Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-12 Thread John A. Ross [Design]
FYI, I reside in the UK but spend a lot of working time also in Sweden
and Germany, not so much in China/Korea any more as those operations are
well up and running now.

US orientated, political nomenclature means little to me although I
guess, I better get used to it for NAB next weekend if I want to
appreciate the humour ;)

John


 -Original Message-
 From: Abd ulRahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 2:56 AM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 
 At 07:16 PM 4/11/2004, John A. Ross [RSDTV] wrote:
 You can hardly call me silent [...]
 
 I'm not sure where Mr. Ross lives, but in the United States 
 various politicians have been known to use the term silent 
 majority to claim that anyone who disagrees with them merely 
 represents some extremist fringe, and they are the true 
 spokespeople for the majority.
 
 My point was that we don't know how the majority feels simply 
 from how we individually feel, nor do we necessarily know it 
 from the squeaky wheels. 
 This is *not* a criticism of squeaky wheels, nor is it any 
 attempt to denigrate Mr. Ross or what he has been saying.
 
 As far as being coherent, I will devote as much time, 
 documentation and 
 effort as otherwise required to get my point across, on one simple 
 condition.
 
 In my usage of the word, then, Mr. Ross is a single photon. 
 Coherent as I used it would mean some coordinated 
 expression of users, not merely an individual expression.
 
 That is as long as I believe my efforts are not wasted, nor 
 in vain, or 
 that they are actually being acknowledged at all.
 
 Yes, though the last clause is ... incoherent. :-) At least I 
 couldn't quite make sense of it. But the point is clear from 
 the first part. 
 (Coherent is here used to mean unintelligible, which is 
 *not* how I was using it in my previous post.)
 
 The last point is Altiums weakness. An insular community and 
 train of 
 thought. There are many specialists who could compile a survey for 
 Altium, in my experience home grown surveys, even by the most 
 experienced 'marketing' types is flawed from the start.
 
 I don't know what kind of surveying Altium has done. I've 
 received informal calls, and it is possible that something 
 was being compiled from these. But I do have in mind a more 
 active form of communication between users and the company.
 
 I see helping other users without reward a positive use of my time.
 
 As do I.
 
 If I think for a moment I am wasting my time I would rather 
 spend it on 
 my kids  my family, they are by far my preferred future investment.
 
 Understood.
 
 I guess you just see my comments as being incoherent, ineffective, a 
 waste of your reading tome and of no practical use. So be it.
 
 No, that is not at all how I see Mr. Ross's writing. When I 
 see writing that is a waste of time I pass it by!
 
 Mr. Ross, unfortunately, appears to have taken some very 
 general comments I made as if they were directed at him, 
 merely because his post triggered the observations. I'll 
 quote what I wrote that might have occasioned this:
 
 Anyway, I'd like to see better communication between Altium 
 and the users, and that is going to require a certain level 
 of organization of the users. 
 You can't communicate with someone who is incoherent, and 
 there is no active mechanism which will allow the users to 
 speak coherently.
 
 Incoherent did not refer to Mr. Ross, but to the body of 
 users -- all of us --, who have no means of communicating 
 coherently, that is, with one voice (ideally, representing 
 a broad consensus). The mailing lists function partially 
 toward this direction, sometimes, but not reliably.
 
 I'll ignore the other bait ;)
 
 There was an implicit invitation at the end of my post for 
 users to join in developing coherence (on 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED], which has 
 decision-making mechanisms); I could speculate that Mr. Ross 
 is saying that he will ignore this, but, to be truthful, I 
 don't really know what he meant.
 
 
 
 


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-12 Thread edsi
John wrote
You can hardly call me silent, I am certainly not in Jami's league when it
comes to hell raising but I am certainly not quiet (no insult intended
Jami).



I will vouch for Mr. Ross,  He has helped me out on several occasions, including 
translating a PADs file or two

Thanks John and keep up the chin up!   Is that a British saying?

Mike





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-11 Thread Dennis Saputelli
so as a friend of mine once said:
'you got any _good_ news'?

our 2004 has still not arrived
i was advised by altium that the CDs were 'injected' into 
the US mail system in mid march
(i'll leave that comment as the straight man setup line)

it has been a long long stated goal of protel to offer
a complete suite of end to end design tools - 
way back to the earliest days when they weren't really offering them

so i guess this latest push into FPGAs et al is the final 
leg of that journey

PCB layout tools are maybe just not sexy enough to hold their full
attention any longer

a solid 3D modeller (2-way w/ solidworks), 
a real (useable) interactive semi automated
comp placement tool and
a screaming -interactive- autorouter
would be examples of a few productivity enhancers that would 
be much appreciated by us board guys
these types of enhancements don't seem to be on their radar

however, the multi channel stuff is compelling enough for 
us to give 2004 a whack
also in a few years 99SE will probably finally break due to some
Access/MDAC or other MS problem, so the switch over is an inevitability
i think

Dennis Saputelli

edsi wrote:
 
 The problem with DXP, it is fairly widely acknowledged, is that its
 increased power has come with an increased complexity which has not yet been 
 sufficiently been compensated by ease-of-use enhancements. An
 experienced 99SE user is going to face a serious retraining hit at this time. The 
 general report from those who bite the bullet and learn the DXP way is that it is 
 worth it, *but*, quite obviously, if you are going to have to retrain, the time is 
 ripe to consider other systems.
 
 Here is my assessment
 Fair Warning ... don't uninstall your 99SE if the EULA indeed recommended that you 
 uninstall. I have had 2004 long enough to do about 6 pcb designs, and can report few 
 if any real improvements. Let's count the real improvements, without arguing whether 
 features are better or not. PCB onlyI don't dabble in the schematica world
 
 SPECTRA interface has improved, ODB output is an improvement, PAD stacks are finally 
 implemented. RELIABILTY rates with version 3.x. I got access violations to the point 
 that it quit working on me completely. Had to shut down for a half day, translate 
 that to half day loss wages. Mouse control rates with version 3.x . Things stick to 
 your cursor and you scream at your PC LET IT GO , I don't want to pick that up. 
 Maybe I need to slow down my inputs so DXP can catch up. I forgot to mention, it 
 worse than a resource hog it is a pig. It is slower than 99SE. I am running a 2 Gig 
 machine. I had to disable MACAFEE virus and my firewall. Half the time it wont even 
 come up if the firewall is activated. How is that for real feedback and not just 
 saying it sucks. Some Keystrokes are disabled so now you have depress buttons with 
 the mouse/ cursor which slows design down,  it has the real feel of ACCEL.  I also 
 am trained on PCAD.Most the menus are not easily legible, you have do read thru
 alot of uneccessary inform
 ation and  pictures to change one parameter. The same information is there but the 
 presentation is poor. Maybe a PADS user or an ACCEL user might like it because they 
 don't know the difference. ACCEL graphics looks like bit-mapped Crayola and if you 
 zoom out in PADs round pads turn to squares and other objects , so this looks good 
 to new Altium customers.
 
 The masking features are cool but in case ya'll didn't know it, you could mask in 
 99SE. In single mode, with one a mechanical layer click on the net, net class etc. 
 on the pcb panel. The mask isn't crystal clear, but Protel could have improved this 
 without introducing ACCESS VIOLATIONS , Bet you didn't know you mask in 99SE. I've 
 been doing it for years to analyses complex routes.
 
 99 percent of what I typed into the online help turned up no help. Custumizing is 
 very limited.   I exceeded this program's abilty in a few hours.  I exceed the 
 original DXP release in about 30 minutes. It was useless. I must be getting smarter. 
  2004 is much better than DXP but ...
 
 There is no real clear advantage over 99SE PCB other than popping up ACCESS 
 VIOLATIONS . It designs the same  boards, in more time . Believe me, by the time I 
 rolled my 6 th board out, I know how to use this program. It takes longer to design 
 with because you fight with it instead of it rolling off your finger tips. I don't 
 care if Altium is listening or not at this point, Im just passing the costs on to my 
 customers like everyone else does. Hope Altium never needs a design from me because 
 I would charge them my highest rate. At this point, I don't have time to debug their 
 tools anymore, including their router. This stuff should be mature, very mature. It 
 has been under development for a long time. DXP is basically on it 4th release with 
 2004. I don't see the dust settling until SP2 for 2004. I will be closer to 
 retirement by then so it won't 

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-11 Thread John A. Ross [RSDTV]
Mr Lomax

You can hardly call me silent, I am certainly not in Jami's league when it
comes to hell raising but I am certainly not quiet (no insult intended
Jami).

As far as being coherent, I will devote as much time, documentation and
effort as otherwise required to get my point across, on one simple
condition. 

That is as long as I believe my efforts are not wasted, nor in vain, or that
they are actually being acknowledged at all. 

The last point is Altiums weakness. An insular community and train of
thought. There are many specialists who could compile a survey for Altium,
in my experience home grown surveys, even by the most experienced
'marketing' types is flawed from the start.

I see helping other users without reward a positive use of my time.

If I think for a moment I am wasting my time I would rather spend it on my
kids  my family, they are by far my preferred future investment.

I guess you just see my comments as being incoherent, ineffective, a waste
of your reading tome and of no practical use. So be it.

I'll ignore the other bait ;)

John
  

 -Original Message-
 From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 10:31 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 
 At 02:40 PM 4/10/2004, John A. Ross [RSDTV] wrote:
 It is a sad fact that Altium would prefer to listen to the 
 'few' than 
 the many as regards how their tools are now styled, viewed and the 
 direction that they have taken.
 
 This brings us to a classic problem, that of the alleged 
 silent majority. 
 Unless you actually survey a population, you don't really 
 know what the population, as a whole thinks, and even polls 
 and surveys can be problematic. Many people simply assume 
 that the majority thinks the way they do. I think I have a solution.
 
 By the few I mean the 'yes' men who will agree to anything 
 from Altium 
 that betters their own needs [...]
 
 Hmmm Isn't it normal for people to agree with something 
 that betters their own needs?
 
 It seems fairly clear that some users *like* DXP and others 
 don't. The balance is far from clear.
 
 Anyway, I'd like to see better communication between Altium 
 and the users, and that is going to require a certain level 
 of organization of the users. 
 You can't communicate with someone who is incoherent, and 
 there is no active mechanism which will allow the users to 
 speak coherently. So there is just whatever happens to be 
 written on the mailing lists, often by those who are 
 disproportionally motivated to write (and I include myself in 
 this) or whatever Altium privately gleans from isolated users 
 (or, perhaps, determines more scientifically, I certainly 
 don't know the extent or power of Altium's research in this area).
 
 And I'm going to have to write about that on 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 
 
 



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-11 Thread Abd ulRahman Lomax
At 07:16 PM 4/11/2004, John A. Ross [RSDTV] wrote:
You can hardly call me silent [...]
I'm not sure where Mr. Ross lives, but in the United States various 
politicians have been known to use the term silent majority to claim that 
anyone who disagrees with them merely represents some extremist fringe, and 
they are the true spokespeople for the majority.

My point was that we don't know how the majority feels simply from how we 
individually feel, nor do we necessarily know it from the squeaky wheels. 
This is *not* a criticism of squeaky wheels, nor is it any attempt to 
denigrate Mr. Ross or what he has been saying.

As far as being coherent, I will devote as much time, documentation and
effort as otherwise required to get my point across, on one simple
condition.
In my usage of the word, then, Mr. Ross is a single photon. Coherent as I 
used it would mean some coordinated expression of users, not merely an 
individual expression.

That is as long as I believe my efforts are not wasted, nor in vain, or that
they are actually being acknowledged at all.
Yes, though the last clause is ... incoherent. :-) At least I couldn't 
quite make sense of it. But the point is clear from the first part. 
(Coherent is here used to mean unintelligible, which is *not* how I was 
using it in my previous post.)

The last point is Altiums weakness. An insular community and train of
thought. There are many specialists who could compile a survey for Altium,
in my experience home grown surveys, even by the most experienced
'marketing' types is flawed from the start.
I don't know what kind of surveying Altium has done. I've received informal 
calls, and it is possible that something was being compiled from these. But 
I do have in mind a more active form of communication between users and the 
company.

I see helping other users without reward a positive use of my time.
As do I.

If I think for a moment I am wasting my time I would rather spend it on my
kids  my family, they are by far my preferred future investment.
Understood.

I guess you just see my comments as being incoherent, ineffective, a waste
of your reading tome and of no practical use. So be it.
No, that is not at all how I see Mr. Ross's writing. When I see writing 
that is a waste of time I pass it by!

Mr. Ross, unfortunately, appears to have taken some very general comments I 
made as if they were directed at him, merely because his post triggered the 
observations. I'll quote what I wrote that might have occasioned this:

Anyway, I'd like to see better communication between Altium and the users, 
and that is going to require a certain level of organization of the users. 
You can't communicate with someone who is incoherent, and there is no 
active mechanism which will allow the users to speak coherently.

Incoherent did not refer to Mr. Ross, but to the body of users -- all of 
us --, who have no means of communicating coherently, that is, with one 
voice (ideally, representing a broad consensus). The mailing lists function 
partially toward this direction, sometimes, but not reliably.

I'll ignore the other bait ;)
There was an implicit invitation at the end of my post for users to join in 
developing coherence (on [EMAIL PROTECTED], which 
has decision-making mechanisms); I could speculate that Mr. Ross is saying 
that he will ignore this, but, to be truthful, I don't really know what he 
meant.



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-10 Thread hwasti
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?

2004-04-10 Thread hwasti
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?

2004-04-10 Thread Rich Thompson
 I got my 2004 disks last week, so far I have found it to be very good. Much
better than DXP.  The new schematic wiring modes are great, real time
savers, and the sch display is neater too.  PCB hasn't changed much compared
to dxp but I like that side mostly anyway.  The whole package 'seems'
finished now, where as dxp didn't.  It is much better than 99SE, I
wouldn't go back to that if you paid me.  Sorry if that sounds like an
advert ;-)

Rich

PS.  The router still isn't much good for multilayer designs, but for double
sided stuff it works okay. We don't go below 7mil track/space though.

-Original Message-
From: Cliff Gerhard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
I went back to Protel and made the transition from 99SE to DXP. I don't know
why they didn't just fix 99SE instead of basically starting over.
Trying to use DXP at first made me feel like a complete idiot, it is a
resource hog (my 1GHZ computer is too slow?) and the software still isn't
quite finished (I am still waiting for 2004, hopefully it is better).  This
has been very painful, but at least it wasn't $40k a seat!  

I hope Protel is not bailing out of the shrink wrapped CAD market.
There isn't much else out there for us who can't afford (or don't need) the
high dollar tools.  If they are putting all their eggs in the embedded
system business I can't see them surviving too much longer.
Then I guess I'll be back to that familiar place of having to pick a new CAD
system.  



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-10 Thread Christopher Coley
I am getting fairly fed up with all this negativism towards Altium.  The
product they have released is very complex and is bound to have bugs, just
look at the bugs in Microsoft products, and for the most part they are doing
something about them.  

Don't get me wrong they do have their problems, But in general please tell
me where I can get an all encoumpasing product that is comparible at the
same price.  No I don't mean list them I have seen the lists here hundreds
of times!  This is meant to be a thought provoking exercise, 

If instead of all the griping here you were to send clear E-Mails to Altium
(Not spam them!) but clear E-Mails that describe the problem and how to
replicate it I am sure they will do something.  In other words the griping
is getting you anywhere.

Now as to a lot of the problems they are usually User generated (Don't flame
me for this) and a clear discription of the problem here or on the Altium
boards will probably get you an answer as to work around it.

Chris.

P.S. I have been using Protel since V1.0 and although it has issues it work
very well for my company.  As a side note I have never called support so I
can comment on that.  But I have always found a work around or that I was
doing something wrong.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 11:45 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: 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?

2004-04-10 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
At 02:44 AM 4/10/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[re Altium's essay into software maintenance fees]
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.
They did not decide ... to renege on their contract, although many users 
took the announcement that way. The announcement was clumsy, to be sure. 
The service program they announced was one which, for an annual fee, was to 
provide upgrades in addition to ordinary support. It is possible that 
future purchasers would have seen some reduction in support if they had not 
paid the fee, but there was pretty clearly no plan to cut back on the kind 
of included support that was already being provided, i.e., service packs 
with bug fixes for a limited period of time, and discounts on upgrades to 
the next version.

Most CAD companies in the Altium class have annual maintenance fees. The 
Protel model was not all that different: free maintenance -- for a 
limited time -- and upgrade fees. If one looked at the upgrade costs over a 
substantial period, they were comparable to what other companies were 
charging for maintenance (and they are still that way, though a little 
cheaper perhaps).

Altium saw that the change was not being taken well by users and backed 
off. In reality, the backing off was simply a redefinition of the 
maintenance program, making it clear that the program was an optional 
addition rather than a substitution. They still offered Total Support, they 
just made it clear that this was something being sold for valued added, not 
something previously included being taken away to be replaced with a 
regular payment.

When I was making my original Protel purchase decision, I researched a 
number of CAD systems. Among the ones I considered at the time was Cadence 
Allegro Workstation. It was going to cost $10,000, as I recall, for a 
somewhat limited seat, on a special deal. They did not mention that $1500 
maintenance was in addition, and was obligatory *even for the first year*, 
i.e., you could not buy just the seat, you had to buy the first years 
maintenance in addition. I'm sure I would have found out when I placed the 
purchase order!

But I was able to get into Protel 98 for $1995 because of a friend's 
un-upgraded Autotrax license And it was $700 more to move to Protel 99, 
shortly before the SE release, which was free, of course.

The problem with DXP, it is fairly widely acknowledged, is that its 
increased power has come with an increased complexity which has not yet 
been sufficiently been compensated by ease-of-use enhancements. An 
experienced 99SE user is going to face a serious retraining hit at this 
time. The general report from those who bite the bullet and learn the DXP 
way is that it is worth it, *but*, quite obviously, if you are going to 
have to retrain, the time is ripe to consider other systems.

I suspect that retraining to one of the other major systems is going to be 
quite a bit more difficult than retraining to DXP, but my point here is 
that by issuing DXP the way they did, Altium has set up a potential cause 
of user loss. I'm sure they are taking a hit from it, but how serious is 
the hit, I would have little way of knowing. This issue is not going to 
affect new DXP users as much as it is going to affect 99SE upgraders.

The real sleeper would be the number of 99SE-DXP upgrades that are 
gathering dust. Sales might look good now, only to collapse with the next 
revision as those users move to a competing system. This won't be happening 
with new DXP users, I think.

DXP 2004 is improved in many ways, and might ameliorate the situation, but 
I think the central retraining issue has not been adequately addressed. The 
Query system, in particular, is clearly more powerful in most ways, but it 
is also a formidable barrier to a 99SE user who is just trying to do a 
simple global edit. Sure, eventually he'll learn how to do things quickly 
in DXP (though maybe still not quite so quickly), but that barrier can be 
quite frustrating. I am not the only one who is reminded of OrCAD Layout.

  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.
This comment completely neglects the major component of Total Support: 
included upgrades. If Mr. Wasti had purchased Total Support, he wuuld have 
received the DXP and DXP 2004 upgrades without additional charge, and I 
think he might have the Nanoboard (a nominal $995 

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-10 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
At 12:51 PM 4/10/2004, Christopher Coley wrote:
I am getting fairly fed up with all this negativism towards Altium.
With all due respect, if the negativism is leading to digestive 
disturbances, the sensible thing is to stop reading the thread which is 
clearly, on the face, about alternatives to Altium and thus invites, among 
other things, negative comment

If instead of all the griping here you were to send clear E-Mails to Altium
(Not spam them!) but clear E-Mails that describe the problem and how to
replicate it I am sure they will do something.  In other words the griping
is getting you anywhere.
Nowhere, I think Mr. Coley intended to write.

Many of the issues which underly the gripes have been described extensively 
here and on the DXP list. Both lists are read by Altium personnel. If there 
is an Altium policy that, to consider a suggestion for improvement or a bug 
report (that is easily reproducible), it must be sent directly to them, 
well, the policy should be changed immediately. Users talk with each other 
about usage issues, and for Altium to be able to eavesdrop on that 
conversation (and to participate in it on the DXP list) is a business 
opportunity.

Some users don't seem to know how to engage in constructive criticism, and, 
to be fair, some may be frustrated in that their efforts at such criticism 
seem to have been ignored. Altium, compared to many other companies, has 
made great strides in being able to engage in open communication with its 
customers, but there is still far to go, much more that could be done. 
Compared to many other companies, I'd give them an A or a B. Compared to 
what could be done, a D. Most companies would flunk completely

Now, is this relevant to user support. I claim that it is. The 
consideration of a move to a competing product *is* a user issue. This list 
is not an Altium list, it is a Protel EDA *user* list. Support (i.e., 
questions about how I can do this or that) is an important aspect of this 
list, but user needs are not limited to that, and there is no better place 
to discuss alternatives to Protel. Within broad list definitions and No 
better place is my basic standard of relevance...





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-10 Thread John A. Ross [RSDTV]
 -Original Message-
 From: edsi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 6:48 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 
 snip 
 
 Altium better start to listen to folks like Ray.  Ray came to 
 the same conclusions that everyone else has about DXP without 
 anyone holding a prompter if front of him.  Ray's statement 
 are pretty significant from a marketing standpoint
 

It is a sad fact that Altium would prefer to listen to the 'few' than the
many as regards how their tools are now styled, viewed and the direction
that they have taken. 

By the few I mean the 'yes' men who will agree to anything from Altium that
betters their own needs, it is a shame that Altium cannot think for
themselves in this respect. Just because certain users can communicate well
with Altium (speak software developer language well) does not make their
guidance on product direction a good thing, or a fair representation of the
user base as a whole.

But when success is measured in pure $ at the bottom line of the
companies books instead of product quality, or user base, it is very common
for successful companies to believe that first, they can do no wrong (based
purely on their financial success and not on the product), second, their
users are locked to them so they can do what they want, third, their own
opinion (and that of their loyal followers and advocates) is more important
than the user base as a whole.
 
Generally companies fooled into a train of thought like this will 'skip'
user complaints or good suggestions that do not fit their master plan or
take a 'blinkered' view if it does not come from a source they like and will
never admit their error to themselves, and so they become isolated from the
majority of their user base.

Again IMO the trend is to restyle the Enviroment to resemble a software IDE
which better suits the FPGA tools integration (or take over), a useful
evolution indeed, and re-positions Altium tools pretty well, but I think the
core reason is that it is easier for the developers to produce an Enviroment
THEY would like, THEY understand, find NATURAL for THEM or use, than spend
the time to ask and understand what the PCB designers would actually like.

Despite its market re-positioning, I don't think the FPGA tools will stand
up well to other FPGA tool vendors on their own, so treating the PCB tools
as the poor cousins is a bad decision and IMO a mistake. 

Feature and functionality wise DXP/2004 is a big improvement, but I have
seen nothing added in DXP/2004 that could not have been left inside the 99SE
GUI (no retraining, no new skills needed, just more productive tools), but
as said above, that would have been a lot harder for developers to meet the
UI requirements at the same time as considering the needs of the PCB
designer.

How many software developers do you know that would prefer DOS boxes brought
back and return everyone to command line entries :-) ? Er, no thanks. Sound
familiar (query language, scripting...)

Altium have did it very badly IMO (glad I am not alone) to the point that
the pain is in some cases, simply not worth the gain, due to making simple
things harder (un-natural for non software familiar people) to do.

Like others, I converted many of my customers from other vendors products to
98/99 purely on its ease of use, short learning curve, stability and I would
happily have stood my ground to defend statements I made to promote
P98/P99SE when challenged.

I cannot in honesty do this with DXP/2004, I would need to respond that
unless you do FPGA or need Multi Channel design, you do not gain that much
more. I think Altium have seriously underestimated this type of 'sale by
recommendation' outlet. Big mistake. I guess they can expect the same from
the PCAD community when they move them to the DXP platform.

It's a hard and sometimes lonely path to get a good reputation, it's a lot
easier to get a bad one. Which path Altium are on, only time will tell.

Could I go on about this all day, yes, but that would be boring for all as
it is really repetition of all that has gone before as well as being ignored
by Altium because it is not what Altium likes to hear.

John






 Reagan
 
 
 
 
 
 -- Original Message --
 From: Brooks,Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date:  Fri, 9 Apr 2004 09:12:42 -0700 
 
 Ray,
 
 I made the mistake that you are considering before. The group I was 
 with in Temecula bought Pads on my misguided recommendation... I was 
 taken in by the demo. The guys made it look so easy, then when I got 
 the software and realized they sold me a package that was 
 stripped down 
 compared to the one they demonstrated... I saw red.  If I wanted the 
 package that did all the fancy stuff like interactive 
 routing and push 
 and shove placement etc, I would have to pay thousands 
 more for the 
 'add-ons

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-10 Thread Tony Karavidas
 

 -Original Message-
 From: Matt Pobursky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 2:30 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 
 On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 13:19:34 -0700, Brooks,Bill wrote:
  This is pretty damning commentary. And maybe a bit 'rash'...
  
  It does make me think hard about Mentor and the cost/vs. 
 productivity 
  issues.
  If, I say,* IF * Altium is shifting its focus to the 
 embedded systems 
  market as a way of garnering revenue... it may mean that they have 
  come to the conclusion that there is no more or not enough 
 money to be 
  made in the PCB design industry for them, for whatever 
 reason. I doubt 
  this, because I know that Protel has the lion's share of 
 the market in 
  the UK and the rest of the world for that matter...
 
 I've thought about this too and I think most EDA tool 
 companies lose sight of the fact that they are providing 
 tools to a niche market (relative to other desktop PC 
 software) with a limited size and the requirements haven't 
 changed all that much in the past 20 years. Yeah, geometries 
 have gotten smaller and frequencies higher, but schematic 
 capture and PCB design principles are still pretty much the same
 -- physics doesn't change and the manufacturing is still 
 basically copper on a substrate. 
 
 I know when it comes to tools, I want reliability and familiarity.
 Something I can pick up, do my job efficiently, count on the 
 results and move on. 

We could all still be doing it by hand. That was reliable and familiar. Too
bad the component manufacturers just didn't shrink their parts 50% each
time. A big old DIP40 would be 1/4 We could have kept the same artwork, and
instead of reducing it 10 times, we could reduce it 20 times, cutting the
PCB down to just 1/4 of what it was in the previous rev. A big old DIP40
would be the size of a DIP16, except it would be surrounded by a lot more
tiny pins.



 Making software more complex and feature rich -- whether 
 for serving the fractional percent of users that really 
 require the added features (but seldom used by the vast 
 majority) or for marketing purposes
 -- seems to be more common every day. Why can't good software 
 be developed and maintained at a relatively stable feature 
 and bug-free level? I guess the software companies see no 
 increasing revenue stream with this model (since the current 
 version stays current, longer), even though it results in 
 the best product for the end user. So it actually pays to 
 produce buggy or otherwise deficient code, where you get to 
 charge the user for the fixes in the next release (service 
 pack, whatever -- heck, just change the name of the program 
 and charge an upgradge fee! ;-) ). Sheesh, I wish I could run 
 my business and write my software that way... 

How will ANY company survive if they sell you ONE - Bug Free, Featured
Laden, Value Priced, application that you are so happy with you never need
to upgrade? 
Come on, get real. Either they need to charge for bug fixes (bad) or charge
for new features (ok), but whatever they do, they need to generate $$.

Software companies have an entirely different model than us 'embedded'
contractors or hardware manufacturing companies. They invest WAY more energy
into a s/w product than we do in h/w products. Every product I know of (in
personal terms) has the h/w development done in a fraction of the time the
s/w is done. Over my career, the money paid to me for my work has been
recovered over and over again in consumer product sales. I can spin a design
into a different product will little effort and sell it again to all the
people that have to have the latest gadget. Altium can't do that. Even if we
were totally happy with 99SE, we wouldn't dump it just to have 2004 for no
good reason. It has to have more features in order to make it attractive. I
don't think it seems to be more common every day, I think it's been common
from the beginning.





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-10 Thread Tony Karavidas
 

 -Original Message-
 From: Matt Pobursky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 2:06 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 

 I took a look at the Pulsonix website today and I must say 
 I'm impressed. They seem to have put together a package that 
 does what 90% of engineers and PCB designers I talk to need. 
 The price seems reasonable too. If their tools work as 
 advertised, I think Altium has much to fear. 


It's $6495, not much different from 2004 and includes a lot less.

It seems like they don't do slots either:
http://www.pulsonix.com/FAQ/0001_ComponentSlots.htm



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-10 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
At 02:40 PM 4/10/2004, John A. Ross [RSDTV] wrote:
It is a sad fact that Altium would prefer to listen to the 'few' than the
many as regards how their tools are now styled, viewed and the direction
that they have taken.
This brings us to a classic problem, that of the alleged silent majority. 
Unless you actually survey a population, you don't really know what the 
population, as a whole thinks, and even polls and surveys can be 
problematic. Many people simply assume that the majority thinks the way 
they do. I think I have a solution.

By the few I mean the 'yes' men who will agree to anything from Altium that
betters their own needs [...]
Hmmm Isn't it normal for people to agree with something that betters 
their own needs?

It seems fairly clear that some users *like* DXP and others don't. The 
balance is far from clear.

Anyway, I'd like to see better communication between Altium and the users, 
and that is going to require a certain level of organization of the users. 
You can't communicate with someone who is incoherent, and there is no 
active mechanism which will allow the users to speak coherently. So there 
is just whatever happens to be written on the mailing lists, often by those 
who are disproportionally motivated to write (and I include myself in this) 
or whatever Altium privately gleans from isolated users (or, perhaps, 
determines more scientifically, I certainly don't know the extent or power 
of Altium's research in this area).

And I'm going to have to write about that on 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-10 Thread hwasti
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]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-10 Thread Joe Sapienza
Hamid,

Not sure as I was looking at it proper, unless I get to drive it may as well
be David Copperfield. However I am a target as I dropped maintenance on
their product and I have switched a few of their customers into P99SE, my
name seems to happen by them too often. As I am frequently contacted for
whatevers. Do they offer me a free upgrade maintenance or anything else?
Heck no

The product was PADS.

Joe



- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 6:47 PM
Subject: 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]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-10 Thread edsi
The problem with DXP, it is fairly widely acknowledged, is that its 
increased power has come with an increased complexity which has not yet been 
sufficiently been compensated by ease-of-use enhancements. An 
experienced 99SE user is going to face a serious retraining hit at this time. The 
general report from those who bite the bullet and learn the DXP way is that it is 
worth it, *but*, quite obviously, if you are going to have to retrain, the time is 
ripe to consider other systems.


Here is my assessment
Fair Warning ... don't uninstall your 99SE if the EULA indeed recommended that you 
uninstall. I have had 2004 long enough to do about 6 pcb designs, and can report few 
if any real improvements. Let's count the real improvements, without arguing whether 
features are better or not. PCB onlyI don't dabble in the schematica world

SPECTRA interface has improved, ODB output is an improvement, PAD stacks are finally 
implemented. RELIABILTY rates with version 3.x. I got access violations to the point 
that it quit working on me completely. Had to shut down for a half day, translate that 
to half day loss wages. Mouse control rates with version 3.x . Things stick to your 
cursor and you scream at your PC LET IT GO , I don't want to pick that up. Maybe I 
need to slow down my inputs so DXP can catch up. I forgot to mention, it worse than a 
resource hog it is a pig. It is slower than 99SE. I am running a 2 Gig machine. I had 
to disable MACAFEE virus and my firewall. Half the time it wont even come up if the 
firewall is activated. How is that for real feedback and not just saying it sucks. 
Some Keystrokes are disabled so now you have depress buttons with the mouse/ cursor 
which slows design down,  it has the real feel of ACCEL.  I also am trained on PCAD.   
 Most the menus are not easily legible, you have do read thru alot of uneccessary 
inform
ation and  pictures to change one parameter. The same information is there but the 
presentation is poor. Maybe a PADS user or an ACCEL user might like it because they 
don't know the difference. ACCEL graphics looks like bit-mapped Crayola and if you 
zoom out in PADs round pads turn to squares and other objects , so this looks good to 
new Altium customers.

The masking features are cool but in case ya'll didn't know it, you could mask in 
99SE. In single mode, with one a mechanical layer click on the net, net class etc. on 
the pcb panel. The mask isn't crystal clear, but Protel could have improved this 
without introducing ACCESS VIOLATIONS , Bet you didn't know you mask in 99SE. I've 
been doing it for years to analyses complex routes. 

99 percent of what I typed into the online help turned up no help. Custumizing is very 
limited.   I exceeded this program's abilty in a few hours.  I exceed the original DXP 
release in about 30 minutes. It was useless. I must be getting smarter.  2004 is much 
better than DXP but ...

There is no real clear advantage over 99SE PCB other than popping up ACCESS VIOLATIONS 
. It designs the same  boards, in more time . Believe me, by the time I rolled my 6 th 
board out, I know how to use this program. It takes longer to design with because you 
fight with it instead of it rolling off your finger tips. I don't care if Altium is 
listening or not at this point, Im just passing the costs on to my customers like 
everyone else does. Hope Altium never needs a design from me because I would charge 
them my highest rate. At this point, I don't have time to debug their tools anymore, 
including their router. This stuff should be mature, very mature. It has been under 
development for a long time. DXP is basically on it 4th release with 2004. I don't see 
the dust settling until SP2 for 2004. I will be closer to retirement by then so it 
won't matter.  

Include unreliable netlist imports, not finding errors in the netlist, and not being 
able to match components to the libraries.  How is that for unreliable,   This is a 
recipe for designing a disaster.  I pride myself in the few errors,  I make.  I can 
not trust this program to maintain the level of integrity I have had.   How is that 
for an assesment

Mike Reagan 

EDSI

Note to Dennis Saputelli :

The 028 holes are still a problem in 2004, just harder to change back now. 



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread edsi
Ray

The choice is simple you need to purchase Mentor Expedition ,  appox cost 36K.   
Simply the best

Mike Reagan
EDSI


-- Original Message --
From: Ray Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:  Fri, 09 Apr 2004 07:41:56 -0700

Our group has used Protel for years.  I've tried to get everyone to change 
to something else for most of that time but the resistance has been fairly 
great.  It seems that the the philosophy has been that pain you know is 
preferable to the pain you don't know.  However, with the introduction of 
DXP/2004 everyone is starting to realize that a good tool is needed.  Is 
there something that is generally considered to be the best?  I realize 
that some of the tools cost significantly more but when the frustration, 
poor results, and wasted time are considered, it may not actually be that 
expensive.  One of the guys here uses PADS and really likes it.  If we make 
a change we don't want to make the same mistake we made with Protel again.

Ray Mitchell
Engineer, Code 2732
SPAWAR Systems Center
San Diego, CA. 92152
(619)553-5344
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Brooks,Bill
Ray, 

I made the mistake that you are considering before. The group I was with in
Temecula bought Pads on my misguided recommendation... I was taken in by the
demo. The guys made it look so easy, then when I got the software and
realized they sold me a package that was stripped down compared to the one
they demonstrated... I saw red.  If I wanted the package that did all the
fancy stuff like interactive routing and push and shove placement etc, I
would have to pay thousands more for the 'add-ons'. The total would come to
about 22K... we chose not to by more stuff, but to try to get along with
what we bought. I cussed aloud many times when trying to learn to use the
software on my own. I took a 1 day compressed class and that didn't help
much either... 

Pads is functional, if not confusing... and if you don't know any tool it
can be fine, you just need to allow yourself 6 months to a year to get it to
be really useful. Learning all the 'work arounds' can be a full time job,
and very frustrating when you have a job to get done. I spent a lot of time
on the phone with the tech support guy in Los Angeles, He speaks with a
Russian accent to boot. That was not fun when he was out on sales calls... 

The thing I am trying to say is, Protel was what we purchased after fighting
with the PADS program for a month and a half. PADS would not take back their
software, so we had to eat the 12 grand we invested in that software. Later
I took a class at Palomar College that was using PADS and walked through a
full semester of training with the package and still I don't like it, but I
was able to use it. It's a frustrating package for a guy like me who expects
to find the print command under the word, print. There's was buried in some
dialog box that had no reference to printing at all. 

Protel has been a better software package than the PADS program was for me,
mostly because Protel was more intuitive to use, I spent less time looking
for a command or feature than I did with PADS and it was easier to use and
it let me undo mistakes which PADS was notorious for NOT letting me do.

The new 2004 product remains to be seen... I would be patient and don't get
too discouraged with all the talk you hear on this forum... some of us are
real idealists... I think I'm included in that group. 

As soon as I can get the time to spend on kicking the tires on the new
software I will let you know what I think of where we are with Protel. 
In the mean time you can ask specific questions about the functionality on
this forum and you might consider get the training class that Matthew
Berggren does on Protel if you can. It was helpful in getting a better sense
of what the software can do and where you can go with it. Although I found
when I was learning Protel that a local designer who had been using it since
version 2.0 was more savvy and had better 'tricks' for being productive with
it than I got anywhere else. 

I have been using Protel since version 98 and that was in 1998. It's not a
bad package. There are just some features I wish it had that are less than
perfect, but hopefully they will iron those out in the future. 

Feel free to give me a call if you need help. Or just publish your questions
here and you have a lot of years of PROTEL experience here at your
fingertips with all these great guys and gals listening in. They will be
glad to help and discuss your issues I'm sure and even some of them are
programmers who will write user commands that you can use to get better
productivity out of the software. 

(Okay, so now I am an apologist for the Altium company... so shoot me...)


Actually, the best combo I have used so far in this price range is the Orcad
schematic package with the Protel PCB editor and the Specctra Autorouter and
AutoCad for the drafting of mechanical things like board outlines,
dimensions, etc... 

We use the schematic package here that comes with Protel and we get by with
it. Have for the last 3 years.


Bill Brooks 
PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
TITAN CORPORATION
DATRON WORLD COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
3030 Enterprise Court, Vista, CA 92083 
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.titan.com/business_units/index.html?organization_id=81
Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510 
___
Member of the San Diego Chapter of the IPC Designers Council
Communications Officer, Web Manager
http://dcchapters.ipc.org/SanDiego/



-Original Message-
From: Ray Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 7:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

Our group has used Protel for years.  I've tried to get everyone to change 
to something else for most of that time but the resistance has been fairly 
great.  It seems that the the philosophy has been that pain you know is 
preferable to the pain you don't know.  However, with the introduction of 
DXP/2004 everyone is starting 

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-09 Thread Brooks,Bill
2nd Best... would be Cadence. The features are similar but the user
interface is 10 years behind. Similar cost, similar time to get up and
running... similar maintenance...similar modularity.


Bill Brooks 
PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510


-Original Message-
From: Brooks,Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 9:55 AM
To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

The 'best' program out there by popular opinion... I hate to say this... Is
supposedly Mentor Expedition. 

Now that being said... the reason it's the 'best' is not its ease of use. 
It does gate and pin swapping. It has a first class interactive autorouter. 
It can interface with REAL GOOD simulation tools and they can do simulation
based upon the board geometry. The design team at Qualcomm was using Mentor
to do the cell phones that they are so famous for... but it took having a
Mentor rep onsite to deal with the issues that they had... and a lot of
custom programming... it was not cheap.

I taught a PCB design class at Palomar using Mentor... What a pain ... 
Mentor set us up with a minimal system... ala the PADS story...( see
previous e-mail) 
 
They have a similar sales philosophy at Mentor, (may be why they bought
PADS), add on modules that you need so you can customize 'till the cows come
home' it's a very 'feature rich' environment... But... with that comes
great difficulty in use and lots of time on the tech support hotline trying
to figure out what went wrong... and why this thing here crashes, and what's
this error code mean? Etc.. etc..

They have pretty good phone support for paying customers. Colleges, well
they don't support the colleges as well as paying customers. They are a big
company, and they make millions every year. The software costs about 40K a
seat. Figure to spend a year to get it to the productive level you would
expect it to be at for a design team. It's a big investment of man hours and
money, but I hear once you get it up and running smoothly it's a performer.
Also expect to pay your designers 100k or more a year. That goes with the
territory as well, so I am told, unless you outsource to India.

Our sister company used Mentor Board station and upgraded to Expedition...
after a year and a half they couldn't seem to get any more productivity out
of it and shut it down due to the oppressive maintenance cost. They are
shopping their boards outside to a guy that uses PADS that gets them what
they want quickly with out the large maintenance fees that Mentor charges
for support. We use Protel here.. and so far, Altium does not charge us for
support... 

I could set up a design group of 5 guys on Protel for the cost of one Mentor
seat and maintenance.  

So if you have a year and half a million to spend, you might be able to get
the 'best' for your team. And that might be an option for you, if it is, I
can put you in touch with a good friend of mine who is the regional
tech/sales guy for the whole southwest I know he will treat you and your
company very well. Some folks need the capabilities that are not available
in Protel and can afford to buy them. For the rest of us, there is Protel.


Bill Brooks 
PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510


-Original Message-
From: Ray Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 7:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

Our group has used Protel for years.  I've tried to get everyone to change 
to something else for most of that time but the resistance has been fairly 
great.  It seems that the the philosophy has been that pain you know is 
preferable to the pain you don't know.  However, with the introduction of 
DXP/2004 everyone is starting to realize that a good tool is needed.  Is 
there something that is generally considered to be the best?  I realize 
that some of the tools cost significantly more but when the frustration, 
poor results, and wasted time are considered, it may not actually be that 
expensive.  One of the guys here uses PADS and really likes it.  If we make 
a change we don't want to make the same mistake we made with Protel again.

Ray Mitchell
Engineer, Code 2732
SPAWAR Systems Center
San Diego, CA. 92152
(619)553-5344
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Leon Heller

- Original Message - 
From: Ray Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:41 PM
Subject: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 Our group has used Protel for years.  I've tried to get everyone to change
 to something else for most of that time but the resistance has been fairly
 great.  It seems that the the philosophy has been that pain you know is
 preferable to the pain you don't know.  However, with the introduction of
 DXP/2004 everyone is starting to realize that a good tool is needed.  Is
 there something that is generally considered to be the best?  I realize
 that some of the tools cost significantly more but when the frustration,
 poor results, and wasted time are considered, it may not actually be that
 expensive.  One of the guys here uses PADS and really likes it.  If we
make
 a change we don't want to make the same mistake we made with Protel again.

Have a look at Pulsonix: http://www.pulsonix.com

It was developed from scratch by a group of people who used to work for
Zuken-Redac, support is excellent. Unlike Altium, they fix bugs immediately
they come to light. The autorouter is quite good and works reliably. Pricing
is competitive.

I set an independent users group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

It gets very little traffic because the software is so easy to use and has
so few problems.

It imports Protel designs in ASCII format, as well as those produced with
most other products.

A full working demo (100 pins limit) may be downloaded and, if you ask them
nicely, you may have a full license for 30 days or more, so that you can
evaluate the software properly.

Leon


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Tom Robinson
Hi Leon;

Is the phone support good at Pulsonix?

tr :)


-Original Message-
From: Leon Heller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 1:53 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?



- Original Message - 
From: Ray Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:41 PM
Subject: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 Our group has used Protel for years.  I've tried to get everyone to change
 to something else for most of that time but the resistance has been fairly
 great.  It seems that the the philosophy has been that pain you know is
 preferable to the pain you don't know.  However, with the introduction of
 DXP/2004 everyone is starting to realize that a good tool is needed.  Is
 there something that is generally considered to be the best?  I realize
 that some of the tools cost significantly more but when the frustration,
 poor results, and wasted time are considered, it may not actually be that
 expensive.  One of the guys here uses PADS and really likes it.  If we
make
 a change we don't want to make the same mistake we made with Protel again.

Have a look at Pulsonix: http://www.pulsonix.com

It was developed from scratch by a group of people who used to work for
Zuken-Redac, support is excellent. Unlike Altium, they fix bugs immediately
they come to light. The autorouter is quite good and works reliably. Pricing
is competitive.

I set an independent users group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

It gets very little traffic because the software is so easy to use and has
so few problems.

It imports Protel designs in ASCII format, as well as those produced with
most other products.

A full working demo (100 pins limit) may be downloaded and, if you ask them
nicely, you may have a full license for 30 days or more, so that you can
evaluate the software properly.

Leon



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Leon Heller

- Original Message - 
From: Tom Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 Hi Leon;
 
 Is the phone support good at Pulsonix?

Very good. Someone is always available during UK working hours.

Leon


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Tom Robinson
How about phone support in the USA?

tr :)


-Original Message-
From: Leon Heller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:07 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?



- Original Message - 
From: Tom Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 Hi Leon;
 
 Is the phone support good at Pulsonix?

Very good. Someone is always available during UK working hours.

Leon



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Leon Heller

- Original Message - 
From: Tom Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 How about phone support in the USA?

The US distributor is LPKF. I don't know what their support is like, though.
You could try posting a msg to the UG, there are several US users who belong
to it.

Leon


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Joe Sapienza
Mike,

You left out the surprise that Dimensioning is also an OPTION, yes it is
designed for and by marketing/sales guys, must be a dream for some of them,
lest we forget the maintenance fee is also relative to number of options

Joe



- Original Message - 
From: edsi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 I am in agreement with Bill Brooks and his comments about PADS.  I too own
a seat of PADS. Unfortunately for $8500  I can't use it.  DXF is an option,
design rules are a $4K option and get this.copy and paste is an option.
GONG! piece of crap for $8500.

 If you asked me several years ago about Protel, I would stack it against
anything ( providing you never attempted to user the router). The main
advantage was user interface and getting up to speed.  There is no clear
advantage to other products. DXP is as cumbersome and awkward to use as
PCAD, Cadence, or Mentor. So given that all is equal
 Mentor is the  clear winner.

 Altium better start to listen to folks like Ray.  Ray came to the same
conclusions that everyone else has about DXP without anyone holding a
prompter if front of him.  Ray's statement are pretty significant from a
marketing standpoint





 Mike Reagan





 -- Original Message --
 From: Brooks,Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date:  Fri, 9 Apr 2004 09:12:42 -0700

 Ray,
 
 I made the mistake that you are considering before. The group I was with
in
 Temecula bought Pads on my misguided recommendation... I was taken in by
the
 demo. The guys made it look so easy, then when I got the software and
 realized they sold me a package that was stripped down compared to the
one
 they demonstrated... I saw red.  If I wanted the package that did all the
 fancy stuff like interactive routing and push and shove placement
etc, I
 would have to pay thousands more for the 'add-ons'. The total would come
to
 about 22K... we chose not to by more stuff, but to try to get along with
 what we bought. I cussed aloud many times when trying to learn to use the
 software on my own. I took a 1 day compressed class and that didn't help
 much either...
 
 Pads is functional, if not confusing... and if you don't know any tool it
 can be fine, you just need to allow yourself 6 months to a year to get it
to
 be really useful. Learning all the 'work arounds' can be a full time job,
 and very frustrating when you have a job to get done. I spent a lot of
time
 on the phone with the tech support guy in Los Angeles, He speaks with a
 Russian accent to boot. That was not fun when he was out on sales
calls...
 
 The thing I am trying to say is, Protel was what we purchased after
fighting
 with the PADS program for a month and a half. PADS would not take back
their
 software, so we had to eat the 12 grand we invested in that software.
Later
 I took a class at Palomar College that was using PADS and walked through
a
 full semester of training with the package and still I don't like it, but
I
 was able to use it. It's a frustrating package for a guy like me who
expects
 to find the print command under the word, print. There's was buried in
some
 dialog box that had no reference to printing at all.
 
 Protel has been a better software package than the PADS program was for
me,
 mostly because Protel was more intuitive to use, I spent less time
looking
 for a command or feature than I did with PADS and it was easier to use
and
 it let me undo mistakes which PADS was notorious for NOT letting me do.
 
 The new 2004 product remains to be seen... I would be patient and don't
get
 too discouraged with all the talk you hear on this forum... some of us
are
 real idealists... I think I'm included in that group.
 
 As soon as I can get the time to spend on kicking the tires on the new
 software I will let you know what I think of where we are with Protel.
 In the mean time you can ask specific questions about the functionality
on
 this forum and you might consider get the training class that Matthew
 Berggren does on Protel if you can. It was helpful in getting a better
sense
 of what the software can do and where you can go with it. Although I
found
 when I was learning Protel that a local designer who had been using it
since
 version 2.0 was more savvy and had better 'tricks' for being productive
with
 it than I got anywhere else.
 
 I have been using Protel since version 98 and that was in 1998. It's not
a
 bad package. There are just some features I wish it had that are less
than
 perfect, but hopefully they will iron those out in the future.
 
 Feel free to give me a call if you need help. Or just publish your
questions
 here and you have a lot of years of PROTEL experience here at your
 fingertips with all these great guys and gals listening in. They will be
 glad to help and discuss your issues I'm sure

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-09 Thread Brooks,Bill
I'm sure they were former auto salesmen ... 'oh, you want brakes with it...
well that's the diamond option, and a steering wheel? Well you need the
platinum option...' etc... etc.. 


Bill Brooks 
PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510


-Original Message-
From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 12:35 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

Mike,

You left out the surprise that Dimensioning is also an OPTION, yes it is
designed for and by marketing/sales guys, must be a dream for some of them,
lest we forget the maintenance fee is also relative to number of options

Joe



- Original Message - 
From: edsi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 I am in agreement with Bill Brooks and his comments about PADS.  I too own
a seat of PADS. Unfortunately for $8500  I can't use it.  DXF is an option,
design rules are a $4K option and get this.copy and paste is an option.
GONG! piece of crap for $8500.

 If you asked me several years ago about Protel, I would stack it against
anything ( providing you never attempted to user the router). The main
advantage was user interface and getting up to speed.  There is no clear
advantage to other products. DXP is as cumbersome and awkward to use as
PCAD, Cadence, or Mentor. So given that all is equal
 Mentor is the  clear winner.

 Altium better start to listen to folks like Ray.  Ray came to the same
conclusions that everyone else has about DXP without anyone holding a
prompter if front of him.  Ray's statement are pretty significant from a
marketing standpoint





 Mike Reagan





 -- Original Message --
 From: Brooks,Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date:  Fri, 9 Apr 2004 09:12:42 -0700

 Ray,
 
 I made the mistake that you are considering before. The group I was with
in
 Temecula bought Pads on my misguided recommendation... I was taken in by
the
 demo. The guys made it look so easy, then when I got the software and
 realized they sold me a package that was stripped down compared to the
one
 they demonstrated... I saw red.  If I wanted the package that did all the
 fancy stuff like interactive routing and push and shove placement
etc, I
 would have to pay thousands more for the 'add-ons'. The total would come
to
 about 22K... we chose not to by more stuff, but to try to get along with
 what we bought. I cussed aloud many times when trying to learn to use the
 software on my own. I took a 1 day compressed class and that didn't help
 much either...
 
 Pads is functional, if not confusing... and if you don't know any tool it
 can be fine, you just need to allow yourself 6 months to a year to get it
to
 be really useful. Learning all the 'work arounds' can be a full time job,
 and very frustrating when you have a job to get done. I spent a lot of
time
 on the phone with the tech support guy in Los Angeles, He speaks with a
 Russian accent to boot. That was not fun when he was out on sales
calls...
 
 The thing I am trying to say is, Protel was what we purchased after
fighting
 with the PADS program for a month and a half. PADS would not take back
their
 software, so we had to eat the 12 grand we invested in that software.
Later
 I took a class at Palomar College that was using PADS and walked through
a
 full semester of training with the package and still I don't like it, but
I
 was able to use it. It's a frustrating package for a guy like me who
expects
 to find the print command under the word, print. There's was buried in
some
 dialog box that had no reference to printing at all.
 
 Protel has been a better software package than the PADS program was for
me,
 mostly because Protel was more intuitive to use, I spent less time
looking
 for a command or feature than I did with PADS and it was easier to use
and
 it let me undo mistakes which PADS was notorious for NOT letting me do.
 
 The new 2004 product remains to be seen... I would be patient and don't
get
 too discouraged with all the talk you hear on this forum... some of us
are
 real idealists... I think I'm included in that group.
 
 As soon as I can get the time to spend on kicking the tires on the new
 software I will let you know what I think of where we are with Protel.
 In the mean time you can ask specific questions about the functionality
on
 this forum and you might consider get the training class that Matthew
 Berggren does on Protel if you can. It was helpful in getting a better
sense
 of what the software can do and where you can go with it. Although I
found
 when I was learning Protel that a local designer who had been using it
since
 version 2.0 was more savvy and had better 'tricks' for being productive
with
 it than I got anywhere else

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-09 Thread Joe Sapienza
Bill you have the idea, just bear in mind they sell new product but act like
USED car salesmen

Yesterday I sat thru the demo of OADS 5.02 and their new Schematic package
PADS Design, you'de be amazed how many new features loked to my mind to be
stolen/copied directly from Protel 99SE



- Original Message - 
From: Brooks,Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


 I'm sure they were former auto salesmen ... 'oh, you want brakes with
it...
 well that's the diamond option, and a steering wheel? Well you need the
 platinum option...' etc... etc..


 Bill Brooks
 PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
 Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510


 -Original Message-
 From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 12:35 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

 Mike,

 You left out the surprise that Dimensioning is also an OPTION, yes it is
 designed for and by marketing/sales guys, must be a dream for some of
them,
 lest we forget the maintenance fee is also relative to number of options

 Joe



 - Original Message - 
 From: edsi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 1:47 PM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


  I am in agreement with Bill Brooks and his comments about PADS.  I too
own
 a seat of PADS. Unfortunately for $8500  I can't use it.  DXF is an
option,
 design rules are a $4K option and get this.copy and paste is an
option.
 GONG! piece of crap for $8500.
 
  If you asked me several years ago about Protel, I would stack it against
 anything ( providing you never attempted to user the router). The main
 advantage was user interface and getting up to speed.  There is no clear
 advantage to other products. DXP is as cumbersome and awkward to use as
 PCAD, Cadence, or Mentor. So given that all is equal
  Mentor is the  clear winner.
 
  Altium better start to listen to folks like Ray.  Ray came to the same
 conclusions that everyone else has about DXP without anyone holding a
 prompter if front of him.  Ray's statement are pretty significant from a
 marketing standpoint
 
 
 
 
 
  Mike Reagan
 
 
 
 
 
  -- Original Message --
  From: Brooks,Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Reply-To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Date:  Fri, 9 Apr 2004 09:12:42 -0700
 
  Ray,
  
  I made the mistake that you are considering before. The group I was
with
 in
  Temecula bought Pads on my misguided recommendation... I was taken in
by
 the
  demo. The guys made it look so easy, then when I got the software and
  realized they sold me a package that was stripped down compared to the
 one
  they demonstrated... I saw red.  If I wanted the package that did all
the
  fancy stuff like interactive routing and push and shove placement
 etc, I
  would have to pay thousands more for the 'add-ons'. The total would
come
 to
  about 22K... we chose not to by more stuff, but to try to get along
with
  what we bought. I cussed aloud many times when trying to learn to use
the
  software on my own. I took a 1 day compressed class and that didn't
help
  much either...
  
  Pads is functional, if not confusing... and if you don't know any tool
it
  can be fine, you just need to allow yourself 6 months to a year to get
it
 to
  be really useful. Learning all the 'work arounds' can be a full time
job,
  and very frustrating when you have a job to get done. I spent a lot of
 time
  on the phone with the tech support guy in Los Angeles, He speaks with a
  Russian accent to boot. That was not fun when he was out on sales
 calls...
  
  The thing I am trying to say is, Protel was what we purchased after
 fighting
  with the PADS program for a month and a half. PADS would not take back
 their
  software, so we had to eat the 12 grand we invested in that software.
 Later
  I took a class at Palomar College that was using PADS and walked
through
 a
  full semester of training with the package and still I don't like it,
but
 I
  was able to use it. It's a frustrating package for a guy like me who
 expects
  to find the print command under the word, print. There's was buried in
 some
  dialog box that had no reference to printing at all.
  
  Protel has been a better software package than the PADS program was for
 me,
  mostly because Protel was more intuitive to use, I spent less time
 looking
  for a command or feature than I did with PADS and it was easier to use
 and
  it let me undo mistakes which PADS was notorious for NOT letting me do.
  
  The new 2004 product remains to be seen... I would be patient and don't
 get
  too discouraged with all the talk you hear on this forum... some of us
 are
  real idealists... I think I'm included in that group.
  
  As soon as I

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-09 Thread Brooks,Bill
This is pretty damning commentary. And maybe a bit 'rash'... 

It does make me think hard about Mentor and the cost/vs. productivity
issues. 
If, I say,* IF * Altium is shifting its focus to the embedded systems market
as a way of garnering revenue... it may mean that they have come to the
conclusion that there is no more or not enough money to be made in the PCB
design industry for them, for whatever reason. I doubt this, because I know
that Protel has the lion's share of the market in the UK and the rest of the
world for that matter... 

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. They may have reasoned
that Cadence and Mentor are getting along this way. They have a customer
base that has bought into the regular payment of fees for services... and
expect to be kept operating because of their regular annual payments.
Software upgrades and service packs are funded by the service agreement
monies, and they make a killing in the 'Training Center' area because nobody
can sit down and learn it without training. Protel failed to make that
happen... we as a body rejected the idea. They may have decided to take a
different tack at it... 

 This reminds me of how the CAD market used to be before the desktop
computers were available... Huge fees for the initial purchase of equipment
and software, a year in setup and customization, a full time 'programmer'
type to handle upgrades and customization of the software, and a large
payment to the CAD vendor every year for maintenance. 


I don't know about you, but I hated that business model. Only very large
companies could afford the cost of doing engineering in those days... the
'small guy' just bought a drafting board and a light table... no software or
maintenance contract required... and worked like a dog to try to keep up.
We can't go back to those days anymore. Bishop graphics doesn't sell the
tape and Mylar. But... there is Protel.

Mentor demos very well. Mentor has the features that we should have in
Protel. I used it for the first time in a class/seminar at PCB WEST on HDI
Design. They offered it as the tool to demo the class exercises and it was
remarkable easy to use for that class... (I remind you, there was a Mentor
Tech support guy there in the class making sure we didn't have a bad
experience) It got me interested. I checked into it later and it was my
choice for the class at Palomar. Little did I know that it was going to be
so hard to get it implemented into the class curriculum and difficult to use
for my students. But that is the past.  I expect Mentor will garner a large
part of the PCB market over the next few years. It is a complex system and
not for the squeamish... it takes real effort to get your arms around it. 

The EDA industry has a lot of struggling players who have been bought up by
bigger 'fish' because they were not able to survive even with the
maintenance revenue... That's what Mentor did, they bought Veribest
(Cadnetix) and saved their overwhelmingly difficult product BOARD STATION
from extinction... Cadence bought Orcad. Innoveda bought Pads and then
Mentor bought Innoveda... gobble, gobble. 

Those big vendors like Cadence and Mentor will all adopt the old business
model because the only players will be big companies... no competition,
maybe Protel can't compete. Or maybe we just don't see the whole picture...
Lots of 'maybes' in there.  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. I would prefer that Protel remain a player and fix the product...
there is a need for the smaller companies to have somewhere they can go to
get their board software. As the economy picks up there will be a lot more
startup shops and they will need Protel... or a cad vendor like them if they
want to design in house. Then there's always the guys who set up shop and
contract their jobs. And then there's China.. hmm that's another subject.

 If Mentor was cheaper Protel would not have a chance. Hang in there Protel
and get the product working before sending it out. And... listen to your
customers...

Best regards, 

Bill Brooks 
PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 11:51 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

  edsi wrote:

Altium better start to listen to folks like Ray.  Ray came to the same
conclusions that everyone else has about DXP without anyone holding a
prompter if front of him.  Ray's statement are pretty significant from a
marketing standpoint

I was at the PCB design expo last month.  Altium was a no-show.  I 
talked to a number of vendors (not just PCB design software vendors) 
about how

Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?

2004-04-09 Thread Matt Pobursky
On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 13:19:34 -0700, Brooks,Bill wrote:
 Those big vendors like Cadence and Mentor will all adopt the old business
 model because the only players will be big companies... no competition,
 maybe Protel can't compete. Or maybe we just don't see the whole picture...
 Lots of 'maybes' in there.  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. I would prefer that Protel remain a player and fix the product...
 there is a need for the smaller companies to have somewhere they can go to
 get their board software. As the economy picks up there will be a lot more
 startup shops and they will need Protel... or a cad vendor like them if they
 want to design in house. Then there's always the guys who set up shop and
 contract their jobs. And then there's China.. hmm that's another subject.
 
 If Mentor was cheaper Protel would not have a chance. Hang in there Protel
 and get the product working before sending it out. And... listen to your
 customers...

This has been a really interesting discussion without degrading into 
outright Protel/Altium bashing. I think all of us on the list are 
hoping for the best, but there's a bunch of us that have been in the 
industry a long time and have heard and seen all the stories and
promises... 

I took a look at the Pulsonix website today and I must say I'm
impressed. They seem to have put together a package that does what 90%
of engineers and PCB designers I talk to need. The price seems
reasonable too. If their tools work as advertised, I think Altium has
much to fear. 

As for me and my PCB designer -- we've decided to use Protel 99SE until 
it becomes impractical for us. Protel 2004 adds no must have features 
that make a switch worthwhile to us. I really wish Altium would have 
just fixed the handful of known issues with P99SE and charged an 
upgrade fee for it. I would have gladly coughed up $1000-$1500 for 
it, both for the bug fixes and to avoid having to go through a learning
curve for a tool I'm still not convinced would let me do my job any
faster or better. 

So for now, we're riding it out with P99SE but watching what develops 
in the market. Pulsonix just got added to the watch list. 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. 

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread ajenkins
So I assume they use it as a budle for their PCB milling machines?

 -Original Message-
 From: Leon Heller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:34 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 
 
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: Tom Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 8:11 PM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite 
 recommendation?
 
 
  How about phone support in the USA?
 
 The US distributor is LPKF. I don't know what their support 
 is like, though. You could try posting a msg to the UG, there 
 are several US users who belong to it.
 
 Leon
 
 


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Leon Heller

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


So I assume they use it as a budle for their PCB milling machines?

Yes, Pulsonix has a file output facility for LPKF machines.

Leon


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Cliff Gerhard
Bill, I think your opinion about Mentor is spot on.   

Sorry long rant ahead

A few years back, I took a job managing the layout department (among
other things) for a company that had been using PADs for several years.
One of my jobs was to pick new CAD software because they were very tired
of PADs.  The one that really got me was when I asked PADs about cutting
and pasting.  I had an op amp circuit that was similar to one that we
had done on another board.  I wanted to copy it to the new design.  It
would only copy the components.  All of the traces would be removed.
They came back with you need our design re-use package.  $4k +
Maintenance to cut and paste! Unreal! 

We had also been bitten several times by software bugs (DRC and Gerber
generation) that caused very expensive and time critical boards to be
scrapped.  I was personally using Protel at the time, but it was not
even considered because they wanted a high end tool.  

We were using Cadence for IC development (well into six figures for
those tools!) and I was under some pressure to pick the Cadence PCB
tools. All of the engineers (about 20) were using OrCAD (which had just
been bought by Cadence) and we didn't want all of the engineers to have
to learn a new schematic capture program, so we also needed to be able
to use OrCAD as a front end for a while at least.   

The tools from Cadence and Mentor were not well integrated at all at
that time.  They had both been gobbling up smaller companies and adding
bits and pieces to their software into their existing products.  Many
different and non-intuitive ways to do the same thing. 

I did my research and it was very much like dealing with used car
salesmen. A very unpleasant experience.  At the time, Mentor had just
picked up Veribest and their interactive manual routing was very
impressive.  We had to maintain all of our old PADs designs and both
salesmen (Cadence and Mentor) assured me, in writing, that they had a
working PADs translator and it would not be an issue.

I made the decision to go with Mentor. The cost was about $80k for two
seats.  We immediately had problems.  The PADs \translator was non
functional for quite some time and we had a bunch of problems trying to
use Orcad Netlists.  You had to have an error free netlist loaded to
even place a part on a new board!  

Once we placed the P.O., we needed support to get through these issues.
Tech support and the leghumping salesman, who had been calling me
several times a day prior to getting the P.O. signed, were now taking
days to return my calls.  At one point, I feared that I might loose my
job over the decision.  After about a year (no exaggeration) the layout
people were finally getting up to speed with the tools and fairly happy
with them.  These were very sharp people and excellent designers too. 

I have since moved on and am now back with a small product development
company.  I was again faced with the problem of choosing a CAD system.
We do not have the deep pockets to afford the high end tools.  After
my experience with Mentor, I am not sure I would have considered it even
if we could afford it.  

I went back to Protel and made the transition from 99SE to DXP. I don't
know why they didn't just fix 99SE instead of basically starting over.
Trying to use DXP at first made me feel like a complete idiot, it is a
resource hog (my 1GHZ computer is too slow?) and the software still
isn't quite finished (I am still waiting for 2004, hopefully it is
better).  This has been very painful, but at least it wasn't $40k a
seat!  

I hope Protel is not bailing out of the shrink wrapped CAD market.
There isn't much else out there for us who can't afford (or don't need)
the high dollar tools.  If they are putting all their eggs in the
embedded system business I can't see them surviving too much longer.
Then I guess I'll be back to that familiar place of having to pick a new
CAD system.  

o~o
Cliff Gerhard, P.E.
E-M Designs, Inc.
 


-Original Message-
From: Brooks,Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 12:48 PM
To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?


I'm sure they were former auto salesmen ... 'oh, you want brakes with
it... well that's the diamond option, and a steering wheel? Well you
need the platinum option...' etc... etc.. 


Bill Brooks 
PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510






* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Dennis Saputelli
] Good schematic/PCB development suite recommendation?
 
 I'm sure they were former auto salesmen ... 'oh, you want brakes with
 it... well that's the diamond option, and a steering wheel? Well you
 need the platinum option...' etc... etc..
 
 Bill Brooks
 PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D., C.I.I.
 Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510
 

-- 
___
Integrated Controls, Inc.   Tel: 415-647-0480  EXT 107 
2851 21st StreetFax: 415-647-3003
San Francisco, CA 94110 www.integratedcontrolsinc.com


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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? PCAD

2004-04-09 Thread John Strupat
How about the other Altium package, PCAD?

I'm amazed that Altium markets both when I can't find a straight up
comparison between them.

John Strupat
JST Limited





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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?

2004-04-09 Thread Abd ulRahman Lomax
At 01:50 PM 4/9/2004, Leon Heller wrote:
Have a look at Pulsonix: http://www.pulsonix.com

It was developed from scratch by a group of people who used to work for
Zuken-Redac, support is excellent. Unlike Altium, they fix bugs immediately
they come to light.
There are a number of small companies which do this. However, it is 
probably overstated. They fix, I'm fairly sure, *some* deficiencies when 
they come to light. Others likely take some time. The interval between 
service packs for Protel, early in a product cycle, is not long; but I do 
think that patch release should be far more frequent, on an open beta basis.

 The autorouter is quite good and works reliably. Pricing
is competitive.
I set an independent users group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

It gets very little traffic because the software is so easy to use and has
so few problems.
The reference is appreciated, but more likely it has little traffic because 
it doesn't have so many subscribers. CAD users talk to each other, and lots 
of questions asked on support lists are about design issues, not 
specifically CAD system questions.

I haven't looked at Pulsonix in a long time, I should mosey on over



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