Hi Harry, I have been complaining ever since 98SE. Trouble is you get seduced by the silky touch you get with DXP and its really hard to switch. For instance, using Orcad is like getting into a bed full of cold porridge after using Protel or DXP, and just as buggy. I am seriously thinking of going to Tsien. They lease their product for around £400 pa, which is dirt cheap compared to Altium, and they work on the bugs (or you don't renew the lease). Again, its not as silky as DXP but, long ago, I used their Boardmaker app under DOS and it was absolutely bullet proof.
Robert -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Harland Sent: 24 January 2008 07:31 To: peda@techservinc.com Subject: Re: [PEDA] Schematic - Dashed Lines. So it is not really a bug, because a menu choice had been provided that didn't work. Oh well, so that's all right then. And even though that menu choice doesn't work, it is actually still possible to create dashed lines by pasting short line segments, as and how required. That's really fantastic too; where would everyone be without the provision of such advice to help them out? But just in case anyone has a "tin ear", I do NOT think that defects like that are "all right then" at all. I'm not unduly bothered about that defect in particular, but it is still all-too-typical of what Altium has been shipping to its customers since the days when God was still in diapers. I honestly can't and don't understand why there aren't far more complaints about how buggy Altium's software is. However, as far as I am concerned, anyone who doesn't see fit to complain about the defects in their applications, but who is prepared to publicly defend them, is an accessory to the provision of crappy software, and is thus part of the problem. It is public knowledge that many people are unhappy about Microsoft. I'm not trying to start any flame war on that matter, and/or which type of OS (Windows, Linux, or others) that people should install on their PCs, but at least MS continues to provide service packs and patches for earlier versions of Windows for quite some time after releasing following versions. (They aren't still supporting NT 4.0, but they still did so for some time after releasing following versions, and AFAIK, they are still, for at least the time being, continuing to support Windows 2000.) OTOH, each time Altium releases another major version, they stop releasing SPs for the previous major version. It would be one thing to not continue releasing SPs for the previous version if the last SP released for that version resulted in it being totally bug-free. However, not only has that never been the case, but the final versions of each major version still contain *serious* defects, such as those involving output (e.g. Gerber files and printouts). I don't believe for one minute that Altium are at all likely to ever release a SP5 for AD2004 (or a SP3 for DXP, or a SP7 for Protel 99SE, or a SP4 for Protel 98 ...). However, given that other companies have issued "product recalls" on various occasions and for various reasons, I still don't understand why Altium's customers tolerate that. And to make matters even worse, there is nothing atypical about outstanding defects continuing to remain unrectified within following major versions. So not only are customers not getting serious defects rectified "for free", but many are paying good money to upgrade to the next major version, ... and *still* not getting many serious defects rectified. I don't want to see the software industry subjected to higher levels of regulation than is currently the case, as it is unlikely that there would be a beneficial impact as far as prices or ongoing innovation are concerned. But software of the quality released by Altium still increases the likelihood of such an outcome occurring. I have already said what I think of anyone who doesn't see fit to complain about the defects, but who is prepared to publicly defend them. In the case of this defect, shortcomings of the GDI could be regarded as a complicating factor, but it is still not an excuse for failing to provide some type of "workaround" of a satisfactory manner, or otherwise appropriately modifying the user interface to prevent giving users the impression that certain functionality is available when that is actually not the case. Regards, Geoff. Harry Selfridge wrote: > Hi Brad, > > This is an old issue that is well known. It's not really a bug, but > a result of how the dotted and dashed lines were produced. In > Protel99SE graphical lines were drawn using the Windows Graphics > Device Interface (GDI), and the Windows GDI does not support the > width property. The bug was allowing a menu choice that didn't work. > > You can manually create dashed lines of any width by drawing a short > solid line with the desired width, then use copy and paste, or paste > it multiple times using Paste Array. > > Regards - Harry > > At 11:43 AM 1/7/2008, you wrote: > >The schematic line tool displays dashed (and dotted) lines with the > >line width of smallest no matter what it is set to. > > > >If you change the line back to solid then the line width gets set to > >the correct value. > > > >Is this a known bug? > > > >Protel99SE SP6. > > > >Tx Brad. Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail ____________________________________________________________ You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum To Post messages: mailto:PEDA@techservinc.com Unsubscribe and Other Options: http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): http://www.mail-archive.com/peda@techservinc.com ____________________________________________________________ You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum To Post messages: mailto:PEDA@techservinc.com Unsubscribe and Other Options: http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): http://www.mail-archive.com/peda@techservinc.com
