Abd, You seem to be missing the point, so I will try and state it a little differently.
Just about two years ago, I bought into the DXP hype, and purchased DXP, on the promise that it was going to be a useful productive tool that would actually be a cut above Protel 99 SE. Or more specifically, I bought ATS, with the promise that a fully functional and fully operational DXP Product would be shortly delivered. It is now almost 2 years later and I have still not seen a functional DXP Product, although I am somewhat impressed by the advanced reports regarding the new release of DXP, and it seems that I actually might receive the Product that I paid for 2 years ago sometime here in the next few days in the mail. Please do not make this out to be sour grapes on my part, because I can assure you that I am not by any means alone in this assessment that this long long overdue, and not in fact just overdue, but actually due. In fact, this has pretty much been the prevailing, if not unanimous sentiment in the DXP Forums for the past year and a half. Forums, which include several "pre-release" Forums, all of which by the way you have been strikingly absent from, excepting the beginning of the initial Yahoo! DXP Forum, and the last month of the current DXP Technical Forum, which pretty much means that you haven't even kept yourself abreast of what has been really been happening or to just what extent DXP Customers have been dissatisfied with what has been delivered to them, and the rate of progress on turning DXP into a Functional Package. This Forum, the PEDA Forum, is not necessarily an accurate gauge of all that has taken place in the past year and a half, especially in terms of DXP Customer dissatisfaction. Too be sure, once the first "pre-release" of "Service Pack 3" was released last April, things began to start looking up, and when the second "build" of the "pre-release" of "Service Pack 3" (the so-called "Build 104" (didn't that come from NT somewhere?)) was released at the end of May, there were many that thought that DXP could finally be used as a replacement for Protel 99 SE. Unfortunately, Altium refused to make that version generally available, which meant that it was only available thru the "beta" program, which limited it's availability to only those who would be willing to participate in the "beta" program. Altium further intentionally withheld any final release of "Service Pack 3" for over three quarters of a year now, until they could make some changes to the DXP Design Explorer Platform so that they could integrate Nexar into the Platform, which really has nothing to do with the basic original DXP Product, and the long overdue formal release of "Service Pack 3". So now, as I stated before, here we stand almost a year after the release of the 2 "pre-release" versions of "Service Pack 3", a year and a half after the release of the DXP Product, and 2 years after I paid for DXP, patiently waiting for the arrival of what appears may be our first really functional copy of DXP. And you, Abd, who have not participated in the DXP Forums, apparently not even to "monitor them" beyond what has appeared here in the PEDA Forum, now step forth and presume to speak as if you really know what is going on. Excuse me! What really bothers me about this whole thing, is the bogus proposition that this whole thing that is now being presented to us as an "Upgrade"! BS! What "Upgrade"! It appears that what we actually have here is "pre-release Service Pack 3, Build 104", with a few more fixes, renamed and finally released. It actually looks as if 98 percent of the "fixes" in the 16 page PDF which lists what was done between "Service Pack 2" and the present, were actually done in the 2 "pre-release" versions of "Service Pack 3", last year, and that actually very little has actually been done within the last three quarters of a year. Look at the list closely, especially when it comes to DXP PCB and Situs. Then of course then there is a web page which list the "New Features" in the "New Release", the new "Upgraded" and renamed version of the software. If you will look real closely at the 3 "New Features" in the software listed under the Situs Autorouter, you will find that the first "New Feature" listed is "Completion". How stupid can you get? I mean yes, the Situs Autorouter never has been able to route even a moderate design to "completion", and people have been complaining about this issue in the various DXP Forums ever since DXP was first released, so in one sense it actually is a "New Feature", but to now say that it does route to "completion", and that this fact is a "New Feature", shows just how distorted Altium's thinking is on this "New Product", this "Upgrade". This in fact just verifies the fact that the Situs Autorouter was never fully operational to begin with. This is also somewhat disappointing since various people from Altium have stated in the DXP Forum in the last 6 months that the Situs Autorouter was undergoing a total overhaul, and even indicated that that might be what was holding up the final release of "Service Pack 3", and to now here that "Completion" is a "New Feature" is beyond comprehension. Haven't they done anything else to improve Situs? I guess the final blow, the final humility, is that after I purchased DXP under ATS 2 years ago, and after Altium promised to do away with ATS, and since I have patiently waited for these 2 years for them to deliver a functional DXP Product to me, they have now relegated me to a second class citizen, since I did not renew my ATS this last year when it expired, since I was out of work, and couldn't afford it, and I now have to listen to Nick as he graciously extends me a "free Upgrade" to the "New Product", but at the same time tells me that I am not entitled to a printed manual, since after all, I am only a second class citizen and second class customer. BS! Absolute BS! Nick, Altium - You are not "giving" me anything! I Purchased DXP 2 years ago on your promise to deliver a fully functional and fully operational DXP Product, and I am entitled to a fully functional and fully operational DXP Product! You have been living off of my "purchase" of DXP for the last 2 years, and not just my purchase alone, but the purchases of hundreds if not thousands of others just like me that have purchased DXP either thru ATS or directly, on your promise to fix the damn thing. I am in fact very very pleased that it finally appears that you may actually have finally fixed most of the shortcomings of DXP, and that I may in fact finally receive a functional and operational DXP Product in my mail box here in the next few days, but please please please stop treating me as if I am a second class citizen and a second class customer. You are not giving me anything! I have paid for a fully functional and fully operational DXP Product, and I expect to get it! Altium, please also let me remind you of the fact that Phil Loughhead has made it perfectly clear in a series of posts in the DXP Forum, that the name change from DXP to Protel 2004 was strictly for clarification to clear up the ambiguity over calling both the Design Explorer Platform and also the Schematic and PCB portions of the product, by the name DXP, and that Protel 2004 is in fact still DXP, and not a new or different Product. So Please stop trying to tell me that "Protel 2004" is a new Product, and that you are graciously going to "give" me a "free upgrade" to it. And yes, thank you, I would appreciate a new Printed Copy of the New Manual, just as I believe all of your Customers who have paid for the DXP Product would, even those who you have relegated to "second-class" status. Sorry to go off like this, but I am tired of being treated like I, and all of the other DXP Customers who have been waiting for so long, and even have been intentionally ignored for the last 6 months, are not entitled to what we paid for, and not entitled to a Printed Manual. And yes Altium, I would gladly accept your apology for treating your loyal customers this way. And please Abd, getting back to you, you are really not qualified to speak out on this issue, so please don't. Respectfully submitted, JaMi Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 9:20 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great, > [sigh...] > > At 09:34 PM 3/8/2004, JaMi Smith wrote: > >This is kind of what I was trying to address in the DXP Forum with a post > >there, before Nick stepped in and totally side-stepped the issue by > >telling me to go read a link. > > Pesky fellow, he, distracting us from our monomanias. > > >People keep calling Protel 2004 an "Upgrade". > > Yes. > > >With the exception of the "Nano-Board" stuff, it occurs to me that this is > >not a real "Upgrade" in anything but name only, and that in respect to DXP > >Schematic and DXP PCB that this is really nothing more than the long long > >overdue Realease of "Service Pack 3". > > There is an SP3 in Beta. My understanding is that Protel 2004 includes a > lot more than SP3. There is enough improvement in 2004 that the term > "Upgrade" is earned. A major service pack is often tantamount to an > upgrade. 99SE was an upgrade.... more than a simple service pack, which > might be confined to bug fixes only. > > >This seems to be somewhat comparable to the "Upgrade" from Protel 99 > >Service Pack 2 to Protel 99 SE, which if I understand it correctly, was > >actually also called Service Pack 3. > > Yes. But it was really an upgrade. Protel sometimes includes operational > enhancements in service packs, and bug fixes in upgrades. The latter is > more unusual, because by the time service packs are no longer issued for a > product, *most* of the bugs have been fixed, the true bugs. > > >The problem here is that while I understand that the step from Protel 99 > >to Protel 99 SE actually was in fact a really big step, what we appear to > >have here is simply some additional functionality, which you must pay for > >if you want, and which is clearly additional to the basic DXP Package, but > >that with respect to the basic Schematic and PCB Packaging part of DXP, we > >are only getting a Service Pack, and one that really doesen't look like it > >really may have addressed all of the problems in the "DXP Only" part of > >the package, based on what I am seeing here in the forums. > > The only additional functionality that must be paid for, if one is getting > the DXP-Protel2004 automatic upgrade, is the.... what's it called, the > prototype board, the name slips my mind. > > >Respecting the issue of "too many trees" for Manuals, When I got my > >initial Release of DXP, I got a manual that was just over 3/8" thick that > >was an absolute joke (I am once again restraining myself to keep it clean > >here in the forum), that was totally worthless, and very soon actually > >obsolete. > > The DXP manual was thin; however, at the same time, Altium did create a > huge amount of additional documentation in PDF. I still find the conversion > from 99SE to DXP a painful process, and so I'd like to see even additional > documentation, though I think some of it would be better written by users. > > Most of the DXP manual is not obsolete. > > > I can accept the fact that Altium did > >not want to print any manuals while they were trying to get their > >collective DXP act together, but if they think that that time has come, > >and they have actually decided to go ahead and print a "THICK manual" as > >Mike called it, then I do believe that Altium "owes" one of these manuals > >to all of it's DXP customers, since it never delivered a useable manual in > >the first place, and have been "begging off" giving one to every DXP > >Licensee with various excuses over the last year and a half now. > > Altium is not obligated to give us anything that was not included in the > package when we purchased it. If we didn't consider the package adequate, > we could have returned it then; at least that would have been the time to > act. Manuals are expensive to print. > > Now, if Altium gives its DXP-2004 free upgraders a manual, that would be a > kindness. It would certainly be a nice gesture. But the reality of the > situation does not warrant a tirade against Altium. The cost would be > significant, though not so high that a shareholder of the company would be > likely to complain! > > >Altium - If you have actually have printed a manual, then distribute it to > >the people that you have been stalling for the last year and a half, > >irrespective of the number of trees that it takes. > > Sheesh. Did Altium promise a new manual, free? If so, I missed it, but I > miss a lot. If they promised it, yes, they owe it. Otherwise, it would be > an appreciated generosity, but not something to blame them about if they > don't send it. Yes, I'm sure they've printed a manual. Some people have > seen it, as reported here. But the press run would be sufficient for > anticipated sales of new licenses. They aren't getting any additional > revenue from the free upgrades.... However, Altium has always sold manuals > in the past. If you lost your manual, you could buy a replacement. The 99SE > manual was $90. I suspect that there is a price for the 2004 manual. > Perhaps Altium could offer the manual for cost to DXP free upgraders. That > would be a middle ground. If you don't want to pay it, you've got the PDFs.... > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *