I have one contrary experience. I re-did a simple two layer board I did
by hand years ago, and Situs did better than any previous version. In
fact it looks pretty damn good...close to hand routing.

All previous routers could manage 100%, but they looked like hell. Situs
did not.
The problem is I can do little boards by hand anytime. I'm hoping for
Situs to step up to the plate for the LARGE boards that I don't want to
do by hand anymore.

Tony


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 5:58 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues
> 
> 
> I am not experienced in using the new Situs router but I have 
> tried it with disastrous results.  Since I thought I might 
> have been doing something wrong, I loaded the sample boards 
> routed at Altium by what I would have thought to be an 
> experienced Situs user.  I posted a list of sample areas to 
> look at on these boards a while ago on the DXP forum.  From 
> what I saw, the results were worse than my results in some 
> cases.  Perhaps I am too picky but I see no reason for 5 or 
> six power vias near each other all connected by short traces 
> on various layers to tie one pin to the power buss when just 
> one via would have done the job.  Several acid traps and 
> traces exiting pads at oddball angles with stairstepping.  
> After reviewing the sample boards, I decided not to mess with 
> Situs again until a few service packs have come out.  
> Overall, I did not see anything in the sample boards to 
> indicate that Situs is an improvement.
> 
> Rob
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 4:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues
> 
> 
> > At 04:23 PM 8/30/2002 -0400, Michael Reagan (EDSI) wrote:
> > >I probably would pay for SP7  with as long as they met the 
> long list 
> > >of
> our
> > >requirements also.
> >
> > I too have been put off by the complexities introduced with 
> DXP. If it 
> > had been, say, a bug fix for 99SE, at a corresponding 
> price, there is 
> > no doubt that I'd be using it. If the additional features had come 
> > without greatly confusing the user interface (for one used 
> to 99SE), 
> > I'd be wanting them too. We were long awaiting an improved 
> autorouter, 
> > and I had heard rumors about how good it was going to be, rivalling 
> > Specctra, etc.
> >
> > I haven't seen any comments on the DXP list on Situs except 
> for some 
> > information about the design rules it follows, which have not been 
> > much improved, i.e., there are apparently still plenty of 
> rules which 
> > are
> ignored.
> >
> > Something is wrong.
> >
> > The unfortunate thing about the DXP release is that the work was 
> > invested, it would seem, in advance of a true marketing study, at 
> > least of one involving a sufficient number of existing users. 
> > Programming for a service pack is one thing, programming 
> for feature 
> > improvements may be something else. It is difficult, I'd 
> think, to go 
> > back, but it might not be
> impossible.
> >
> > The theory behind the Client/Server architecture was that the 
> > individual modules were separately maintainable. How much 
> the Advanced 
> > PCB server was modified to make it into the DXP PCB server, I don't 
> > know.
> >
> > I would think that solid software management for a product 
> like Protel 
> > would involve continuously fixing bugs, as soon as 
> possible, releasing 
> > service packs regularly, and sometimes including feature 
> improvements 
> > -- gradually -- as part of the process. A maintenance model allows 
> > this,
> which
> > is probably one reason why Altium has gone that way. The 
> transition, 
> > however, has not been handled well. There should never have 
> been such 
> > a dead time with no service pack. SP7 should have been 
> released long 
> > ago.
> >
> > I can understand the argument that was probably put forth: since we 
> > are going to make all these major changes, we need to put all our 
> > effort into them instead of fooling around with code that 
> is going to 
> > become obsolete anyway. Yet this argument is one that keeps 
> software 
> > buggy on into eternity. There is a reason why organisms 
> only change a 
> > little DNA at a time! Make too many changes at once, nothing works 
> > well any more.
> >
> > So then you have to do all kinds of new software testing, 
> etc., to try 
> > to find the bugs that have been introduced with the 
> changes. Plus, a 
> > crucial part of the "organism" is the user. Confuse the 
> user, and the 
> > best
> software
> > becomes next to useless.
> >
> > But it might not be impossible to put together an SP7, 
> perhaps much of 
> > the coding has already been done and even tested to some 
> degree. I'd 
> > suggest a price of, say, $1K for it, fully appliable to DXP (or, 
> > perhaps, to ATS) when the user decides to go that way. Enough 99SE 
> > users might pay for an SP7 to make it worthwhile; it would generate 
> > good will among the users -- except for those who insist 
> that anything 
> > short of feature improvement should be free, period.
> >
> > As far as $2000 for the DXP upgrade, the fact is that a 
> truly improved 
> > autorouter would be worth $2K just by itself. Problem is, 
> in order to 
> > get it -- assuming that Situs is actually greatly improved 
> now or in 
> > the near future -- we have to move into a user interface that is 
> > sufficiently different to put many of us off. Unless Altium does 
> > something about this. Remember, the whole point of 
> Client/Server was 
> > to modularize the programs while permitting interaction.
> >
> > (While I was a Beta tester for DXP, events in my own life prevented 
> > me,
> and
> > thus far have continued to prevent me, from investing much 
> time in DXP 
> > either during Beta or subsequently. Perhaps the autorouter is truly 
> > magic, and it has simply escaped comment on the DXP list; in that 
> > event, I
> presume
> > that someone who knows better will enlighten us.)
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> **********************************************************************
> > **
> > * Tracking #: 80B2D86297784D429EB1D3578C179B77B45AEA09
> > *
> > 
> **************************************************************
> **********
> 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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