in this, I ask for explicit instructions, just step by step please. He writes back and says if you read the message it says how to do it. I go back over message, and there isn't much there. So I open hood, turn on machine, go to update firmware, and attempt to do so. Failure. OK, so it doesn't take, and I can see that the firmware is still the old version. I call tech support back, and tell him what happened. He logs into my PC remotely and walks through the steps. It looks like it's gonna go, and then he says to shut machine off. I do, and then restart. I get the dreaded 'failure to update firmware' message. Now, when we turn on my 300, there's nothing, no lights, no connection whatsoever to the machine. It's dead. So he trys a bunch of stuff remotely, which does nothing. He then tells me I'm going to have to have a new CPU put into the 300. Wow, great. I've got work that's in the hopper and my machine is dead in the water. He makes a subtle suggestion that it may have been my fault that my first attempt to update didn't work. I tell him that the machine was still working and talking to my job control after that first attempt, and it was only when he asked me to shut it down (apparently) prematurely that the problem started. Besides, I say, I did ask for very specific instructions on a step by step basis to update, which they never gave me. So now I'm dead in the water, and waiting for an overnight delivery of a new CPU which I have to replace myself. This better work. I'm not happy on the level of communication that they initially offered, even after I asked for specifics. Like I mentioned in my previous post, sometimes their support just seems a little hurried and sloppy when you ask for help. The tech worked hard to get it up and going after the problem occurred, but in my mind this all could have been avoided. Not happy at the moment. My 300 is still under warranty, so that's good, but even if it wasn't they need to make this right. Keeping my fingers crossed that the new CPU will work, and it's not too much trouble to replace. Not real happy at the moment :mad:

[Bert Kemp]

Yea I would be pretty upset also.:mad: Sure would make me think again about buying a trotec. At the prices they charge their support should be top notch.

[Keith Winter]

Hi hope they get it resolved for you Don. Agreed, they currently seem to not have enough techs for their growing install base.


Here's my latest experience with trotec tech support. This morning I had a lull in some projects so I decided to update both job control and firmware for my speedy 300. Went to ftp site, downloaded both files. Updated job control, no problem. Firmware, I call the tech support and ask them to give some good instructions on how to update. He sends me an email that basically says open up hood, turn on, then update. So, wanting to be very precise in this, I ask for explicit instructions, just step by step please. He writes back and says if you read the message it says how to do it. I go back over message, and there isn't much there. So I open hood, turn on machine, go to update firmware, and attempt to do so. Failure. OK, so it doesn't take, and I can see that the firmware is still the old version. I call tech support back, and tell him what happened. He logs into my PC remotely and walks through the steps. It looks like it's gonna go, and then he says to shut machine off. I do, and then restart. I get the dreaded 'failure to update firmware' message. Now, when we turn on my 300, there's nothing, no lights, no connection whatsoever to the machine. It's dead. So he trys a bunch of stuff remotely, which does nothing. He then tells me I'm going to have to have a new CPU put into the 300. Wow, great. I've got work that's in the hopper and my machine is dead in the water. He makes a subtle suggestion that it may have been my fault that my first attempt to update didn't work. I tell him that the machine was still working and talking to my job control after that first attempt, and it was only when he asked me to shut it down (apparently) prematurely that the problem started. Besides, I say, I did ask for very specific instructions on a step by step basis to update, which they never gave me. So now I'm dead in the water, and waiting for an overnight delivery of a new CPU which I have to replace myself. This better work. I'm not happy on the level of communication that they initially offered, even after I asked for specifics. Like I mentioned in my previous post, sometimes their support just seems a little hurried and sloppy when you ask for help. The tech worked hard to get it up and going after the problem occurred, but in my mind this all could have been avoided. Not happy at the moment. My 300 is still under warranty, so that's good, but even if it wasn't they need to make this right. Keeping my fingers crossed that the new CPU will work, and it's not too much trouble to replace. Not real happy at the moment :mad:

[Don Corbeil]

Yea I would be pretty upset also.:mad: Sure would make me think again about buying a trotec. At the prices they charge their support should be top notch.

And to add insult to injury, even though it happened under the tech's control (remote assistance), he just sent me a followup email that said they want to bill me for the cost of expedited shipping the new CPU! I immediately called them back, couldn't get a hold of the tech who sent it to me (naturally). So I asked to speak to the head of operations at trotec, and told her the story. She was very apologetic and said NO way should I be expected to pay for a fix to a problem I did not create. She also told me that there is a specific instruction sheet that should have been sent to me to go over the step by step instructions on how to do the firmware update. As I mentioned, techs never sent that to me. If it wasn't for how she handled my complaint, and her willingness to followup thoroughly with me, I'd be going ballistic right now.

[Scott Shepherd]

So I asked to speak to the head of operations at trotec, and told her the story. She was very apologetic and said NO way should I be expected to pay for a fix to a problem I did not create. She also told me that there is a specific instruction sheet that should have been sent to me to go over the step by step instructions on how to do the firmware update. As I mentioned, techs never sent that to me. If it wasn't for how she handled my complaint, and her willingness to followup thoroughly with me, I'd be going ballistic right now.

I'm assuming that was Amie? Amie's the best. She's been there for a long time, cut her teeth on technical problems and knows how to take care of customers. She used to be really involved in day to day issues with customers. Now, she's been promoted and isn't as easy to get to as she used to be.

I miss Amie :( She's not only one of the best Trotec has, she's one of the best in the industry.

[Keith Winter]

Yes sounds like Amie, she's very good. There are a couple others that are great as well there.


I'm assuming that was Amie? Amie's the best. She's been there for a long time, cut her teeth on technical problems and knows how to take care of customers. She used to be really involved in day to day issues with customers. Now, she's been promoted and isn't as easy to get to as she used to be.

I miss Amie :( She's not only one of the best Trotec has, she's one of the best in the industry.

[Don Corbeil]

Yes, it was Amie, and she does know how to treat customers!
I am so thankful I reached her, as I didn't know who to talk to there after the last message from the tech. I actually feel like this will get resolved now.

[Mike Null]

Trotec has been very lucky to have Amie on their staff. She has more engraving experience than any of them, including experience with rotary machines and Newing Hall before she started in the early days with Trotec. In my view, she's the primary reason Trotec has grown so rapidly in the U.S. She has a customer focus unlike anybody I know.

[Dan Hintz]

Dan, from the website-
SuperSpeed - How It Works

Looks like they're using a special final optic to handle the two polarizations... definitely better than trying to twiddle the final optic mechanically, but it also means the final optic is not the same as most others have on their machines (i.e., it'll be more expensive). Anyone out there confirm the final optic is specially coated and I'm not missing something else in the description?

[Don Corbeil]

Replaced my speedy 300 CPU, and my machine is up and running again :)
Trotec Tech gave me his personal number (they were off today) and walked me through it. Relieved that experience is over.