At 02:49 PM 7/31/2002 -0400, Darryl Newberry wrote: >BTW, anybody going to join Altium's DXP list?
I have. > I bet the real reason they are >creating their own list is so THEY can filter and control the distribution. I highly doubt it. Gad, what a paranoid view of the world! The yahoogroups DXP list is open subscription, though they could change that at any time -- and they might, to avoid the autosubscribing spammers, not to prevent legitimate users from subscribing. If Protel used their position as owner of the list to prevent legitimate discussion, they would not be able to keep it secret because of this list and the other yahoogroups lists, it would be next to suicidal, really stupid, and they aren't stupid at all, not to mention *that* stupid. No, they simply responded to a user suggestion that a separate list be formed to deal with a more narrow topic that could otherwise overwhelm this list. I've done that kind of thing in the past and also met with some hostility, though the consensus has been, I think, supportive. I've written many times that I'd see this list as improved if it were to fracture into many lists, each one more focused, but with the provision that, ordinarly, subscribing to a main list automatically subscribed one to the subsidiary lists. I.e., opt-in for the main list, then opt-out for special topic lists. Those who were generally interested in Protel and wanted to read everything would get everything, i.e., it would be, pretty much, as things were when there was only the one Techserv Forum. Those who needed to cut down their mail intake could unsubscribe from the more specialized lists while still being able to get mail on the topics which interested them particularly (for most of us this might be a main user mutual tech-support list, which is the main function of the Techserv list at this time.) The Protel Users Association has a family of lists on yahoogroups, including a list used to make decisions as an association. The Association is not likely to start up a special list in competition with an existing list unless the existing list is being managed abusively. In other words, if enough of us agreed that the Protel-owned DXP list was unjusly censoring posts, we'd simply start our own, or we would simply ignore the Protel list and discuss DXP here, until or unless Techserv decides to shut that down. (Techserv is a private company, a service bureau, and is *not* controlled by Protel users, per se. But mostly they keep their hands off the list.) >I prefer to bitch here in a public forum where the world can read about it. That strategy works for some people, or, more accurately, it worked once or a few times, so the person continues to repeat it, i.e., attempts to get better service or products by excoriating the company that provides it or them, and does not notice how rarely it works. More often, it is tilting at windmills which, by and large, tend to ignore all the shouting and continue to turn according to their own ideas. Complaining about Protel software in a public forum can be useful where a consensus develops among users as a result; where such a consensus has been developed and, particularly if it is formally expressed, we have seen Altium staff to be very, very responsive. It is not necessary as part of this process to consider them evil conspirators or incompetent boobs who are ruining the life of all us innocent people by inflicting junk software on us. It is not necessary for us to imply that their work product is junk or trash. If it were junk or trash, we wouldn't be using it! If someone really thinks that there is a better product *for the money*, I, for one, would like to know about it. However, mere "bitching" rarely results in such an expressed consensus, since bitching does little more than relieve some emotional pressure on the part of the complainer, thus there is *less* energy available for the work of actually facilitating change. As to Cadence, Cadence definitely monitors this list, though that does not mean that they necessarily use addresses here to promote their products. If they did, it would be a violation of list rules as they stand, though it would *not* be, in my opinion, spam. Spam is by definition, not targeted to an audience reasonably likely to have an interest in the product. Personally, if Cadence has offers, I'd like to receive them, though I would caution Protel users that (1) Cadence has a tendency to understate the true cost of ownership of the software in its promotions. For example, they advertised Allegro Studio at $10K at one point, I was seriously considering it. I did not find out until later that the price did not include maintenance, *and the purchase of a year's maintenance was obligatory, part of the deal, and it was $5K.* They've changed, I think, some of the policies, so this is just a head's up. (2) Cadence is not an open design system, and those of us who are used to Protel might find it a tad cumbersome. But, in this case, I'd talk to people who are familiar with both systems; I'll only add that I was fairly recently considered for a position at a major CAD service bureau that used only Cadence Allegro. And the major negative was that they estimated it would take me quite a few months to get up to speed. (3) The DXP router was supposed to be a Specctra killer. I don't know if they have accomplished that, I haven't tested the router. But that is the direction the Altium wants to take the software and it explains, to some extent, the price increases. Personally, I prefer to see the DXP discussion move to a separate list, and I see no reason not to use the one which Mr. Loughhead set up. I find it crucial that the main user list be user controlled or at least function for the most part as if it were user controlled, with some backup in case the owner goes belly-up or goes beyond limits (and this is the situation now). For the most part, however, exactly who owns a mailing list is not so important. I'm under non-disclosure regarding DXP Beta (or may be, I forget the exact agreement), but I'll take the liberty to say this: the DXP Beta list was a very successful experiment, I'd say, in closer communication between users and the programming staff. I'll quote Mr. Loughhead: >Since this forum worked so well as a method of sharing knowledge about >the new product, we have decided to create a new public DXP-focused >forum. Like the beta forum, the new forum is strictly for technical >DXP--related discussions. It is open to licensed DXP users, as well as >people evaluating a DXP-based product. Members of Altium's technical >staff will also monitor and participate in this forum. For staff to participate, it is essential that the list not be a mere bitching session, or that it be allowed to degenerate into flame wars between users and staff. Otherwise the burden on staff will be too great and Altium would be likely to return to the policy that staff did *not* participate in such a forum. I'd prefer to see, however, that the regulation of this be in user hands, and I would think that it would be much more acceptable if, for example, an abusive user were to be banned, should it be deemed necessary, by consensus of other users than by a decision on the part of Altium. (The Protel Users Association could, I think, take on the responsibility of setting list rules and the rare task of enforcing them.) (Technical note: yahoogroups lists have management tools that make it unnecessary, for the most part, to ban abusive users unless the abuse extends beyond sending flame mails to the list. Instead, such a user can be put, individually, on moderation, i.e., a moderator would approve posts before passing it on. There can be many moderators who have this ability to approve, so it does not need to be a matter easily controlled by personal biases and animosities but rather a matter of consensus. But such steps are rarely necessary. Most people, given clear and reasonable rules, can and will follow them.) Abd ul-Rahman Lomax LOMAX DESIGN ASSOCIATES PCB design, consulting, and training Protel EDA license resales Easthampton, Massachusetts, USA (413) 527-3881, efax (419) 730-4777 www.lomaxdesign.com ************************************************************************ * Tracking #: DA046084CB89934CA68FA0D2F1C3B772906149C3 * ************************************************************************ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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://firstname.lastname@example.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *