> >[...] not me but 3 of our team members with new machine of P4 2.4Ghz on
> >WinXP decide to leave 99se for Protel 2.8 and that included my superior
> >who is fluent with Protel because he was "grown up" with it since his
> >colledge days.
> Let's put it this way: why one would do so is a complete mystery to me,
> I think to most readers of this list, unless we can chalk it up to a local
> problem (i.e., some condition not shared by the rest of us), or to lack of
> experience with Protel. Sometimes even an "experienced" user lacks some
> critical piece of information, it can happen to the best of us, and has.

Maybe he wants to use the pin swapping feature in 2.8 ?  IMO, Protel should
never have eliminated that feature in later versions.  It makes manual
layout optimization feasible, as I have said before on several occasions.

> My point was that it is an $8000 piece of software. If it takes $50 worth
> of graphics card to make it run properly, it would be an insignificant
> additional investment. The real cost is in identifying and fixing the
> problem.

Funny thing is, if Protel ran on Linux, Altium could easily fix these video
card bugs by inspecting the source code for the video card drivers and
seeing what screws up in Protel or in the driver.  But closed source video
drivers, forget it.

It's interesting how $8000 software is expected to have bugs, quirks, and
bad behavior that is to be accomodated, whereas shrink-wrap apps are
expected to have much higher quality and work with the hardware you already
have.  I personally don't subscribe to this mindset.  If you follow it to
it's logical conclusion, then mega-expensive software should be expected to
be a bug-infested pile of dung, and free software should be a bug-free pile
of gold.  Ever notice how so many business hate their enterprise software?
Or their accounting software?  I personally know of a company that has
changed their accounting software 3 times in 5 years (no, it's not my own

The more expensive software is, the higher degree of perfection I expect.
That's why I don't own any expensive software (except for Protel).  Not that
Protel is perfect, just that it's got the highest value-performance product
(like gain-bandwidth product of op-amps) that I know of, as of the time I
bought into it (1996 with 2.8, and upgraded to 99SE in 2000).  Now, if
Altium keeps raising their prices, this will no longer be true.

I'd sure love to see the magical, mystical 99SE SP7, with video card fixes,
mouse fixes, pin swapping, and (insert your favorite fix/feature here) added
;-)  Altium may as well do this, they are not going to get any money out of
me for DXP.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Unacceptable Bug in Protel 99 SE SP6..!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to