> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Reagan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:01 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great,
> 
> For those of you that dont know, we are honored to have 
> MASTER JEDI Bill Brooks among us. Mr. Brooks was a top 
> qualifier in the TOP GUN contest.

Already used to his many posts in Technet forums :)

> Bill, wanted to ask .... was the training class worth it?  We 
> have 11 engineers at Cornet Technology that are still using 
> 98.  We have 11 seats of unopened DXP and I am trying to 
> convince management to get their engineering
> department to use 2004.    What can we expect to learn from 
> the training?

My Colleague, Markus was at one of the training courses, he had planned to
attend some more, Markus care to add something here?

He did say they were usefull, and well worth it just to skip some of the
steep learning curve, but I would prefer he put it in his own words.

John






> 
> 
> Mike Reagan
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brooks,Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:12 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great,
> 
> 
> In my case, we upgraded a few machines to get the latest PCB 
> and schematic tools because the discount was available and I 
> didn't hear too many complaints about the DXP software on the 
> other forum... though the asking for help is constant... If 
> it was easier to use I would expect to see mostly newbies 
> over there walking through some of the more difficult steps...
> 
> We paid the money for a training class. I used it on a couple 
> of designs and was very frustrated with it... So I put the 
> box away and kept using the one I could use 99SE.
> 
> I have felt frustrated with almost every new release... I 
> guess that's human nature...
> 
> When I got 98 I found out that they had broken some features 
> that were in
> 2.8 2.5 I can't remember the number now... but I asked them 
> to send me a copy of the older release too when I needed to 
> send something to PADS it would still work in the older 
> software but not in 98. ASCII out the file and read it into 
> the older software and jump through the hoops and viola! A 
> PADS file.. Why did they break it? Who knows...
> 
>  So at one point in order to do my work I needed 3 versions 
> of Protel, Orcad Schematic and Autocad to get my job done. 
> They still don't have an 'all in one' package even though the 
> sales pitch would have you believe it.
> 
> When they came out with 99 I waited until the roar of 
> complaints died down and when they got to service pack 3 I 
> figured it would be okay.... but they came out with 99SE 
> instead.... oh boy....
> 
> I resisted that one for a long time too.. until finally when 
> I changed jobs I was forced into it.  I have been using it 
> after figuring out that the windows filing system was the 
> only way to go to avoid loosing track of what 'copy of a copy 
> of a backup version of the file' was the right one....
> sheeze..
> 
> I longed for a PCB package to edit PCB's and a Schematic 
> Package to edit schematics... and all this other stuff could 
> go in the trash for all I cared. So now we are up to service 
> pack 6 on 99SE and there is a new release, DXP.
> 
> So I waited again when DXP came out... and it looks like I 
> didn't wait long enough. So we shall see how the 2004 product 
> shapes up... but I expect it to be consistent with the 
> previous releases... buggy for the first 3 service packs and 
> harder to use all together.
> 
> I guess that's why I 'ranted on ' a bit on the sales pitch of 
> how great it was... but I can guarantee I won't 'get my 
> knickers in a knot' worrying about it.
> 
> (I just love that one... 'Knickers in a Knot'... I heard that 
> on TV the other night <grin>)
> 
> Bill Brooks
> PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
> Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 7:53 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great,
> 
> On 02:08 PM 10/03/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> >Ian Wilson wrote:
> >
> >>I am intrigued by this.  How do the people that haven't 
> used something 
> >>know it is not more (or less) productive than what they are using.
> >
> >That one is easy to answer.  Go back and read the posts 
> again.  Almost 
> >every individual, including me, has indicated that they 
> actually tried 
> >DXP before putting it away.
> 
> I understand that and did read it the posts. I was not 
> commenting on whether DXP is better or worse that P99SE. My 
> question was asking Phil how he *knew* it was less productive 
> if it was still "in the box".  He replied to say it was 
> installed but he no longer used it.  This is a clarification 
> my overly literal brain can deal with.
> 
> I do know there are lots of people around that have used DXP 
> to some degree and given up. It will be interesting to see 
> what happens over the next few months.
> 
> Bye for now,
> Ian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to