Thank you Brian

JaMi

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Guralnick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Speaking of Protel Bugs.


> 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
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to