They are safe. It's just that it is still possible to recreate the temporary
mouse lockup when panning over a blank area of a
PCB, or off the edge. The NVIDIA card seem least vulnerable, though, I will not say
that it's impossible.
Again, I'm investing a lot in a new Protel / PC setup, & I do not want to chance a
down-grade from what I am using right now. I
have no time to play swapping video card with different mice & changing drivers. The
whole idea of the new system is to prevent
such a waste of time.
____________
Brian Guralnick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice (514) 624-4003
Fax (514) 624-3631
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Ingle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 6:47 PM
Subject: [PEDA] Matrox = bad ??? g550 ??
> I must have missed the thread on the new Matrox Para.... card. Did look
> at it briefly, after I upgraded to my current system (dual 2ghz athalon,
> matrox g550 1g ddr) Works great so far, but I have only briefly perused
> old designs in Protel right now I am heavy into the embedded Linux and FPGA
> code that go with this project. Anyway is there a proble I should concern
> myself with re the g550? To date I have had the understanding that Matrox
> cards and drivers were the SAFE way to go with PROTEL. And to date my
> g200 and older Matrox Mellenium have performed well when other cards at
> work haven't.
>
> Mike
>
>
> On 2002.07.24 14:17 Brian Guralnick wrote:
> > Here is my take on the situation:
> >
> > If, every mouse & video card combination I have used to date
> > auto-scrolls & manipulates any other software's windows fine
> > without bugs & clunking, WHY should there be a special case for Protel
> > where bugs should be acceptable when you happen to own not
> > the correct combination of hardware?
> >
> > The only way I would NOT consider this a bug, is if, and only if,
> > Protel / Altium made clear print on their hardware system
> > requirements that you should never use ATI, or Matrox video cards, with
> > these specific mice, or, mention that the auto-pan may
> > malfunction under these circumstances.
> >
> > When purchasing such an expensive product & an expensive professional
> > PC, I would consider this auto-pan issue fundamental,
> > since when using Protel, I plan to design some PCBs. If it were not for
> > this group, "Protel EDA Forum", my new development PC would
> > might have had the new Matrox Parhelia only to find out that this 600$
> > card would turn out to be a lemon with Protel. I can't even
> > chance getting a professional work-station grade NVIDIA card. For all I
> > know, slight differences in it's GPU code might lock up the
> > auto-pan as well. Sad to say, I'm going to use a cheap GF4MX. The same
> > card which is in my current system. It's the only way I
> > could be certain that a 2.5GHz system will not run more sluggishly than
> > my current 1.0GHz system. This is the main reason why I
> > will not upgrade to ATS. If Altium/Protel can not hire a single coder
> > who has good experience debugging, or correcting odd windows
> > glitches where 99% of existing other software has no issues with the same
> > hardware, I can not in confidence dish out more money to
> > get the next software which probably has the same, & perhaps new draw
> > backs.
> >
> > ____________
> > Brian Guralnick
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Voice (514) 624-4003
> > Fax (514) 624-3631
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 4:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Speaking of Protel Bugs.
> >
> >
> > > I'm tired of talking to you about this. I understand it's a problem for
> > you
> > > and it's terrible that's it causing you so much grief. But as easily as
> > you
> > > say "IT IS PROTEL'S FAULT AND IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO FIX THE
> > BUG!!!!"
> > > why can't you seem to grasp your own words when you tell us changing
> > your
> > > mouse fixes the problem?
> > >
> > > Don't you think this sentence could be true: "IT IS MICROSOFT'S MOUSE
> > DRIVER
> > > FAULT AND IT IS THEIR(MS) RESPONSIBILITY TO FIX THE BUG!!!!"
> > >
> > > Microsoft Mouse = Bug
> > > Logitech Mouse != Bug
> > > MS Mouse on Jami's system = Bug
> > > MS Mouse on Tony's system != Bug
> > >
> > > You admit that PROTEL WORKS with a Logitech mouse.
> > > You hear from me that PROTEL WORKS with a Microsoft Mouse (on MY
> > system)
> > >
> > > Why do you insist it's Protel's fault? Maybe they could be generous and
> > find
> > > a 'workaround' for your screwed up mouse, but I certainly don't blame
> > them
> > > for it.
> > >
> > > I'm done!
> > >
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 12:58 PM
> > > > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > > > Cc: JaMi Smith
> > > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Speaking of Protel Bugs.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >
> > > > snip
> > > >
> > > > > > The real issue is that statements like:
> > > > > > > No it's not unstable. (Not for me at least) That is exactly
> > > > > > what I'm using
> > > > > > > for a mouse.
> > > > > > > I'm using whatever driver that came with Win2000.
> > > > > > gloss over the problem. The operative phrase is "(Not for me at
> > > > > > least)", and
> > > > > > that is a primary indication that could in fact be a Protel
> > > > > > problem, simply
> > > > > > by virtue of the fact that it is so inconsistant. (In
> > > > reality, the very
> > > > > > nature of the problem itself points the finger at Protel).
> > > > >
> > > > > What!? You have examples of people that use the MS wheel mouse just
> > fine
> > > > > with P99SE.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is exactly what I was responding to here - someone saying that
> > they
> > > > were using a Microsoft Wheel Mouse and the software delivered with
> > Windowa
> > > > 2000 (which is Intellimouse), and he was saying that it worked just
> > fine.
> > > > Ask him.
> > > >
> > > > > Next, you state you GOT RID of your MS mouse and purchased a
> > Logitech
> > > > mouse
> > > > > and all your problems went away and you STILL blame Protel?
> > > > Man, I do not
> > > > > understand your thinking...
> > > > > It could be a Dell problem, who knows. Yeah it could be
> > > > Protel's problem,
> > > > > but the evidence would point in many other places.
> > > > > (I bet you think OJ didn't do it either.)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > You are correct!
> > > >
> > > > Protel crashed regulary with the Microsoft wheel mouse and Microsoft
> > > > Intellimouse software that was delivered with the Microsoft Windows
> > 2000
> > > > Professional Operating System on a brand new Dell Deminsion 4100.
> > Protel
> > > > lost the Keboard Shortcuts instantly after touching the "wheel" every
> > time
> > > > Protel was run. By this I mean that when you ran Protel, the keyboard
> > > > shortcuts operated perfectly right up to the instant that you rotated
> > the
> > > > wheel 1 click. This identical behavior caused identical crashes on 3
> > > > identical Dell Dimension 4100 machines.
> > > >
> > > > I corrected the bug which caused the crashes and the loss of the
> > Keyboard
> > > > Shortcuts by installing a Logitech wheel mouse and Logitech Mouseware
> > > > software.
> > > >
> > > > Protel 99 SE with SP 6 would not operate without crashing on a brand
> > new
> > > > unmodified out of the box system from a major computer manufacturer.
> > > >
> > > > This is a known problem which has been in the "knowledge base" ever
> > since
> > > > Protel 98.
> > > >
> > > > This is why I call it a BUG.
> > > >
> > > > What about this do you not understand?
> > > >
> > > > Of course he did it. Everybody knows he did it including the jury.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would almost be willing to bet that if all of the Logitech
> > > > > > Mouse users out
> > > > > > there were to reinstall their operating systems fresh and not
> > > > reinstall
> > > > > > their "Mouseware", and scrounged another mouse with a wheel for a
> > > > > > test (did
> > > > > > not use the Logitech mouse) that 50% of them would find out that
> > they
> > > > have
> > > > > > the problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to see that. If protel could get a grip on the problem
> > > > maybe they
> > > > > could fix it.
> > > >
> > > > Why do you think I have been screeming and yelling about it!
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > How about a poll?? EVERYONE ON THIS LIST THAT HAS THIS PROBLEM
> > SHOULD
> > > > EMAIL
> > > > > THE LIST SO 'WE' CAN COUNT THEM.
> > > >
> > > > What!
> > > >
> > > > If only 10 people have the Bug it's not a Bug?
> > > >
> > > > There have been ample complaints directly to Protel to establist to
> > Protel
> > > > that it is a Bug! This is why it has been in Protel's own
> > > > Knowledge Base for
> > > > so long.
> > > >
> > > > PROTEL KNOWS IT'S A BUG!
> > > >
> > > > THATS WHY I'M BITCHING SO MUCH!
> > > >
> > > > PROTEL KNOWS IT'S A BUG!
> > > >
> > > > PROTEL HAS KNOWN THAT THIS IS A BUG EVER SINCE PROTEL 98!
> > > >
> > > > PROTEL KNOWS IT'S A BUG!
> > > >
> > > > PROTEL EITHER WON'T FIX IT, OR CAN'T FIX IT!
> > > >
> > > > IF THEY WONT FIX IT, I BELIEVE THAT ALL OF THEIR CUSTOMERS AND
> > > > POTENTIAL NEW
> > > > CUSTOMERS NEED TO KNOW THAT THEY WON'T FIX IT. I BELIEVE THAT
> > > > THIS POSITION
> > > > IS UNACCEPTABLE.
> > > >
> > > > IF THEY CAN'T FIX IT, I QUESTION THEIR COMPETANCE AS PROGRAMMERS, AND
> > THAT
> > > > IS WHY I BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOUD SEEK ASSISTANCE FROM MICROSOFT.
> > > >
> > > > I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND THE
> > > > PROBLEM AND HAVE
> > > > CHOSEN TO IGNORE IT AND HOPE THAT IT WILL GO AWAY. I FOR ONE WILL
> > > > NOT LET IT
> > > > GO AWAY
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I did a design on an audio card that worked in all PCI
> > > > Macintosh computers
> > > > > except for this one guy. We wanted to be pro-active and try and
> > > > solve the
> > > > > problem just in case it was the 'tip of the iceberg' sort of thing.
> > The
> > > > > customer agreed to ship his computer to us for evaluation and
> > > > we could NOT
> > > > > figure it out in a reasonable time ( under 1 week) We purchased
> > another
> > > > > similarly configured system and it worked on that one.
> > > > >
> > > > > We probably could have found it with enough time, but it wasn't
> > > > worth the
> > > > > thousands of dollars the company was burning on it so we returned
> > the
> > > > > computer and issues the guy a full refund and some brownie points.
> > > > > The problem YOU have may be hard for Protel to reproduce, period.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not even comparable - This has been reported directly to Protel by
> > enough
> > > > different people that it has been in their Knowledge Base for
> > > > years, not to
> > > > mention the occurances reported in this forum.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > While companies such as Microsoft do there best to see that
> > > > > > different pieces
> > > > > > of hardware from different suppliers all work the same in their
> > > > Operating
> > > > > > Systems, we all know that the simple truth of the matter is that
> > > > > > they don't.
> > > > > > Part of this is Microsoft, and part of this is the different
> > > > manufacturers
> > > > > > who write the different drivers for their own products.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree, but then again, look how many bugs are in MS code?
> > > > TONS. Yes it's
> > > > a
> > > > > lot of code, but if you track driver updates, service packs,
> > > > etc, you get
> > > > > the idea of how many problems are lurking.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is why they (Protel) need to join the Microsoft System
> > Development
> > > > Network, to be able to keep on top of the problems and get help from
> > > > Microsoft.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I could accept some of the Microsoft Bashing and pointing the
> > blame
> > > > > > elsewhere if in fact Protel / Altium would specify a "Golden
> > > > System" (a
> > > > > > specific brand of hardware in a specific configuration) that
> > > > > > their software
> > > > > > was guarenteed to work perfectly with, but they haven't and
> > apparently
> > > > > > won't. I therefore maintain that Protel / Altium is responsible
> > for
> > > > making
> > > > > > sure that there software will work properly with any relativey
> > > > > > new "generic"
> > > > > > hardware running "generic" installations of the Operating Systems
> > > > software
> > > > > > they "claim" Protel will "run on" (Windows 95, 98, 2000, and
> > > > NT), using
> > > > > > "generic" periferials (any somewhat "standard" mouse (as in
> > > > Microsoft),
> > > > or
> > > > > > printer (as in HP)). We all demand this this for any other
> > > > > > software we buy,
> > > > > > why not Protel.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wasn't MS bashing; I was saying it's not cut and dry Protel's
> > fault.
> > > >
> > > > Errrrgh!!! So Maybe it is the falt of the original programmer who
> > Protel
> > > > hired to do the code - Sheeeesh!!! IT IS PROTEL'S FAULT AND IT IS
> > THEIR
> > > > RESPONSIBILITY TO FIX THE BUG!!!!!!!!!!
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I completely agree!!! They should specify 1 or more systems
> > > > that would be
> > > > > 'perfect' for 99SE.
> > > > > Shit, we spend $8000 on s/w, who cares what a system costs if it
> > works
> > > > > reliably.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > snip
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >2. ) I am also betting that the anti-intuitave panning is
> > > > > > still there
> > > > > > snip
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I disagree completely. PADS PowerPCB does it the way you
> > request and
> > > > it
> > > > > > > sucks. I keep having to find the area of interest because it
> > jumped
> > > > > > > somewhere on my screen. Yes, it's more or less in the center,
> > > > > > but my eyes
> > > > > > > weren't in the center before the jump so I have to focus in on
> > it.
> > > > That
> > > > > > > isn't natural.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I like the way Protel did it. It keeps the item in my original
> > > > > > focus still
> > > > > > > in focus after the zoom operation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Funny that you mention your eyes and "original focus".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In reality, you have to completely "re-focus" on the "new
> > > > image" after a
> > > > > > zoom in or out irregardless of where the cursor is. Sorry, I wont
> > buy
> > > > this
> > > > > > one.
> > > > >
> > > > > No I don't have to "re-focus." When I'm looking at something,
> > > > somewhere on
> > > > > my screen, I put the cursor THERE and press PageUP. Guess what?
> > > > It zoomed
> > > > in
> > > > > exactly where my eyes were positioned, and I do not have to refocus
> > or
> > > > hunt
> > > > > for position. BTW, there is no such word as irregardless. It is
> > > > > "regardless."
> > > > >
> > > > Alright - I'm brain dead - I ment irrespective and wrote irregardless
> > -
> > > >
> > > > I think we are all using the wrong term here when we say
> > > > "re-focus" because
> > > > we don't actually have to "re-focus" in any of the scenearios
> > > > that have been
> > > > mentioned here in this thread. I believe that it would be more
> > correct to
> > > > say that we have to "re-aquire" or "re-visualize" the new image.
> > > > I will say
> > > > more on this is another response to another parallel post.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Most people "look around" at different points of an image such as
> > that
> > > > > > presented by the Protel display screen. and in fact usually zoom
> > in or
> > > > out
> > > > > > so that they can observe either more of a certain portion of that
> > > > > > image, or
> > > > > > view a certain portion closer and in more detail.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Forgive me. I believe your arguement is simply not realistic.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that your only valid arguement would be personal
> > > > preferences.
> > > > > > Personal preferences will vary from user to user. Personal
> > > > > > preferences will
> > > > > > also sometimes change within as short a time as a few days or
> > > > > > weeks when the
> > > > > > same user gets a new toy to play with, such as a new version of
> > the
> > > > same
> > > > > > software that might implement something differently. All said
> > > > and done,
> > > > > > Protel is still the odd man out in the industry.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why? I am beginning to boil it down to either one of two
> > posibilities.
> > > > > > Protel software programmers and developers either don't know what
> > the
> > > > rest
> > > > > > of the world has been doing for the past 25 years, or they
> > > > simply "don't
> > > > > > care" and are going to do it their way anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > And (I hate this phrase) 'thinking outside the box' is a bad thing?
> > We
> > > > > wouldn't have many features in P99 if Protel software programmers
> > and
> > > > > developers did it like "the rest of the world."
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No one has said thinking outside the box or doing things differently
> > is a
> > > > bad thing.
> > > >
> > > > I am a fairly creative individual and have a patent and some
> > published
> > > > articles to prove it. I certainly am not against progress or looking
> > for a
> > > > better way to do things.
> > > >
> > > > Just because something is new or different does not make it good
> > > > or better.
> > > >
> > > > Some things are done in certain ways because they happen to work.
> > > >
> > > > Some things are done in certain ways because they happen to
> > > > always have been
> > > > done that way. This is not necessarily good, but it is not
> > necessarily bad
> > > > either.
> > > >
> > > > Some things are just screwed up, plain and simple.
> > > >
> > > > Not liking something because it is different is not the same as
> > resisting
> > > > change.
> > > >
> > > > Not liking something that is different and also screwed up
> > > > usually has more
> > > > to do with the fact that it is screwed up rather than because it it
> > > > different.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > snip
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Use the home key...it's 1 cm away from the page up key. I
> > > > would think
> > > > by
> > > > > > now
> > > > > > > you could find it without looking for it. If you dont like
> > that,
> > > > > > > right-mouse-button drag the screen.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why do I have to hit one more key?
> > > > >
> > > > > Why do I have to look around the screen needlessly?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As stated above - you have to "re-aquire" anyway, no matter what.
> > > > why do you
> > > > have to do any more than that (such as hitting another key). See
> > parallel
> > > > post.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I am not as keyboard proficient as many other people out
> > > > there are, and
> > > > I
> > > > > > usually have to "look" at the keyboard to find the Home key
> > (which is
> > > > > > actually almost 4 cm away (center to centrer)), and then "look"
> > > > > > again to put
> > > > > > my fingers back on the PgUp and PgDn keys to continue zooming
> > > > in or out.
> > > > >
> > > > > The MS Natural keyboard has them right near each other. The END key
> > is
> > > > right
> > > > > there too for quick redraws.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Like I said - call me stupid - I have to look at the keyboard.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thats the problem! Talk about loosing your "original focus" and
> > > > > > then having
> > > > > > to re-aquire it again! I believe your arguement regarding keeping
> > > > > > things "in
> > > > > > focus" (as it were) actually works in favor of having the zoomed
> > image
> > > > > > "center" about the cursor after a zoom, just like the rest of the
> > > > > > world does
> > > > > > it, rather than looking for and pressing another key.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't need to look away to press the keys.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Like I said - call me stupid - I have to look at the keyboard - and
> > then I
> > > > have to look back at the screen and "re-aquire" the image - and that
> > is a
> > > > waste of my time - that slows me down.
> > > >
> > > > JaMi Smith
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ************************************************************************
> > > > * Tracking #: D0EF54A748B8D249B151A073040D1E101FA31BA4
> > > > *
> > > > ************************************************************************
> > > >
> > > >
> >
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
