Re: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb?
Tony, JaMi, Partly I have to agree with Joey. First of all, the bugs that are really annoing mostly happen if I don't have the time. I need to finish a certain job, and now even the file is gone. Hopefully the backup is OK. Then I realize the autobackup has ceased to work two hours ago. Happened more than once. In these moments you don't think about reporting any error... Second, there are some conceptional errors (that I and others also reported) that never have been changed even since P3.0. There are workarounds, so I can live with them, however sometimes I struggle in old traps... Third - there are *several* hotkeys that will cause P99SE to crash in *some* (not in all) circumstance. Unfortunately these circumstances happen mostly when I work with *very* large projects where I don't always have the time to shut down, restart, and then hit the same key in the same situation. Which is almost impossible if it happens like described above, i.e. when some background process has already become unstable. When will the user become aware of that? But 4) we (the users group) also found a lot of bugs, discussed them, specified the exact circumstances for them to happen, reported them, and finally some of them got fixed. I wish Protel would have fixed more... Altium, I really do want my SP7! Heiko Vachek > -Original Message- > From: Tony Karavidas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 7:25 AM > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb? > > > Not to jump all over you, but how do you suppose Altium is supposed to > fix bugs if we don't report them? > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Joey Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:06 PM > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb? > > > > > > Generally when an application blows up when I do something, I > > just stop doing it. I don't have time to figure out how to > > file a bug report. If a company wants to hear about their > > bugs from me they had better put a bug reporting tool right > > in the application and make it dead simple to use. > > > > Certainly, I've found a number of bugs like the ones I hear > > about here over the years, many I know are still there. It > > is no surprise to me that other people are finding previously > > unreported bugs, because I'm sure there are lots of others > > who are like me and just work around the bugs if it is not > > too much work. > > > > Joey Nelson > > > > JoeScan > > > > -Original Message- > > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: September 10, 2002 8:21 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Cc: JaMi Smith > > Subject: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb? > > > > What's goin' on here! > > > > Ok, so now how come all of a sudden bugs are crawling out of > > the woodwork here, and Protel 99 SE seems to be exploding > > every time someone touches it. > > > > How can some of these things have possibly been hiding in > > here for so long and never been discovered by any of you guys? > > > > OK, a few posts back someone was commenting on the fact that > > they thought that Protel / Altium has a specific agenda re > > abandoning Protel 99 SE at the that time, and that even way > > back then they had a specific agenda in mind to replace > > Protel 99 SE by a specific point in time. > > > > Protel / Altium seems to desperately be trying to get > > everyone to buy into DXP real real fast, even though it is > not ready. > > > > I am not gonna say it, but it makes you wonder. > > > > It has happened before. > > > > JaMi > > > > (yeah - I'll admit - this one is wild!) > > > > Altium, I really do want my SP7! > > > > Altium, I aslo want the antidote! > > > > > > ** > > ** > > * Tracking #: 7020644822A7D845887FAC26256105C4461E725D > > * > > ** > > ** > > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Hi Ian, I haven't changed the shortcut, this is what the short properties are: Process PCB:SetCurrentLayer ParaLayerName = NextSignal It will toggle through the electrical layers when there are some, else toggle through the enabled layers when no electrical layers are enabled. Ever since I installed SP8 it my 99 runs perfectly :) (I can't help myself) Cheers, Darren > >Hi Terry, > > > >No crash here with two mech and multilayer on, it just > >toggles through the 3 layers enabled? > > > >Darren > > Are you using '*' ot '+' key to toggle through the layers. Have you > remapped '*' to toggle through all the layers or is it still > the default > "toggle through copper layers"? > > Crashes for me. Added to the bug list. * Tracking #: BB4D4BE7830CFF419B717B80651BD64841DEE396 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Mine didn't crash (2 mech layers + multilayer all on) Running P99SE, SP6, win2k sp3. Cheers, Matthew van de Werken Electronics Engineer CSIRO Exploration & Mining - Gravity Group 1 Technology Court - Pullenvale - Qld - 4069 ph: (07) 3327 4685 fax: (07) 3327 4455 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 2:10 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Cc: JaMi Smith > Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > Terry, Darren, Tony, > > OK, lets' look at some stats here. > > Terry, you found it, what OS are you running on what type of system. > > Darren, you say you did not crash or lock up, what OS are you > running on > what type of system. > > Tony, it appears that you tested a few different machines, is > that so? and > what are the details. Can you try other systems? > > I am running Win2K SP2 on an IBM 6648 866MHz Pentium III with > 128M of ram (I > geuss this means I gotta learn how to use the Win2K Event Log). > > One of the primary reasons I would think we need to document > all of these > problems, is that it will build the case for Protel / Altium > giving in to us > on SP7. > > Can you imagine what this must be doing to their rep as "competent > programmers" right about now. > > And right now in the other forum their saying "Come on guys > and gals, trust > us, buy into ATS and DXP, you know we'll fix all of these > problems with DXP, > just like we did with Protel 99 SE, oops!" > > JaMi > > - Original Message - > From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:54 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > Even more interesting: WinXP generates some error reports when this > crash occurs (to report to MS if I say it's ok) and the two files > appcompat.txt and client99se.exe.mdmp have a lot of > interesting info in > them. > > I can read some of the ASCII in the mdmp file: > > PCB:SetCurrentLayere current layertart > PCBHotKeysePCB:SetCurrentLayer > PCBPCB:SetCurrentLayer > > > -Original Message- > > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > > > > I just discovered this. > > > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > > Layers and the Multilayer turned on. > > > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers > > were off.. > > > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > > > TC > > > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > > intended only for the > > > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > > confidential or > > contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > > use, distribution, copying or > > disclosure is strictly prohibited. > > > > > > > > ** > > ** > > * Tracking #: 2C815BCD3319AD4D9E05C68FB9315927394BFA14 > > * > > ** > > ** > > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
On 12:34 PM 11/09/2002 +1000, Darren said: >Hi Terry, > >No crash here with two mech and multilayer on, it just >toggles through the 3 layers enabled? > >Darren Are you using '*' ot '+' key to toggle through the layers. Have you remapped '*' to toggle through all the layers or is it still the default "toggle through copper layers"? Crashes for me. Added to the bug list. Ian Wilson * Tracking #: FD64426CD8D07F4898DC8089FC18914F18113EB0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb?
Not to jump all over you, but how do you suppose Altium is supposed to fix bugs if we don't report them? > -Original Message- > From: Joey Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:06 PM > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb? > > > Generally when an application blows up when I do something, I > just stop doing it. I don't have time to figure out how to > file a bug report. If a company wants to hear about their > bugs from me they had better put a bug reporting tool right > in the application and make it dead simple to use. > > Certainly, I've found a number of bugs like the ones I hear > about here over the years, many I know are still there. It > is no surprise to me that other people are finding previously > unreported bugs, because I'm sure there are lots of others > who are like me and just work around the bugs if it is not > too much work. > > Joey Nelson > > JoeScan > > -Original Message- > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: September 10, 2002 8:21 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Cc: JaMi Smith > Subject: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb? > > What's goin' on here! > > Ok, so now how come all of a sudden bugs are crawling out of > the woodwork here, and Protel 99 SE seems to be exploding > every time someone touches it. > > How can some of these things have possibly been hiding in > here for so long and never been discovered by any of you guys? > > OK, a few posts back someone was commenting on the fact that > they thought that Protel / Altium has a specific agenda re > abandoning Protel 99 SE at the that time, and that even way > back then they had a specific agenda in mind to replace > Protel 99 SE by a specific point in time. > > Protel / Altium seems to desperately be trying to get > everyone to buy into DXP real real fast, even though it is not ready. > > I am not gonna say it, but it makes you wonder. > > It has happened before. > > JaMi > > (yeah - I'll admit - this one is wild!) > > Altium, I really do want my SP7! > > Altium, I aslo want the antidote! > > > ** > ** > * Tracking #: 7020644822A7D845887FAC26256105C4461E725D > * > ** > ** > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb?
Generally when an application blows up when I do something, I just stop doing it. I don't have time to figure out how to file a bug report. If a company wants to hear about their bugs from me they had better put a bug reporting tool right in the application and make it dead simple to use. Certainly, I've found a number of bugs like the ones I hear about here over the years, many I know are still there. It is no surprise to me that other people are finding previously unreported bugs, because I'm sure there are lots of others who are like me and just work around the bugs if it is not too much work. Joey Nelson JoeScan -Original Message- From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: September 10, 2002 8:21 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Cc: JaMi Smith Subject: [PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb? What's goin' on here! Ok, so now how come all of a sudden bugs are crawling out of the woodwork here, and Protel 99 SE seems to be exploding every time someone touches it. How can some of these things have possibly been hiding in here for so long and never been discovered by any of you guys? OK, a few posts back someone was commenting on the fact that they thought that Protel / Altium has a specific agenda re abandoning Protel 99 SE at the that time, and that even way back then they had a specific agenda in mind to replace Protel 99 SE by a specific point in time. Protel / Altium seems to desperately be trying to get everyone to buy into DXP real real fast, even though it is not ready. I am not gonna say it, but it makes you wonder. It has happened before. JaMi (yeah - I'll admit - this one is wild!) Altium, I really do want my SP7! Altium, I aslo want the antidote! * Tracking #: 7020644822A7D845887FAC26256105C4461E725D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable?
just a thought, you should have SP6 installed. > -Original Message- > From: Robert Ritchey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:50 PM > > Hi all, > I've had 99SE for almost a year but have used it very little. I > am trying to use it now to make a composite of two boards I did in PCB 2.8 (still my > favorite). > I have a 750MHz dual-processor Dell system and 99SE just stops dead in the > water when it is doing things, especially trying to figure out > the inner plane > connections which it seems to do way too much. The drawing is painfully > slow. I can't believe everyone using 99SE has a 2GHz or better processor > but this is completely unusable in my estimation on my computer. > Are there tricks to get a decent amount of performance out of this software > so I don't have to twiddle my thumbs for 5 minutes every time I change something? * Tracking #: FB1E1490696DAF4C8686A5AA9E73AE5D0EE718D2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
> -Original Message- > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:10 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Cc: JaMi Smith > Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > Terry, Darren, Tony, > > OK, lets' look at some stats here. > > Terry, you found it, what OS are you running on what type of system. > > Darren, you say you did not crash or lock up, what OS are you > running on what type of system. > > Tony, it appears that you tested a few different machines, is > that so? and what are the details. Can you try other systems? I do have work to do! ;) Yes, I tried it on WinXPPro and Win98ME. Both machines are just under 1GHz and have 512MB and 128MB respectively. Same behavior on both. > I am running Win2K SP2 on an IBM 6648 866MHz Pentium III with > 128M of ram (I geuss this means I gotta learn how to use the > Win2K Event Log). > > One of the primary reasons I would think we need to document > all of these problems, is that it will build the case for > Protel / Altium giving in to us on SP7. > > Can you imagine what this must be doing to their rep as > "competent programmers" right about now. > > And right now in the other forum their saying "Come on guys > and gals, trust us, buy into ATS and DXP, you know we'll fix > all of these problems with DXP, just like we did with Protel > 99 SE, oops!" > > JaMi > > - Original Message - > From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:54 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > Even more interesting: WinXP generates some error reports > when this crash occurs (to report to MS if I say it's ok) and > the two files appcompat.txt and client99se.exe.mdmp have a > lot of interesting info in them. > > I can read some of the ASCII in the mdmp file: > > PCB:SetCurrentLayere current layertart > PCBHotKeysePCB:SetCurrentLayer PCBPCB:SetCurrentLayer > > > -Original Message- > > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > > > > I just discovered this. > > > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and > > the Multilayer turned on. > > > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers were > > off.. > > > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > > > TC > > > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > intended only > > for the > > > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > confidential > > or contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > > use, distribution, copying or > > disclosure is strictly prohibited. > > > > > > > > ** > > ** > > * Tracking #: 2C815BCD3319AD4D9E05C68FB9315927394BFA14 > > * > > ** > > ** > > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash (do I get my money back?)
My setup is: Protel 99SE SP6 Windows 2000 SP2 Pentium 4, 2GHz, 1GB DDR ram, 2 x 80G HDD (mirror), G550 Graphics 2 x 1600 x 1200, 32b/24b colour, LARGE FONTS. At the same time I have open Outlook 2002, DXP, a few IE 6.0.26, windows explorer, a few mails and Corel Draw ver 10. Mech layers 1 and 2 plus multilayer enabled, display set to All final. And of course I have my clock set back at 1992 :) <<< (Joke Joke Joke 'don't hit me') Darren > Terry, Darren, Tony, > > OK, lets' look at some stats here. > > Darren, you say you did not crash or lock up, what OS are you > running on > what type of system. * Tracking #: 7B7EF3EADB73F642862C4EE8053B5DE1DC0BCB0A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
Hello, I have not checked if any of the board shops below have online quotes. A subscriber of the SI-LIST put these together and I thought the contacts might be useful. Personally, I have had only positive experience with MEI, TTM, and Teradyne. By this I mean that I have no experience with any of the others mentioned below so I cannot say one way or the other. Cheers! Drew `, ,` `, ,` `, ,` `, ,` `, ,` `, ,` Hi all, As promised here is a summary of PCB manufacturers that I found out about as a result of my question to the list. I also received some direct responses from some PCB manufacturers or their agents, and I've included those because it shows they take their work seriously enough to look at the si-list (or know somebody who does). This should in no way be regarded as a personal endorsement for any of these manufacturers. Recommendations === Marcel Electronics(MEI) - http://www.marcelelec.com/ Hytek Services - http://www.hytekservices.com DDI (Dynamic Details Incorporated) - Contact Gary Sullivan, sales. Milpitas,CA. Phone 408-263-0940. - http://www.ddiglobal.com Tyco Printed Circuit Group - http://printedcircuits.tycoelectronics.com/ Yamamoto - http://www.yusa.com/locations.htm Sanmina - http://www.sanmina.com/company_info/locations/glob_loc.jsp Merix (They are a spin off from Tektronix, Tek's old pcb shop) - http://www.merix.com/ Multek - http://www.multek.com/ OPC (Oriental Printed Circuits Limited) - http://www.opc.com.hk/opc.html Graphics Research - I couldn't find a web site or any other details for this fab. MHA Logistics Australia Pty Ltd. (Agent for several UK Fabs) - David Swarbrick - Phone: 03 5977 1132, Fax: 03 5977 1301 - e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Direct Contacts from Manufacurers = Northrop Grumman - http://www.littoninterconnect.com/ TTM Technologies - http://www.ttmtechnologies.com/production/quick.htm OPC (Oriental Printed Circuits Limited) - http://www.opc.com.hk/opc.html Teradyne - http://www.teradyne.com/prods/tcs/products/pcb/index.html Precision Australia (Formerly Precision Circuits) - http://www.precisionaustralia.com.au/indexl.html Hope this is of use (certainly useful to us!) Regards, Robert > > > > Hi, > > > > A number of people have asked me to post a summary of the PCB Fab > > recommendations that I've received. I'll happily do this (though most of > > the replies went to the list), but I might wait a week to see if any > > other recommendations come in. > > > > Regards, > > > > Robert > > > > > > Robert wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > We're in the process of looking around for some new PCB manufacturers, > > > after some disappointing performance from our current set. > > > > > > I was wondering if anyone could give us some recommendations for a good > > > quality manufacturer of high-speed, multilayer boards, especially with a > > > track record of delivering quality, fast-turn prototypes on time. > > > > > > Location not really important. > > > > > > Feel free to reply to me directly if you don't want to broadcast your > > > opinions. > > > > > > Many thanks in advance, > > > > > > Robert > > > > > > -- > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field > > > > > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: > > > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list > > > > > > For help: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'help' in the Subject field > > > > > > List archives are viewable at: > > > http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list > > > or at our remote archives: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages > > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > > http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu > > > - Original Message - Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:14 PM Subject: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ? > Hello, > > Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards > without getting other quotes. I've done business with a > couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like > controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't > want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 > weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- > forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that > does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself > quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply > plugging in the board parameters. > > Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places > besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast > quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? > > thanks, miker > > *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Terry, Darren, Tony, OK, lets' look at some stats here. Terry, you found it, what OS are you running on what type of system. Darren, you say you did not crash or lock up, what OS are you running on what type of system. Tony, it appears that you tested a few different machines, is that so? and what are the details. Can you try other systems? I am running Win2K SP2 on an IBM 6648 866MHz Pentium III with 128M of ram (I geuss this means I gotta learn how to use the Win2K Event Log). One of the primary reasons I would think we need to document all of these problems, is that it will build the case for Protel / Altium giving in to us on SP7. Can you imagine what this must be doing to their rep as "competent programmers" right about now. And right now in the other forum their saying "Come on guys and gals, trust us, buy into ATS and DXP, you know we'll fix all of these problems with DXP, just like we did with Protel 99 SE, oops!" JaMi - Original Message - From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash Even more interesting: WinXP generates some error reports when this crash occurs (to report to MS if I say it's ok) and the two files appcompat.txt and client99se.exe.mdmp have a lot of interesting info in them. I can read some of the ASCII in the mdmp file: PCB:SetCurrentLayere current layertart PCBHotKeysePCB:SetCurrentLayer PCBPCB:SetCurrentLayer > -Original Message- > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > I just discovered this. > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and the Multilayer turned on. > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers > were off.. > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > TC > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > intended only for the > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > confidential or > contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > use, distribution, copying or > disclosure is strictly prohibited. > > > > ** > ** > * Tracking #: 2C815BCD3319AD4D9E05C68FB9315927394BFA14 > * > ** > ** > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
That's Autotrax. Protel PCB would have been 1986. -Original Message- From: Tony Karavidas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 1:03 PM To: 'Protel EDA Forum' Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! Yeah, 1989. Red box, Protel Autotrax. (I still have a box sitting here!) * Tracking #: 89D071E82E023840B9DCC1888D1046F839EC218A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
I make it a point to not attach to this (or any other) list. The data was interesting but probably only useful to Altium. If they ask for it, I'll supply it. About your other email: I think lately when some of those bugs are found by one person, the rest of us have been eager to try them on our systems for comparison. I don't think I've ever pressed the * key with all routing layers turned off. (until today) > -Original Message- > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:24 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Cc: JaMi Smith > Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > Tony, > > If those were attachments they ain't there anymore. > > JaMi > > - Original Message - > From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:54 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > Even more interesting: WinXP generates some error reports > when this crash occurs (to report to MS if I say it's ok) and > the two files appcompat.txt and client99se.exe.mdmp have a > lot of interesting info in them. > > I can read some of the ASCII in the mdmp file: > > PCB:SetCurrentLayere current layertart > PCBHotKeysePCB:SetCurrentLayer PCBPCB:SetCurrentLayer > > > -Original Message- > > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > > > > I just discovered this. > > > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and > > the Multilayer turned on. > > > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers were > > off.. > > > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > > > TC > > > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > intended only > > for the > > > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > confidential > > or contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > > use, distribution, copying or > > disclosure is strictly prohibited. > > > ** > ** > * Tracking #: 00F1177DD6F7FA47AAA5A14D0465D1DFFF5DA86F > * > ** > ** > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Joe, Looking in the AUTOTRAX manuals, dates of around late 1998 are used, for copyrights etc. This is for ver 1.0 I think. But 1986 is when I was using Protel PCB which I believe first shipped in 1985. Autotrax had at least 4 mid layers, I have no documentation on the Protel PCB product. There was a separate program for plotting 'TRAXPLOT'. and the pcb program was named 'TRAXEDIT'. Here is part of the spec list for Autotrax: max board 32" x 32" layers 6 signal, plus power and ground planes 2 component overlays 2 solder masks 2 paste masks 1 keepout grid 1mil to 1000mil track width 1 to 255mil pad/via 1 to 1000mil max nets 1000 pads 48 types cheers, Darren > -Original Message- > From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 13:01 > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > Darren, > I seem to be remembering 89, are you sure on that date or is my brain > starting to fade? > Joe > > > - Original Message - > From: "Darren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:01 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > > > Phil, > > > > In 1986 that was just called 'Protel PCB' that was the > > first version I used then. And I never used tape again > > > > :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) > > > > Darren * Tracking #: 387FE060CCBF9847B861491FEC8D126F0153C83F * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Yeah, 1989. Red box, Protel Autotrax. (I still have a box sitting here!) > -Original Message- > From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:01 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > Darren, > I seem to be remembering 89, are you sure on that date or is > my brain starting to fade? Joe > > > - Original Message - > From: "Darren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:01 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > > > Phil, > > > > In 1986 that was just called 'Protel PCB' that was the > > first version I used then. And I never used tape again > > > > :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) > > > > Darren > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: DUTTON Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 11:19 > > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > > > > > > This looks a long way ahead of the original DOS Autotrax > software. I > > > expect that it's only a name similarity. Can't remember if it was > > > 'Protel PCB' or 'AutoTrax' first (around 1986/87). > > > Ran it on an XT. Only top, bottom and 2 planes, handful of > > > track and pad sizes, no schematic editor and no netlist. > > > It was far better and cheaper than just about anything else > > > around at the time though. I think that it was marketed as > > > Tango in the US back then. > > > The place that I worked for then had a mainframe based system > > > that we could view one layer at a time and a screen refresh > > > could take 20 minutes. Other than that, it was hand taped. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Phil. > > > > > > > ** > > ** > > * Tracking #: 0319981F8A988E4BA7DFC57FC02CAACEC4BDF916 > > * > > > ** > ** > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Tony, If those were attachments they ain't there anymore. JaMi - Original Message - From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash Even more interesting: WinXP generates some error reports when this crash occurs (to report to MS if I say it's ok) and the two files appcompat.txt and client99se.exe.mdmp have a lot of interesting info in them. I can read some of the ASCII in the mdmp file: PCB:SetCurrentLayere current layertart PCBHotKeysePCB:SetCurrentLayer PCBPCB:SetCurrentLayer > -Original Message- > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > I just discovered this. > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and the Multilayer turned on. > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers > were off.. > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > TC > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > intended only for the > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > confidential or > contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > use, distribution, copying or > disclosure is strictly prohibited. * Tracking #: 00F1177DD6F7FA47AAA5A14D0465D1DFFF5DA86F * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] Shazam Gollie! - Time Bomb?
What's goin' on here! Ok, so now how come all of a sudden bugs are crawling out of the woodwork here, and Protel 99 SE seems to be exploding every time someone touches it. How can some of these things have possibly been hiding in here for so long and never been discovered by any of you guys? OK, a few posts back someone was commenting on the fact that they thought that Protel / Altium has a specific agenda re abandoning Protel 99 SE at the that time, and that even way back then they had a specific agenda in mind to replace Protel 99 SE by a specific point in time. Protel / Altium seems to desperately be trying to get everyone to buy into DXP real real fast, even though it is not ready. I am not gonna say it, but it makes you wonder. It has happened before. JaMi (yeah - I'll admit - this one is wild!) Altium, I really do want my SP7! Altium, I aslo want the antidote! * Tracking #: 7020644822A7D845887FAC26256105C4461E725D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Darren, I seem to be remembering 89, are you sure on that date or is my brain starting to fade? Joe - Original Message - From: "Darren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:01 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > Phil, > > In 1986 that was just called 'Protel PCB' that was the > first version I used then. And I never used tape again > > :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) > > Darren > > > -Original Message- > > From: DUTTON Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 11:19 > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > > > This looks a long way ahead of the original DOS Autotrax software. > > I expect that it's only a name similarity. > > Can't remember if it was 'Protel PCB' or 'AutoTrax' first > > (around 1986/87). > > Ran it on an XT. Only top, bottom and 2 planes, handful of > > track and pad sizes, no schematic editor and no netlist. > > It was far better and cheaper than just about anything else > > around at the time though. I think that it was marketed as > > Tango in the US back then. > > The place that I worked for then had a mainframe based system > > that we could view one layer at a time and a screen refresh > > could take 20 minutes. Other than that, it was hand taped. > > > > regards, > > > > Phil. > > > > * Tracking #: 0319981F8A988E4BA7DFC57FC02CAACEC4BDF916 > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam
Jami, He had been gone for some time. They told my friend the VP that it was a response to some sort of virus, waiting for more info. Joe Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7! - Original Message - From: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam > Joe, > > I must have missed this post yesterday morning. > > Sorry to hear that, I hope it was his choice and he moved on to better > things. > > Do you have any idea as to how just long he has been "no longer employed at > Kollmogren"? > > Has it been for a some period of time, or was it very recent, like last > week, and possibly even friday as I speculated. > > Do you have any status or update on what happened. > > JaMi > > Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7! > > > - Original Message - > From: "Joe Sapienza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 9:57 AM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam > > > > Ken Jackson is no longer employed at Kollmogren > > > > > > * Tracking #: 451859AFC9AECA48B544537322F350EA9944661C > * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] DXP - Crunch time?
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 02:48:33 +0100, I wrote: >I like the PCB printer in 99SE, so I decide to find out what DXP has got >instead. And as you read some time ago found not much that I liked. Playing some more today - investigating the inconsistent and irrational user interface I stumbled across an "Output Jobs" item in the project menu. Another long story I won't bother going into (also I don't really understand how it is supposed to work) but, it looks like a PCB Project does store a few pre-defined print outputs equivilent to 99SE's PCB Printer documents. If you configure the print job from the project | output jobs dialog then it does prompt to save the project before closing and the configuration is retained. If you configure the print job from the file menu while a PCB document is open then you are not prompted to save the project and the configuration is lost. Maybe configuration in the project is changed without the project being flagged as being modified, but then you can change (and loose) these configurations with only a PCB file (no project) loaded. It looks like most of the functionality of 99SE's cam output documents is provided the same way. Cheers, Terry. * Tracking #: 4388D7CA1E73CE46B5334EE6D5A565562D3A0B0A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Even more interesting: WinXP generates some error reports when this crash occurs (to report to MS if I say it's ok) and the two files appcompat.txt and client99se.exe.mdmp have a lot of interesting info in them. I can read some of the ASCII in the mdmp file: PCB:SetCurrentLayere current layertart PCBHotKeysePCB:SetCurrentLayer PCBPCB:SetCurrentLayer > -Original Message- > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > I just discovered this. > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and the Multilayer turned on. > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers > were off.. > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > TC > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > intended only for the > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > confidential or > contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > use, distribution, copying or > disclosure is strictly prohibited. > > > > ** > ** > * Tracking #: 2C815BCD3319AD4D9E05C68FB9315927394BFA14 > * > ** > ** > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Confirmed! Wow that's a bugger! > -Original Message- > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:22 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum (E-mail) > Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > > > I just discovered this. > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and the Multilayer turned on. > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers > were off.. > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > TC > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is > intended only for the > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be > confidential or > contain legally privileged information. If you are not the > intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, > use, distribution, copying or > disclosure is strictly prohibited. > > > > ** > ** > * Tracking #: 2C815BCD3319AD4D9E05C68FB9315927394BFA14 > * > ** > ** > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
SHAZAM GOLLIE ! ! ! TOAST HERE TOO ! ! ! JaMi - Original Message - From: "Terry Creer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum (E-mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:21 PM Subject: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash > I just discovered this. > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical Layers and the > Multilayer turned on. > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers were off.. > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > TC > > Disclaimer: The information contained in this email is intended only for the > > use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be confidential or > contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended > recipient > you are hereby notified that any perusal, use, distribution, copying or > disclosure is strictly prohibited. * Tracking #: 9D53090D0233BB4B8FCF89F6E7C53E100DD022E4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Ian, Please see below, JaMi - Original Message - From: "Ian Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 3:26 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > On 02:36 PM 10/09/2002 -0700, JaMi Smith said: > > >Protel / Altium is in trouble. > > > >That is obvious. > > > You are making wild statements and they help no-one. > Ian, I respectfully beg to differ with you. I respectfully submit that while I will agree that my response to some Protel 99SE screw up while I am working on my system, may in fact be "wild", but I do no think that any of the actual "statements" that I have made about Protel / Altium, or Protel 99 SE, here in this forum, or specifically in the post that you are replying to, can be said to fall into that category. Respecting the specific statement that you cite above, I respectfully submit that there is nothing "wild" about it, and I further respectfully submit that it seems to be fairly obvious to anyone who has been monitoring the DXP forum, or participating in it as you have, and seen any of the monumental attitude changes, or any of the scrambling to make people happy, or any of the turnarounds on specific stances that have been postured, or even simply the attentiveness, all by the Altium personnel there, from the CEO on down, that that, in and of itself, reflects that they themselves appear to think that they are in trouble. I further respectfully submit that there seems to be a lot of consensus on the belief in the statement that "Protel / Altium is in trouble". It is not just me that thinks that, and I am not the source of that idea either. As to whether or not my statements are helping anyone or not, I really do believe that at an absolute minimum, they are in fact helping to let Protel / Altuim that they really are accountable to their customers and users and that they really do have a responsibility to us that they cannot ignore. Whether or not they are of any help beyond that, is open for question, and still remains to be seen. I would additionally point out that a number of people in this form seem to have agreed with a number of statements that I have made here in this forum recently. Some have agreed specifically. Some have agreed conditionally. And some have agreed some by acquescience. While I certrainly would not take that to mean that anyone agrees with everything that I say, or even most of what I have to say, I have tried to be responsible in what I have said here in the forum, and I stand by the my statement above that I do not consider that any of my statements regarding Protel / Altium themselves either "wild" or otherwise out of line. Thanks for your response and comments, JaMi * Tracking #: 41557525CFF20548907B465CA0B7D457EEB99779 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Hi Terry, No crash here with two mech and multilayer on, it just toggles through the 3 layers enabled? Darren > -Original Message- > From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 12:22 > > I just discovered this. > > I had all copper layers turned off, and only 2 Mechanical > Layers and the > Multilayer turned on. > > Then I hit 'Asterisk' not thinking that all my copper layers > were off.. > > Protel just froze and I had to Ctrl+Alt+Del End Task to 'fix' it... > > TC * Tracking #: FB26B5062B088F49805E1B7C4E4E94D11B1F5014 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] GTC - Guaranteed To Crash
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Phil, In 1986 that was just called 'Protel PCB' that was the first version I used then. And I never used tape again :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Darren > -Original Message- > From: DUTTON Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 11:19 > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > This looks a long way ahead of the original DOS Autotrax software. > I expect that it's only a name similarity. > Can't remember if it was 'Protel PCB' or 'AutoTrax' first > (around 1986/87). > Ran it on an XT. Only top, bottom and 2 planes, handful of > track and pad sizes, no schematic editor and no netlist. > It was far better and cheaper than just about anything else > around at the time though. I think that it was marketed as > Tango in the US back then. > The place that I worked for then had a mainframe based system > that we could view one layer at a time and a screen refresh > could take 20 minutes. Other than that, it was hand taped. > > regards, > > Phil. * Tracking #: 0319981F8A988E4BA7DFC57FC02CAACEC4BDF916 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
This looks a long way ahead of the original DOS Autotrax software. I expect that it's only a name similarity. Can't remember if it was 'Protel PCB' or 'AutoTrax' first (around 1986/87). Ran it on an XT. Only top, bottom and 2 planes, handful of track and pad sizes, no schematic editor and no netlist. It was far better and cheaper than just about anything else around at the time though. I think that it was marketed as Tango in the US back then. The place that I worked for then had a mainframe based system that we could view one layer at a time and a screen refresh could take 20 minutes. Other than that, it was hand taped. regards, Phil. -Original Message- From: Bagotronix Tech Support [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 1:56 AM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! Wasn't AutoTrax the predecessor to Protel? I wonder if the original DOS code has been recycled into a Windows app? Did anyone on this list use the original DOS AutoTrax software? How does this compare? Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:32 AM Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > Hello all, > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ > > Interesting, no? > > Steve. > > > * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable?
Bob, it sound like you are having performance problems because of too many rules. If so, the culprit is probably the Design Rule Translation wizard. It pops up the first time you open an imported P2.8 file. This wizard is not very smart and it often makes hundreds of needless or duplicate rules for solder mask, power ground expansion and connect styles. This can slow down your system tremendously. If so, un-check the boxes for these rules, then manually create the rules you need after the wizard is complete. Hope this helps. Mark Koitmaa TechServ At 04:49 PM 9/10/2002, you wrote: >Hi all, >I've had 99SE for almost a year but have used it very little. I am trying >to use >it now to make a composite of two boards I did in PCB 2.8 (still my favorite). >I have a 750MHz dual-processor Dell system and 99SE just stops dead in the >water when it is doing things, especially trying to figure out the inner plane >connections which it seems to do way too much. The drawing is painfully >slow. I can't believe everyone using 99SE has a 2GHz or better processor >but this is completely unusable in my estimation on my computer. Are there >tricks to get a decent amount of performance out of this software so I don't >have to twiddle my thumbs for 5 minutes every time I change something? >Thanks, > >-Bob > >Robert Ritchey >Quest Engineering & Development >1328 East Cottonwood Lane >Phoenix, AZ 85048-4765 >Tel: (480) 460-2652 >FAX: (480) 460-2653 >E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >WWW: www.QuestEngDev.com/ >WWW: www.Smart-Fly.com/ > * Tracking #: 020FF9E76389DA469F6E2FFC8BEB83812092ED4B * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] Address select jumper using 0R links...
I need to select the address of a card using 0R (0805) links, and I want to create a footprint with 3 SM pads, and be able to specify the link be loaded 1-2 or 2-3, without having to manually edit the Pick and Place file. I don't mind using two different SCH components (since changing will happen rarely), or even two PCB footprints. Any ideas? Can I have a 3 pad PCB footprint and only load a 2 terminal part? Will the PnP generator get confused? Damon Kelly Hardware Engineer * Tracking #: CA875FA2F7A34F40998D05ED1D25A06AEFE46A80 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Protel Autotrax is available for download on the Protel site as freeware. See at the bottom of the page... http://www.protel.com/resources/downloads/index.html It does support netlist also. I have it running on a HP Jornada 720 handheld pc using an dos emulator called pocketDOS. I haven't been able to run it to run full screen, only 320 x 200 and 4 colours I have uploaded a screen shot to the files area. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/protel-users/files/ Who needs DXP when I have this :) Darren > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jon Elson snip > I don't think a revival of the original Autotrax product > would be of much > value to the average designer today. Also, I think it is > available as freeware > > from a number of net archives. > > Jon * Tracking #: 8F33B327FA04AA45AC9AC863D1E8CC498E6B9971 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable?
Robert, the other productivity enhancement in PCB is to hide your large nets, typically GND. To do this select nets in the explorer pane, double click on the net (GND), select hide. This will remove those delays where the status bar at the bottom of the page reads "analyzing net GND". Similarly you can do the same for large Vcc or Vdd nets. Sincerely, Brad Velander. Lead PCB Designer Norsat International Inc. Microwave Products Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) Fax (604) 292-9010 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norsat.com Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 certification > > -Original Message- > > From: Robert Ritchey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 9:50 AM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Subject: [PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable? > > > > > > Hi all, > > I've had 99SE for almost a year but have used it very little. > > I am trying > > to use > > it now to make a composite of two boards I did in PCB 2.8 (still my > > favorite). > > I have a 750MHz dual-processor Dell system and 99SE just > > stops dead in the > > water when it is doing things, especially trying to figure > > out the inner plane > > connections which it seems to do way too much. The drawing > > is painfully > > slow. I can't believe everyone using 99SE has a 2GHz or > > better processor > > but this is completely unusable in my estimation on my > > computer. Are there > > tricks to get a decent amount of performance out of this > > software so I don't > > have to twiddle my thumbs for 5 minutes every time I change > something? > > Thanks, > > > > -Bob * Tracking #: A53546ECA9E06F40834BE0B63132062F0659CE48 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Jami, Don't get me wrong I like a rebel with an attitude! March on troops but I think we are going to be left in the dust holding our breath waiting for SP7 even if we pay wish a premium on it.Protel would then be supporting 3 products, 99SE, DXP and Accel Pee Pee cad.I don think were going to see that. As steamed as most of us are, The Borgs were right resistance is futile Mike Reagan - Original Message - From: JaMi Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Protel EDA Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: JaMi Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:36 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > Michael, > > See below, > > JaMi > > - Original Message - > From: "Michael Reagan (EDSI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:44 AM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > > Jami wrote > > >That is why I have floated several different proposals here in this > forum, > > ranging from SP7, to free upgrades to DXP (without ATS) for all who bought > > into Protel 99 SE at its current level due to the fact that it actually > does > > have problems and these people have never received any support at all. > > These proposals have met with a lot of support, even from you.> > > > What the hell are you talking about . I read every one your > > proposals.you arent an Altium employee and certainly not top level > > management at Altium so I doubt if the chances for SP7 are any better > today > > than they were a year ago.. . . > > I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the current level of customer > dissatisfaction both with ATS and DXP, not to mention Protel 99 SE, weighs > very very heavily right now on all of Protel / Altiums top executives and > employees, and further, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that every > word of every thread that has passed thru this forum in the past few weeks > has been very carefully read and is in fact being very carefully considered > by all of Protel / Altiums top executives and employees as we speak. > > Protel / Altium is in trouble. > > That is obvious. > > They are racing against time with DXP for many reason already discussed > here. > > That is obvious. > > They are on the verge of loosing not only a lot of current and also future > customers. > > That is obvious > > You don't think that Protel / Altium is looking to pull a rabbit out of a > hat, and looking for some real magic answers and real magic solutions to > some of these problems? (rhetorical) > > > >. . . I really hate to say > this but I am sure > > Altium's marketing knew ( or should have have known) the risks with > > current users releasing DXP. Legal enforcement of buggy software is > > probably impossible, because all software has bugs now. It is an accepted > > practice as shameful as it is. You choices are like mine, dont purchase > or > > recommend a purchase. That hits Nick's parachute where it hurts the most, > > by depreciating stock value.It hurts my investment also, because Im a > > stock holder. > > > > I am sure that they knew some of it, and I am sure that the were willing to > take a certain amount of risk. > > But I think that they may have misjudged what they were getting in for. > > I also think that they never thought it would get this far out of hand and > get this bad. > > Thanks for your input and participation, > > JaMi > > > > > > > * Tracking #: CBDE12417A445D4580167346B41F13009A4AC982 > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] DXP forum
Daniel, to view the archives you must be logged in to Yahoo and view them from your groups. I had a problem with this as well and discovered I had to add the DXP forum to my groups and then log in after that. Sincerely, Brad Velander. Lead PCB Designer Norsat International Inc. Microwave Products Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) Fax (604) 292-9010 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norsat.com Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 certification > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:39 PM > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > Subject: Re: [PEDA] DXP forum > > > > Could someone advise me on how to review email archives from > the DXP forum. > I am interested in the discussion that has already > transpired, but I just > signed onto the forum today. > > Thanks, > Daniel * Tracking #: AE41D922F9E4274E83D97999330EEAE30DC5BC30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable?
Hi Robert: Turn off the online DRC, or at least be more selective about what you enable the on-line DRC for - this should improve your performance. Also, the autosave takes a little while every 15 inutes or so - you can increase the time interval for that. I run it on a PIII-500, and the performance is more than adequate for me. (Also, it's stable, efficient and productive). Cheers, Matthew van de Werken Electronics Engineer CSIRO Exploration & Mining - Gravity Group 1 Technology Court - Pullenvale - Qld - 4069 ph: (07) 3327 4685 fax: (07) 3327 4455 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Robert Ritchey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 9:50 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: [PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable? > > > Hi all, > I've had 99SE for almost a year but have used it very little. > I am trying > to use > it now to make a composite of two boards I did in PCB 2.8 (still my > favorite). > I have a 750MHz dual-processor Dell system and 99SE just > stops dead in the > water when it is doing things, especially trying to figure > out the inner plane > connections which it seems to do way too much. The drawing > is painfully > slow. I can't believe everyone using 99SE has a 2GHz or > better processor > but this is completely unusable in my estimation on my > computer. Are there > tricks to get a decent amount of performance out of this > software so I don't > have to twiddle my thumbs for 5 minutes every time I change something? > Thanks, > > -Bob > * Tracking #: 276F77382DAD4F4188DBEFA75BAC8C9182F30CA4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] DXP forum
See: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxptechforum/messages John Williams - Original Message - From: "Daniel Webster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] DXP forum > > Could someone advise me on how to review email archives from the DXP forum. > I am interested in the discussion that has already transpired, but I just > signed onto the forum today. > > Thanks, > Daniel > * Tracking #: 831FBF7356E46A4FB24F5E829A91129B9FB7D3B3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] How To Make 99SE Usable?
Hi all, I've had 99SE for almost a year but have used it very little. I am trying to use it now to make a composite of two boards I did in PCB 2.8 (still my favorite). I have a 750MHz dual-processor Dell system and 99SE just stops dead in the water when it is doing things, especially trying to figure out the inner plane connections which it seems to do way too much. The drawing is painfully slow. I can't believe everyone using 99SE has a 2GHz or better processor but this is completely unusable in my estimation on my computer. Are there tricks to get a decent amount of performance out of this software so I don't have to twiddle my thumbs for 5 minutes every time I change something? Thanks, -Bob Robert Ritchey Quest Engineering & Development 1328 East Cottonwood Lane Phoenix, AZ 85048-4765 Tel: (480) 460-2652 FAX: (480) 460-2653 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: www.QuestEngDev.com/ WWW: www.Smart-Fly.com/ * Tracking #: 0D2CAF202E06AE4BB91E983250FF4FA7A9F98A54 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] DXP forum
Could someone advise me on how to review email archives from the DXP forum. I am interested in the discussion that has already transpired, but I just signed onto the forum today. Thanks, Daniel * Tracking #: 451859AFC9AECA48B544537322F350EA9944661C * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam
Joe, I must have missed this post yesterday morning. Sorry to hear that, I hope it was his choice and he moved on to better things. Do you have any idea as to how just long he has been "no longer employed at Kollmogren"? Has it been for a some period of time, or was it very recent, like last week, and possibly even friday as I speculated. Do you have any status or update on what happened. JaMi Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7! - Original Message - From: "Joe Sapienza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam > Ken Jackson is no longer employed at Kollmogren > * Tracking #: 451859AFC9AECA48B544537322F350EA9944661C * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
Robison Michael R CNIN wrote: > Hello, > > Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards > without getting other quotes. I've done business with a > couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like > controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't > want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 > weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- > forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that > does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself > quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply > plugging in the board parameters. > > Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places > besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast > quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? We used to use Imagineering, aka www.pcbnet.com, as they were cheaper than Advanced Circuits a few years ago. Beware, though, that they charge for electrical test but may not actually do the test. We had a 6-layer board that they did for us, it had the ET stamp on it, but a batch of the boards were NOT tested. We don't have the equipment to test them ourselves, so we find the inner layer shorts, etc. AFTER all the parts are on. Well, we have no other choice but to blacklist them on this particular type of problem. We have gone through about 5 fabricators due to this same game. Advanced Circuits has NEVER pulled this stunt on us. Before we went to Advanced Circuits the first time, we used Proto-Circuits in Alpharetta, GA, and left them for the same reason. I will say that Imagineering remade the batch of boards that were defective, but the two that were stuffed before we detected the problem had to be repaired by extensive effort to locate the inner-plane shorts. That can take 4+ hours to zero in on the exact pad where the defect is. Jon * Tracking #: DBFC7DAD68C6934F8D35CD4E1B36A04A69A6F842 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] I want my .... I want my... I want my SP7
:) Bill Brooks * Tracking #: F90318EB8B2EE947B643C214A171187F29977808 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
On 02:36 PM 10/09/2002 -0700, JaMi Smith said: >Protel / Altium is in trouble. > >That is obvious. You are making wild statements and they help no-one. You are excitable, you have said that much yourself, I suggest a couple of bex and lie down... Ian * Tracking #: 923508BF5C37D7489B91F8ED1D63C36302DDCA86 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Excellent! . . . Excellent! Yes Altium, I really really really do want my SP7! - Original Message - From: "Rob Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:32 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > I also couldn't agree more on SP7. It is unfair to expect users to pay for > DXP when they cannot use it right away with all the bug fixes and retraining > required. On the other hand, I might be tempted to pay for the DXP upgrade > if it would buy me SP7. I would see an immediate value to the upgrade and I > could then use DXP at my leisure and when I felt it was ready, I would > switch over to DXP. This is what I did with P99 and P99SE, but then ATS was > not an issue at that time either. I am hesitant to jump on with ATS without > SP7 and not knowing the actual working release date of DXP. Not to mention > the uncertainty with the next release of PCAD and how the Altium developers > will have time to support both products. This is the most uncertainty I > have ever witnessed with Protel since I started using it in 1993~. It may > well be that I upgrade to DXP and pay ATS, but not without them proving to > me it is worthwhile. > > Rob > > > - Original Message - > From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:53 AM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > > > Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7 > > > > I second that motion. > > > > Best regards, > > Ivan Baggett > > Bagotronix Inc. > > website: www.bagotronix.com > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:32 AM > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > > > > > > * Tracking #: 77192193B7945C4B8F9167D362BD7FC6CBD86145 > > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
- Original Message - From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:53 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7 > > I second that motion. > Actually, I believe that a lot of people out here do also. I'll bet that Protel / Altium is really monitoring the pulse here on SP7, and is really hoping that the talk dies down and the issue of SP7 goes away here in the forum. But I got an idea!<=== (Uh oh! - look out - he's dangerous when he's thinking) You know, if we keep the issue of SP7 before their eyes and not let the issue of SP7 die, then we really might have more of a chance of really getting SP7. To that end, I would suggest that everyone who posts any post to this forum include that little statement at the bottom of each and every post, simply as a way of letting Altium know that we really do want SP7, and you really are still thinking about it, and that it is not just another "passing post" on a "passing topic" as it were here in the forum. JaMi Yes Altuim, I really do want my SP7 * Tracking #: 05E1ABD4C5047744AA00D8928513A38FD70EA433 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
No, I cannot. I had to drop one supplier because they'd have my order laying around for a few days before processing it. On the other hand, the one processing the files there would call me in case he didn't understand something. The new supplier appears to have a dummy there. I recently forgot to do a ground fill after the n-th iteration and got a pcb back with hundreds of holes that were connecting to ground but the ground was missing. I'd have expected a call. It is not only the price that matters. I'd rather have one that thinks a bit for itself. I once had an urgent pcb and sent the data to a boardhouse before going to vacation, intending to proceed when I'm back. There were a few unplated holes and even they knew it was in a hurry they sent an email and waited for a reply doing nothing for a week. I can drill a 3mm out myself, aahhh ... Then there are those that have a very urgent service, very pricey. They tried to call me for a day or so to ask me whether I took 1 or 3 for the same overall price. I have to tell them next time make 3, I can always throw 2 away later on. Aahhh. ... Rene * Tracking #: DB9881888A94C0418689B024F298FA9AA4F9D1F5 * -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com & commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net Robison Michael R CNIN wrote: > > Hello, > > Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards > without getting other quotes. I've done business with a > couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like > controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't > want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 > weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- > forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that > does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself > quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply > plugging in the board parameters. > > Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places > besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast > quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
I've had really good results with these guys, good products, good pricing and great next day service. These are all the things I need. May not be the right choice for production quantities. I usually send them gerbers panels, for the most bang for the buck. http://www.accutrace.com/ - Original Message - From: "Dwight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ? > We've had good results from Sierra Proto Express (www.protoexpress.com, > which jumps to something else) for small quantities (<10 boards), 4-layer > stuff. Looks like they'll quote online up to 6-layer, 5/5 spacing. Once I > submitted a quote request for a larger quantity, I think they responded in > 2-3 days. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Robison Michael R CNIN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:14 PM > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > > > > Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards > > without getting other quotes. I've done business with a > > couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like > > controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't > > want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 > > weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- > > forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that > > does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself > > quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply > > plugging in the board parameters. > > > > Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places > > besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast > > quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? > > > > thanks, miker > > > > > > > * Tracking #: 5EB840F2C833984092708FC6B9AD83C4BE7C4BCE > * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
> I have hit monitors hard enough to break them when Protel 99 SE has screwed > me up. JaMi, be careful with your rage. CRTs have a vacuum inside them, and can implode. The shower of glass shards could seriously injure you. When I was 11 years old (mid 1970's), I would salvage old TV sets from the dumpster and take them apart. One day I had just taken the guts out of a 25 in. color set, and gently put the CRT on a padded chair. I knew even then that they had vacuum in them and could be hazardous. Even so, the CRT imploded a couple of hours later. Fortunately, no one was in that room when it happened. It was so loud I thought some criminal had shot the sliding glass door with a shotgun (I was home alone at the time - no jokes about the movie please). After 30 minutes of hiding and being absolutely quiet, I sneaked out of my room and found glass everywhere, even around corners! > I have ZERO TOLERANCE for incompetence. > I have ZERO TOLERANCE for crap. Yeah, I hate it too. But you are going to be a miserable person if you let it get to you, because there is lots of incompetence and lots of crap in this world. And lots of people who don't mind propagating it. Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > Ian > > See below, > > JaMi > > - Original Message - > From: "Ian Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 3:51 AM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > > On 02:48 AM 10/09/2002 -0700, Tony Karavidas said: > > >Hi Jami, > > ><..snip..> > > > > Please remember that long before I joined this forum, you, > > > > and many of the other major players here have had a very long > > > > time to "relate" to Altium and "motivate" them with that > > > > "personal connection", and we are still at SP6, and all you > > > > have gotten from Altium is the "opportunity" to pay for "ATS" > > > > and buy a lottery ticket called DXP that may or may not ever produce. > > > > > >Not quite true. Several people were picked as beta testers for unknown > > >reasons, I happen to be one of them. One thing that I (and many others) > > >got out of it was to be able to voice our opinions directly to the > > >development team and have them make changes to DXP in direct > > >relationship to what we were saying! That is pretty powerful. There were > > >some big changes that happened in that period and it was because some > > >user's ideas were better than the developer's ideas. I think that's > > >pretty darn cool. > > > > Jami, > > > > I gotta step in here. > > > > Jami you should compare the changes in P99 to P99SE. These changes were > > achieved largely by careful considered discussion on this forum and some > > efforts by some users to present polls and collate the results. Others > may > > like to document this history if required. > > > > They were not achieved by the rants and raves that many of us (me very > much > > included) had engaged in prior. > > > > The efforts by users to engage Protel (as it was) rather than fight proved > > to be much more successful and may have been part of the support > sea-change > > in Protel that was observed in the period between late P98 and P99SE > > SP6. We are in danger of loosing this engagement - at least on this > > list. The forum members here can make a call as to the current SNR of > this > > list. > > > > You may think this is going soft on Altium - so be it. I see it as a > > cooperative method of helping the company I currently rely on to operate > my > > business. > > > > Personally - I think I am having a better chance of achieving change with > > the sort of discussion underway on the DXP forum than the degenerating > > flailing of this list. > > > > Would I like SP7 for P99SE - sure would. > > > > Ian Wilson > > > > Thanks Ian, > > I really and truly can understand and do in fact appreciate all that you and > all of the other guys (and gals) here in the forum have gone thru with > Protel / Altium in the past, and respect the working relationship that you > guys have built with them, and everything that has been accomplished. > > I also really and truly respect what you are saying regarding manners of > communication, and what can be accomplished by taking the time and energy to > try and approach people and things in the right t way. > > However, without in any manner attempting to belittle or berate or ignore > all of that, the fact is that I have a job to do, whether for myself, on my > own copy of Protel 99 SE, or for my employer, on his Protel 99 SE. > > Protel 99 SE is a tool that I choose (at home) or have (at work) to use to > do my job. > > It is not whatever history you guys have with Protel 99 SE and its > predecessors. > > I
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Tim, Sorry I couldn't get back to you sooner. I'm on a US government contract and working in Isolation and on site for the remainder of the week. Not to mention I have to actually drive there. Anyway it appears that The answers to your questions were pretty well covered by other responses today. Joe - Original Message - From: "Tim Fifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:33 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > Joe, > > Please explain why this sounds dangerous? What do you put on your mechanical > layer that is not contained on the silk screen? > > Tim > > -Original Message- > From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > Tim, > It sounds as if you intend to use the silkscreen layer for the assembly > info? A dangerous practice and extra work. Usually do all this stuff on a > separate mechanical layer. Then go the PDF route. > Joe > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tim Fifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 3:08 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > > Richard, > > > > What I do is make a copy of the .ddb file (renaming it appropriately) and > > create the assembly drawing from it. I delete all but the .pcb and print > > preview files. > > Then I auto position all ref des to center (with correct rotation). > > In the print preview I use top and bottom overlays with the mechanical > > outline and title block. I set it up on an 11x17 and create a .pdf file. > > > > I find this is quite neat and clear when assembling as the ref des are > > inside the component outline. > > > > Tim > > > > > > > > * Tracking #: 524F310DD953EB41BC284D893FB206FADF1F2123 > > * > > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
- Original Message - From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) ~ ~ ~ > JaMi, how do you know he's not still alive, sitting on a South American or > Caribbean beach, sipping drinks and hanging out with Elvis ? ;-) > I wish it were so, I really really wish it were so, but was told otherwise. I mean yeah, I am glad I caught him, and glad he didn't get away with putting the screws to any more people, but I really wished him no personal ill health. I have seen too much in that department on my own to wish any on anyone else. JaMi * Tracking #: 060B9281B039D1418CAED3004B0761DA6F1F6AE4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
We've had good results from Sierra Proto Express (www.protoexpress.com, which jumps to something else) for small quantities (<10 boards), 4-layer stuff. Looks like they'll quote online up to 6-layer, 5/5 spacing. Once I submitted a quote request for a larger quantity, I think they responded in 2-3 days. > -Original Message- > From: Robison Michael R CNIN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:14 PM > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > > Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards > without getting other quotes. I've done business with a > couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like > controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't > want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 > weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- > forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that > does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself > quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply > plugging in the board parameters. > > Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places > besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast > quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? > > thanks, miker > * Tracking #: 5EB840F2C833984092708FC6B9AD83C4BE7C4BCE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Michael, See below, JaMi - Original Message - From: "Michael Reagan (EDSI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:44 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > Jami wrote > >That is why I have floated several different proposals here in this forum, > ranging from SP7, to free upgrades to DXP (without ATS) for all who bought > into Protel 99 SE at its current level due to the fact that it actually does > have problems and these people have never received any support at all. > These proposals have met with a lot of support, even from you.> > > What the hell are you talking about . I read every one your > proposals.you arent an Altium employee and certainly not top level > management at Altium so I doubt if the chances for SP7 are any better today > than they were a year ago.. . . I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the current level of customer dissatisfaction both with ATS and DXP, not to mention Protel 99 SE, weighs very very heavily right now on all of Protel / Altiums top executives and employees, and further, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that every word of every thread that has passed thru this forum in the past few weeks has been very carefully read and is in fact being very carefully considered by all of Protel / Altiums top executives and employees as we speak. Protel / Altium is in trouble. That is obvious. They are racing against time with DXP for many reason already discussed here. That is obvious. They are on the verge of loosing not only a lot of current and also future customers. That is obvious You don't think that Protel / Altium is looking to pull a rabbit out of a hat, and looking for some real magic answers and real magic solutions to some of these problems? (rhetorical) >. . . I really hate to say this but I am sure > Altium's marketing knew ( or should have have known) the risks with > current users releasing DXP. Legal enforcement of buggy software is > probably impossible, because all software has bugs now. It is an accepted > practice as shameful as it is. You choices are like mine, dont purchase or > recommend a purchase. That hits Nick's parachute where it hurts the most, > by depreciating stock value.It hurts my investment also, because Im a > stock holder. > I am sure that they knew some of it, and I am sure that the were willing to take a certain amount of risk. But I think that they may have misjudged what they were getting in for. I also think that they never thought it would get this far out of hand and get this bad. Thanks for your input and participation, JaMi * Tracking #: CBDE12417A445D4580167346B41F13009A4AC982 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
Miker, I like these guys: http://www.prototron.com They usually get quotes back to me in a couple of hours, and I don't even use the online feature. Their quality is absolutely top-notch, but their pricing can be variable and sometimes out-of-line on simple stuff. They are quick to sharpen their pencil though, if you point it out to them. I deal with the Tucson office. Good luck, Frank At 04:14 PM 9/10/2002 -0500, you wrote: >Hello, > >Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards >without getting other quotes. I've done business with a >couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like >controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't >want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 >weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- >forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that >does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself >quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply >plugging in the board parameters. > >Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places >besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast >quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? > >thanks, miker > Frank Gilley Dell-Star Technologies (918) 838-1973 Phone (918) 838-8814 Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dellstar.com * Tracking #: 0A204991C050394391D6491B9FBC7DB4D2281222 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Ian See below, JaMi - Original Message - From: "Ian Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 3:51 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > On 02:48 AM 10/09/2002 -0700, Tony Karavidas said: > >Hi Jami, > ><..snip..> > > > Please remember that long before I joined this forum, you, > > > and many of the other major players here have had a very long > > > time to "relate" to Altium and "motivate" them with that > > > "personal connection", and we are still at SP6, and all you > > > have gotten from Altium is the "opportunity" to pay for "ATS" > > > and buy a lottery ticket called DXP that may or may not ever produce. > > > >Not quite true. Several people were picked as beta testers for unknown > >reasons, I happen to be one of them. One thing that I (and many others) > >got out of it was to be able to voice our opinions directly to the > >development team and have them make changes to DXP in direct > >relationship to what we were saying! That is pretty powerful. There were > >some big changes that happened in that period and it was because some > >user's ideas were better than the developer's ideas. I think that's > >pretty darn cool. > > Jami, > > I gotta step in here. > > Jami you should compare the changes in P99 to P99SE. These changes were > achieved largely by careful considered discussion on this forum and some > efforts by some users to present polls and collate the results. Others may > like to document this history if required. > > They were not achieved by the rants and raves that many of us (me very much > included) had engaged in prior. > > The efforts by users to engage Protel (as it was) rather than fight proved > to be much more successful and may have been part of the support sea-change > in Protel that was observed in the period between late P98 and P99SE > SP6. We are in danger of loosing this engagement - at least on this > list. The forum members here can make a call as to the current SNR of this > list. > > You may think this is going soft on Altium - so be it. I see it as a > cooperative method of helping the company I currently rely on to operate my > business. > > Personally - I think I am having a better chance of achieving change with > the sort of discussion underway on the DXP forum than the degenerating > flailing of this list. > > Would I like SP7 for P99SE - sure would. > > Ian Wilson > Thanks Ian, I really and truly can understand and do in fact appreciate all that you and all of the other guys (and gals) here in the forum have gone thru with Protel / Altium in the past, and respect the working relationship that you guys have built with them, and everything that has been accomplished. I also really and truly respect what you are saying regarding manners of communication, and what can be accomplished by taking the time and energy to try and approach people and things in the right t way. However, without in any manner attempting to belittle or berate or ignore all of that, the fact is that I have a job to do, whether for myself, on my own copy of Protel 99 SE, or for my employer, on his Protel 99 SE. Protel 99 SE is a tool that I choose (at home) or have (at work) to use to do my job. It is not whatever history you guys have with Protel 99 SE and its predecessors. It is not whether Protel 99 SE SP6 works better than SP5, or SP1, or 99, or 98. It is not that Protel 99 SE works reasonably well 98 percent of the time. It is not that Protel 99 SE does 98 percent of the things that I want it to do. What it is, it that occasionally, Protel 99 SE screws up, and I mean really screws up, and screws up bad, I mean screws up big time, and when that happens, I go ballistic, I mean thru the roof. I mean there are times when Protel 99 SE crashes and looses something that I spent a lot of time on, or screws up my database for some stupid stupid reason. These are inexcusable and unacceptable. I mean totally totally 100 percent unacceptable. Protel 99 SE is supposed to be a fairly well developed and fairly mature piece of software, and it is simply inexcusable, totally inexcusable, that it does some of the things that it does. It is just simply as simple as that. When Protel 99 SE explodes on me, I explode on it, and usually scream and yell and go thru the roof. I have put my fist thru keyboards and thrown them against walls when Protel 99 SE has screwed me up (keyboards are cheap, and the one I am using know is missing 2 keys from it's last trip to the wall". I have hit monitors hard enough to break them when Protel 99 SE has screwed me up. I have knocked over a brand new Dell 535 2.2 GHz Pentium 4 when ripping the power cord out when Protel 99 SE hung up and I could not shut the system down. When my daughter was eight years she bought me a T shirt with the cartoon on the front of it with a duck holding the big hammer over the computer monitor, about ready to trash it, with the
[PEDA] Board Shops with Online Quotes ?
Hello, Purchasing is complaining about us buying so many boards without getting other quotes. I've done business with a couple other shops, but only for specialty work, like controlled impedance or an extreme dimension. I don't want to get quotes from these shops because it takes 2 weeks to get a quote back from them. For the straight- forward stuff that's simply unacceptable. The shop that does our "normal" boards has an online do-it-yourself quote that I can get in a matter of minutes by simply plugging in the board parameters. Can you folks please recommend to me two or three places besides Advanced Circuits where I can get a real fast quote, preferrably the online type I mentioned above? thanks, miker * Tracking #: 3272D7AF0716FA46A2987B3B77CC5C1D6B3580AB * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Tony Karavidas wrote: > Yuck. Why don't you just run protel at home? If you (or anyone at work) > isn't using it at work at the same time as you're using it at home, I > think it's perfectly legal. The OLD user agreement definitely permitted this. I think they pulled this out about 3-4 years ago. I'm pretty sure it is a one machine only license now, no matter whether it is being used or not. Jon * Tracking #: 8F84F42BD4E8134EA54B57CCF5000A38A47CD071 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Bagotronix Tech Support wrote: > Wasn't AutoTrax the predecessor to Protel? > > I wonder if the original DOS code has been recycled into a Windows app? Did > anyone on this list use the original DOS AutoTrax software? How does this > compare? I used the original Protel Tango PCB, which I think was either the same as Autotrax, or a slightly later version sold in the US by Accel Technologies. It wasn't bad, for PCB editing, but was 4 layers only, and barely that. Foremost, it did NOT have NETLISTS! Or, at least, there was no connection between the netlist and the PCB tracks, except that it could highlight all the pads in a particular net. There was no DRC. It had no external ground plane facility, only inner plane. So, if you needed a front or back side ground plane, you had to plot the inner layer and hand retouch all the pads with pen and ink! I don't think a revival of the original Autotrax product would be of much value to the average designer today. Also, I think it is available as freeware from a number of net archives. Jon * Tracking #: E29D253CFD937848BF180A84B4CB10154CD755EB * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Brad, Thanks very much, I too looked at it that way but when I realized the step to unlock the primitives of all those parts was involved and like you say the number of steps and not being clean I totaly abandoned that idea. Everytime I thought I had a neat or better way to handle it there was always a few gotcha's. The silk is my assembly output "as is" plain an simple. Not pretty but I refuse to take that many steps and the kind of steps to get a proper top and bottom assembly dwg. Just thought you might of had a neat trick for this one. Your right most CAD systems handled this well many moons ago. Oh well, thanks again though for the info, I'll just keep it this way till DXP takes care of it. I'm ready though with that mechanical layer just in case I do ultimately get to DXP. So far been able to tell customers that if you really want a better assembly dwg this is what it will take and they have agreed with me. Thanks Bob Wolfe - Original Message - From: "Brad Velander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 3:26 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > Robert, > you will see that I indicated that Protel/Altium needs a > mechanical/assembly layer pairing just as most packages have or have had for > many many years. I think that I heard on the DXP forum that this is a > reality in DXP, no guarantees. Not that I care, DXP is a very distant glint > in my eye at the moment. > > Using the mechanical layer for assembly on bottom assemblies. It can > be done, but no, it is not clean or easy and can be loaded with > possibilities for errors. > > With all of your parts placed and the board completed. Assumes that > you normal mechanical layer is top assembly. Select all the components that > were placed on the bottom layer. Unlock the primitives of those selected > components. Select the unlocked primitives of the mechanical layer (should > only be the ones for components on the bottom layer). Use a global edit to > transfer the selected primitives to a bottom mechanical assembly layer. Use > a global edit to lock all component primitives again. Done! Do your assembly > prints or gerbers with the layer inverted and you will have an as seen from > the bottom assembly view. Not too bad but still more cumbersome then we > should have to deal with in this day and age. > > Ooops forgot, if you use the .designator string as we do on the > assembly layer, you have to mirror the .designator strings when you transfer > them to the bottom assembly layer. There is no easy way to do this, > basically one by one is the only acceptable manner. > > PADS did it automagically 6+ years ago, PCAD did it approx. 3 - 4 > years ago in a slightly different manner but it worked. Protel has never > done it since ver 1.0, what is wrong with this picture? > > Sincerely, > Brad Velander. > > Lead PCB Designer > Norsat International Inc. > Microwave Products > Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) > Fax (604) 292-9010 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.norsat.com > Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 > certification > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Robert M. Wolfe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:01 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > > > > Brad, > > The only problem I still see with this is the fact that this ONE > > mechanical layer is in fact still one layer and not easily > > if at all able to be separated out for the bottom assembly view. > > If there is a way I would love to hear it, I have in fact used > > a mechanical layer in my library for an assembly layer in > > hopes of future > > enhancments from Protel to actually use this layer properly. > > For now I use as you stated, but there really needs to be an > > association > > with two layers for this to work right. If there was a way to change > > all bottom parts using this machanical layer to another layer > > that would > > work but again not clean, this should all happen as soon as you push > > the part. > > Bob Wolfe > > > * Tracking #: CA1E4AE66DC0824ABD750F0592FDE7C79D06CF8E > * > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond
Excellent! Excellent! So simple, yet so elegantly stated! JaMi - Original Message - From: "Fabian Hartery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:14 AM Subject: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond ~ ~ ~ > Like many others, I will support ATS if it means SP7 will arrive to give DXP > the time to sort out its bugs. . . . >. . . With DXP, I do not have the time to fix things I did not > want to see broke in the first place. > > Fabian Hartery > Research Engineer, B. Eng (Electrical) > * Tracking #: 3086737C0D031C4AB34714EB80AE1D79D55A07E4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Tony, See below, JaMi - Original Message - From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:48 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) ~ ~ ~ <=== I'm getting tired or writing "snip" ::) > Well I think ATS throws a new monkey wrench into the pic. Before ATS, we > got 6 good service pack out of them and the whole time they were not > collecting for them. Yes, a solid argument can be made for "I paid for > those service packs up front when I bought the buggy software." But they > didn't have to release them OR add features to them. I think the > development efforts since SP6 was creating DXP. I'm not sure why ATS > came along with it, but they do have finite resources and someone > thought DXP would be better for the company than SP7. (Probably because > they couldn't sell SP7 and could sell DXP) > Actually, while you may not have seen it from your perspective, I believe that the 6 Service Packs were probably aimed at new customers and potential new customers at the time, and were necessary to keep any "bad press" from getting started or any that existed from getting out of hand. If a customer doesn't think that you are supporting him, he is not going to buy another seat, or recommend a purchase to someone else. (I think that this very important to remember this at this point in time with everything that is going on right now.) A major part of any sales are preceded by contact and discussion with current users, and without all of those Service Packs, I would guess there would have been monumentally less sales of new seats both to existing as well as new customers. Also I think that it is reasonable to conclude that potential customers have been looking into this forum to get an idea about any problems and support, since it has been accessible directly from the Protel / Altium web page for some time, and other users would also direct potential buyers here. When you take all of this into account, I would actually say that all of those Service Packs really and truly have been paid for. >From this perspective, you might actually even say that even those who may have thought that they were getting the "free ride", were in fact "paying" for the Service Packs. The "paid up front" argument is also very valid. If you pay for something and it does not work, it should be fixed, whether it takes 1, 6, 7, or 10 or 100 Service Packs, period. > Post ATS makes it complicated for them and users because IMO, I think > ATS would require Protel to do SP7 or some other concession towards DXP. > Actually, more on this aspect of ATS in another time and place. ~ ~ ~ > Sure, I think they should do something: Either offer a SP7, or modify > ATS, or make DXP rock! > I agree, but the problem is that DXP needs to "rock!" right now, today, and in the absence of that in the immediately foreseeable future, we are stuck with the whats' left, only I would rephrase it as SP7 AND modify ATS. ~ ~ ~ > How many times are you going to reference the EULA? I never one > mentioned it in my post. > Actually, I wrote this post on the Design Aids issue in direct response to your comments on EULAs in an earlier post of yours from Saturday (I am just slow in catching up): *** INSERT Fred, I wasn't defending the practice of people shipping buggy software. I was merely pointing out it happens a lot and I don't think it merits the talk about "...violates the ethic of..." What, are you going to sue them? Read the EULA. Read any EULA. The most you'll get is your money back for the product, but you'd probably have a hard time with that if you've worked with it for years and have successfully churned out boards. ***END INSERT I may have misunderstood something here, but this was the catalyst for my writing up the whole Design Aids Bankruptcy story. For quite some time now I have been seeing occasional statements here in the forum that in essence state that there is no legal or other recourse against Altium and that we as customers and users are totally at their mercy. Well, I obviously disagree with this assessment, and I have in fact even replied to a few of these posts in the past with a quick reference to having put Design Aids out of business, although I have waited until your comment here above to take the time to try and write the story up. It really and truly is a facinating story, but I have tried to be very brief with it here in these posts in the forum since it is somewhat off topic. Anyway, onwards and upwards. Thanks for your comments, JaMi * Tracking #: 67AC4BAF8E9C944CA2A35E2155C77A42BD57AA8B * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Robert, you will see that I indicated that Protel/Altium needs a mechanical/assembly layer pairing just as most packages have or have had for many many years. I think that I heard on the DXP forum that this is a reality in DXP, no guarantees. Not that I care, DXP is a very distant glint in my eye at the moment. Using the mechanical layer for assembly on bottom assemblies. It can be done, but no, it is not clean or easy and can be loaded with possibilities for errors. With all of your parts placed and the board completed. Assumes that you normal mechanical layer is top assembly. Select all the components that were placed on the bottom layer. Unlock the primitives of those selected components. Select the unlocked primitives of the mechanical layer (should only be the ones for components on the bottom layer). Use a global edit to transfer the selected primitives to a bottom mechanical assembly layer. Use a global edit to lock all component primitives again. Done! Do your assembly prints or gerbers with the layer inverted and you will have an as seen from the bottom assembly view. Not too bad but still more cumbersome then we should have to deal with in this day and age. Ooops forgot, if you use the .designator string as we do on the assembly layer, you have to mirror the .designator strings when you transfer them to the bottom assembly layer. There is no easy way to do this, basically one by one is the only acceptable manner. PADS did it automagically 6+ years ago, PCAD did it approx. 3 - 4 years ago in a slightly different manner but it worked. Protel has never done it since ver 1.0, what is wrong with this picture? Sincerely, Brad Velander. Lead PCB Designer Norsat International Inc. Microwave Products Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) Fax (604) 292-9010 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norsat.com Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 certification > -Original Message- > From: Robert M. Wolfe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:01 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > Brad, > The only problem I still see with this is the fact that this ONE > mechanical layer is in fact still one layer and not easily > if at all able to be separated out for the bottom assembly view. > If there is a way I would love to hear it, I have in fact used > a mechanical layer in my library for an assembly layer in > hopes of future > enhancments from Protel to actually use this layer properly. > For now I use as you stated, but there really needs to be an > association > with two layers for this to work right. If there was a way to change > all bottom parts using this machanical layer to another layer > that would > work but again not clean, this should all happen as soon as you push > the part. > Bob Wolfe * Tracking #: CA1E4AE66DC0824ABD750F0592FDE7C79D06CF8E * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond
I'm with ya Ivan, It's not just for 2 layer boards though. If you have 100 rpaks on a board it sure can come in handy. I STILL cannot believe that pin&gate swapping is not part of 99SE. It is a "Royal PITA" not to have that capability What a total waste of time and effort to have to go back to the schematic or even edit a netlist. Bob Wolfe - Original Message - From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:43 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond > > Yes, there is pin swapping within DXP. This is a horrible pox. Why would > > anyone wish to declare pin 1 is really pin 5 ? > > That's not what pin swapping is supposed to be. Pin swapping is where the > pins retain their proper numberings, but the nets that they are connected to > can be swapped. Protel PCB v2.8 had this feature, and they took it away in > later versions. Pin swapping is very useful when a PCB must be laid out for > 2 layers, and signals must be flowed from one component to another without > vias. I used this feature extensively on a PCB back in 1996. I created the > schematic, brought the netlist into PCB, routed and swapped pins, then > corrected the schematic to match the routed PCB. It was impressive the > amount of circuitry I put on that 2 layer PCB. A photo of the board (see > "I/O Board") is here: http://www.bagotronix.com/custom.html Yes, that's a > 2-layer PCB! > > Gate swapping is also useful for optimizing routing when you are using > multi-part components, such as a 74HC14 hex inverter. > > I would like to see these features put back into Protel 99SE. If they have > made it back into DXP, that's good, I suppose. > > Best regards, > Ivan Baggett > Bagotronix Inc. > website: www.bagotronix.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Fabian Hartery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:14 PM > Subject: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond > > > > To all... > > > > It is obvious the major failings of DXP are no doubt due to a failure of > > Altium to survey its client base to see what would be truly desired within > a > > new product. The 'we think you want' policy does work well when viewed > > against the 'we can go away' reaction. > > > > There *has* to be an intent to merger PCAD and Protel some point in the > > future. The talk of PCAD as a high end solution is just a Linus factor. I > > have done far more work in a less painful fashion with 99SE, at a tremdous > > cost savings. I took the time to accept the learning curve that was not > > taken as acceptable by a PCAD user. My point is, I do not like endless hot > > keys. For a mechanical designer, the same evolutions exists for AutoCad > > users who have migrated from Desktop to Inventor. > > > > If my early perceptions were correct, with the Accel buy out, there was a > > import engine offered as a Protel feature six months into this game. There > > was also a buy-in incentive as well. I preceive there was no mass > migration > > to Protel because of 'the scare factor' that was all so evident when 98 > > users met 99. This is not the same for DXP. 99SE was/is good. Not > flawless, > > just good in a manner that is lean and very efficient to me. 98, while > also > > good never consolidated a work effort within a common, controllable, > > database. This is a feature I have come to admire. > > > > Yes, there is pin swapping within DXP. This is a horrible pox. Why would > > anyone wish to declare pin 1 is really pin 5 ? The only plus within DXP is > > that there is an intent to merger the SCH/PCB libraries. That is fine *if* > > the user is in ultimate control, not the s/w. The fact that the DDB regime > > 'may' disappear means, I have to go back and police libraires and > revisions > > all over again. Links ? Links can be broken, confused or just simply lost. > > When multiple designers manipulate a common library without a > consolidation > > manager, life is just aweful. All I want to say is, I need no more > work. > > > > Like many others, I will support ATS if it means SP7 will arrive to give > DXP > > the time to sort out its bugs. To me, it was SP3 that accomplished much of > > that for 99SE. After SP5, I saw no major improvements that affected my > > designs directly. With DXP, I do not have the time to fix things I did not > > want to see broke in the first place. > > > > Fabian Hartery > > Research Engineer, B. Eng (Electrical) > > > > Guigne International Limited > > 63 Thorburn Road > > St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada > > A1B3M2 > > tel: 709-738-4070 > > fax: 709-738-4093 > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > website: www.guigne.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > -- > > > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged > > information and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity >
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Brad, The only problem I still see with this is the fact that this ONE mechanical layer is in fact still one layer and not easily if at all able to be separated out for the bottom assembly view. If there is a way I would love to hear it, I have in fact used a mechanical layer in my library for an assembly layer in hopes of future enhancments from Protel to actually use this layer properly. For now I use as you stated, but there really needs to be an association with two layers for this to work right. If there was a way to change all bottom parts using this machanical layer to another layer that would work but again not clean, this should all happen as soon as you push the part. Bob Wolfe - Original Message - From: "Brad Velander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:01 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > Tim, > I am not trying to answer for Joe but here is what we do. We include > in our library land patterns a mechanical layer with a precise 1:1 scale of > the component and the special .designator string. This is our assembly > layer. It is also the sanity check layer where you can look at the real part > dimensions and measure the distances between any components. You can't do > this with a silkscreen that must clear pads, mounting holes or other copper > obstacles. Dangerous using the silkscreen? I don't quite understand that > reference but using this method is definitely advantageous. > Now if only we had mechanical or special assembly layer pairing like > most every other CAD package have, we would be laughing for even > double-sided assemblies. > > Sincerely, > Brad Velander. > > Lead PCB Designer > Norsat International Inc. > Microwave Products > Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) > Fax (604) 292-9010 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.norsat.com > Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 > certification > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Tim Fifield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:33 AM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > > > > Joe, > > > > Please explain why this sounds dangerous? What do you put on > > your mechanical > > layer that is not contained on the silk screen? > > > > Tim > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 4:33 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > > > > Tim, > > It sounds as if you intend to use the silkscreen layer for > > the assembly > > info? A dangerous practice and extra work. Usually do all > > this stuff on a > > separate mechanical layer. Then go the PDF route. > > Joe > > > * Tracking #: 381CB48292AE4F4D9B8D5E8B4A00EFF3D4299245 > * > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond
> Yes, there is pin swapping within DXP. This is a horrible pox. Why would > anyone wish to declare pin 1 is really pin 5 ? That's not what pin swapping is supposed to be. Pin swapping is where the pins retain their proper numberings, but the nets that they are connected to can be swapped. Protel PCB v2.8 had this feature, and they took it away in later versions. Pin swapping is very useful when a PCB must be laid out for 2 layers, and signals must be flowed from one component to another without vias. I used this feature extensively on a PCB back in 1996. I created the schematic, brought the netlist into PCB, routed and swapped pins, then corrected the schematic to match the routed PCB. It was impressive the amount of circuitry I put on that 2 layer PCB. A photo of the board (see "I/O Board") is here: http://www.bagotronix.com/custom.html Yes, that's a 2-layer PCB! Gate swapping is also useful for optimizing routing when you are using multi-part components, such as a 74HC14 hex inverter. I would like to see these features put back into Protel 99SE. If they have made it back into DXP, that's good, I suppose. Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "Fabian Hartery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:14 PM Subject: [PEDA] SP7 and beyond > To all... > > It is obvious the major failings of DXP are no doubt due to a failure of > Altium to survey its client base to see what would be truly desired within a > new product. The 'we think you want' policy does work well when viewed > against the 'we can go away' reaction. > > There *has* to be an intent to merger PCAD and Protel some point in the > future. The talk of PCAD as a high end solution is just a Linus factor. I > have done far more work in a less painful fashion with 99SE, at a tremdous > cost savings. I took the time to accept the learning curve that was not > taken as acceptable by a PCAD user. My point is, I do not like endless hot > keys. For a mechanical designer, the same evolutions exists for AutoCad > users who have migrated from Desktop to Inventor. > > If my early perceptions were correct, with the Accel buy out, there was a > import engine offered as a Protel feature six months into this game. There > was also a buy-in incentive as well. I preceive there was no mass migration > to Protel because of 'the scare factor' that was all so evident when 98 > users met 99. This is not the same for DXP. 99SE was/is good. Not flawless, > just good in a manner that is lean and very efficient to me. 98, while also > good never consolidated a work effort within a common, controllable, > database. This is a feature I have come to admire. > > Yes, there is pin swapping within DXP. This is a horrible pox. Why would > anyone wish to declare pin 1 is really pin 5 ? The only plus within DXP is > that there is an intent to merger the SCH/PCB libraries. That is fine *if* > the user is in ultimate control, not the s/w. The fact that the DDB regime > 'may' disappear means, I have to go back and police libraires and revisions > all over again. Links ? Links can be broken, confused or just simply lost. > When multiple designers manipulate a common library without a consolidation > manager, life is just aweful. All I want to say is, I need no more work. > > Like many others, I will support ATS if it means SP7 will arrive to give DXP > the time to sort out its bugs. To me, it was SP3 that accomplished much of > that for 99SE. After SP5, I saw no major improvements that affected my > designs directly. With DXP, I do not have the time to fix things I did not > want to see broke in the first place. > > Fabian Hartery > Research Engineer, B. Eng (Electrical) > > Guigne International Limited > 63 Thorburn Road > St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada > A1B3M2 > tel: 709-738-4070 > fax: 709-738-4093 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > website: www.guigne.com > > > > > > > > -- -- > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged > information and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to > which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify > the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy > any copies from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose > its contents to anyone. Any dissemination, distribution or use of this > information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized > and may be illegal. We cannot accept liability for any damage sustained > as a result of software viruses and advise you to carry out your own virus > checks before opening any attachment. > -- -- > > > > > * Tracking #: D23846867
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Tim, One of my major complaints about Protel is its lack of assembly layer capability, there should be 2 other layers call them mechanical or whatever that automatically mirror AND change to a designated other layer when that part is pushed to bottom or top. The Top & Bottom Overlay layers do this however there are many times and situations where I want an exact image of the part but would not want all of that in silkscreen. One good example is connectors that hang over edge of board, why provide silkscreen data that clearly will go off edge of board. Also there may be a little more detail required in an assembly view you would not want on silkscreen. There is no clean way I've seen in 99SE to handle this. Not sure I'd call it dangerous, but I just do not like putting the kind of detail into a silkscreen layer that could potentially end up on pads. Yes I know the fab vendor can do this but why put too many places on a design that this has to be done. Bob Wolfe. - Original Message - From: "Tim Fifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:33 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > Joe, > > Please explain why this sounds dangerous? What do you put on your mechanical > layer that is not contained on the silk screen? > > Tim > > -Original Message- > From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > Tim, > It sounds as if you intend to use the silkscreen layer for the assembly > info? A dangerous practice and extra work. Usually do all this stuff on a > separate mechanical layer. Then go the PDF route. > Joe > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tim Fifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 3:08 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > > Richard, > > > > What I do is make a copy of the .ddb file (renaming it appropriately) and > > create the assembly drawing from it. I delete all but the .pcb and print > > preview files. > > Then I auto position all ref des to center (with correct rotation). > > In the print preview I use top and bottom overlays with the mechanical > > outline and title block. I set it up on an 11x17 and create a .pdf file. > > > > I find this is quite neat and clear when assembling as the ref des are > > inside the component outline. > > > > Tim > > > > > > > > * Tracking #: 524F310DD953EB41BC284D893FB206FADF1F2123 > > * > > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] SP7 and beyond
To all... It is obvious the major failings of DXP are no doubt due to a failure of Altium to survey its client base to see what would be truly desired within a new product. The 'we think you want' policy does work well when viewed against the 'we can go away' reaction. There *has* to be an intent to merger PCAD and Protel some point in the future. The talk of PCAD as a high end solution is just a Linus factor. I have done far more work in a less painful fashion with 99SE, at a tremdous cost savings. I took the time to accept the learning curve that was not taken as acceptable by a PCAD user. My point is, I do not like endless hot keys. For a mechanical designer, the same evolutions exists for AutoCad users who have migrated from Desktop to Inventor. If my early perceptions were correct, with the Accel buy out, there was a import engine offered as a Protel feature six months into this game. There was also a buy-in incentive as well. I preceive there was no mass migration to Protel because of 'the scare factor' that was all so evident when 98 users met 99. This is not the same for DXP. 99SE was/is good. Not flawless, just good in a manner that is lean and very efficient to me. 98, while also good never consolidated a work effort within a common, controllable, database. This is a feature I have come to admire. Yes, there is pin swapping within DXP. This is a horrible pox. Why would anyone wish to declare pin 1 is really pin 5 ? The only plus within DXP is that there is an intent to merger the SCH/PCB libraries. That is fine *if* the user is in ultimate control, not the s/w. The fact that the DDB regime 'may' disappear means, I have to go back and police libraires and revisions all over again. Links ? Links can be broken, confused or just simply lost. When multiple designers manipulate a common library without a consolidation manager, life is just aweful. All I want to say is, I need no more work. Like many others, I will support ATS if it means SP7 will arrive to give DXP the time to sort out its bugs. To me, it was SP3 that accomplished much of that for 99SE. After SP5, I saw no major improvements that affected my designs directly. With DXP, I do not have the time to fix things I did not want to see broke in the first place. Fabian Hartery Research Engineer, B. Eng (Electrical) Guigne International Limited 63 Thorburn Road St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada A1B3M2 tel: 709-738-4070 fax: 709-738-4093 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] website: www.guigne.com This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone. Any dissemination, distribution or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. We cannot accept liability for any damage sustained as a result of software viruses and advise you to carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. * Tracking #: D23846867F934845AD452A50B4E487F4813D57A0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
I called and asked them about this once, and they told me that it is perfectly fine to install it on multiple machines as long as only the purchased number of licences is in use at any one time. This makes it easy for me to work on stuff either at work or at home. Now that a major design cycle is complete, I'm trying to get caught up on all the groups again. Alot has happened... but not enough to support this many messages. Nick is right, this group is getting a little too much like a chat room for those of us with limited time to deal with all the messages. Frank At 10:47 AM 9/10/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Yuck. Why don't you just run protel at home? If you (or anyone at work) >isn't using it at work at the same time as you're using it at home, I >think it's perfectly legal. > > Frank Gilley Dell-Star Technologies (918) 838-1973 Phone (918) 838-8814 Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dellstar.com * Tracking #: 7C5CF161DC44504AA126D2C8E53DDD75C5A2601A * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
never thought of it that way. I should look at the agreement, after all we are using a floating lisc. -Original Message- From: Tony Karavidas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:48 PM To: 'Protel EDA Forum' Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! Yuck. Why don't you just run protel at home? If you (or anyone at work) isn't using it at work at the same time as you're using it at home, I think it's perfectly legal. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:51 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > $195 for the full package? I think I might get it for home > just to do some hobby boards. > > > -Original Message- > From: Stephen Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:32 AM > To: Protel forum > Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > Hello all, > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ Interesting, no? Steve. * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Yuck. Why don't you just run protel at home? If you (or anyone at work) isn't using it at work at the same time as you're using it at home, I think it's perfectly legal. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:51 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > $195 for the full package? I think I might get it for home > just to do some hobby boards. > > > -Original Message- > From: Stephen Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:32 AM > To: Protel forum > Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > Hello all, > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ Interesting, no? Steve. * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
And how about that 1 page online tour? I downloaded the app and installed it. Tried to open a SCH using File Open -Schematic, and got a dialog box that said: Files of type: PCB(*.sch) Nice start! It's a 'PCBSCH' file. LOL OK so I find the directory where they are hiding the demo files (you'd think the demo would point to the demo files) and find a file called 3D Demo.sch. I load it and get a blank schematic. I'm wondering why the created a blank demo, and I finally figure out the screen is zooming in real tight so I'm looking at a blank section of the populated page. Very nice...(not) Panning is odd. The mouse wheel works, but it chooses the physical center of the page as it's reference. Not usable IMO. Menu panning is useless. The only panning I can find that is 1/2 way useable is the scroll bars. Yuck. Oh wait, if I press and hold the mouse wheel I can pan. OK, that's cool! Oh, arrow keys work too. OK, panning is OK now. So anyway, this SCH file shows a little circuit and there are some text instructions on the sch to tell me to launch the PCB design wizard and start routing. I didn't know I could autoroute before any parts were actually on the board! SO I move all the parts to the board and the ratsnest shows up. I cannot move more than one part at a time. When I select a handful of parts and then try to move them, only the one where the mouse is actually moves. :( I press autoroute and it works (no comments yet on the ability). I want to see the board in 3D and their istructions tell me where I'm supposed to find the 3D function: "Finally select View\View PCB in 3D from the PCB designer menu to view the board in 3D" I'm in the PCB editor, and I don't see no stinkin' View\View PCB in 3D. Oh well... Maybe it doesn't crash?? Hey, didn't protel have a trademark on Autotrax? > -Original Message- > From: Brian Guralnick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:50 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > The guys who made this web site should convert their screen > shot .BMPs to .PNGs. I gave up after the first page in the > "viewing" of their online manuals. > > Looks really cheap... > > > Brian Guralnick > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Voice (514) 624-4003 > Fax (514) 624-3631 > > > - Original Message - > From: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:32 AM > Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > Hello all, > > > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own > conclusions: > > > > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ > > > > Interesting, no? > > > > Steve. > > > > > ** > > ** > > * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C > > * > > > ** > ** > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
I agree 100%. I also started in 1993 with Protel V1.5, I think. Since then, several times protels upgrade politics were very obscure. Once (1996?) I sold the whole package and bought a new one, because it was cheaper than to upgrade. And as far as I remember, it never happened that they released a SP after the release of a major upgrade. P3.0, P98, P99, P99SE - always the same story: take the opportunity of a sales action, buy, and wait for 1 or 2 SP's of the new package (or vice versa: wait first and buy then), then you can dare to use it. Heiko Vachek elektronik 21 GmbH > -Original Message- > From: Rob Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:33 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > I also couldn't agree more on SP7. It is unfair to expect > users to pay for > DXP when they cannot use it right away with all the bug fixes > and retraining > required. On the other hand, I might be tempted to pay for > the DXP upgrade > if it would buy me SP7. I would see an immediate value to > the upgrade and I > could then use DXP at my leisure and when I felt it was ready, I would > switch over to DXP. This is what I did with P99 and P99SE, > but then ATS was > not an issue at that time either. I am hesitant to jump on > with ATS without > SP7 and not knowing the actual working release date of DXP. > Not to mention > the uncertainty with the next release of PCAD and how the > Altium developers > will have time to support both products. This is the most > uncertainty I > have ever witnessed with Protel since I started using it in > 1993~. It may > well be that I upgrade to DXP and pay ATS, but not without > them proving to > me it is worthwhile. > > Rob > > * Tracking #: 7365955ADAD6364EABF0F5AAC7813B9E6596 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
I purchased Auto-Trax from Protel along with The initial windows schematic software. Way back when they were in Santa Clara Ca. Mike riginal Message - From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:25 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > Wasn't AutoTrax the predecessor to Protel? > > I wonder if the original DOS code has been recycled into a Windows app? Did > anyone on this list use the original DOS AutoTrax software? How does this > compare? > > Best regards, > Ivan Baggett > Bagotronix Inc. > website: www.bagotronix.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:32 AM > Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > Hello all, > > > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > > > > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ > > > > Interesting, no? > > > > Steve. > > > > > > * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C > > * > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
I also couldn't agree more on SP7. It is unfair to expect users to pay for DXP when they cannot use it right away with all the bug fixes and retraining required. On the other hand, I might be tempted to pay for the DXP upgrade if it would buy me SP7. I would see an immediate value to the upgrade and I could then use DXP at my leisure and when I felt it was ready, I would switch over to DXP. This is what I did with P99 and P99SE, but then ATS was not an issue at that time either. I am hesitant to jump on with ATS without SP7 and not knowing the actual working release date of DXP. Not to mention the uncertainty with the next release of PCAD and how the Altium developers will have time to support both products. This is the most uncertainty I have ever witnessed with Protel since I started using it in 1993~. It may well be that I upgrade to DXP and pay ATS, but not without them proving to me it is worthwhile. Rob - Original Message - From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:53 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7 > > I second that motion. > > Best regards, > Ivan Baggett > Bagotronix Inc. > website: www.bagotronix.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:32 AM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > > * Tracking #: 77192193B7945C4B8F9167D362BD7FC6CBD86145 > * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Wasn't AutoTrax the predecessor to Protel? I wonder if the original DOS code has been recycled into a Windows app? Did anyone on this list use the original DOS AutoTrax software? How does this compare? Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:32 AM Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > Hello all, > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ > > Interesting, no? > > Steve. > > > * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Tim, I am not trying to answer for Joe but here is what we do. We include in our library land patterns a mechanical layer with a precise 1:1 scale of the component and the special .designator string. This is our assembly layer. It is also the sanity check layer where you can look at the real part dimensions and measure the distances between any components. You can't do this with a silkscreen that must clear pads, mounting holes or other copper obstacles. Dangerous using the silkscreen? I don't quite understand that reference but using this method is definitely advantageous. Now if only we had mechanical or special assembly layer pairing like most every other CAD package have, we would be laughing for even double-sided assemblies. Sincerely, Brad Velander. Lead PCB Designer Norsat International Inc. Microwave Products Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) Fax (604) 292-9010 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norsat.com Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 certification > -Original Message- > From: Tim Fifield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:33 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > Joe, > > Please explain why this sounds dangerous? What do you put on > your mechanical > layer that is not contained on the silk screen? > > Tim > > -Original Message- > From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > > > Tim, > It sounds as if you intend to use the silkscreen layer for > the assembly > info? A dangerous practice and extra work. Usually do all > this stuff on a > separate mechanical layer. Then go the PDF route. > Joe * Tracking #: 381CB48292AE4F4D9B8D5E8B4A00EFF3D4299245 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
> Yes Altium, I really do want my SP7 I second that motion. Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:32 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) * Tracking #: 77192193B7945C4B8F9167D362BD7FC6CBD86145 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
> Unfortunately, Roger had Cancer, and died within a short time after all of > this happened, and so I really do not know who really ended up with what in > the end. JaMi, how do you know he's not still alive, sitting on a South American or Caribbean beach, sipping drinks and hanging out with Elvis ? ;-) Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 11:11 PM Subject: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) * Tracking #: CBD8479AC66FA141A6E4170BC22EA8949A776074 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Mike, Jami, others, with this wild discussion about the failings of Altium/Protel/DXP/P99SE there is not a lot that you could do about anything other than DXP. Grab all of your marketing literature and sales promotion literature, manuals, does it not state that DXP has pin and gate swapping? Where is it? Does it not make other claims that are not presently fulfilled in the released software? Multi-channel functions that seem to not work correctly? Functions long standing within Protel tools that have disappeared? What else have Nick or Peter claimed is "coming", should it have not have been there already? They have been working on this release of software for over two years, why does it need another year? Why was it released now, rather than when it works as advertised with the features that they have advertised? That is Altium's legal soft spot. That is the belly of the beast, take your sword and insert it there. Certainly glad I was never counting on DXP for my sanity. Saving money everyday and my thinning hairline. Sincerely, Brad Velander. Lead PCB Designer Norsat International Inc. Microwave Products Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) Fax (604) 292-9010 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norsat.com Norsat's Microwave Products Division has now achieved ISO 9001:2000 certification > -Original Message- > From: Michael Reagan (EDSI) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:45 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > Jami wrote > >That is why I have floated several different proposals here > in this forum, > ranging from SP7, to free upgrades to DXP (without ATS) for > all who bought > into Protel 99 SE at its current level due to the fact that > it actually does > have problems and these people have never received any support at all. > These proposals have met with a lot of support, even from you.> > > What the hell are you talking about . I read every one your > proposals.you arent an Altium employee and certainly not top level > management at Altium so I doubt if the chances for SP7 are > any better today > than they were a year ago. I really hate to say this but > I am sure > Altium's marketing knew ( or should have have known) the risks with > current users releasing DXP. Legal enforcement of buggy > software is > probably impossible, because all software has bugs now. It > is an accepted > practice as shameful as it is. You choices are like mine, > dont purchase or > recommend a purchase. That hits Nick's parachute where it > hurts the most, > by depreciating stock value.It hurts my investment also, > because Im a > stock holder. > > Mike Reagan * Tracking #: 757D2858E437DA4BAB2A845B1EEC1FCECFA81A5E * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam
Warning Unable to process data: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_NextPartTM-000-2cb322a3-3eb1-485f-bc74-605773acc74b"
Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam
At 09:18 AM 9/10/2002 -0400, Matt Daggett wrote: >Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > > (2) If you really want to do something about spam, look into Spamcop.com. > >I think you mean spamcop.net - spamcop.net will process spam to find >originating IP, and will offer to send complaints to the appropriate >abuse desks. Probably, yes. The product from McAfee, Spamcop, may accomplish some similar purposes, but I think it was spamcop.net that I used for a while. I want to thank Mr. Daggett for clarifying my post and adding additional suggestions. * Tracking #: 066C37ECC026604B80EBE3D0A0025A4976FFAE26 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] GND Plane Neck
Re: [PEDA] Fw: on topic supply SOS
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 02:06:34 -0400, Brian Guralnick wrote: >> Which wima parts are you trying to get? > >I have no problem getting them in quantity, say 400 - 600 pieces. > >I figure I only need 10 of each. > >http://www.wima.de/smd2220.htm >1.0uf >0.1uf >0.01uf > >http://www.wima.de/mks2.htm >10uf > >All of them, 5v, or above... I thought I explained before these capacitors are junk - totally unsuitable. It is a worry you are still talking about them. Cheers, Terry. * Tracking #: FA308951DF19924897B2940C44B2D88C59B19932 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
$195 for the full package? I think I might get it for home just to do some hobby boards. -Original Message- From: Stephen Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:32 AM To: Protel forum Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! Hello all, I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: http://www.autotraxeda.com/ Interesting, no? Steve. * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
> From: Brian Guralnick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > The guys who made this web site should convert their screen > shot .BMPs to .PNGs. I gave up after the first page in the > "viewing" of > their online manuals. > > Looks really cheap... At $195, that's an understatment... aj * Tracking #: 2B0749621EBFBC4EA04439B7055407DBE3959205 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Cease the spam
Warning Unable to process data: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_NextPartTM-000-074234c0-39aa-429a-b309-77126cbfce45"
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
- Original Message - From: "Brian Guralnick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:50 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > The guys who made this web site should convert their screen shot .BMPs to .PNGs. I gave up after the first page in the "viewing" of > their online manuals. > > Looks really cheap... It works cheap too! But skip the design tools for a mo', Altium could do a lot worse than to dump their 3d 'viewer' & licence the 3D engine (there are others available) & editor (create own models) from this guy if its his. Its fast & you can define your own basic shapes, and export to 3d tools. Have not tried it fully, but with a little work it would be a more welcome addition to DXP than the current viewer. John > - Original Message - > From: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:32 AM > Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > > > > Hello all, > > > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > > > > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ > > > > Interesting, no? > > > > Steve. > > > > > > * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C > > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Jami wrote >That is why I have floated several different proposals here in this forum, ranging from SP7, to free upgrades to DXP (without ATS) for all who bought into Protel 99 SE at its current level due to the fact that it actually does have problems and these people have never received any support at all. These proposals have met with a lot of support, even from you.> What the hell are you talking about . I read every one your proposals.you arent an Altium employee and certainly not top level management at Altium so I doubt if the chances for SP7 are any better today than they were a year ago. I really hate to say this but I am sure Altium's marketing knew ( or should have have known) the risks with current users releasing DXP. Legal enforcement of buggy software is probably impossible, because all software has bugs now. It is an accepted practice as shameful as it is. You choices are like mine, dont purchase or recommend a purchase. That hits Nick's parachute where it hurts the most, by depreciating stock value.It hurts my investment also, because Im a stock holder. Mike Reagan * Tracking #: 33DBFDF400025843AE7127D596716418D8797A87 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)...
Joe, Please explain why this sounds dangerous? What do you put on your mechanical layer that is not contained on the silk screen? Tim -Original Message- From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 4:33 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... Tim, It sounds as if you intend to use the silkscreen layer for the assembly info? A dangerous practice and extra work. Usually do all this stuff on a separate mechanical layer. Then go the PDF route. Joe - Original Message - From: "Tim Fifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 3:08 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] You can't get there from here (I think)... > Richard, > > What I do is make a copy of the .ddb file (renaming it appropriately) and > create the assembly drawing from it. I delete all but the .pcb and print > preview files. > Then I auto position all ref des to center (with correct rotation). > In the print preview I use top and bottom overlays with the mechanical > outline and title block. I set it up on an 11x17 and create a .pdf file. > > I find this is quite neat and clear when assembling as the ref des are > inside the component outline. > > Tim > > > > * Tracking #: 524F310DD953EB41BC284D893FB206FADF1F2123 > * > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Jami wrote: >When I pointed this out to Roger on the first day of a three day international "Design Aids DS1Users Group Meeting" hosted by Boeing in Seattle Washington in the fall of 1983 (84?), he immediately left the conference early and flew back to Southern California so that he could immediately file for Federal Bankruptcy protection< Jami, I think the bankruptcy filing was already in his adgenda that dark Seattle afternoon regardless of your input. I am also confident Altium will make good on DXP even if it takes them another year.SP6 was a long time in the making.Altium may not file for bankuptcy, if anything they would be aquired by any of the big three. Mike Reagan EDSI * Tracking #: 39772F96C2D6394BA34B3D529FD9173E0123DD56 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
The guys who made this web site should convert their screen shot .BMPs to .PNGs. I gave up after the first page in the "viewing" of their online manuals. Looks really cheap... Brian Guralnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice (514) 624-4003 Fax (514) 624-3631 - Original Message - From: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:32 AM Subject: [PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?! > Hello all, > > I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: > > http://www.autotraxeda.com/ > > Interesting, no? > > Steve. > > > * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C > * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] Protel clone on the way?!?!?!
Hello all, I haven't looked in great depth at this, so draw your own conclusions: http://www.autotraxeda.com/ Interesting, no? Steve. * Tracking #: FDE37C3C1A14CE49AE5E6D600B3ABF48B8E75D4C * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
On 02:48 AM 10/09/2002 -0700, Tony Karavidas said: >Hi Jami, ><..snip..> > > Please remember that long before I joined this forum, you, > > and many of the other major players here have had a very long > > time to "relate" to Altium and "motivate" them with that > > "personal connection", and we are still at SP6, and all you > > have gotten from Altium is the "opportunity" to pay for "ATS" > > and buy a lottery ticket called DXP that may or may not ever produce. > >Not quite true. Several people were picked as beta testers for unknown >reasons, I happen to be one of them. One thing that I (and many others) >got out of it was to be able to voice our opinions directly to the >development team and have them make changes to DXP in direct >relationship to what we were saying! That is pretty powerful. There were >some big changes that happened in that period and it was because some >user's ideas were better than the developer's ideas. I think that's >pretty darn cool. Jami, I gotta step in here. Jami you should compare the changes in P99 to P99SE. These changes were achieved largely by careful considered discussion on this forum and some efforts by some users to present polls and collate the results. Others may like to document this history if required. They were not achieved by the rants and raves that many of us (me very much included) had engaged in prior. The efforts by users to engage Protel (as it was) rather than fight proved to be much more successful and may have been part of the support sea-change in Protel that was observed in the period between late P98 and P99SE SP6. We are in danger of loosing this engagement - at least on this list. The forum members here can make a call as to the current SNR of this list. You may think this is going soft on Altium - so be it. I see it as a cooperative method of helping the company I currently rely on to operate my business. Personally - I think I am having a better chance of achieving change with the sort of discussion underway on the DXP forum than the degenerating flailing of this list. Would I like SP7 for P99SE - sure would. Ian Wilson * Tracking #: 1374F0FDC7AA0742BEED75AED2A64C58411EDB6D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Hi Jami, See comments scattered below... > -Original Message- > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:33 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Cc: JaMi Smith > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > Tony > > See below, > > JaMi > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:32 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > > > > > "...and while many of those "bugs" were in fact addressed > and fixed, > > there were always a few that had been reported by virtually every > > customer, that were never addressed or fixed." > > > > You should pat yourself on the back...with a club. So it > seems to me > > that this guy was trying to fix the bugs and you found the > best thing > > to do was threaten him with a "breach of contract" lawsuit? > Great. So > > the guy runs scared and throws in the towel. Now you've got > yourself > > some expensive software that's "really neat" and no one to fix it, > > ever. Smart move. > > > > Actually, I tried to keep the story short. The reason he went > to the "Users Group" meeting was to say that Design Aids as a > company had no employees to fix any of the bugs - major bugs > - but that he as an individual would - for a consulting fee - > about $10,000.00 a crack - fix these major bugs for > individual companies, on a consulting basis. > > Kind of like Protel saying that we won't do anything until > you pay an additional ATS, and then still not do anything. > > After the meeting in Seattle, everyone came up and handed > business me cards wanting copies of the tapes openly produced > of the meeting for their corporate lawyers. It was only after > this, and at the urging of, and with the support of, all of > the representatives of all of those 35 companies, that I > persued the avenue that I did. > > Roger Rutman was a scumbag looking to rape his customers who > he knew he had over a barrel, since he alone had the source > code. and could patch the binary images for each > installation. He was unethical, and was trying to rip people off. > > I have a very clear conscious over Design Aids and bringing > in the Feds, and the sincere thanks of all of the people > involved with the different companies. > > One direct result was that the Feds allowed another "service > bureau" company, Cadd Technology out of New Mexico, to start > handling "software problems" once they freed up the source > code that I had found by my investigation into the court > documents. This allowed many companies to get there systems > fixed at reasonable prices, and in a reasonable amount of time. > > It was the best possible ending to an impossible situation, > and it made Roger accountable to the point that when he > contracted to do a project for a fixed price, he had to do it > no matter how many hours a day it took him, and it had to be > done by a specific time or the Feds would be on his case. OK, well when your story got longer and more complete, it got better. > With all of the talk going on both here in this forum and > also in the DXP forum, there have been numerous people > talking about whether or not we customers and users are going > to get "hung out to dry", or whether Altium has the > "integrity" to do what is right, or whether they are going to > go "belly up". These are not my words, and these are not > fears that I have stirred up all by myself. > > While I am certainly contributing to a lively discussion, I > am not putting words into other peoples mouths. > > All I am saying here with this post is that we are not in > fact totally helpless and totally at the mercy of Altiums > whims, and that we do not have to stand idly by while Altium > goes on about its merry without giving us a second thought. > > > > And do you think once the gov't was involved that he really > tried to > > do the work properly under those conditions? Doubtful. > > He actually had to to be able to eat and keep a roof over his head. I meant he was probably functioning in a slowly evolving snails pace, not as an enthusiastic developer. But since he was a scumbag, heck with him. > There are probably a lot of people still around who remember > Design Aids and what happeded when Roger tried to steal the > source code to DS1. I am not inventing this story. > > > >Doubtful. Enron and WorldCom > > have nothing to do with the guy you buried or with Protel. > Unlike the > >two big companies that were hiding the fact they were > cooking the books > >to the extreme, the bugs in Protel are there in your face. > > I am certainly not saying that I think that "Altium is out to > screw us", although some in the forum have hinted at it or > directly stated it. > > But at the same time I am in fact saying "Altium, don't even > think about it", be
Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?)
Tony See below, JaMi - Original Message - From: "Tony Karavidas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:32 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] So sue me ...(was:Crunch time?) > > "...and while many of those "bugs" were in fact addressed and fixed, > there were always a few that had been reported by virtually every > customer, that were never addressed or fixed." > > You should pat yourself on the back...with a club. So it seems to me > that this guy was trying to fix the bugs and you found the best thing to > do was threaten him with a "breach of contract" lawsuit? Great. So the > guy runs scared and throws in the towel. Now you've got yourself some > expensive software that's "really neat" and no one to fix it, ever. > Smart move. > Actually, I tried to keep the story short. The reason he went to the "Users Group" meeting was to say that Design Aids as a company had no employees to fix any of the bugs - major bugs - but that he as an individual would - for a consulting fee - about $10,000.00 a crack - fix these major bugs for individual companies, on a consulting basis. Kind of like Protel saying that we won't do anything until you pay an additional ATS, and then still not do anything. After the meeting in Seattle, everyone came up and handed business me cards wanting copies of the tapes openly produced of the meeting for their corporate lawyers. It was only after this, and at the urging of, and with the support of, all of the representatives of all of those 35 companies, that I persued the avenue that I did. Roger Rutman was a scumbag looking to rape his customers who he knew he had over a barrel, since he alone had the source code. and could patch the binary images for each installation. He was unethical, and was trying to rip people off. I have a very clear conscious over Design Aids and bringing in the Feds, and the sincere thanks of all of the people involved with the different companies. One direct result was that the Feds allowed another "service bureau" company, Cadd Technology out of New Mexico, to start handling "software problems" once they freed up the source code that I had found by my investigation into the court documents. This allowed many companies to get there systems fixed at reasonable prices, and in a reasonable amount of time. It was the best possible ending to an impossible situation, and it made Roger accountable to the point that when he contracted to do a project for a fixed price, he had to do it no matter how many hours a day it took him, and it had to be done by a specific time or the Feds would be on his case. With all of the talk going on both here in this forum and also in the DXP forum, there have been numerous people talking about whether or not we customers and users are going to get "hung out to dry", or whether Altium has the "integrity" to do what is right, or whether they are going to go "belly up". These are not my words, and these are not fears that I have stirred up all by myself. While I am certainly contributing to a lively discussion, I am not putting words into other peoples mouths. All I am saying here with this post is that we are not in fact totally helpless and totally at the mercy of Altiums whims, and that we do not have to stand idly by while Altium goes on about its merry without giving us a second thought. > And do you think once the gov't was involved that he really tried to do > the work properly under those conditions? Doubtful. He actually had to to be able to eat and keep a roof over his head. There are probably a lot of people still around who remember Design Aids and what happeded when Roger tried to steal the source code to DS1. I am not inventing this story. >Doubtful. Enron and WorldCom > have nothing to do with the guy you buried or with Protel. Unlike the > two big companies that were hiding the fact they were cooking the books > to the extreme, the bugs in Protel are there in your face. I am certainly not saying that I think that "Altium is out to screw us", although some in the forum have hinted at it or directly stated it. But at the same time I am in fact saying "Altium, don't even think about it", because I for one will scream "bloody murder". I am not for a moment saying that I think that Altium's top management is getting ready to jump into their "golden parachutes" and take what may be left and abandon ship, in the manner of ENRON. But I am saying that if it even begins to look like they might even be thinking about doing something like that, then that we as the people who stand to loose the most will be ready to do what it takes to prevent that. I will be the first to admit that we really do need to do is support Altium right now, but at the same time I will be the first to say that they really need to support us too. > It doesn't > take long to find them, and you CAN return the s/w if it isn't suitable. > Go buy someone else's software if you
