Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-09 Thread Bagotronix Tech Support

Lots of message traffic in this KLUNK! thread...

KLUNK! reminds me of the animated cartoon series (Dastardly and Muttley in
Their Flying Machines) that featured WWI-style pilots Dick Dastardly, his
dog Muttley, and 2 screw-up sidekick pilots, one of whom was named Klunk.
Dick Dastardly and his sidekicks (bad guys cast as a German stereotype) were
always trying to stop the carrier pigeon (Yankee Doodle) from delivering the
vital message of the day (whatever that was).  Dastardly and his sidekicks
would devise the most hare-brained of schemes to stop that pigeon!, and
they would always fail, in a hilarious spectacular crash.  Here is a website
about this old cartoon show:
http://www.tibonia.com/Dmeg1.htm

If we are Yankee Doodle pigeon (carrying money), and Altium is the Vulture
Squadron, it seems that Altium's recent ATS and DXP efforts (hare-brained
schemes to get that money) are crashing and burning similarly.  :-)

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com



* Tracking #: 00A5912C470F794D8335C4AB6369D929792C073E
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-08 Thread Joe Sapienza

I know you do PCB layout, but do you design software also?


Tony,

I do PCB in Protel and the competition package. I also do mechanical stuff
in Acad and Cadkey, soon adding Solidworks.
I spent the last 6 years developing Controllers, touchscreens and customized
software interfaces, so I do have some Ideas on what and how the memory is
managed in windows.


If you look at the file creation dates on many items you will see that they
are there for the call. Inevitably a new engine can only do what it's
available data and subroutines have to offer.

Joe

- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 I wouldn't disagree with you much, but to add a few other thoughts:

 Did P98 KLUNK! back in 1998 on Win98? Maybe a service pack to windows,
 or win2k or winXP changed somehow and caused the KLUNK! to start. The
 reason I ask that is because I have a simple app I purchased and it was
 running fine one win98, then on win2k. At some point I tried it on winXP
 and the minimize button no longer worked! How could a simple, ubiquitous
 task as minimize stop working?? I have no idea, but I asked the vendor
 that supports the app and they say they are aware of it and will release
 a fix at some point. Does the lack of a date mean they aren't sure why
 it broke?

 I know you do PCB layout, but do you design software also?


  -Original Message-
  From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 1:41 AM
  To: Protel EDA Forum
  Cc: JaMi Smith
  Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
  Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
   Jami,
  
   Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different machine? (I
   can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think
  your frequent
   crashes are pretty unusual.
  
 
  Tony,
 
  Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a
  Dell Model 4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded,
  on a Dell Model 535 2.3Ghz Pentium 4, at work.
 
  I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy of
  Protel 99 SE SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista
  866 MHz Pentium III at home.
 
  I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of
  usage, and the reason it has been so high in the past several
  weeks is that the total usage has been an average of about 12
  hours a day, with occasions reaching up to 18 hours straight.
 
  When I push Protel, it crashes!
 
  When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!
 
  I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others
  out there, I just think that I may have a slightly higher
  usage, and be much much more vocal and much much less
  tolerant about the crashes.
 
  I really really think that is as simple as that.
 
  I think that far far too many people out there have become
  accustomed to their systems crashing on them from time to
  time for one reason or another, and actually think nothing of
  it. Many accept it as the cost of doing business as it
  were, and in some cases actually blame it on themselves
  thinking that it was something that they might have done
  wrong, or that for some reason the hardware or software
  combination that they have just does not live up to Protel's
  requirements and expectations.
 
  I have heard some people insist that their system is rock
  solid, and never crashes, and yet these are the very same
  people who admit that they have occasionally seen hidden
  processes or phantom copies of Protel still running when
  they go to shut their system down.
 
  This is not normal.
 
  This is not how software is supposed to run.
 
  Especially when that software is currently costing $8,000.00 a copy.
 
  It is not simply a fluke.
 
  It is not something that you did wrong.
 
  It is not that you have a flaky system.
 
  It is simply inexcusable blunders and oversights in programming.
 
  It really and truly is that Protel really and truly is flaky software.
 
  If nothing else, what we have learned today is that Protel
  can't even perform the simplest of functions of terminating
  its own program correctly and returning control and resources
  to the operating system, without making an error.
 
  This is fundamental.
 
  This is an obvious blunder.
 
  And this problem has been there all of the time.
 
  I know that there may be some in this forum who would take
  issue and try to say that this is not a big problem, and my
  answer to them is simply that we really do not know how big
  the problem is since we do not have the source code and can
  therefore not really understand what is or is not happening,
  and I don't think that that is really

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-08 Thread Joe Sapienza

Maybe that is where P99 ended up. Like I said, I'm just guessing.

without sitting down and doing an in depth lookse. I am not inclined nor do
I have the free time.


- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Hi Joe,

 I looked at the dates because your comment sparked interest. The older
 dates look to me like development tool DLLs, PLD stuff (the files from
 1996), icons, pretty benign and uncontrollable stuff.

 If you look at the meat of the code, the file are dated 2002. I would
 disagree with you just because there are so many new problems with DXP.
 Even some core functions that we were familiar with have changed.

 I'm just guessing, but maybe the code base of P99SE was getting very
 difficult to maintain, and they opted for a 'fresh start' in many ways.

 In this article: http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20020819S0056 the
 author states: To achieve the best long-term results, it is often
 necessary to have the courage to discard bad code and rewrite it.

 Maybe that is where P99 ended up. Like I said, I'm just guessing.




  -Original Message-
  From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 3:39 AM
  To: Protel EDA Forum
  Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
  Jami,
 
  This problem only manifests itself after long usage for you.
  Then it may be related to the way it uses memory, i refer to
  it a memory leakage and does occur to some people. The
  problem was very obvious when the early Windows versions were
  release. I suspect that whatever the implemented fix was it
  was manily a bandaid or leak control as we used to call it.
  Personally I have not seen it as of late and my sessions
  never run that long, I haven't seen any of this especially in Win2K.
 
  Judging on the creation dates of many of the files in DXP i
  would surmize that the issue could still be there as the
  files are from the early versions and loaded into the new DXP
  front end GUI.
 
  I think it would take a bigger redo than the fron end to fix
  it. I believe that the release of DXP was very rushed to keep
  up with the competition as one of the major competitors was
  releasing a new version at the same time.
 
  Joe
 
 
  - Original Message -
  From: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:40 AM
  Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
  
   - Original Message -
   From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
   Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
  
  
Jami,
   
Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different
  machine? (I
can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think your
frequent crashes are pretty unusual.
   
  
   Tony,
  
   Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a Dell
   Model 4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded, on a
  Dell Model
   535
  2.3Ghz
   Pentium 4, at work.
  
   I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy
  of Protel 99
   SE SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista 866 MHz
  Pentium III
   at
  home.
  
   I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of
  usage, and
   the reason it has been so high in the past several weeks is
  that the
   total
  usage
   has been an average of about 12 hours a day, with occasions
  reaching
   up to 18 hours straight.
  
   When I push Protel, it crashes!
  
   When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!
  
   I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others out
   there, I just think that I may have a slightly higher usage, and be
   much much more vocal and much much less tolerant about the crashes.
  
   I really really think that is as simple as that.
  
   I think that far far too many people out there have become
  accustomed
   to their systems crashing on them from time to time for one
  reason or
  another,
   and actually think nothing of it. Many accept it as the
  cost of doing
   business as it were, and in some cases actually blame it on
   themselves thinking that it was something that they might have done
   wrong, or that
  for
   some reason the hardware or software combination that they
  have just
   does not live up to Protel's requirements and expectations.
  
   I have heard some people insist that their system is rock
  solid, and
   never crashes, and yet these are the very same people who
  admit that
   they have occasionally seen hidden processes or phantom
  copies of
   Protel still running when they go to shut their system down.
  
   This is not normal.
  
   This is not how software is supposed to run.
  
   Especially when

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-08 Thread Joe Sapienza

Jami,

I read this and I agree with some of it. Keeping in mind several reasons for
the timing of an Immature release, or a late release I understand the sales
and marketing side of the argument. As far as the user side It is
unacceptable to consume time sorting out the problems in a new tool that is
both expensive and allegedly an improvement of something already in place.
The real question is where threshold of diminishing short and longterm
returns are in each users individual organization.

With regard to the klunk issue i recommend just giving the system a shutdown
whenever you go to lunch or a meeting or whaever and that may help clear the
memory and residuals therein. That is provided you can afford the reboot
times with your particular conditions.

Joe



- Original Message -
From: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Joe,

 Please see below,

 Thanks,

 JaMi


 - Original Message -
 From: Joe Sapienza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 3:38 AM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


  Jami,
 
  This problem only manifests itself after long usage for you. Then it may
 be
  related to the way it uses memory, i refer to it a memory leakage and
does
  occur to some people. The problem was very obvious when the early
Windows
  versions were release. I suspect that whatever the implemented fix was
it
  was manily a bandaid or leak control as we used to call it. Personally I
  have not seen it as of late and my sessions never run that long, I
haven't
  seen any of this especially in Win2K.
 

 Interesting point. I never thought of it as a question of how long a
 continuous session was, or the duration of time between boot and
 shutdown. This is scary. I know that in the past I have worked at big
 corporations where they have brought in job shoppers and worked people
 double shift and triple shift people on the same workstations (such
 Cadnetix, Mentor, CBDS, and CADAM) to keep the resources in use 16 or 24
 hours a day to shorten the length of large project when things have really
 gotten into a crunch. If what you say is true, can you imagine what would
 happen in a design department with say 5 seats of Protel, if they tried to
 fully utilize their resources in the same manner today?

 All of my recent problems with 99 SE SP6 within the last year have been on
 three different platforms, all running Win2K, where I am generally running
 Protel all day, but the system is shut down every night.

 Several years ago however, I was running Protel 98 on both Win 95 ORS2 and
 NT4 SP3, and while using Protel was only a small part of my job there, it
 did crash on a regular basis. What used to get me there was that when
Protel
 98 crashed, It would loose all trace of the file. I mean lost, except for
 original backup which could have been  several hours or even days or weeks
 old (if I remember correctly, it did not make a new backup until you saved
 the file you were currently working on , so that if you crashed, you lost
 the current copy). There may have been a way to recover it (similar to
those
 brought up here by Dennis), but I didn't know how. That was where I
learned
 that when it came to Protel, I needed to SAVE often, and also SAVE AS
to
 multiple files every time I saved, which was easy with the old file
 structure since I just had to double click on each of the two different
 names I would use for primary and reserve files.

  Judging on the creation dates of many of the files in DXP I would
surmise
  that the issue could still be there as the files are from the early
 versions
  and loaded into the new DXP front end GUI.
 

 This is what scares me.

 This is what I am afraid of.

 It is not that KLUNK! may or may not be a problem in DXP, since Tony
 already has said that it is not.

 My fear is that there are many other problems of a basic nature similar to
 KLUNK!, that have been programmed into existing modules, that are being
 incorporated bodily into DXP, Band-Aid and all, waiting to do their thing.

 I mean programmers as a lot are fairly consistent people. When you are
 good, you are good on a regular basis. When you are sloppy, you are sloppy
 on a regular basis. When you screw up, you don't just do it once. When you
 do a big and obvious KLUNK!, there are usually several more smaller ones
 hiding in the wings.

 You may have noticed how I am going out of my way not to mention other
 Protel problems that have discussed here in the past, and I will not bring
 them up here except to say that they are consistent with KLUNK!.

 I mean can you imagine if you cataloged each and every exception error
 that has occurred with Protel, just how many different ones there would
be,
 and just how many of each you would have, and just how many

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-08 Thread Igor Gmitrovic

In my experience Protel versions 3.0, 98 and 99 were flaky. Protel 99SE with SP6 is 
stable. I aggree with you on SP7. There are things to be corrected.

Igor

-Original Message-
From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, 7 September 2002 6:41 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Cc: JaMi Smith
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.



- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Jami,

 Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different machine? (I
 can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think your frequent
 crashes are pretty unusual.


Tony,

Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a Dell Model
4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded, on a Dell Model 535 2.3Ghz
Pentium 4, at work.

I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy of Protel 99 SE
SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista 866 MHz Pentium III at home.

I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of usage, and the
reason it has been so high in the past several weeks is that the total usage
has been an average of about 12 hours a day, with occasions reaching up to
18 hours straight.

When I push Protel, it crashes!

When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!

I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others out there, I
just think that I may have a slightly higher usage, and be much much more
vocal and much much less tolerant about the crashes.

I really really think that is as simple as that.

I think that far far too many people out there have become accustomed to
their systems crashing on them from time to time for one reason or another,
and actually think nothing of it. Many accept it as the cost of doing
business as it were, and in some cases actually blame it on themselves
thinking that it was something that they might have done wrong, or that for
some reason the hardware or software combination that they have just does
not live up to Protel's requirements and expectations.

I have heard some people insist that their system is rock solid, and never
crashes, and yet these are the very same people who admit that they have
occasionally seen hidden processes or phantom copies of Protel still
running when they go to shut their system down.

This is not normal.

This is not how software is supposed to run.

Especially when that software is currently costing $8,000.00 a copy.

It is not simply a fluke.

It is not something that you did wrong.

It is not that you have a flaky system.

It is simply inexcusable blunders and oversights in programming.

It really and truly is that Protel really and truly is flaky software.

If nothing else, what we have learned today is that Protel can't even
perform the simplest of functions of terminating its own program correctly
and returning control and resources to the operating system, without making
an error.

This is fundamental.

This is an obvious blunder.

And this problem has been there all of the time.

I know that there may be some in this forum who would take issue and try to
say that this is not a big problem, and my answer to them is simply that we
really do not know how big the problem is since we do not have the source
code and can therefore not really understand what is or is not happening,
and I don't think that that is really the issue here anyway.

I think the issue here is that this KLUNK! problem proves beyond any
shadow of a doubt that there are in fact some very basic software bugs and
problems in Protel 99 SE, and that Protel / Altium has really never looked
at the software from a stability and reliability standpoint to see whether
or not there really are problems there when people have complained of
crashes.

Do you realize the magnitude of this blunder!

What we have found out here today is something as basic and fundamental as
writing your very first hello world! program in C, and having it crash on
exiting main.

Whether or not it causes other problems is secondary to the fact that it is
a programming blunder of monumental proportions, and the jury is not really
in on whether or not it causes any other problems.

These are the same people who are now trying to sell you another can of
worms called DXP.

I apologize for my little soap box oratory here,  and it is certainly not my
intention to offend anyone or start another battle of words, but this is
Problem Number One in Introduction to Fundamental Programming 101, on How to
Properly Terminate any Program, and Protel / Altium has flunked the course.

I believe that this problem needs to be widely publicized, and Protel /
Altium needs to be pressured into stepping up to the plate and taking
responsibility for the problem, and promising to do something about it, for
all current Protel 99 SE users and customers.

There are many Protel 99 SE customers out

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-08 Thread Igor Gmitrovic

There are many factors in the same equation, but as I see it, they had to come up with 
something completely new so they could introduce the ATS. That, to me, is the most 
important factor in all this. They are fighting for revenue, as any other busines 
does. That they might lose in the end is a law of (business) nature.

Igor

-Original Message-
From: mariusrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, 8 September 2002 4:06 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.



- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Hi Joe,

 I looked at the dates because your comment sparked interest. The older
 dates look to me like development tool DLLs, PLD stuff (the files from
 1996), icons, pretty benign and uncontrollable stuff.

 If you look at the meat of the code, the file are dated 2002. I would
 disagree with you just because there are so many new problems with DXP.
 Even some core functions that we were familiar with have changed.

 I'm just guessing, but maybe the code base of P99SE was getting very
 difficult to maintain, and they opted for a 'fresh start' in many ways.

 In this article: http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20020819S0056 the
 author states: To achieve the best long-term results, it is often
 necessary to have the courage to discard bad code and rewrite it.

 Maybe that is where P99 ended up. Like I said, I'm just guessing.


discarding bad code is one thing, changing top level GUI specs is another .
They decided to incorporate new features and discard old features based on
management perception rather than user feedback. Starting from scratch new
code doesn't mean discarding the old menus or feature set . All it needed
was some corrections and some additions to be a better EDa tool than 99se or
the competition . Then with the brand new enhanced spec software engineers
could've written code in any language of their choice and on any platform .
Altium should have correlated the feature set with the market segment
they're addressing. They should've made an effort to keep the familiar menus
regardless of the underlying code whenever possible. IT looks a lot like the
not invented here syndrome , new development team is brought in, old
people let go, new people badmouth old ones and then change everything
including what was good. This was terribly foolish because Altium was
somewhere up there on the learning curve in designing EDA tools . 99se was
the nth iteration with lots of incremental improvements over previous
versions. Giving up their functionality and replacing them with different
options/menus/features threw them years back on the evolution scale. They
could've rewritten the whole program from scratch but still maintain a top
level GUI familiar interface , instead I bet they rewrote the GUI and
probably patched the old underlying code. I'm sure it's still that Delphi
code BTW . An example of how not to develop software, or what happens to
shareholders money when management doesn't have a clue. They are currently
reinventing the wheel , unfortunately it's still square or octagonal at best
.

Matt Tudor , MSEE
http://gigahertzelectronics.com


p.s. in this day and age the PLD tool makes no sense whatsoever , Xilinx,
Actel, Atmel, Altera offer free tools with better funcionality , which have
the added advantage that they actually _work_ for a change .



* Tracking #: B583A16F9F0D87409C1CC56EB92C8E2B42E82B54
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread JaMi Smith


- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Jami,

 Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different machine? (I
 can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think your frequent
 crashes are pretty unusual.


Tony,

Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a Dell Model
4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded, on a Dell Model 535 2.3Ghz
Pentium 4, at work.

I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy of Protel 99 SE
SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista 866 MHz Pentium III at home.

I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of usage, and the
reason it has been so high in the past several weeks is that the total usage
has been an average of about 12 hours a day, with occasions reaching up to
18 hours straight.

When I push Protel, it crashes!

When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!

I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others out there, I
just think that I may have a slightly higher usage, and be much much more
vocal and much much less tolerant about the crashes.

I really really think that is as simple as that.

I think that far far too many people out there have become accustomed to
their systems crashing on them from time to time for one reason or another,
and actually think nothing of it. Many accept it as the cost of doing
business as it were, and in some cases actually blame it on themselves
thinking that it was something that they might have done wrong, or that for
some reason the hardware or software combination that they have just does
not live up to Protel's requirements and expectations.

I have heard some people insist that their system is rock solid, and never
crashes, and yet these are the very same people who admit that they have
occasionally seen hidden processes or phantom copies of Protel still
running when they go to shut their system down.

This is not normal.

This is not how software is supposed to run.

Especially when that software is currently costing $8,000.00 a copy.

It is not simply a fluke.

It is not something that you did wrong.

It is not that you have a flaky system.

It is simply inexcusable blunders and oversights in programming.

It really and truly is that Protel really and truly is flaky software.

If nothing else, what we have learned today is that Protel can't even
perform the simplest of functions of terminating its own program correctly
and returning control and resources to the operating system, without making
an error.

This is fundamental.

This is an obvious blunder.

And this problem has been there all of the time.

I know that there may be some in this forum who would take issue and try to
say that this is not a big problem, and my answer to them is simply that we
really do not know how big the problem is since we do not have the source
code and can therefore not really understand what is or is not happening,
and I don't think that that is really the issue here anyway.

I think the issue here is that this KLUNK! problem proves beyond any
shadow of a doubt that there are in fact some very basic software bugs and
problems in Protel 99 SE, and that Protel / Altium has really never looked
at the software from a stability and reliability standpoint to see whether
or not there really are problems there when people have complained of
crashes.

Do you realize the magnitude of this blunder!

What we have found out here today is something as basic and fundamental as
writing your very first hello world! program in C, and having it crash on
exiting main.

Whether or not it causes other problems is secondary to the fact that it is
a programming blunder of monumental proportions, and the jury is not really
in on whether or not it causes any other problems.

These are the same people who are now trying to sell you another can of
worms called DXP.

I apologize for my little soap box oratory here,  and it is certainly not my
intention to offend anyone or start another battle of words, but this is
Problem Number One in Introduction to Fundamental Programming 101, on How to
Properly Terminate any Program, and Protel / Altium has flunked the course.

I believe that this problem needs to be widely publicized, and Protel /
Altium needs to be pressured into stepping up to the plate and taking
responsibility for the problem, and promising to do something about it, for
all current Protel 99 SE users and customers.

There are many Protel 99 SE customers out there that have a monumental
investment in Protel 99 SE software, and simply cannot afford to upgrade
to DXP to solve the existing problems and shortcomings with Protel 99 SE.

Don't you find it a little ironic that all of the Altium Management from
the CEO on down is scrambling to pacify every whim of the users in the DXP
Forum so that they can convince everyone

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread Joe Sapienza

Jami,

This problem only manifests itself after long usage for you. Then it may be
related to the way it uses memory, i refer to it a memory leakage and does
occur to some people. The problem was very obvious when the early Windows
versions were release. I suspect that whatever the implemented fix was it
was manily a bandaid or leak control as we used to call it. Personally I
have not seen it as of late and my sessions never run that long, I haven't
seen any of this especially in Win2K.

Judging on the creation dates of many of the files in DXP i would surmize
that the issue could still be there as the files are from the early versions
and loaded into the new DXP front end GUI.

I think it would take a bigger redo than the fron end to fix it. I believe
that the release of DXP was very rushed to keep up with the competition as
one of the major competitors was releasing a new version at the same time.

Joe


- Original Message -
From: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:40 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.



 - Original Message -
 From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


  Jami,
 
  Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different machine? (I
  can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think your frequent
  crashes are pretty unusual.
 

 Tony,

 Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a Dell Model
 4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded, on a Dell Model 535
2.3Ghz
 Pentium 4, at work.

 I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy of Protel 99 SE
 SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista 866 MHz Pentium III at
home.

 I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of usage, and the
 reason it has been so high in the past several weeks is that the total
usage
 has been an average of about 12 hours a day, with occasions reaching up to
 18 hours straight.

 When I push Protel, it crashes!

 When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!

 I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others out there, I
 just think that I may have a slightly higher usage, and be much much more
 vocal and much much less tolerant about the crashes.

 I really really think that is as simple as that.

 I think that far far too many people out there have become accustomed to
 their systems crashing on them from time to time for one reason or
another,
 and actually think nothing of it. Many accept it as the cost of doing
 business as it were, and in some cases actually blame it on themselves
 thinking that it was something that they might have done wrong, or that
for
 some reason the hardware or software combination that they have just does
 not live up to Protel's requirements and expectations.

 I have heard some people insist that their system is rock solid, and never
 crashes, and yet these are the very same people who admit that they have
 occasionally seen hidden processes or phantom copies of Protel still
 running when they go to shut their system down.

 This is not normal.

 This is not how software is supposed to run.

 Especially when that software is currently costing $8,000.00 a copy.

 It is not simply a fluke.

 It is not something that you did wrong.

 It is not that you have a flaky system.

 It is simply inexcusable blunders and oversights in programming.

 It really and truly is that Protel really and truly is flaky software.

 If nothing else, what we have learned today is that Protel can't even
 perform the simplest of functions of terminating its own program correctly
 and returning control and resources to the operating system, without
making
 an error.

 This is fundamental.

 This is an obvious blunder.

 And this problem has been there all of the time.

 I know that there may be some in this forum who would take issue and try
to
 say that this is not a big problem, and my answer to them is simply that
we
 really do not know how big the problem is since we do not have the source
 code and can therefore not really understand what is or is not happening,
 and I don't think that that is really the issue here anyway.

 I think the issue here is that this KLUNK! problem proves beyond any
 shadow of a doubt that there are in fact some very basic software bugs and
 problems in Protel 99 SE, and that Protel / Altium has really never looked
 at the software from a stability and reliability standpoint to see whether
 or not there really are problems there when people have complained of
 crashes.

 Do you realize the magnitude of this blunder!

 What we have found out here today is something as basic and fundamental as
 writing your very first hello world! program in C, and having it crash
on
 exiting main.

 Whether or not it causes other problems

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread Tony Karavidas

I wouldn't disagree with you much, but to add a few other thoughts:

Did P98 KLUNK! back in 1998 on Win98? Maybe a service pack to windows,
or win2k or winXP changed somehow and caused the KLUNK! to start. The
reason I ask that is because I have a simple app I purchased and it was
running fine one win98, then on win2k. At some point I tried it on winXP
and the minimize button no longer worked! How could a simple, ubiquitous
task as minimize stop working?? I have no idea, but I asked the vendor
that supports the app and they say they are aware of it and will release
a fix at some point. Does the lack of a date mean they aren't sure why
it broke?

I know you do PCB layout, but do you design software also?


 -Original Message-
 From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 1:41 AM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Cc: JaMi Smith
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
  Jami,
 
  Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different machine? (I 
  can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think 
 your frequent 
  crashes are pretty unusual.
 
 
 Tony,
 
 Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a 
 Dell Model 4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded, 
 on a Dell Model 535 2.3Ghz Pentium 4, at work.
 
 I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy of 
 Protel 99 SE SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista 
 866 MHz Pentium III at home.
 
 I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of 
 usage, and the reason it has been so high in the past several 
 weeks is that the total usage has been an average of about 12 
 hours a day, with occasions reaching up to 18 hours straight.
 
 When I push Protel, it crashes!
 
 When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!
 
 I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others 
 out there, I just think that I may have a slightly higher 
 usage, and be much much more vocal and much much less 
 tolerant about the crashes.
 
 I really really think that is as simple as that.
 
 I think that far far too many people out there have become 
 accustomed to their systems crashing on them from time to 
 time for one reason or another, and actually think nothing of 
 it. Many accept it as the cost of doing business as it 
 were, and in some cases actually blame it on themselves 
 thinking that it was something that they might have done 
 wrong, or that for some reason the hardware or software 
 combination that they have just does not live up to Protel's 
 requirements and expectations.
 
 I have heard some people insist that their system is rock 
 solid, and never crashes, and yet these are the very same 
 people who admit that they have occasionally seen hidden 
 processes or phantom copies of Protel still running when 
 they go to shut their system down.
 
 This is not normal.
 
 This is not how software is supposed to run.
 
 Especially when that software is currently costing $8,000.00 a copy.
 
 It is not simply a fluke.
 
 It is not something that you did wrong.
 
 It is not that you have a flaky system.
 
 It is simply inexcusable blunders and oversights in programming.
 
 It really and truly is that Protel really and truly is flaky software.
 
 If nothing else, what we have learned today is that Protel 
 can't even perform the simplest of functions of terminating 
 its own program correctly and returning control and resources 
 to the operating system, without making an error.
 
 This is fundamental.
 
 This is an obvious blunder.
 
 And this problem has been there all of the time.
 
 I know that there may be some in this forum who would take 
 issue and try to say that this is not a big problem, and my 
 answer to them is simply that we really do not know how big 
 the problem is since we do not have the source code and can 
 therefore not really understand what is or is not happening, 
 and I don't think that that is really the issue here anyway.
 
 I think the issue here is that this KLUNK! problem proves 
 beyond any shadow of a doubt that there are in fact some very 
 basic software bugs and problems in Protel 99 SE, and that 
 Protel / Altium has really never looked at the software from 
 a stability and reliability standpoint to see whether or not 
 there really are problems there when people have complained 
 of crashes.
 
 Do you realize the magnitude of this blunder!
 
 What we have found out here today is something as basic and 
 fundamental as writing your very first hello world! program 
 in C, and having it crash on exiting main.
 
 Whether or not it causes other problems is secondary to the 
 fact that it is a programming blunder of monumental 
 proportions, and the jury is not really in on whether or not 
 it causes any

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread Tony Karavidas

Hi Joe,

I looked at the dates because your comment sparked interest. The older
dates look to me like development tool DLLs, PLD stuff (the files from
1996), icons, pretty benign and uncontrollable stuff.

If you look at the meat of the code, the file are dated 2002. I would
disagree with you just because there are so many new problems with DXP.
Even some core functions that we were familiar with have changed.

I'm just guessing, but maybe the code base of P99SE was getting very
difficult to maintain, and they opted for a 'fresh start' in many ways.

In this article: http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20020819S0056 the
author states: To achieve the best long-term results, it is often
necessary to have the courage to discard bad code and rewrite it.

Maybe that is where P99 ended up. Like I said, I'm just guessing.




 -Original Message-
 From: Joe Sapienza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 3:39 AM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 Jami,
 
 This problem only manifests itself after long usage for you. 
 Then it may be related to the way it uses memory, i refer to 
 it a memory leakage and does occur to some people. The 
 problem was very obvious when the early Windows versions were 
 release. I suspect that whatever the implemented fix was it 
 was manily a bandaid or leak control as we used to call it. 
 Personally I have not seen it as of late and my sessions 
 never run that long, I haven't seen any of this especially in Win2K.
 
 Judging on the creation dates of many of the files in DXP i 
 would surmize that the issue could still be there as the 
 files are from the early versions and loaded into the new DXP 
 front end GUI.
 
 I think it would take a bigger redo than the fron end to fix 
 it. I believe that the release of DXP was very rushed to keep 
 up with the competition as one of the major competitors was 
 releasing a new version at the same time.
 
 Joe
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: JaMi Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:40 AM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:14 PM
  Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
   Jami,
  
   Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different 
 machine? (I 
   can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think your 
   frequent crashes are pretty unusual.
  
 
  Tony,
 
  Over the past year, most of my problems have been on either a Dell 
  Model 4100 1GHz Pentium III or once that was upgraded, on a 
 Dell Model 
  535
 2.3Ghz
  Pentium 4, at work.
 
  I then purchased my own license, and now have my own copy 
 of Protel 99 
  SE SP6 installed on my own IBM Model 6648 NetVista 866 MHz 
 Pentium III 
  at
 home.
 
  I actually just think that the crashes are just a matter of 
 usage, and 
  the reason it has been so high in the past several weeks is 
 that the 
  total
 usage
  has been an average of about 12 hours a day, with occasions 
 reaching 
  up to 18 hours straight.
 
  When I push Protel, it crashes!
 
  When Protel crashes, I scream and yell!
 
  I don't think that I am having more crashes than some others out 
  there, I just think that I may have a slightly higher usage, and be 
  much much more vocal and much much less tolerant about the crashes.
 
  I really really think that is as simple as that.
 
  I think that far far too many people out there have become 
 accustomed 
  to their systems crashing on them from time to time for one 
 reason or
 another,
  and actually think nothing of it. Many accept it as the 
 cost of doing 
  business as it were, and in some cases actually blame it on 
  themselves thinking that it was something that they might have done 
  wrong, or that
 for
  some reason the hardware or software combination that they 
 have just 
  does not live up to Protel's requirements and expectations.
 
  I have heard some people insist that their system is rock 
 solid, and 
  never crashes, and yet these are the very same people who 
 admit that 
  they have occasionally seen hidden processes or phantom 
 copies of 
  Protel still running when they go to shut their system down.
 
  This is not normal.
 
  This is not how software is supposed to run.
 
  Especially when that software is currently costing $8,000.00 a copy.
 
  It is not simply a fluke.
 
  It is not something that you did wrong.
 
  It is not that you have a flaky system.
 
  It is simply inexcusable blunders and oversights in programming.
 
  It really and truly is that Protel really and truly is 
 flaky software.
 
  If nothing else, what we have learned today is that Protel 
 can't even 
  perform the simplest of functions of terminating its own

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread JaMi Smith

Joe,

Please see below,

Thanks,

JaMi


- Original Message -
From: Joe Sapienza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Jami,

 This problem only manifests itself after long usage for you. Then it may
be
 related to the way it uses memory, i refer to it a memory leakage and does
 occur to some people. The problem was very obvious when the early Windows
 versions were release. I suspect that whatever the implemented fix was it
 was manily a bandaid or leak control as we used to call it. Personally I
 have not seen it as of late and my sessions never run that long, I haven't
 seen any of this especially in Win2K.


Interesting point. I never thought of it as a question of how long a
continuous session was, or the duration of time between boot and
shutdown. This is scary. I know that in the past I have worked at big
corporations where they have brought in job shoppers and worked people
double shift and triple shift people on the same workstations (such
Cadnetix, Mentor, CBDS, and CADAM) to keep the resources in use 16 or 24
hours a day to shorten the length of large project when things have really
gotten into a crunch. If what you say is true, can you imagine what would
happen in a design department with say 5 seats of Protel, if they tried to
fully utilize their resources in the same manner today?

All of my recent problems with 99 SE SP6 within the last year have been on
three different platforms, all running Win2K, where I am generally running
Protel all day, but the system is shut down every night.

Several years ago however, I was running Protel 98 on both Win 95 ORS2 and
NT4 SP3, and while using Protel was only a small part of my job there, it
did crash on a regular basis. What used to get me there was that when Protel
98 crashed, It would loose all trace of the file. I mean lost, except for
original backup which could have been  several hours or even days or weeks
old (if I remember correctly, it did not make a new backup until you saved
the file you were currently working on , so that if you crashed, you lost
the current copy). There may have been a way to recover it (similar to those
brought up here by Dennis), but I didn't know how. That was where I learned
that when it came to Protel, I needed to SAVE often, and also SAVE AS to
multiple files every time I saved, which was easy with the old file
structure since I just had to double click on each of the two different
names I would use for primary and reserve files.

 Judging on the creation dates of many of the files in DXP I would surmise
 that the issue could still be there as the files are from the early
versions
 and loaded into the new DXP front end GUI.


This is what scares me.

This is what I am afraid of.

It is not that KLUNK! may or may not be a problem in DXP, since Tony
already has said that it is not.

My fear is that there are many other problems of a basic nature similar to
KLUNK!, that have been programmed into existing modules, that are being
incorporated bodily into DXP, Band-Aid and all, waiting to do their thing.

I mean programmers as a lot are fairly consistent people. When you are
good, you are good on a regular basis. When you are sloppy, you are sloppy
on a regular basis. When you screw up, you don't just do it once. When you
do a big and obvious KLUNK!, there are usually several more smaller ones
hiding in the wings.

You may have noticed how I am going out of my way not to mention other
Protel problems that have discussed here in the past, and I will not bring
them up here except to say that they are consistent with KLUNK!.

I mean can you imagine if you cataloged each and every exception error
that has occurred with Protel, just how many different ones there would be,
and just how many of each you would have, and just how many of those will
still continue to happen in DXP.

Scary.

Very scary.

 I think it would take a bigger redo than the fron end to fix it. I believe
 that the release of DXP was very rushed to keep up with the competition as
 one of the major competitors was releasing a new version at the same time.


Exactly, it was rushed by the new management that is more and more income
driven, and as it appears more and more as each day goes by, less
technically, shall we say, oriented, to be nice.

It is very apparent to me that what is going on in the Official Altium
Monitored DXP Forum right now, is a continuation of the rush and
application of yet more Band-Aids, in an attempt to redeem DXP and ATS in
the mind of customers before October 1st.

And the real question is, when are they going to take the time to do the
real trouble shooting and real programming to make the product, and all of
its many components, some of which have been causing problems for years,
work properly?

Unfortunately, I do not think that Altium is willing to admit the problems,
much less fix them.

I think

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread JaMi Smith


- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.



 Did P98 KLUNK! back in 1998 on Win98? Maybe a service pack to windows,
 or win2k or winXP changed somehow and caused the KLUNK! to start. The
 reason I ask that is because I have a simple app I purchased and it was
 running fine one win98, then on win2k. At some point I tried it on winXP
 and the minimize button no longer worked! How could a simple, ubiquitous
 task as minimize stop working?? I have no idea, but I asked the vendor
 that supports the app and they say they are aware of it and will release
 a fix at some point. Does the lack of a date mean they aren't sure why
 it broke?


Excellent question and very valid point!

P98 does KLUNK! in Win98, but I am not sure about Win95 or NT4.

Is it possible that anyone else out there can answer this question?

 I know you do PCB layout, but do you design software also?


the short answer is yes. This is a simple question which I believe you and
several others have asked before, but I haven't gotten around to answering
it yet. I will. Too long an answer for today though, as I still have to
finish the board from hell by Monday.

JaMi



* Tracking #: A58DB5C5900B284F8CC1B32F5139D275AEA803EE
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-07 Thread mariusrf


- Original Message -
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 Hi Joe,

 I looked at the dates because your comment sparked interest. The older
 dates look to me like development tool DLLs, PLD stuff (the files from
 1996), icons, pretty benign and uncontrollable stuff.

 If you look at the meat of the code, the file are dated 2002. I would
 disagree with you just because there are so many new problems with DXP.
 Even some core functions that we were familiar with have changed.

 I'm just guessing, but maybe the code base of P99SE was getting very
 difficult to maintain, and they opted for a 'fresh start' in many ways.

 In this article: http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20020819S0056 the
 author states: To achieve the best long-term results, it is often
 necessary to have the courage to discard bad code and rewrite it.

 Maybe that is where P99 ended up. Like I said, I'm just guessing.


discarding bad code is one thing, changing top level GUI specs is another .
They decided to incorporate new features and discard old features based on
management perception rather than user feedback. Starting from scratch new
code doesn't mean discarding the old menus or feature set . All it needed
was some corrections and some additions to be a better EDa tool than 99se or
the competition . Then with the brand new enhanced spec software engineers
could've written code in any language of their choice and on any platform .
Altium should have correlated the feature set with the market segment
they're addressing. They should've made an effort to keep the familiar menus
regardless of the underlying code whenever possible. IT looks a lot like the
not invented here syndrome , new development team is brought in, old
people let go, new people badmouth old ones and then change everything
including what was good. This was terribly foolish because Altium was
somewhere up there on the learning curve in designing EDA tools . 99se was
the nth iteration with lots of incremental improvements over previous
versions. Giving up their functionality and replacing them with different
options/menus/features threw them years back on the evolution scale. They
could've rewritten the whole program from scratch but still maintain a top
level GUI familiar interface , instead I bet they rewrote the GUI and
probably patched the old underlying code. I'm sure it's still that Delphi
code BTW . An example of how not to develop software, or what happens to
shareholders money when management doesn't have a clue. They are currently
reinventing the wheel , unfortunately it's still square or octagonal at best
.

Matt Tudor , MSEE
http://gigahertzelectronics.com


p.s. in this day and age the PLD tool makes no sense whatsoever , Xilinx,
Actel, Atmel, Altera offer free tools with better funcionality , which have
the added advantage that they actually _work_ for a change .



* Tracking #: B583A16F9F0D87409C1CC56EB92C8E2B42E82B54
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Dennis Saputelli

yeah i never noticed that either (the difference in the closing 'klunk')
but we do get it sometimes too

i wonder if this has anything to do with the 'issue' of phantom copies
of protel still running even after it is quit 
which seems to be specific to WIN2K

(i.e., the situation where Protel shows in the task manager after it has
been closed)

maybe the KLUNK is really trying to tell us something

i would also speculate that it *may* have something to do with 'compact
on close' which sometimes on some systems doesn't work correctly

why doesn't someone  - :) turn off compact on close and explore this
possible relationship to the mystery KLUNK

Dennis Saputelli

JaMi Smith wrote:
 
 OK . . .
 
 So I'll admit, I missed the Class on Protel 99 SE Basics . . .
 
 And I slept thru most of the Protel 99 SE 101 and 102 Classes . . .
 
 But gimmie a break . . .
 
 This one has got me baffled . . .
 
 So what are the two simplest functions that one can possibly perform in
 Protel 99 SE?
 
 I mean the absolute simplest, most bare bones, easiest things to do in
 Protel 99 SE.
 
 I mean like, are you ready for this one, START Protel 99 SE, and are you
 ready for this one, END Protel 99 SE.
 
 Not too complex here, just simple stuff.
 
 OK . . .
 
 I can think of 3 ways to START Protel 99 SE (without an open database):
 
 1. Double click the ICON on the Desktop.
 
 2. Place the cursor over the ICON in the Desktop and press ENTER.
 
 3. Navigate the START MENU and go from there.
 
 Nothing too complicated, nothing major, and I do not have any problems here,
 I can handle everything so far.
 
 But now comes the problem.
 
 I can think of 6 ways to END Protel 99 SE (without an open database):
 
 1. Click on the big X  (Close) in the upper right hand corner of the
 Application.
 
 2. From the File menu pulldown click on Exit.
 
 3. From the Task Manager, select Protel and end it.
 
 4. Shutdown the system.
 
 5. Hit RESET, or turn off the power switch, or simply pull the plug out of
 the wall (believe it or not I have had to resort to this before when Protel
 99 SE locks up).
 
 6. Simply wait for it to CRASH, which it always seems to do all by itself
 sooner or later.
 
 Now I will admit that the last 4 are not normal ways of simply ENDING Protel
 99 SE, so we can eliminate them right off the bat, and simply stick with the
 first 2.
 
 No Brainer . . .
 
 OK . . .
 
 So I simply START Protel 99 SE by any of the above methods, or maybe some
 that I haven't thought of, and go from there.
 
 Now comes the hard part, we have Protel 99 SE up and running, with no
 database open, in all of its glory, and we want to close it, so what do we
 do?
 
 1. We hit the big X, and wala!, it closes. Simple enough, I can andle
 this. No problem here.
 
 2 We go to the File menu pulldown, and click on Exit, and what happens
 now?
 
 Well first of all, it takes much much much much longer to END Protel 99 SE
 this way, but now comes the real problem, on it's final exit, we get, are
 you ready for it, a Microsoft KLUNK! sound, you know, the sour note that
 Microsoft gives off when you commit an error!
 
 Not the Happy little Bell that Microsoft uses to get your attention, but
 the KLUNK! that it uses to say ERROR!, or WRONG ANSWER. or You Blew
 It!.
 
 OK . . .
 
 One of the two simplest functions in Protel 99 SE, and it can't even do this
 without a KLUNK!.
 
 It can't even do this without an ERROR!
 
 What's wrong with this picture ???
 
 What's wrong with this picture !!!
 
 OK . . .
 
 So maybe it's me.
 
 Does this happen to anyone else?
 
 JaMi



* Tracking #: 6B9E4565338E3148841D7226674F665E1C2A4F09
*

-- 
___
www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
   tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street  
  fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Nicholas Cobb

I don't have compact on close on and I get the KLUNK. Even though I too
never noticed this.
Nick Cobb

-Original Message-
From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:13 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


yeah i never noticed that either (the difference in the closing 'klunk')
but we do get it sometimes too

i wonder if this has anything to do with the 'issue' of phantom copies
of protel still running even after it is quit
which seems to be specific to WIN2K

(i.e., the situation where Protel shows in the task manager after it has
been closed)

maybe the KLUNK is really trying to tell us something

i would also speculate that it *may* have something to do with 'compact
on close' which sometimes on some systems doesn't work correctly

why doesn't someone  - :) turn off compact on close and explore this
possible relationship to the mystery KLUNK

Dennis Saputelli

JaMi Smith wrote:

 OK . . .

 So I'll admit, I missed the Class on Protel 99 SE Basics . . .

 And I slept thru most of the Protel 99 SE 101 and 102 Classes . . .

 But gimmie a break . . .

 This one has got me baffled . . .

 So what are the two simplest functions that one can possibly perform in
 Protel 99 SE?

 I mean the absolute simplest, most bare bones, easiest things to do in
 Protel 99 SE.

 I mean like, are you ready for this one, START Protel 99 SE, and are you
 ready for this one, END Protel 99 SE.

 Not too complex here, just simple stuff.

 OK . . .

 I can think of 3 ways to START Protel 99 SE (without an open database):

 1. Double click the ICON on the Desktop.

 2. Place the cursor over the ICON in the Desktop and press ENTER.

 3. Navigate the START MENU and go from there.

 Nothing too complicated, nothing major, and I do not have any problems
here,
 I can handle everything so far.

 But now comes the problem.

 I can think of 6 ways to END Protel 99 SE (without an open database):

 1. Click on the big X  (Close) in the upper right hand corner of the
 Application.

 2. From the File menu pulldown click on Exit.

 3. From the Task Manager, select Protel and end it.

 4. Shutdown the system.

 5. Hit RESET, or turn off the power switch, or simply pull the plug out
of
 the wall (believe it or not I have had to resort to this before when
Protel
 99 SE locks up).

 6. Simply wait for it to CRASH, which it always seems to do all by
itself
 sooner or later.

 Now I will admit that the last 4 are not normal ways of simply ENDING
Protel
 99 SE, so we can eliminate them right off the bat, and simply stick with
the
 first 2.

 No Brainer . . .

 OK . . .

 So I simply START Protel 99 SE by any of the above methods, or maybe some
 that I haven't thought of, and go from there.

 Now comes the hard part, we have Protel 99 SE up and running, with no
 database open, in all of its glory, and we want to close it, so what do we
 do?

 1. We hit the big X, and wala!, it closes. Simple enough, I can andle
 this. No problem here.

 2 We go to the File menu pulldown, and click on Exit, and what happens
 now?

 Well first of all, it takes much much much much longer to END Protel 99 SE
 this way, but now comes the real problem, on it's final exit, we get, are
 you ready for it, a Microsoft KLUNK! sound, you know, the sour note
that
 Microsoft gives off when you commit an error!

 Not the Happy little Bell that Microsoft uses to get your attention, but
 the KLUNK! that it uses to say ERROR!, or WRONG ANSWER. or You Blew
 It!.

 OK . . .

 One of the two simplest functions in Protel 99 SE, and it can't even do
this
 without a KLUNK!.

 It can't even do this without an ERROR!

 What's wrong with this picture ???

 What's wrong with this picture !!!

 OK . . .

 So maybe it's me.

 Does this happen to anyone else?

 JaMi



* Tracking #: 6B9E4565338E3148841D7226674F665E1C2A4F09
*

--
___
www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
   tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street
  fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Dennis Saputelli

just curious
is there a reason you don't have compact on close on?

Dennis Saputelli


Nicholas Cobb wrote:
 
 I don't have compact on close on and I get the KLUNK. Even though I too
 never noticed this.
 Nick Cobb
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:13 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 yeah i never noticed that either (the difference in the closing 'klunk')
 but we do get it sometimes too
 
 i wonder if this has anything to do with the 'issue' of phantom copies
 of protel still running even after it is quit
 which seems to be specific to WIN2K
 
 (i.e., the situation where Protel shows in the task manager after it has
 been closed)
 
 maybe the KLUNK is really trying to tell us something
 
 i would also speculate that it *may* have something to do with 'compact
 on close' which sometimes on some systems doesn't work correctly
 
 why doesn't someone  - :) turn off compact on close and explore this
 possible relationship to the mystery KLUNK
 
 Dennis Saputelli
 
 JaMi Smith wrote:
 
  OK . . .
 
  So I'll admit, I missed the Class on Protel 99 SE Basics . . .
 
  And I slept thru most of the Protel 99 SE 101 and 102 Classes . . .
 
  But gimmie a break . . .
 
  This one has got me baffled . . .
 
  So what are the two simplest functions that one can possibly perform in
  Protel 99 SE?
 
  I mean the absolute simplest, most bare bones, easiest things to do in
  Protel 99 SE.
 
  I mean like, are you ready for this one, START Protel 99 SE, and are you
  ready for this one, END Protel 99 SE.
 
  Not too complex here, just simple stuff.
 
  OK . . .
 
  I can think of 3 ways to START Protel 99 SE (without an open database):
 
  1. Double click the ICON on the Desktop.
 
  2. Place the cursor over the ICON in the Desktop and press ENTER.
 
  3. Navigate the START MENU and go from there.
 
  Nothing too complicated, nothing major, and I do not have any problems
 here,
  I can handle everything so far.
 
  But now comes the problem.
 
  I can think of 6 ways to END Protel 99 SE (without an open database):
 
  1. Click on the big X  (Close) in the upper right hand corner of the
  Application.
 
  2. From the File menu pulldown click on Exit.
 
  3. From the Task Manager, select Protel and end it.
 
  4. Shutdown the system.
 
  5. Hit RESET, or turn off the power switch, or simply pull the plug out
 of
  the wall (believe it or not I have had to resort to this before when
 Protel
  99 SE locks up).
 
  6. Simply wait for it to CRASH, which it always seems to do all by
 itself
  sooner or later.
 
  Now I will admit that the last 4 are not normal ways of simply ENDING
 Protel
  99 SE, so we can eliminate them right off the bat, and simply stick with
 the
  first 2.
 
  No Brainer . . .
 
  OK . . .
 
  So I simply START Protel 99 SE by any of the above methods, or maybe some
  that I haven't thought of, and go from there.
 
  Now comes the hard part, we have Protel 99 SE up and running, with no
  database open, in all of its glory, and we want to close it, so what do we
  do?
 
  1. We hit the big X, and wala!, it closes. Simple enough, I can andle
  this. No problem here.
 
  2 We go to the File menu pulldown, and click on Exit, and what happens
  now?
 
  Well first of all, it takes much much much much longer to END Protel 99 SE
  this way, but now comes the real problem, on it's final exit, we get, are
  you ready for it, a Microsoft KLUNK! sound, you know, the sour note
 that
  Microsoft gives off when you commit an error!
 
  Not the Happy little Bell that Microsoft uses to get your attention, but
  the KLUNK! that it uses to say ERROR!, or WRONG ANSWER. or You Blew
  It!.
 
  OK . . .
 
  One of the two simplest functions in Protel 99 SE, and it can't even do
 this
  without a KLUNK!.
 
  It can't even do this without an ERROR!
 
  What's wrong with this picture ???
 
  What's wrong with this picture !!!
 
  OK . . .
 
  So maybe it's me.
 
  Does this happen to anyone else?
 
  JaMi
 
 
 * Tracking #: 6B9E4565338E3148841D7226674F665E1C2A4F09
 *
 
 --
 ___
 www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street
   fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110

-- 
___
www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
   tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street  
  fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Nicholas Cobb

It takes too long to close DDBs when accessing them on the network.

-Original Message-
From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:52 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


just curious
is there a reason you don't have compact on close on?

Dennis Saputelli


Nicholas Cobb wrote:

 I don't have compact on close on and I get the KLUNK. Even though I too
 never noticed this.
 Nick Cobb

 -Original Message-
 From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:13 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

 yeah i never noticed that either (the difference in the closing 'klunk')
 but we do get it sometimes too

 i wonder if this has anything to do with the 'issue' of phantom copies
 of protel still running even after it is quit
 which seems to be specific to WIN2K

 (i.e., the situation where Protel shows in the task manager after it has
 been closed)

 maybe the KLUNK is really trying to tell us something

 i would also speculate that it *may* have something to do with 'compact
 on close' which sometimes on some systems doesn't work correctly

 why doesn't someone  - :) turn off compact on close and explore this
 possible relationship to the mystery KLUNK

 Dennis Saputelli

 JaMi Smith wrote:
 
  OK . . .
 
  So I'll admit, I missed the Class on Protel 99 SE Basics . . .
 
  And I slept thru most of the Protel 99 SE 101 and 102 Classes . . .
 
  But gimmie a break . . .
 
  This one has got me baffled . . .
 
  So what are the two simplest functions that one can possibly perform in
  Protel 99 SE?
 
  I mean the absolute simplest, most bare bones, easiest things to do in
  Protel 99 SE.
 
  I mean like, are you ready for this one, START Protel 99 SE, and are you
  ready for this one, END Protel 99 SE.
 
  Not too complex here, just simple stuff.
 
  OK . . .
 
  I can think of 3 ways to START Protel 99 SE (without an open database):
 
  1. Double click the ICON on the Desktop.
 
  2. Place the cursor over the ICON in the Desktop and press ENTER.
 
  3. Navigate the START MENU and go from there.
 
  Nothing too complicated, nothing major, and I do not have any problems
 here,
  I can handle everything so far.
 
  But now comes the problem.
 
  I can think of 6 ways to END Protel 99 SE (without an open database):
 
  1. Click on the big X  (Close) in the upper right hand corner of the
  Application.
 
  2. From the File menu pulldown click on Exit.
 
  3. From the Task Manager, select Protel and end it.
 
  4. Shutdown the system.
 
  5. Hit RESET, or turn off the power switch, or simply pull the plug
out
 of
  the wall (believe it or not I have had to resort to this before when
 Protel
  99 SE locks up).
 
  6. Simply wait for it to CRASH, which it always seems to do all by
 itself
  sooner or later.
 
  Now I will admit that the last 4 are not normal ways of simply ENDING
 Protel
  99 SE, so we can eliminate them right off the bat, and simply stick with
 the
  first 2.
 
  No Brainer . . .
 
  OK . . .
 
  So I simply START Protel 99 SE by any of the above methods, or maybe
some
  that I haven't thought of, and go from there.
 
  Now comes the hard part, we have Protel 99 SE up and running, with no
  database open, in all of its glory, and we want to close it, so what do
we
  do?
 
  1. We hit the big X, and wala!, it closes. Simple enough, I can
andle
  this. No problem here.
 
  2 We go to the File menu pulldown, and click on Exit, and what
happens
  now?
 
  Well first of all, it takes much much much much longer to END Protel 99
SE
  this way, but now comes the real problem, on it's final exit, we get,
are
  you ready for it, a Microsoft KLUNK! sound, you know, the sour note
 that
  Microsoft gives off when you commit an error!
 
  Not the Happy little Bell that Microsoft uses to get your attention,
but
  the KLUNK! that it uses to say ERROR!, or WRONG ANSWER. or You
Blew
  It!.
 
  OK . . .
 
  One of the two simplest functions in Protel 99 SE, and it can't even do
 this
  without a KLUNK!.
 
  It can't even do this without an ERROR!
 
  What's wrong with this picture ???
 
  What's wrong with this picture !!!
 
  OK . . .
 
  So maybe it's me.
 
  Does this happen to anyone else?
 
  JaMi

 
 * Tracking #: 6B9E4565338E3148841D7226674F665E1C2A4F09
 *
 
 --

___
 www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street
   fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110

--
___
www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
   tel

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread JaMi Smith

Dennis and the group,

I apologize for my sporadic responses, but I am having trouble with my email
provider, SBCGLOBAL.NET, and they are only giving me about half of my email.
I am sure the rest is just stuck on some server in Podunk Arkansas, and will
show up sometime tomorrow.

Please see below.

JaMi


- Original Message -
From: Dennis Saputelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 yeah i never noticed that either (the difference in the closing 'klunk')
 but we do get it sometimes too

 i wonder if this has anything to do with the 'issue' of phantom copies
 of protel still running even after it is quit
 which seems to be specific to WIN2K

 (i.e., the situation where Protel shows in the task manager after it has
 been closed)


This is what I mean by hidden processes, and leftover processes, the
things that never show up in Task Manager, but cause additional crashes
and never show up until you try to shutdown, and then bingo, there it is,
and you have to say END NOW.

 maybe the KLUNK is really trying to tell us something


I would venture to say that Protel / Altuim as made a very simple but
serious programming blunder here that is on the one hand very simple, but
yet at the same time very fundamental, and is in reality the root of all
evil speaking in terms of things Protel

This does appear to be a real programming error.

This does appear to be a fundamental problem.

This does appear to be a bonafide legitamate bug.

This does appear to possibly be the answer to other problems with Protel.

Murphys Law states that this problem has possibly propagated thru into DXP,
which I own, but which is still in the box, and not installed yet. Can
anybody out there who has DXP running (yeah, I know, that is an oxymoron,
like military intelligence) check this problem out on DXP.

Can we also add this to the Official Protel 99 SE BUG list on Yahoo! ?

JaMi

Yes Altuim, I really do want my Service Pack 7.



* Tracking #: F117FDA09B206C41BFC678D36A0DB4AE4E618CF1
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Tony Karavidas

I tried turning it off and also turning off all the other things in
Preferences and it still KLUNK! s

Tony

 -Original Message-
 From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 1:13 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 yeah i never noticed that either (the difference in the 
 closing 'klunk') but we do get it sometimes too
 
 i wonder if this has anything to do with the 'issue' of 
 phantom copies of protel still running even after it is quit 
 which seems to be specific to WIN2K
 
 (i.e., the situation where Protel shows in the task manager 
 after it has been closed)
 
 maybe the KLUNK is really trying to tell us something
 
 i would also speculate that it *may* have something to do 
 with 'compact on close' which sometimes on some systems 
 doesn't work correctly
 
 why doesn't someone  - :) turn off compact on close and 
 explore this possible relationship to the mystery KLUNK
 
 Dennis Saputelli
 
 JaMi Smith wrote:
  
  OK . . .
  
  So I'll admit, I missed the Class on Protel 99 SE Basics . . .
  
  And I slept thru most of the Protel 99 SE 101 and 102 Classes . . .
  
  But gimmie a break . . .
  
  This one has got me baffled . . .
  
  So what are the two simplest functions that one can 
 possibly perform 
  in Protel 99 SE?
  
  I mean the absolute simplest, most bare bones, easiest 
 things to do in 
  Protel 99 SE.
  
  I mean like, are you ready for this one, START Protel 99 
 SE, and are 
  you ready for this one, END Protel 99 SE.
  
  Not too complex here, just simple stuff.
  
  OK . . .
  
  I can think of 3 ways to START Protel 99 SE (without an open 
  database):
  
  1. Double click the ICON on the Desktop.
  
  2. Place the cursor over the ICON in the Desktop and press ENTER.
  
  3. Navigate the START MENU and go from there.
  
  Nothing too complicated, nothing major, and I do not have 
 any problems 
  here, I can handle everything so far.
  
  But now comes the problem.
  
  I can think of 6 ways to END Protel 99 SE (without an open 
 database):
  
  1. Click on the big X  (Close) in the upper right hand 
 corner of 
  the Application.
  
  2. From the File menu pulldown click on Exit.
  
  3. From the Task Manager, select Protel and end it.
  
  4. Shutdown the system.
  
  5. Hit RESET, or turn off the power switch, or simply 
 pull the plug 
  out of the wall (believe it or not I have had to resort to 
 this before 
  when Protel 99 SE locks up).
  
  6. Simply wait for it to CRASH, which it always seems to 
 do all by 
  itself sooner or later.
  
  Now I will admit that the last 4 are not normal ways of 
 simply ENDING 
  Protel 99 SE, so we can eliminate them right off the bat, 
 and simply 
  stick with the first 2.
  
  No Brainer . . .
  
  OK . . .
  
  So I simply START Protel 99 SE by any of the above methods, 
 or maybe 
  some that I haven't thought of, and go from there.
  
  Now comes the hard part, we have Protel 99 SE up and 
 running, with no 
  database open, in all of its glory, and we want to close 
 it, so what 
  do we do?
  
  1. We hit the big X, and wala!, it closes. Simple enough, I can 
  andle this. No problem here.
  
  2 We go to the File menu pulldown, and click on Exit, and what 
  happens now?
  
  Well first of all, it takes much much much much longer to 
 END Protel 
  99 SE this way, but now comes the real problem, on it's 
 final exit, we 
  get, are you ready for it, a Microsoft KLUNK! sound, you know, the 
  sour note that Microsoft gives off when you commit an error!
  
  Not the Happy little Bell that Microsoft uses to get your 
 attention, 
  but the KLUNK! that it uses to say ERROR!, or WRONG 
 ANSWER. or 
  You Blew It!.
  
  OK . . .
  
  One of the two simplest functions in Protel 99 SE, and it 
 can't even 
  do this without a KLUNK!.
  
  It can't even do this without an ERROR!
  
  What's wrong with this picture ???
  
  What's wrong with this picture !!!
  
  OK . . .
  
  So maybe it's me.
  
  Does this happen to anyone else?
  
  JaMi
 
 
 **
 **
 * Tracking #: 6B9E4565338E3148841D7226674F665E1C2A4F09
 *
 **
 **
 -- 
 __
 _
 www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street  
   fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110
 


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

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Ian Wilson

On 03:00 PM 6/09/2002 -0700, JaMi Smith said:

Can we also add this to the Official Protel 99 SE BUG list on Yahoo! ?

You write it out in a suitable fashion and it can be added.

See the bug list for the format but basically:
Date: 2001/02/05 (ISO format)
Summary: Sch: Hidden pin connectivity with unnamed pins
Details: Sch P99SESP6: Hidden pins without a name are allocated a new name 
by the netlister and connected together.  Names of the usual form, 
Net_PinNumber, are allocated.
Submitted by:  name here
Confirmed by: another name here
URL: a URL if there is a source of graphics, sample boards etc that 
elucidate the issue

As for the bug - I am not at all convinced that this is a major issue at 
all and I think it very unlikely that this is the root cause of any of 
Protel's other issues  But I could be wrong.

For those interested they can compare the messages passed about the 
application as it closes using the top right X and the File Exit by 
comparing these to gif screen captures.  There is a difference, but who 
knows where the sound is generated.  Neither method of exiting causes any 
entry in the Win2k event log.
http://www.considered.com.au/images/SpyOutput(KlunkFileExit).gif
http://www.considered.com.au/images/SpyOutput(NoKlunkTopRightX).gif

I rather think this is a very minor issue - I have noticed it in the past 
but have never considered it of any consequence.  Still if it bothers 
others, and they are prepared to write up the bug list entry I am happy to 
add it to the database.

Ian Wilson



* Tracking #: 1AE52E539FD90F478AA403791A5ED1B72BD62A2D
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread JaMi Smith

Ian,

Please see below,

JaMi

PS - Still waiting to hear from someone as to whether this problem exists in
DXP!

- Original Message -
From: Ian Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 On 03:00 PM 6/09/2002 -0700, JaMi Smith said:

 Can we also add this to the Official Protel 99 SE BUG list on Yahoo! ?

 You write it out in a suitable fashion and it can be added.

Thanks, I will, but it may take me a little time, as I am currently lost in
space on a project that just doesn't seem to end.


snip


 As for the bug - I am not at all convinced that this is a major issue at
 all and I think it very unlikely that this is the root cause of any of
 Protel's other issues  But I could be wrong.

snip

 I rather think this is a very minor issue - I have noticed it in the past
 but have never considered it of any consequence.  Still if it bothers
 others, and they are prepared to write up the bug list entry I am happy to
 add it to the database.


I am currently working on the project from hell, on my home system, a
couple of 1 GHz MAX104 ADC's interfacing to a 957 pin Xilink BGA with LVDS
controlled impedance differential pairs, which, needless to say, are all
hand routed. My dependence on my home system, and my fear of loosing it all
with an inopportune crash of Protel, is what lead me to discover this
problem in the first place. But as I mentioned in the my reply to Dwight, I
have noticed several hidden processes (my term), or phantom copies (as
Dennis calls them), in the past several days while I have been operating in
this paranoid mode, and I now unquestionably associate these background
crashes with this KLUNK! Phenomena.

As to whether or not it really means anything, I will simply say that the
verdict is possibly still out on this one. I do know however, that this
topic has come up here in the forum numerous times in the past, and several
people seem to think that it may possibly be associated with other problems,
such as the still unresolved occasional crash for no apparent reason.

Speaking of which, while I cannot remember the exact details, I have had a
number of those unexplained occasional crashes in the past week, which I
now believe are directly related, and which, as a matter of fact, are what
is responsible for getting me into operating in this paranoid mode for the
past few days.

I think that some of those unexplained occasional crashes have been
related to loading and clearing netlists (from OrCAD), and specifically
some bizarre behavior wherein Protel would not let me hand route anything
after clearing all nets and then reloading them, until I exited Protel
and restarted it.

Anyway, now that the KLUNK! phonemna is known, I'll bet that it will be
easy to associate any future crashes or problems with whether or not
there are any hidden processes or phantom copies, and possibly
recreate other problems with unknown causes which have popped up here
in the forum in the past.

I tried to search my local PEDA folder for Task Manager and Shutdown, to
locate some examples of what has been discussed regarding hidden processes
or phantom copies here in the past, but my archive on this system only
goes back to 9/13/01.

I did however come up with a few post that may be relevant, and copied them
in here below.

Thanks for your input.

As a side note, if this seems to be something that we (those in the forum)
can pin down to being a specific problem in Protel 99 SE SP6, then it is
something that Altium should be able to address and fix fairly simply, and
which would truly justify them issuing a Service Pack 7, which could at the
same time possibly address a few other issues too.

To that end, I would request any input from any in the forum regarding this
problem, since we all do not necessarily plan on upgrading to DXP, and it
may not be realistically be really operational for as much as a year yet,
which means that a SP7 really is important to many people out here, and may
in fact be really warrented now.

JaMi

FROM THE ARCHIVES

- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Weird behaviour

 In a message dated 3/6/2002 7:02:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


  had to shut down the program occasionally using Task Manager, and every
once
  in awhile, when I go to shut down Windows, I find out Protel is still


 Yep. MMU/OS fails to release memory... I've seen other Delphi-based apps
do
 this in Win2K...


ALSO FROM THE ARCHIVES.

- Original Message -
From: Ian Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Weird behaviour

 On 12:25 PM 6/03/2002 +, Andy Gulliver said:
 Well I've seen it still there at shutdown after a normal close on
occasions

Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Tony Karavidas

It does not occur in DXP.

 -Original Message-
 From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:53 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Cc: JaMi Smith
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 Ian,
 
 Please see below,
 
 JaMi
 
 PS - Still waiting to hear from someone as to whether this 
 problem exists in DXP!




* Tracking #: 2B437A171D256543BE5C06CB8DC3F84D452AC65D
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread JaMi Smith

Thanks Tony,

JaMi

- Original Message - 
From: Tony Karavidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 It does not occur in DXP.





* Tracking #: 97F7203F058AAF44B45F1235B05D08993943C9B1
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Dennis Saputelli

operating in paranoid mode is generally a good thing when so much work
hangs in the air

to allay your fears somewhat, and you may know this well, a set of up to
ten incrementing timed auto save backups may be written to a 
separate folder which by default is an SE subfolder

these are independent of and in addition to the backups that are made in
the local directory each time you push the save button and i have found
them to very useful on occasion

even a trashed DDB (which, knock on wood, we have not yet had) can be
reasonably well reconstructed using these

i have found that even when the program is crashed, depending on the
crash mode, it generally will faithfully keep making these timed backups

just wait out the 10 minutes or however long you have it set for BEFORE
terminating the TASK

they have saved us a few times and are a thoughtful feature of protel

the settings are in the ARROW menu preferences, autosave button

Dennis Saputelli



* Tracking #: BF27229BE28EAC4A8A688FFBEC335263508E743D
*

-- 
___
www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc.
   tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street  
  fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread JaMi Smith

Thanks Dennis,

I did not know that.

I usually have had to do a recover after a crash from the backup or the
previous backup in the same directory as the original .ddb file, and in
fact I have had to do that at least twice in the last week with this board,
which is probably why I am in paranoid mode to begin with.

I will look into that, because that would mean a great deal of time saved
in some instances, if I did not have to go all of the way back to a previous
backup to recover the database.

Thanks again,

JaMi


- Original Message -
From: Dennis Saputelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.


 operating in paranoid mode is generally a good thing when so much work
 hangs in the air

 to allay your fears somewhat, and you may know this well, a set of up to
 ten incrementing timed auto save backups may be written to a
 separate folder which by default is an SE subfolder

 these are independent of and in addition to the backups that are made in
 the local directory each time you push the save button and i have found
 them to very useful on occasion

 even a trashed DDB (which, knock on wood, we have not yet had) can be
 reasonably well reconstructed using these

 i have found that even when the program is crashed, depending on the
 crash mode, it generally will faithfully keep making these timed backups

 just wait out the 10 minutes or however long you have it set for BEFORE
 terminating the TASK

 they have saved us a few times and are a thoughtful feature of protel

 the settings are in the ARROW menu preferences, autosave button

 Dennis Saputelli




* Tracking #: 7BA82E7D0ABC5749A4DB05FB0887FAC83EA68721
*


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.

2002-09-06 Thread Tony Karavidas

Jami,

Do you have the ability to install P99SE on a different machine? (I
can't remember if you've indicated that before). I think your frequent
crashes are pretty unusual.



 -Original Message-
 From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 7:46 PM
 To: Protel EDA Forum
 Cc: JaMi Smith
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
 Thanks Dennis,
 
 I did not know that.
 
 I usually have had to do a recover after a crash from the 
 backup or the previous backup in the same directory as 
 the original .ddb file, and in fact I have had to do that 
 at least twice in the last week with this board, which is 
 probably why I am in paranoid mode to begin with.
 
 I will look into that, because that would mean a great deal 
 of time saved in some instances, if I did not have to go 
 all of the way back to a previous backup to recover the database.
 
 Thanks again,
 
 JaMi
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Dennis Saputelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 6:50 PM
 Subject: Re: [PEDA] KLUNK! - Whats wrong with this picture.
 
 
  operating in paranoid mode is generally a good thing when 
 so much work 
  hangs in the air
 
  to allay your fears somewhat, and you may know this well, a 
 set of up 
  to ten incrementing timed auto save backups may be written to a 
  separate folder which by default is an SE subfolder
 
  these are independent of and in addition to the backups 
 that are made 
  in the local directory each time you push the save button 
 and i have 
  found them to very useful on occasion
 
  even a trashed DDB (which, knock on wood, we have not yet 
 had) can be 
  reasonably well reconstructed using these
 
  i have found that even when the program is crashed, 
 depending on the 
  crash mode, it generally will faithfully keep making these timed 
  backups
 
  just wait out the 10 minutes or however long you have it set for 
  BEFORE terminating the TASK
 
  they have saved us a few times and are a thoughtful feature 
 of protel
 
  the settings are in the ARROW menu preferences, autosave button
 
  Dennis Saputelli
 
 
 
 **
 **
 * Tracking #: 7BA82E7D0ABC5749A4DB05FB0887FAC83EA68721
 *
 **
 **
 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *