Tony,

This is entirely a personal preference issue from a long time Protel user.
My comments with the new dialogs is a very small issue and would not prevent
me from upgrading to DXP, but I liked the idea of having all data in one
column that I could just quickly scan down for pads, tracks, text etc and
all were pretty much consistent in how they looked.  While I like the new
look, I am not yet sure I will like visually scanning through the graphics
versus the P99SE list for relevant information.  Considering the tab key
function, it may not slow a user down too much, but the quick glance at
attributes between different dialogs in DXP will take some getting used to.
In my opinion, it will take longer to focus on the desired attribute, but
this could be resolved with DXP experience as you mentioned.  Unfortunately,
being experienced with DXP will take some time for me since I will not
upgrade until several more pressing issues are worked out and my demo is now
over.  Speed of the app being one of them and being compatible with P99SE
designs another.  Perhaps it is just my system, but P99SE runs much quicker
and smoother than DXP in my case.  I have several designs loaded with split
planes that currently do not import properly to DXP along with all the CAM
and print settings being wiped out.  DXP needs a lot more work yet, I am
just frustrated that we are going through this again after the same thing
happened with the first P99 release.  The addition of ATS just makes it much
worse.

Rob


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] DXP - Crunch time?


> Why is that? Once you're experienced with DXP (or any app) you know
> where to find stuff. The glitz doesn't slow me down. The speed of the
> app (or lack of speed) slows me down.
>
> What would be the most proficient would be to have the tab key jump
> between the editable fields in the order of most used which could easily
> be determined by a survey on these lists.
>
> For example on a component pad, the first field highlighted is
> Designator. I think that makes sense. However, if you press tab a few
> times you get this order:
>
> Hole Size
> Layer
> Rotation
> Xlocation
> etc...
>
> After a while you get to X size and Ysize. I don't know about you, but I
> find myself tweaking those two things way more often than the location
> of the pad. I personally would like to see it more like this, where the
> plated status is brought to the first tab instead of the 3rd tab. I
> usually never mess with the net association because the schematic drives
> that.
>
> Here is a mockup: http://www.encoreelectronics.com/padedit.jpg
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 6:31 AM
> > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] DXP - Crunch time?
> >
> >
> > Ian,
> > > 7) Dialogs are not as easily navigated as in P99SE - they may look
> > > nicer but I find it harder to find the editable elements.
> > I am in complete agreement with you on the dialogs.  I forgot
> > to add that to my list of issues with DXP.  I find it much
> > easier to find relevant attributes in a well organized list
> > like P99SE has, not with them all haphazardly placed among
> > "glitz" and "glamour".  These new dialogs may help the new
> > user, but once you are proficient with Protel, I think it
> > tends to slow the user down. Rob
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ian Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] DXP - Crunch time?
> >
> >
> > > At 02:48 AM 5/09/02 +0100, you wrote:
> > > ><..snip..>
> > > >As the title said Cruch time - do I spend any more time looking at
> > > >the
> > DXP
> > > >demo and upcoming SP1 re-learning how to use it or do I
> > spend my time
> > > >looking at other packages?
> > > >
> > > >What do you guys think?
> > >
> > > My feelings are very mixed.  I have not tried all of the
> > features and
> > > have not done much after the beta program finished.  I am
> > waiting for
> > > the first service pack before I see what has changed since
> > the beta.
> > > So when I say what I like or dislike it may be that I have
> > not tried
> > > your favorite feature or tested your favorite(!) bug.
> > >
> > > Likes:
> > > 1) query language and reltaed to that the much more powerful design
> > > rules
> > > 2) Sim post processing is improved
> > > 3) New ERC options
> > > 4) Integrated libraries should help configuration control
> > >
> > > Dislikes:
> > > 1) speed
> > > 2) globals are slower and some things very much harder to
> > work out how
> > > to do (but see Likes point 1).
> > > 3) Router is very disappointing - I was hoping for a break through
> > > here.
> > > 4) No SDK released (yet)
> > > 5) I think the spreadsheet view should *not* be on the same
> > panel as the
> > > filter.
> > > 6) ATS
> > > 7) Dialogs are not as easily navigated as in P99SE - they
> > may look nicer
> > > but I find it harder to find the editable elements.
> > > 8) Greater reliance on mouse compared to P99SE - this
> > affects productivity
> > > 9) loss of Selected vs Focussed feature in P99SE and no
> > provision for a
> > > workable replacement (simply making the system more like
> > other Windows
> > apps
> > > is a retrograde step IMO)
> > >
> > > There are others but these are the major ones I can think
> > of just now.
> > >
> > > As an indicator - I have started a few new designs in the
> > last week or
> > > so.  All of these are being done in P99SE.  I have a rather "down"
> > > feeling about it.  Lots to like but ATS really makes the
> > equation more
> > > complex
> > than
> > > it used to be.
> > >
> > > I will re-evaluate after SP1.
> > >
> > > Ian Wilson
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > **********************************************************************
> > > **
> > > * Tracking #: F798CC54297D2F409329F8E4E9D6CD6A24CD0BED
> > > *
> > >
> > **************************************************************
> > **********
> >

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