Before leaving this thread, I would like to recap a few final points:

1. This thread addresses the current practical value of DXP. Your comment,
"The overall spin of DXP has been so bad, I think it's scary from their
point of view and if it were me running the show I'd be listening very
closely to this group.", along with comments from other contributors who
echo a similar sentiment, provides us all some insight as to the current
status of DXP. Consequently, I will wait until user reports indicate that
DXP has become a quality product capable of addressing my needs before I
personally evaluate it. 99SE will suffice until DXP demonstrably performs to
my advantage.

2. We all have been deceived by certain vendors who ship RELEASED software
with known bugs and subsequently have been bitten by these very same bugs.
We cope with the situation because, as you say, it may be in our better
interest to use the buggy software. Software vendors know this, and some of
them unscrupulously exploit the situation. I resent this practice with the
utmost conviction. It is unethical and I will always speak against it. A
lawsuit is folly, but I won't side with those who are apathetic.

3. I did not invent the "sliding scale" concept you so disparage, but I
would be happy to take credit if I did;  it's a creative marketing idea
successfully used by other companies faced with a DXP-like situation. By the
way, 10,000 times $1,600 = $16,000,000. But let's try some alternative
arithmetic. If Altium were lucky enough to find 500 buyers who would pay
$8000 for bug-ridden software, that would yield $4,000,000, definitely not
the better return. The THRIFTY buyers would no doubt migrate towards the
$400/$1600 PRE-DISTRIBUTION discount, as you claim. They, of course, would
be aware that they would pay in other ways, not the least of which is
exposure to the risk of unproven software. But the SMART money would wait
for the "proven" final release. Reduced risk justifies greater financial
exposure, plus minimum liaison required with Altium, far fewer bug episodes,
reduced expense due to wasted time, enhanced probability of meeting project
schedules, higher quality board layouts..........think about it.
Notwithstanding our lack of Altium CEO status, we can certainly relate our
thoughts, but alas, it's not for us to tell Altium how to run their

4. Altera, Xilinx, and Visual DSP are irrelevant. I don't need them, so why
should I care? I have a core group of software tools I use in my work. I
rank each one on its own merit. Likewise, DXP must stand on its own merit.
The fact that other software may be faulty does not make DXP a better

5. SP7 for 99SE has once again emerged as a topic of interest. The current
SP6 is not perfect, but it is certainly functional. Some serious cleanup and
a few finishing touches could turn 99SE into a splendid, first-class
program. I wholeheartedly support the idea, and hope that a strong thrust in
this direction can be generated.

Thanks for a challenging and constructive dialog.

Fred A Rupinski

* Tracking #: 2F8410F75943394888BADB16457E6AAF268B1E3B

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to