What's even worse than not responding to my requests on the DXP forum, is
that I sent them a copy of a file in question and was given an ID number
5211.  After not hearing about what Altium thought of the issue on split
planes, I emailed them directly to find out where things stood and made it
clear I would like to know if the demo version was different from the
production version.  Also since my demo was running out in 9 days, I would
like to have had the opportunity to try some workarounds.  My demo ran out a
couple of days ago and I have not had any responses to my direct emails to
Altium.  Perhaps they are on vacation or their email servers are having
problems.  I understand they may have been busy and the issue may be one
that requires more than just a quick look, but a response to my email with a
progress report would have been appropriate.  I just assumed I am now
blacklisted since I am not an ATS subscriber, but based on Dennis's
experience who is an ATS subscriber, it would seem that Altium is not living
up to their promise on improved support with ATS.

I personally only use the PCB and Schematic tools and really don't care to
support all these other tools that I will never use.  If this new direction
that Altium is taking continues, there will be a tremendous opportunity for
some bright software people who want to duplicate what Protel did so many
years ago.  If I'm not mistaken, I think it was the old Tango developers
that created Protel after Accel bought Tango.  I could be wrong, but I seem
to remember such a story.

I truly hope I am wrong in my impressions of where Altium is going, but I
fear that based on events since the release of DXP that may not be the case.

Rob Young


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Saputelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Service Pack 7 vs DXP issues


> ****
>
> regarding Rob's comment about getting no response because he is not on
> ATS
>
> not so!
> i have ATS and have gotten ZERO response to more than several questions
> which i have posted on the DXP list and also repeated there
> (they may not have been questions they wanted to hear about)
>
> i have been using protel since autotrax (DOS)
> i went through all the cycles, i, like Rob, have been directly
> responsible for AT LEAST
> 5 companies adopting protel, often under protest
> would i do that now?
> no way, in fact being a protel advocate is a bit of an embarrassment at
> the moment
>
> what is the current value of ATS ? (in my humble opinion)
> NOTHING - ZERO - NADA
> in short it is worthless
>
> i think at this point the only way they can resurrect some good will
> from
> ATS owners is to issue the long overdue SP7 for 99SE
>
> since this would have the effect of making people even less motivated to
> move to DXP then they would then have redouble their efforts to improve
> DXP enough to seduce us to make the move
>
> in other words actually earn their keep, offer real value in exchange
> for money
>
> Dennis Saputelli
>
>
> "John A. Ross [Design]" wrote:
> >
> > 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 #: 06DD5C4C586F0E4981A6E27A95B65660427F5D7E
> *
> ************************************************************************
> --
>
___________________________________________________________________________
> www.integratedcontrolsinc.com            Integrated Controls, Inc.
>    tel: 415-647-0480                        2851 21st Street
>       fax: 415-647-3003                        San Francisco, CA 94110

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