Dennis, > if they work on patching and improving 99SE now, they might undermine > and dissipate their efforts to get DXP in shape
The one thing you didn't mention is that they have to maintain PCAD as well. Just read of few of the excerpts from the PCAD forum below. I am quite concerned about the future of Altium. Personally, I don't see PCAD and Protel continuing as two individual packages. If Altium survives this DXP/ATS disaster, I think one package will have to go. ----excerpt of post from PCAD forum on 8/7/2002 I talked to someone at Accel and they assured me they are planning a new release this year and it will work with the new "Situs" autorouter. That same autorouter will work with Protel as well as PCAD. Now that Protel's release has taken place, they will be concentrating on this next release of PCAD. --------------------- ----excerpt of post from PCAD forum on 8/6/2002 People, the scariest thing of all is the silence on the other end. The only communication I've had from PCAD was when they called and asked "when" I was planning on sending my maintenance money. I know how important that money is for the survival of a product and you know no one is selling or buying PCAD these days. If I were to guess the ship already sunk with us on it and were to self absorbed to even realize it. I love my PCAD software but our management already forced PADS down our throats and we are are still choking on it. Unless PCAD shows its head very soon I'd have to say that the last maintenance dollars I send them was the worst money I ever spent. ------------------------------------ ----excerpt of post from PCAD forum on 8/6/2002 My understanding is that they wanted to get the Protel DXP thing out first, as work on it had started already, and that coding is being done on the next PCAD version. If we get half the features and fixes that are still open in our group bug and wish list databases, as well as the open polls, I'd be extremely happy. I know that we have quite a number of Altium people subscribed to this group, so one assumes that that they are very much aware of what we would like to see...... Heck, let them work out the bugs in the new autorouter with the Protel software, that's what I say, so we get something more mature out of the gate, if nothing else. ---------------------- ----excerpt of post from PCAD forum on 8/6/2002 We have NOT updated our maintainance this time because of many of the mentioned reasons. My fear is though, the dwindleing number of people with maintainance may sign the programs death warrant. This may not be completely accurate, but from what I understand, Protel is suppose continue to be the (forgive the name) "low end" program, and P-Cad is suppose to be the upper end with all of those add on programs they have been pushing so much. I have the feeling that with the service packs (instead of updates) that their plan is to get the main program to a good point where it isn't to buggy (lord know everytime they make changes they add more bugs) and add on additional programs to make it more marketable. I'd be betting that the next thing that you will see is another Service Pack or a version with more bugs fixed, better integration with add on programs and a mildly fixed router program. This time they can't say that our maintainance money went to improving the program, but in development of programs that some of may or may not need. I want to make it very clear to them, if they try to integrate PCAD into protel, changing interface etc., I will take the ANOTHER software company up on their deal of a discount with a conversion program. ---------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Saputelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:25 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Altium - Have your cake and eat it too! > well this sounds like a pitch for SP7 among other things > > while i would certainly be entirely in favor of that i am not going to > hold my breath > > to strike to the heart of the matter here is to consider whether Altium > will survive the DXP disaster at all > > they have put themselves in a trick bag > > if they are still around in a year they certainly won't be patching 99SE > or improving it at that time > > if they work on patching and improving 99SE now, they might undermine > and dissipate their efforts to get DXP in shape > > i don't see an easy out for either them or us, unless they have more > resources and integrity than appears to be the case > > in short, i fear that we are screwed > > i sincerely hope that i am proven wrong about all of my speculations > above > > Dennis Saputelli > > JaMi Smith wrote: > > > > Here is a very simple suggestion for Altium. > > > > You have a very large customer and user base for a fairly developed product, > > Protel 99 SE, which has some bugs and problems, bur nothing that cannot be > > fixed with a Service Pack. > > > > You have customers who are familiar with this product, and have a lot of > > money tied up in it, and know how to use it, and in fact swear by it. > > > > You have developed a new product, DXP, which represents a substantial > > investment to you in development time and money. > > > > This product is however different. > > > > It is not simply supposed to be a better continuation of the older product, > > it is in fact different. > > > > It does things differently, and it doesn't do many of the same things. > > > > This is not necessarily good, or necessarily bad, but as Leo said to Riggs > > in the graveyard scene near the end of the movie Lethal Weapon 4, "just > > different". > > > > DXP, in many respects, appears to be designed as a next generation EDA > > Product, and I am sure that if handled properly, that potential can be > > realized. > > > > Is DXP for everyone? > > > > I think you know that the answer is no. > > > > Is Protel 99 SE obsolete? > > > > I think you also know that that answer there is also no. > > > > Protel 99 SE may be to the point that you feel that you cannot develop it > > any further, which may be true, but that does not necessarily mean that it > > is obsolete, or that as a product it does not continue to have a market > > niche. Yes, it does have some problems that need to be fixed, and there are > > a few features that could be easily added, but once that is done, I would > > maintain that Protel 99 SE is still a viable product for years to come. > > > > DXP is new, and in many respects more advanced (at least conceptually), bit > > it too also has some problems, in fact many problems, that need to be fixed, > > and there are a few features that need to be added, but once that is done, I > > would maintain that DXP will also be a viable product for years to come. > > > > Actually, you have two different products here, and I think that you are > > making a big mistake in attempting to replace one with the other. > > > > I would respectfully submit that you will never do that. > > > > I would respectfully submit that you are in fact alienating and loosing > > customers by attempting to do that. > > > > I would respectfully submit that you should consider keeping Protel 99 SE as > > the product that is has taken years to become, and also DXP as a newer, next > > generation, higher level product that it appears to have the potential to > > become. > > > > Yes Altium, I would suggest that you keep Protel 99 SE as a product, and DXP > > too! > > > > Yes Altium, you actually can have your cake and eat it too! > > > > Respectfully submitted > > > > JaMi Smith > > > > > ************************************************************************ > * Tracking #: 85796EE3B3F2F64B82C86527603D3182D5CFDC6B > * > ************************************************************************ > -- > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
