On most of your comparison between DXP and 99SE you have fair points. 

http://www.considered.com.au/DXP_vs_P99SE.htm for those who missed the
link in Ians post before.

But I would need to disagree on the heavy use of queries being
productive. My main frustration is the perception that I spend more time
getting the correct logic for the query, than doing the work itself.
Perhaps someone looking over my shoulder making an analysis of my
perceived lost time could rationalise it a bit better, as I might
simply, be too close to the real issues, to see them clearly for myself.

At the very least, at times I would need to label myself so 'dense' as
not to see the fantastic benefits of the new system for anything other
than complex edits or selections. For simple edits at least its

Perhaps it will come to me with time, for the moment, like some others,
I am really struggling with it, or at least the drastic change,
resulting in serious frustration, which is a bigger enemy.  I am doing
my best to resist the urge to give up, as I do not like to be beat. I
see the same sentiment in some other peoples posts as well.

Of course such a powerful system is advantageous, more power to the user
and all that, especially as the user can 'store' their own complex
queries so the next time they have a need for it, they can re-use it.

My only other major gripe with DXP (apart from the way it links & stores
files) is the 'panel for everything' approach which leads to a lot of
redundancy and confusion for data entry, refresh and display. As for
screen clutter, well,  even with dynamic transparency for panels, its
way too busy, even with 2 monitors at 1600x1200.

Most of these issue have been covered=quite exhaustively on the DXP
lists, and on your own link above, so hopefully Altium will listen (as
they have been doing to date) and make us a bit happier with Sp3 :-)

As for the issue of perceived productivity, there are a lot of more
politically orientated issue there which do not relate to DXP or 99SE in
any real way.   


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 11:07 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] P99SE has Altzheimers' ?
> On 02:18 AM 19/09/2003, Matt Pobursky said:
> >On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 22:29:43 +1000, Ian Wilson wrote:
> > > Otherwise the quote upgrade price is about $2500.  Lets assume a 
> > > designers on-cost is between 25 and 50 dollars per hour - 
> 25 to 50 
> > > hours of improved productivity will pay for it, one week. 
>  So, the 
> > > question then is how long will I have to be running DXP 
> to get 25 to 
> > > 50 hours of productivity improvement?
> > >
> > > That is the real question, not the actual cost.  But this is a 
> > > harder question to answer.
> > >
> > > I have been a little disingenuous here, I haven't included the 
> > > learning curve which is significant in one area - queries.  Add a 
> > > few days for that.
> >
> >I think more than just a little disingenuous. I find it extremely 
> >difficult to believe that anyone not already familiar with 
> DXP can be 
> >as productive as they are with 99SE "in a few days". In 
> fact, this was 
> >a major factor in my cost analysis of DXP vs. 99SE that led to my 
> >decision to not upgrade. That and the fact that even after I 
> go up the 
> >learning curve, I haven't seen anything that will make my designs 
> >better or happen more quickly or with less errors.
> >
> >I'm a reasonably smart guy having many years (20+) of 
> experience with 
> >engineering software in general. I figured more like 1-2 
> months to come 
> >up to speed on DXP and become anywhere near as efficient as 
> I am with 
> >99SE (primary rule of engineering management: engineers are eternal 
> >optimists when it comes to time estimates! ;-)). I also 
> figured I'd be 
> >spending the first week or two just sorting out how 
> everything works in 
> >general. Following the posts on the Yahoo DXP list reinforces this 
> >conclusion.
> >
> >I presume you have someone paying for your "seat time", i.e. 
> you have 
> >an employer that's issuing a paycheck whether your jobs are 
> completed 
> >or not and also continues to pay you while you are "going up the 
> >learning curve" with new software. I'm an independent 
> contractor and I 
> >don't get paid unless the job gets done, so any time I spend 
> learning 
> >new software and struggling with a learning curve are "on my dime".
> My situation exactly - if I don't bill I don't get paid, if I 
> don't work I 
> don't bill.  Almost all of my work is by the hour, so there 
> is actually 
> little financial incentive to make myself more productive, 
> apart from the 
> long term possibility that my clients may see that others can 
> do more in 
> less time.  There is certainly much less incentive to be more 
> productive 
> than someone doing lots of fixed-price work.
> As for DXP not being more productive than P99SE.  That is 
> wrong.  It is 
> easily more productive.  The question is are you happy with 
> the pay back 
> time in your situation.
> If you do multi-channel work, if you do much simulation, if 
> you want better 
> erc, if better library management is important, if easier creation of 
> large-pin count symbols is relevent, if version control 
> integration is 
> important, then the pay back time will be shorter than 
> someone that doesn't 
> want this stuff.  You can see a bigger comparison on the web 
> link I have 
> posted in the past.  I get no detailed analysis or feedback 
> from P99SE 
> users on these points so it would appear to me that most of 
> the people 
> complaining about DXP on this list are not actually using it 
> - which is not 
> unexpected but is a bit of a luxury.  I would certainly be 
> very interested 
> in other detailed analysis on the advantages of P99SE over 
> DXP.  I spent my 
> own time and, hence $, doing this.  Anyone else game?  I did 
> (and do) this 
> as a bit of a service to the users - sort of my contribution 
> instead of 
> writing open-source software. (Ditto my time on these lists.)
> I was comfortable with queries in a couple of days, truely.  
> I did not read 
> the detailed documentation that is now available on the query 
> system (and 
> still haven't).  I doubt I am more intelligent than most of the other 
> players on this list.  So my conclusion is that pretty much 
> everyone else 
> can do this - it does help to have real work to do and real 
> commitment to 
> pushing up the learning curve.  The learning curve for DXP in 
> total was 
> certainly longer than the learning curve for the queries 
> alone.  If it took 
> me months to get across a new tool like DXP then I would be out of 
> business.  I usually give a day for any new instrument, a 
> week for any new 
> software.  I may be involved with a shop doing the DXP 
> upgrade in a week or 
> so.  I will try to see how long it takes (they will have me 
> there which 
> will colour the results, I guess.)
> >This is a significant cost to me -- a week of "learning 
> time" costs me 
> >~$3000 in billable work. There has to be an awful lot of 
> productivity 
> >increase in DXP vs. 99SE to make it a paying proposition for me.
> Ditto.
> >Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't seen much in DXP vs. 99SE 
> >(at least to this point) that makes a huge difference to designers 
> >doing everyday work (schematics and PCB's).
> Oft repeated by those not using it.  Much less so by those using 
> it.  Classic situation.  You can see my comparison and make your own 
> decision.  My preferred tool is DXP, now by a long shot.  I 
> look forward to 
> bug fixes, improvements and the autorouter being made to work 
> on the sort 
> of designs I do. But even without those fixes I am more 
> comfortable and 
> significantly faster in DXP.  I do feel very let down by the 
> non-performance, in my experience, of the autorouter - I 
> would guess for 
> many this is a very fundamental part of the upgrade balance.
> >Just an opinion of a long time Protel user.
> Ditto (Autotrax and Dos Schedit).
> Ian

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