Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?
Brooks,Bill wrote: This is pretty damning commentary. And maybe a bit 'rash'... What exactly do you mean by calling the commentary rash ? Logically, their business model tried to change awhile back... they tried to introduce a system whereby support services would be the revenue stream to replace new sales of PCB software here in the U.S. Protel failed to make that happen... we as a body rejected the idea. And why did we reject the idea? I can not speak for you, but I can speak for myself. There were two reasons. First, when I bought 99SE, it came with support included in the price I paid for it. For them to all of sudden decide that they were going to renege on it is a violation of the contract and I would not stand for it on principle. Secondly, I might have been convinced to go along with the change because of changing business climate. However, the problem for Altium was that I had been occasionally calling the support hotline and knew that there was not much support there. I am certainly not going to pay for something if I was not going to receive any value or frequently receive wrong answers. Maybe other people refused to go along for other reasons, but this was my reasoning. Their attitude of We have great news for you. We have decided to upgrade our service, so the same quality service that you were promised for free, you now get to pay for did not go over well either. I think Protel has a market... it's guys and gals like us that are willing to hold on... but nobody can continue to wait forever. Altium's main market is people who have never heard of Protel before. I doubt they are getting much repeat business. It is hard to translate sayings into other languages, but here's one that bears a lot on Altium's situation for the last 5 or so years: Being bad is OK, having a bad reputation is what is really bad. Altium has acquired a very bad reputation among its users because of poor and short sighted management and now it is finding it hard to get any support from the user base. That may be its undoing. Hamid * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?
Matt Pobursky wrote: As for me and my PCB designer -- we've decided to use Protel 99SE until it becomes impractical for us. That is where I was last July after giving DXP a try. However, I got a project out of the blue that I was not sure could be done in 99SE. At that point, it was too late to try and switch to a new package. I ended up doing the project in 99SE with much pain. While I do not see a similar project on my horizon, I have learned my lesson. It is best to upgrade on your own schedule rather than wait to be forced to move on someone else's schedule. That is what I intend to move to the next CAD system even though 99SE is quite useable for most of what I am doing today and what I see on my horizon. Who knows, they might even offer a deal to convert registered users of other EDA tools to their software? Much as Protel did with Orcad users several years ago (when there was a revolt going on after Cadence bought Orcad). That could be big trouble for Altium. That would be the final nail in Altium's coffin. If I were to make a prediction, that is how I see things ending for Altium. Some competition, either someone moving up from below, or someone moving down from above will start offering credit for a Protel license and Altium will not be able to deal with the mass desertion. Hamid * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?
Joe Sapienza wrote: This past week I was invited to a show and tell of one of the competitor products new versions. Pray tell what competitor's product art thou looking at. Hamid * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] PCB Design Conference West
I am wondering if anyone is going to the PCB Design Conference West this coming week in San Jose, CA? While my primary motivation is to look at the various software packages, a couple of the short courses also look interesting. Based on past experiences, are the courses any good? Hamid * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great,
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: There is enough improvement in 2004 that the term Upgrade is earned. Earned from whom? A company can call something a service pack, an upgrade, a totally new version or a totally different product and none of it has anything to do with reality -- only with marketing. Altium is not obligated to give us anything that was not included in the package when we purchased it. What we purchased when we bought DXP was a software that supposedly worked for doing schematics and PCB at least at the same level as Protel 99SE, supposedly better (otherwise why would you want to change over?). Altium has not delivered that. So DXP-2004, if it actually works, is a belated delivery of what they had promised us a few years ago and were paid for back then. Adding new features is not a substitute for essential features that do not work. Manuals are expensive to print. So is making software actually work. That is all cost of doing business. They aren't getting any additional revenue from the free upgrades Actually they are, in the long run. There are many customers that are ready to bail and Altium needs to do something to keep them. Nothing will kill a company as fast as a few hundred (maybe a few thousand) disgruntle customers in the market looking at the competition's product and openly saying that they are looking because DXP sucks. Altium absolutely has to get all copies of DXP off the market by replacing them with something that works. Failure to do so is certain and swift death. It is true that there is a sucker born every day, but Altium, or any other company, can not stay in business counting on finding new suckers to sell to. One of my tasks for this spring is to decide on a replacement for 99SE. I will give DXP-2004 a fair evaluation when I see my copy (supposedly shipping this week), but I am not optimistic. After the piece of junk I received in the guise of DXP, they would not be seeing a dollar out of my pocket to evaluate a new product. I am certain that I am not the only customer who feels that way. If they were not sending me a free copy of DXP-2004, Altium would not be in the running for my evaluation. I am not ready to declare them beyond hope yet, but from my vantage point Altium is critically ill from self inflicted wounds. DXP2004 is the their last hope. If things do not improve with this release, I for one do not intend to hang around for the funeral. If I have to go through a huge learning curve to learn something new, it is unlikely to be an Altium product. Hamid * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great,
John A. Ross [Design] wrote: shows the actual level of respect Altium has for its users, and they know that they will get away with it, because of the amount of loyalists within the user community who will automatically defend them with tunnel vision. Lots of companies have that attitude. They get away with it because customers know that in order to switch companies, they will have to undergo a major learning curve. Most people do not want to go through this learning curve, both because it is disruptive to their work and because it is a lot of hard frustrating work and us humans are by nature lazy. Even a company as self absorbed and arrogant as Microsoft knows that and has provided hooks to go back to the classic themes in Windows XP. Protel, when designing DXP decided to make a huge departure from the last version, 99SE. Protel knew, or should have known, that for experienced users there would be a huge learning curve. At the very least, that would cost them sales because people would be reluctant to switch because of the learning curve. However, they would hope that people will switch because of the great features that the new software would be providing. But when the new software fails to deliver, the users of the old software have two choices, neither of which is good for Protel. They can stay with the old version for as long as they can and Protel will not see any money out of them. Or if they resign to a learning curve, they can look around at the whole market place and decide on the best software. Protel may or may not win in this search. If anything, the odds are stacked against Protel because these customers already have the inside knowledge that the new Protel product does not work very well. They are more likely to take a chance with a new company based on its sales presentation, rather than stick with Protel which they know to be not very good. In the end, by not providing hooks to make the learning curve simpler for existing users and not delivering a product that improves on the existing product in the areas that the existing users use, Protel has shot itself in the foot. That would not have been so bad, except for the fact that their foot was in their mouth and the head stuck up their rear ends when they shot. As a result, they may have mortally wounded themselves. I intend to give them a little more time, but I certainly do not intend to hang around for the funeral. Hamid IMO Altium are due DXP users a lot more than they are giving, whatever form that may be. Like Protel I do, very much, prepared to help make it better I am, prepared to help anyone else yes I am, willingly without obligation, like many others, prepared to be disrespected for my efforts no I am not, prepared to put a halo on Altiums head no I am not. Without Prejudice of any kind John * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] 2004 DXP Looks Great,
Ian Wilson wrote: I am intrigued by this. How do the people that haven't used something know it is not more (or less) productive than what they are using. That one is easy to answer. Go back and read the posts again. Almost every individual, including me, has indicated that they actually tried DXP before putting it away. In my case, I was actually involved in two complete designs, though in a position as an assistant and a consultant rather than the principal designer. I also played with it enough by importing existing designs and starting (and abandoning) a new design to know that the learning curve was too much and many of the features that I routinely used were either no longer there or had been made quite difficult to use. If you do something a lot and it used to take 5 keystrokes (or mouse clicks) in 99SE but takes 20 in DXP, to me that is a HUGE problem. Even if the new feature is 100 times more powerful (as in the case of the DXP's inspector versus 99SE's global change), if it takes more effort to use the feature for the tasks that you do 99% of the time, the change is actually a huge step backwards not forward. If new features designed to support additional functionality actually make the most often used basic functionality more difficult to use, is that really a benefit or a detriment? The basic philosophy for software user interface development is to streamline the tasks that are used most at the expense of tasks that are used less often. Altium either does not know about this basic concept, or there is no one there who actually uses the software in a realistic setting to know what is used often and what is used rarely. I strongly suspect that it is the latter. Hamid * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
