I'd use mylar and tape if I could turn boards as fast and as cost
effectively as with Protel. Unfortunately, doing 6 mil trace and space could
be somewhat frustrating ;-) Ultimately 2004 has to pay for itself eventually
if its going to be worth upgrading. From what I've read thus far, it would
be awhile (if ever) before I could turn boards any faster in 2004 than in
99SE. Once I get up to speed, then it has to save me ~100 hours (depending
on your loaded labour rate) or a couple board spins due to mistakes. Just to
do the math for you, if it improved my efficiency by 10% (a pretty large
improvement), it would take 900 hours on DXP2004 (1000 on 99se) for it to
pay itself off. At 40 hours a week, thats 22.5 weeks. If you only use it 50%
of the time, it would take a year for it to pay off (at which point we'd be
deciding whether to upgrade to the next latest version). That's a somewhat
simplified view, but it doesn't take into account the initial productivity
hit while learning the new tool.  

For most companies, its a pretty difficult metric to gauge without actually
trying it. The point remains...If I knew Altium was putting its resources
into making the basic features better, I could be better assured that it
would improve my productivity and therefore would be more likely to upgrade.
I can't say whether its a good choice for Altium or not, but I can certainly
tell you that for me, the new features just add to the cost without adding
to productivity

Darcy

-----Original Message-----
From: Protel Hell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June 30, 2004 9:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PEDA] SV: Licenses


I wouldn't agree with that, FPGA is kinda like Windows was in the mid 90's, 
the CAD that didn't make the transition either died or suffered. That's 
probably the main reaon PADS is #1, they were the first to be a true Windows

ap. The others that didn't do it died, the ones that didn't do it quick 
enough floundered. Some stiil haven't done it right. With you guys refusing 
to move off your precious 99SE to DXP there wouldn't be anybody that wants 
DXP other than those who want it for it's FPGA capability. DXP is not 
efficient enough for board layout only, it has to offer SOMETHING other than

it's low cost to hook people. They are trying to be a complete solution for 
the 21st century but you guys are stuck in the 1980's. Bring back the DOS 
version! may as well bring back mylar and tape!

PH

>From: "-" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [PEDA] SV: Licenses
>Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 22:03:32 +0200
>
>
>If Altium/Protel had spent their development resources on their core
>business (SCH + PCB design tools) instead of believeing they could conquer
>the market providing all other dev. tools (simulation, fpga etc), they 
>would
>have been no. 1 today.
>
>Regards
>
>A former Protel reseller
>
>
>-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
>Fra: Protel Hell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sendt: 29. juni 2004 21:47
>Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Emne: Re: [PEDA] Licenses
>
>
>Altiums Protel will never be number 1, it is just too cumbersome. Fine for
>people who have plenty of time but little $$
>
>PH
>
> >From: "Joe Sapienza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: [PEDA] Licenses
> >Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 13:56:57 -0400
> >
> >Mike,
> >
> >I doubt that PADS schematic can overtake anything....end comment
> >
> >With regard to Orcad yes in it's day (DOS) it was the absolute best, 
>hands
> >down. Something happened when it went to Windows then Cadence bought them
> >and well..
> >
> >
> >Joe
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Mike Reagan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 1:48 PM
> >Subject: Re: [PEDA] Licenses
> >
> >
> > >
> > > That is pretty interesting data gathered here.  The interesting part 
>is
> >that
> > > Cadence has been successful in trashing OrCAD from number 1 to a has
> >been.
> > > I doubt if PADs schematic has overtaken OrCad.
> > >
> > > Mike Reagan
> > > EDSI
> > > Frederick MD
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tom Hausherr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 1:30 PM
> > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] IPC-2581 & IPC-7351.
> > >
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > I just talked to Mentor Graphics PADS division and they say that since
> >the
> > > 1st release of PADS Software in 1985 they have logged 85,000 licenses.
> > > PowerLogic (schematic) and PowerPCB (layout) are separate licenses.
> > >
> > > There are currently 18,000 PADS-PowerPCB seats on yearly maintenance.
> > >
> > > It's my personal guess that there are about 35,000 PADS-PowerPCB seats
> >in
> > > use. There are many people using old licenses that are not on yearly
> > > maintenance due to financial hardships over the past 4 years.
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > Tom Hausherr
> > > PCB Libraries
> > > CEO, Director of Technology
> > > 858.592.4826 Phone
> > > 847.745.0450 Fax
> > > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Website: http://www.PCBLibraries.com & http://www.PCBYellowPages.com
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Brooks,Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 9:50 AM
> > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] IPC-2581 & IPC-7351.
> > >
> > > I wonder just how many licensed seats there are of Protel in the
> >world....
> > > is that published anywhere?
> > > Also I wonder if Pads has published the same info?
> > >
> > > I didn't participate in the poll so it's at least off by one.
> > > LOL...
> > >
> > > I would venture to say Protel may have more seats that Pads... but 
>they
> >are
> > > mostly not in the Southwest of the U.S.
> > >
> > > How about it Altium... how many active seats of Protel are there?
> > >
> > >
> > > Bill Brooks
> > > PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
> > > Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510
> > > http://pcbwizards.com
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 5:28 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] IPC-2581 & IPC-7351.
> > >
> > > According to what statistical method?
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Tom Hausherr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 7:09 PM
> > > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> > > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] IPC-2581 & IPC-7351.
> > > >
> > > > Ian,
> > > >
> > > > We took a poll and Protel is number two in worldwide
> > > > installations (behind PADS).
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN Movies - Trailers, showtimes, DVD's, and the latest news from 
>Hollywood!
>http://movies.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200509ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar   get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/






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