What Rob  Young stated is what I have been saying for since Accel was
acquired.  Just  Like some of you,   I am  taking  a very hard look at other
programs.  A very hard look....My future depends on having the right
software for my requirements not someone dictating what my requirements are.

Mike Reagan




----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Protel EDA Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues


> Speaking of the Beta program, I asked to be part of the Beta program for
DXP
> and was not selected.  I have been using Protel since version 1.12 back in
> 1993 I believe, so I would have thought that my input would have been
worth
> something to them.  For whatever reason, they chose not to include me.
That
> was fine as I have too much work to do anyway.  The reason I have recently
> stepped up and began using the DXP demo, is that I have a great interest
in
> seeing that our beloved Protel continues as it has.  While Protel has
never
> been perfect, in my opinion, it has been the best value on the market for
> manual PCB layout and schematic capture.  But now, just as they have been
> gaining ground they decide to make this ATS policy along with a repeat of
> the P99 release.  I nearly severed my Protel relationship over the bugs in
> P99 and continued to use P98 until P99SE came out.  I was encouraged in
that
> the P99SE release directly addressed many of the concerns on this group.
It
> is quite upsetting to see them repeat that mistake again, but this time,
> they expect us to pay for it as well.  Also it just occurred to me as why
I
> am not getting any responses from Altium on the many issues I asked about
in
> the demo........ I am not a current ATS subscriber!  So I am now being
> shunned for previewing their new release.  Not a great way to treat a long
> time user and supporter of Protel in my opinion.  As a consultant, I have
> been responsible for many more seats of Protel than just my seat.  With
> Altium's current attitude, I will recommend to all of my clients that they
> wait to see what the outcome of the ATS policy will really be and until
DXP
> has matured enough to be a usable package.  Unless Altium intends to be
more
> aggressive with service packs on ATS, that will be at least a year and
maybe
> more based upon past experience.
>
> As much as I would like to see SP7, I don't think Altium will provide one
as
> it is not in their new company model to continue with P99SE.  They want to
> move everyone over to DXP and start to collect ATS fees for what is
> currently an inferior product.  Perhaps if they would provide SP7 under
the
> ATS program, it would make the ATS worth something.  Then a user could
> continue to use P99SE with new features and bug fixes and feel like they
got
> something for their money while DXP was getting refined.  Plus the user
> would be able to test DXP and provide valuable feedback to Altium.  I just
> don't agree with paying ATS for bug fixes.  New features, yes... telephone
> tech support for those that need it, yes... fixing buggy software,
> absolutely not!
>
> Is it just me or does it seem like Accel was the one who bought Protel?
> Ever since Protel purchased Accel and changed their name to Atium, it
seems
> that most people at Altium are former Accel people and the new policies
seem
> to be old Accel policies.  I fear that the Protel us long time users have
> come to know and respect is no longer in existence.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John A. Ross [Design]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 10:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues
>
>
> > From: "Brad Velander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 4:58 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues
> >
> >
> > > Rob, could you explain your comments about the Cam Manager in DXP a
> > > little better. Do you mean to say that every time you want to generate
> > > Gerber/Drill output, you have to reconfigure your output formats
> manually
> > > each time? If what I think you are saying is true, who is the rocket
> > > scientist at Protel that blew that one. You know how many mistakes are
> > made
> > > generating gerber/drill formats on an initial configuration, saving
and
> > > tweaking those configurations is only the minimal acceptable feature
for
> > the
> > > past 10 years (some packages longer than that). Aaaarghhh,
Protel/Altium
> > > just don't know what the f#$% they are doing, incompetent, completely
> > > incompetent.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> > You have to generate the ouptuts in the individual groups (gerber, drill
> > etc).
> >
> > Pre Cam-Manager style. So we have ANOTHER step backwards, productivity
> wise.
> > Pay more (ATS) do less! Dont figure with me.
> >
> > The features in DXP that I would have welcomed (productivity increase)
> might
> > not have been so easy to get into a SP7 in 99SE as a database change was
> > needed to accomodate them. BUT, a gradual change into DXP from 99SE
> > enviroment (SP7) would have been less of a shock than it stands now.
> >
> > I got my 'ATS' copy of DXP as I bought a new 99SE license Q2 this year.
> But
> > after using the trial version first, I would say I would rather have
seen
> a
> > SP7 than DXP. For now the 'good' in DXP (and there is some) so far does
> not
> > justify the amount of missed features and reduced productivity for me as
> > compared to 99SE.
> >
> > Although I would not say Altium were completely incompetent with DXP,
what
> I
> > would say is that whovever did the market/user research on what changes
&
> > features should be added into DXP, well, they simply asked the wrong
> people
> > or did not ask in the first place, just skimmed the user lists and made
a
> > few notes. The beta program obviously did not take in a big enough cross
> > section of users (not just loyal experts) to yeild accurate information
on
> > what the 'average user' would like or need, and of course those that did
> > beta test, have their gag order to contend with, so we will never know.
I
> > would have thought after the 99->99SE experience, the situation would
not
> > have occurred again, oh my....
> >
> > :-(
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Brad Velander.
> > >
> > > Lead PCB Designer
> > > Norsat International Inc.
> > > Microwave Products
> > > Tel   (604) 292-9089 (direct line)
> > > Fax  (604) 292-9010
> > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://www.norsat.com
> > > Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000
> > > certification
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Rob Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 6:48 AM
> > > > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If there were a service pack 7 that also included some long
> > > > requested new
> > > > features that are now included in DXP, I would be much more
> > > > inclined to pay
> > > > for SP7 than for DXP.  DXP is promising in some areas, but
completely
> > > > useless for me in it's current state.  I fail to understand
> > > > why Altium had
> > > > to so drastically change the interface that long time Protel
> > > > users will now
> > > > have to retrain themselves.  Features that I would pay for in
> > > > SP7 that are
> > > > currently in DXP would be items such as:
> > > >
> > > > 1.  Layer Pairing in PCB
> > > > 2.  Associative Dimensions
> > > > 3.  Break wire with part in Schematic
> > > > 4.  Right-click panning in schematic like in PCB now.
> > > > 5.  Better padstack control in PCB
> > > > 6.  Part editing in Schematic like in PCB now.
> > > > 7.  Multi-channel capability in Sch and PCB.
> > > > 8.  Automatic edge pullback on PCB planes.
> > > > 9.  Query ability (but please leave existing global options alone!)
> > > > 10.  Ability to exclude certain components from the BOM.
> > > >
> > > <SNIP>
> > > >
> > > > 5.  Cam manager is gone from PCB.  Instead of hitting "F9" to
> > > > process all
> > > > your cam outputs in one keystroke, you will now have to
> > > > process gerbers, nc
> > > > drill files, pick & place and testpoint data individually.
> > > >
> > > <SNIP>
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> > >
> > >
************************************************************************
> > > * Tracking #: BA77E5364D6AD9448C59DC2067018139B233CB65
> > > *
> > >
************************************************************************
>

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