Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
(responses below) Matthew van de Werken Electronics Engineer CSIRO Exploration & Mining - Gravity Group 1 Technology Court - Pullenvale - Qld - 4069 ph: (07) 3327 4685 fax: (07) 3327 4455 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Bagotronix Tech Support [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, 9 August 2001 4:11 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to > the Protel company name > > > > Whenever I do a demo for other programmers such as C++ guys > or whoever, > > they are astonished that I do in 10 minutes what takes them a day. > > This is what applies to the viual stuff. Obviously when > doing nonvisual, > such > > as processing multiple linked data structures, it is the > same as any other > language. > > But as even debugging complex stuff requries finally > something visual, be > it a notepad > > or something more specific, Delphi is faster in development. > > Is the rapid development of Delphi apps due to a superior > IDE, or is the > Delphi language superior? If the magic is in the IDE, then > making rapid > development of C/C++ should just be a question of getting a > better IDE. I > don't have any axe to grind here, I am just curious about it. >From my POV, the superiority of Delphi is in the IDE. C++ Builder offers the same IDE, only in C++. Best of both worlds. I haven't used delphi very much, but I have used C++ Builder, and I couldn't imagine doing a GUI in anything else. Well, I can imagine it, I have done it, and I know which one I prefer. > > I know a VB programmer who writes GUI interfaces for his > company's software. > He says VB is made for the GUI stuff, but other parts of the > software that > were written in VB should have been written in something else > (VC, etc). > > Is the Borland Delphi for Linux product really shipping, or > is it still > vaporware (intentionware)? Last time I visited the Borland > website, their > Delphi for Linux (Kylix) information was very terse, whereas > there was more > info for the Win32 version. It's a real product. You can buy it; you can download a trial version, and you can download a version that is free for use on open-source projects. > > I know this sounds off-topic for this list, but it all began with > considering what is needed to write servers for Protel. > > Best regards, > Ivan Baggett > Bagotronix Inc. > website: www.bagotronix.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rene Tschaggelar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 8:24 AM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> > Changes to the > Protel company name > > > > I'm doing Delphi myself, though not in the Protel context. > > Whenever I do a demo for other programmers such as C++ guys > or whoever, > > they are astonished that I do in 10 minutes what takes them a day. > > This is what applies to the viual stuff. Obviously when > doing nonvisual, > such > > as processing multiple linked data structures, it is the > same as any other > language. > > But as even debugging complex stuff requries finally > something visual, be > it a notepad > > or something more specific, Delphi is faster in development. > > > > And yes, Delphi is Pascal. It is less a matter of the > language that of > what belongs to > > it, the IDE, debugger, everything. It doesn't need DLLs or > OCX or such, > they are crap > > anyway. BCB may come close though as apart from the > language they are > identical. > > BCB is not identical to VC++ what the obj files and libs concern. > > > > Rene > > -- > > Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > I thought Delphi was Pascal Prettified. > > > > > > You mean Delphi isn't Pascal? What is different and why > is it so much > > > better than C++? > > > > > > I've programmed in C, Assemblers, Basic, Visual Basic, > Pascal and C++, > and > > > I would take C++ over the others for a large program in a > heartbeat. C > and > > > assembler are good for embedded code on a > microcontroller, and VB is > great > > > for doing prototypes or test programs. The only thing I > found Pascal > good > > > for was what it was originally developed for, Teaching > Programming. I > did > > > watch a friend try to get Borlands C++ Builder to wo
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
This is, like, s far off topic -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 6:21 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name I thought Delphi was Pascal Prettified. You mean Delphi isn't Pascal? What is different and why is it so much better than C++? I've programmed in C, Assemblers, Basic, Visual Basic, Pascal and C++, and I would take C++ over the others for a large program in a heartbeat. C and assembler are good for embedded code on a microcontroller, and VB is great for doing prototypes or test programs. The only thing I found Pascal good for was what it was originally developed for, Teaching Programming. I did watch a friend try to get Borlands C++ Builder to work properly with an OCX he had worked on developing. It was so buggy when it came to importing DLLs that he and the customer both regretted their decision to use C++ builder instead of Visual C++. Rob "Rene Tschaggelar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/07/2001 05:50:28 PM Please respond to "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: (bcc: Rob LaMoreaux/DSPT) Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name There is no way to come up to speed on such a project in another language than delphi. Why are the competitiors blown to pieces, not because they were dummies, they used the wrong tools. The language must be efficient in development the IDE, meaning RAD has to be efficient. No C++, no nothing except delphi. Rene -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com chris mackensen wrote: > > > Perhaps another solution: now, I am not saying that Protel should open it's > code doors... we need to pay them money to give us tech support ;-)... > however, they should do a complete rewrite (start a new project in the RAD > environment, from scratch, borrowing some known good code from old and > current versions) and adopt some modern standards (like not using mutated > pascal/Delphi :-). That's my opinion... get rid of tinker toy Delphi... > (but leave it as an extensibility option for those so inclined)... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
Bagotronix Tech Support wrote: > > > Whenever I do a demo for other programmers such as C++ guys or whoever, > > they are astonished that I do in 10 minutes what takes them a day. > > This is what applies to the viual stuff. Obviously when doing nonvisual, > such > > as processing multiple linked data structures, it is the same as any other > language. > > But as even debugging complex stuff requries finally something visual, be > it a notepad > > or something more specific, Delphi is faster in development. > > Is the rapid development of Delphi apps due to a superior IDE, or is the > Delphi language superior? If the magic is in the IDE, then making rapid > development of C/C++ should just be a question of getting a better IDE. I > don't have any axe to grind here, I am just curious about it. At least for me, Pascal is easier to read. Well, I guess it is the IDE. There are components to drop down, such a buttons, editbox, dropdownmenues, filelistboxes, notepads, labels, checkboxes, images, scrollbars, pagecontrols, TCPserver, ... almost everything imagineable. You have all this stuff in VC++ too, but you have to code them in a few dozend lines. The delphi components are wrappers around the Win32 API classes, together with object inspectors where you fill in value for the properties and attach events. A doubleclick on the event fills the blank code into the source. The whole is available under BCB too. Why isn't it available in VC++ ? I don't know - MS paid Borland 200Mio$ for the use of this patent. I guess C# will have some of these feature. BTW C# is done by the guy how engineered Delphi. > > I know a VB programmer who writes GUI interfaces for his company's software. > He says VB is made for the GUI stuff, but other parts of the software that > were written in VB should have been written in something else (VC, etc). > > Is the Borland Delphi for Linux product really shipping, or is it still > vaporware (intentionware)? Last time I visited the Borland website, their > Delphi for Linux (Kylix) information was very terse, whereas there was more > info for the Win32 version. Delphi for Linux came out this March and is named Kylix. The desktop version goes for 200$. There is a free OpenEdition downloadable, that a is for OpenSouce code. As it is Version 1.0, a few things are missing, some buggy, the ususal. I like it. Rene * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
MS-VC++ is excellent if you like writing a lot of code!... I am now using Borland C++ Builder, which seems to be a Delphi sheep in C++ wolf's clothing (in fact, I have an off the shelf graphing package for C++ Builder using the VCL, that was written entirely in Delphi... the compatibility seems to work fine; why can't protel offer the SDK in C++ Builder?) it seems to have the similar RAD methodology which makes things so fast to make an application from scratch... but there are highly armed camps on both sides of the efficiency argument which I leave as an exercise to the reader. just like PERL (oh boy... here we go again!), these RADs make extreme efficiency of the programmer's time (and time to market for an application) They allow little code effort for a lot of function bang! Time to run an application may be more bloated however but the magic is in the supporting librarys (where the RAD IDE is the front end to these libraries). There are some RADs for PERL under glade or gnome for unix (and some limited win32) but it hasn't quite caught on yet... who knows where this crazy train de-rails... it all depends, I suppose, on how much power one wishes to exploit and how much code the language (or supporting libraries) needs to exploit that power (efficient use of programmer's time) C/C++ can inherently be more powerful with some of its cryptic syntax (but once you learn the crypticnesses, they're no longer cryptic), yet harder to use (and harder to find errors)... VB and Pascal are a great beginner's language that shelters/protects the user a little bit (with type checking et cetera). If I wanted a rip snorting application though, I would go with C/C++ and provide the language independent extensibility I crave... It's just a matter of hiring the professional programmers to make the Professional Protel application in and to provide the professional language independent extensibility with dynamic (not fixed, 16 part fields) properties and widgets in protel It behooves Protel to use a portable language if they wish to make less painful migrations hmmm. perhaps it may be a matter of time before C++ Builder is ported to linux too... ;-) Cheers, -chris P.S. perl is available/ported on the following platforms and OSs (why? because it was written in C which seems to be a standard for some of these platforms): [Acorn] [AIX] [Amiga] [AS/400] [Apple] [AtheOS] [BeOS] [BSD] [BSD/OS] [Compaq] [Cygwin] [Concurrent] [Debian] [DG/UX] [Digital] [DEC OSF/1] [Digital UNIX] [DYNIX/ptx] [EPOC] [FreeBSD] [Guardian] [HP] [HP-UX] [IBM] [IRIX] [Japanese] [JPerl] [Linux] [LinuxPPC] [LynxOS] [Macintosh] [Mac OS] [Mac OS X] [MachTen] [Minix] [MinGW] [MPE/iX] [MS-DOS] [MVS] [NetBSD] [NetWare] [NextStep] [Novell] [NonStop] [NonStop-UX] [OpenBSD] [OpenLinux] [ODT] [OpenVMS] [OS/2] [OS390] [OSR] [Plan 9] [PowerMAX] [Psion] [QNX] [Redhat] [Reliant UNIX] [RISCOS] [SCO] [SGI] [Sequent] [SINIX] [Slackware] [Solaris] [Sun] [Stratus] [SuSE] [Tandem] [Tru64] [UNIX] [U/WIN] [Unixware] [VMS] [VOS] [Win31] [Win32] [WinCE] [WinMe] [Windows 3.1] [Windows 95/98/Me/NT/W2K] -Original Message- From: Rene Tschaggelar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 8:58 AM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name I admit Protel is far too slow in implemeting long requested features such as righthand mouse panning in the schematic. It would be simple to implement - I did such things in other contexts. I don't have an idea about Protels agenda and time allocations. Delphi or Protel are complex packages, that take at least 6 month continous use until you're at a useful level. The only comparison I have is doing demos for fellow users. And when fulltime VC++ users admit Delphi is faster, then be it so. I recently had a little introduction (6 month, weekly) into CATIA, a 3D contruction package. I was far from fluent, just grasped to possibilities, therefore I cannot compare it to Autocad 3D of which I've seen a few demos. Once you have a whatever package and used it for 6++ month you're stuck with it, not because of the few (perhaps dozend) grands you spent for the purchase of it but for the time you already spent. Should it happen that you then repeatedly hear from colleagues who use similar tools that theirs is better on the whole run, you might consider switching after this or the other project that is ongoing. Where do you get the time to learn from ? Well anyway, in Delphi I found a tool that fullfills all my Windows programming needs. Now it is even available in Linux. Fine for you when you're happy with VC++. Should you have a question about Delphi and how to solve a particular problem, mail me in private. Rene -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com Andrew J Jenkins wrote: > > On 11:50 PM 8/7/2001 +0200
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
> Whenever I do a demo for other programmers such as C++ guys or whoever, > they are astonished that I do in 10 minutes what takes them a day. > This is what applies to the viual stuff. Obviously when doing nonvisual, such > as processing multiple linked data structures, it is the same as any other language. > But as even debugging complex stuff requries finally something visual, be it a notepad > or something more specific, Delphi is faster in development. Is the rapid development of Delphi apps due to a superior IDE, or is the Delphi language superior? If the magic is in the IDE, then making rapid development of C/C++ should just be a question of getting a better IDE. I don't have any axe to grind here, I am just curious about it. I know a VB programmer who writes GUI interfaces for his company's software. He says VB is made for the GUI stuff, but other parts of the software that were written in VB should have been written in something else (VC, etc). Is the Borland Delphi for Linux product really shipping, or is it still vaporware (intentionware)? Last time I visited the Borland website, their Delphi for Linux (Kylix) information was very terse, whereas there was more info for the Win32 version. I know this sounds off-topic for this list, but it all began with considering what is needed to write servers for Protel. Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "Rene Tschaggelar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 8:24 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name > I'm doing Delphi myself, though not in the Protel context. > Whenever I do a demo for other programmers such as C++ guys or whoever, > they are astonished that I do in 10 minutes what takes them a day. > This is what applies to the viual stuff. Obviously when doing nonvisual, such > as processing multiple linked data structures, it is the same as any other language. > But as even debugging complex stuff requries finally something visual, be it a notepad > or something more specific, Delphi is faster in development. > > And yes, Delphi is Pascal. It is less a matter of the language that of what belongs to > it, the IDE, debugger, everything. It doesn't need DLLs or OCX or such, they are crap > anyway. BCB may come close though as apart from the language they are identical. > BCB is not identical to VC++ what the obj files and libs concern. > > Rene > -- > Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I thought Delphi was Pascal Prettified. > > > > You mean Delphi isn't Pascal? What is different and why is it so much > > better than C++? > > > > I've programmed in C, Assemblers, Basic, Visual Basic, Pascal and C++, and > > I would take C++ over the others for a large program in a heartbeat. C and > > assembler are good for embedded code on a microcontroller, and VB is great > > for doing prototypes or test programs. The only thing I found Pascal good > > for was what it was originally developed for, Teaching Programming. I did > > watch a friend try to get Borlands C++ Builder to work properly with an OCX > > he had worked on developing. It was so buggy when it came to importing DLLs > > that he and the customer both regretted their decision to use C++ builder > > instead of Visual C++. > > > > Rob > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
I'm doing Delphi myself, though not in the Protel context. Whenever I do a demo for other programmers such as C++ guys or whoever, they are astonished that I do in 10 minutes what takes them a day. This is what applies to the viual stuff. Obviously when doing nonvisual, such as processing multiple linked data structures, it is the same as any other language. But as even debugging complex stuff requries finally something visual, be it a notepad or something more specific, Delphi is faster in development. And yes, Delphi is Pascal. It is less a matter of the language that of what belongs to it, the IDE, debugger, everything. It doesn't need DLLs or OCX or such, they are crap anyway. BCB may come close though as apart from the language they are identical. BCB is not identical to VC++ what the obj files and libs concern. Rene -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I thought Delphi was Pascal Prettified. > > You mean Delphi isn't Pascal? What is different and why is it so much > better than C++? > > I've programmed in C, Assemblers, Basic, Visual Basic, Pascal and C++, and > I would take C++ over the others for a large program in a heartbeat. C and > assembler are good for embedded code on a microcontroller, and VB is great > for doing prototypes or test programs. The only thing I found Pascal good > for was what it was originally developed for, Teaching Programming. I did > watch a friend try to get Borlands C++ Builder to work properly with an OCX > he had worked on developing. It was so buggy when it came to importing DLLs > that he and the customer both regretted their decision to use C++ builder > instead of Visual C++. > > Rob * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
I admit Protel is far too slow in implemeting long requested features such as righthand mouse panning in the schematic. It would be simple to implement - I did such things in other contexts. I don't have an idea about Protels agenda and time allocations. Delphi or Protel are complex packages, that take at least 6 month continous use until you're at a useful level. The only comparison I have is doing demos for fellow users. And when fulltime VC++ users admit Delphi is faster, then be it so. I recently had a little introduction (6 month, weekly) into CATIA, a 3D contruction package. I was far from fluent, just grasped to possibilities, therefore I cannot compare it to Autocad 3D of which I've seen a few demos. Once you have a whatever package and used it for 6++ month you're stuck with it, not because of the few (perhaps dozend) grands you spent for the purchase of it but for the time you already spent. Should it happen that you then repeatedly hear from colleagues who use similar tools that theirs is better on the whole run, you might consider switching after this or the other project that is ongoing. Where do you get the time to learn from ? Well anyway, in Delphi I found a tool that fullfills all my Windows programming needs. Now it is even available in Linux. Fine for you when you're happy with VC++. Should you have a question about Delphi and how to solve a particular problem, mail me in private. Rene -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com Andrew J Jenkins wrote: > > On 11:50 PM 8/7/2001 +0200, Rene Tschaggelar wrote: > >There is no way to come up to speed on such a project in another language > >than delphi. Why are the competitiors blown to pieces, not because they were > >dummies, they used the wrong tools. The language must be efficient in development > >the IDE, meaning RAD has to be efficient. No C++, no nothing except delphi. > > Pardon me, and no offense, but Huh? > > Delphi is by no means efficient, unless one is the programmer. Question is, is the >programmer or the customer the one who should enjoy efficiencies? > > Delphi, on the other hand (or so I have heard) is easier to learn. > > Now, on to the thrust of my response: > > I have a temper. I admit that I have a temper. I can be an asshole. I admit (freely) >that I can be an asshole. I am who I am, both good and bad. Some despise me, some >like me, some tolerate me, and others are simply amused. But I don't deny it. In >fact, though I attempt to slowly remove those bad traits, and though it is truly a >difficult process, and even though I may never be able to remove all traces of my >"bad" side, I never attempt to lie about who I am or what my faults are. I definitely >never say "I'm just a poor misunderstood nice-guy". What I do say to folks is this: >"I have a temper. However, my temper is rarely provoked unless one displays offensive >behavior first, whether it is by using subterfuge or deception to manipulate or by >saying things which are fallacious or otherwise simply don't add up. Much as I don't >enjoy the process of being an asshole, I will be, but it can most often be avoided >simply by not being one yourself" > > To clarify the analogy, Delphi and its royal supporters (as opposed to normal >supporters) rarely if ever ADMIT Delphi's intrinsic faults, and therefore often >attempt to HIDE them and hide behind rote banners (generally, the rote banners are a >sign of the supporter's relationship to "nobility". This is a problem not because of >the intrinsic problems, but because of the subterfuge that accompanies those flaws >(Much like what is/was so often expeienced by PC users when encountering MAC >users...anywhere in the world... Hence, when confronted with serious core-level >flaws, the Delphi community hides behind the catch-phrase of the shareware community, >"it's a difficult job", one which no-one else enjoys. > > Until the Delphi community (Specifically Protel programmers and those who protect >them with posts like the above) owns up to it's short-coming(s), the problems cannot >be properly addressed, and we'll continue to have these periodic cathartic and >divisive threads, endlessly and pointlessly avoiding the problems and their solutions >in favor of virtual-graphite wars. $5 for every piece of chewing gum. As a Protel >user, is that what you want? > (ex: panning prob. Instead of consolidating under one banner, we instead chose to >have a flame war for literally years, until one side finally won, and Protel attacked >and seems to have solved the problem but it took years, instead of months, IMO all >because of pride in Delphi amongst some of the user community) > > I understand and appreciate the many of the benefits of the Visual-Pascal (Delphi) >model, but really... > Are you suggesting that when discussing code efficiency, Protel (Delphi) can even be >compared to an application like AutoCad (C)...Or are you simply staying within >similar pro
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
I thought Delphi was Pascal Prettified. You mean Delphi isn't Pascal? What is different and why is it so much better than C++? I've programmed in C, Assemblers, Basic, Visual Basic, Pascal and C++, and I would take C++ over the others for a large program in a heartbeat. C and assembler are good for embedded code on a microcontroller, and VB is great for doing prototypes or test programs. The only thing I found Pascal good for was what it was originally developed for, Teaching Programming. I did watch a friend try to get Borlands C++ Builder to work properly with an OCX he had worked on developing. It was so buggy when it came to importing DLLs that he and the customer both regretted their decision to use C++ builder instead of Visual C++. Rob "Rene Tschaggelar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/07/2001 05:50:28 PM Please respond to "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc:(bcc: Rob LaMoreaux/DSPT) Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name There is no way to come up to speed on such a project in another language than delphi. Why are the competitiors blown to pieces, not because they were dummies, they used the wrong tools. The language must be efficient in development the IDE, meaning RAD has to be efficient. No C++, no nothing except delphi. Rene -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com chris mackensen wrote: > > > Perhaps another solution: now, I am not saying that Protel should open it's > code doors... we need to pay them money to give us tech support ;-)... > however, they should do a complete rewrite (start a new project in the RAD > environment, from scratch, borrowing some known good code from old and > current versions) and adopt some modern standards (like not using mutated > pascal/Delphi :-). That's my opinion... get rid of tinker toy Delphi... > (but leave it as an extensibility option for those so inclined)... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
There is no way to come up to speed on such a project in another language than delphi. Why are the competitiors blown to pieces, not because they were dummies, they used the wrong tools. The language must be efficient in development the IDE, meaning RAD has to be efficient. No C++, no nothing except delphi. Rene -- Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com chris mackensen wrote: > > > Perhaps another solution: now, I am not saying that Protel should open it's > code doors... we need to pay them money to give us tech support ;-)... > however, they should do a complete rewrite (start a new project in the RAD > environment, from scratch, borrowing some known good code from old and > current versions) and adopt some modern standards (like not using mutated > pascal/Delphi :-). That's my opinion... get rid of tinker toy Delphi... > (but leave it as an extensibility option for those so inclined)... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
My $0.02 about open source PCB software: It's hard to make money on open source software. The only viable business model I can think of is to sell support services for the software. But that means you have to make it hard to use, put bugs in it, and write bad documentation in order to sell support. After all, if it was easy to use, had great documentation and no bugs, why would anyone need support? Come to think of it this sounds like the business model for closed source software, too... Contrary to popular FUD, programs that run on Linux DO NOT have to be open source. The only time a Linux program must be open source is if it uses GPL open source code (straight or modified) inside the program. Therefore, the biggest obstacles a software company faces when writing a Linux program are: 1) Finding programmers who know how to write for Linux 2) Choosing one X-windows GUI variant (KDE, Gnome, etc.). 3) Rewriting any code previously written for Win32 API 4) Overcoming the "Linux means free software" mindset in customers who might expect EDA software to be free just because it runs on Linux. (1) is probably not too hard these days. The university computing degrees graduate lots of people that know Unix/Linux. Whether they can write GOOD code is another matter. (2) is easy. Just pick one. I would vote for KDE desktop. (3) is problematic. You need programmers who know both Linux and Win32 API, and they might also have to translate one language into another (i.e. Delphi to C). (4) will be overcome if the Linux version is as full-featured and well-supported as the Windows version. However, if it appears that the Linux product is just a marketing flight-of-fancy, don't expect Linux users to be willing to ante up the same dough. Linux users might pay NT prices, but WILL NOT pay Unix prices for software. The problem with making an open source PCB and SCH editor is that these are "niche" software tools. The only folks that can really contribute to the creation of an open source are the folks that meet all of the following requirements: 1) know Linux programming 2) know PCB and SCH design 3) know graphics programming 4) have lots of free time (independently wealthy, perhaps) There is enough of a critical mass of Linux OS programmers to sustain evolution in the Linux OS. But an OS is not niche software. Quite the opposite - an OS is the most "horizontal" of applications. Every computing individual needs one (or two, or...). I have to wonder if there is enough critical mass of Linux programmers (meeting the aforementioned requirements) to write, maintain, and enhance GOOD open source EDA software. Depending on how this Windows XP thing plays out, I might have to switch completely over to Linux for future PCs. Too bad, just when Microsoft finally figured out how to write a good OS (W2K). Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "chris mackensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 5:00 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name > > Is there a public domain open source PCB & schematic capture software? > > Yes. > Also, www.gnu.org has a couple (last I looked a few years ago, and I'm > going on memory here) And I'm sure that a web search would yield a few > more individual ones. There are also many freeware and open source SPICE > simulators that are the free spin-offs from academia. > > Unfortunately, these are usually of the Autotrax/Schedit caliber and are > usually linux/Unix based... This does not preclude a more complete > Protel99SEsque caliber windoze like version out there just need to do > some web surfing... > > I like Protel's UI as far as key stroke commands, customizing, and mouse > stuff, but that's about it... Some of these Open and Free things didn't > seem to think about the UI and used standard UIs from the Calma or Unix 'vi' > days. > > Perhaps another solution: now, I am not saying that Protel should open it's > code doors... we need to pay them money to give us tech support ;-)... > however, they should do a complete rewrite (start a new project in the RAD > environment, from scratch, borrowing some known good code from old and > current versions) and adopt some modern standards (like not using mutated > pascal/Delphi :-). That's my opinion... get rid of tinker toy Delphi... > (but leave it as an extensibility option for those so inclined)... > > If I were to take on a development task like this, I would implement some > modern standards for extensibility like the language independent COM/OLE > Automation or CORBA standards complete with generous usage of a COM/CORB
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
ed data,from configuration files to mail headers to almost anything. It's even been used to parse other programming languages for conversion to Perl. [Perl.com] Symmetric Cryptography in Perl Abhijit Menon-Sen explains how to use Perl to keep your secrets... secret. [Perl.com] -- D. Chris Mackensen, EIT Electrical Engineer Software Engineer -Original Message- From: Brian Guralnick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 12:33 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name This made me think of an interesting question. Is there a public domain open source PCB & schematic capture software? This way, users have the ability to make significant changes themselves & publicly post them. Brian Guralnick - Original Message - From: "Brad Velander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Changes to the Protel company name | Hi all, | I think that the paragraph below, in their own words, says it all. | No changes, no significant fixes, the same old bugs, inefficient code and | glorious marketing driven additions that nobody wants. No changes, no | improvements, just the same old crap under a new name. Is this what the | statement means if taken literally, jeeesh, they can't even write good press | releases. | I find it amazing that Protel not once ever makes any promises to | the users of the product to improve things. Nope can't do that, just | maintain the status quo. Thus we (users) are still working around bugs, | issues and inefficient coding that has existed within the product for 2 - 3 | years at least. Give up, there is no hope! | | Brad Velander, | Lead PCB Designer, | Norsat International Inc., | #300 - 4401 Still Creek Dr., | Burnaby, B.C., V5C 6G9. | Tel. (604) 292-9089 direct | Fax (604) 292-9010 | website www.norsat.com | | | > -Original Message- | > From: Piers Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 12:26 AM | > To: Protel EDA Forum | > Subject: [PEDA] Changes to the Protel company name | > | > | > Hi Everyone, | > | > Further to yesterday's announcement that Protel International | > Limited has changed its name to Altium Limited, we would like | > to clarify that this will not affect the Protel product line | > or its development in any way. | | > | > Best regards, | > | > Altium Limited | > | | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
Brian Guralnick wrote: > This made me think of an interesting question. > > Is there a public domain open source PCB & schematic capture software? This way, > users have the ability to make significant changes themselves & publicly post them. Yes, there are several projects going. One is at http://www.geda.seul.org/ The PCB part seems to have stalled, though. You can look at SourceForge, I think there are some more groups. But, none of these comes anywhere CLOSE to Protel, as far as I know. Given time, however, that could change - and I hope it does! I really bristle at paying lots of money for Protel (Altium) to buy fancy ads, buy competitors, do 'deals' etc. and never seem to spend any money making the product better. (Yes, I guess they ARE working on a few problems, as SP5 is a lot better that the original release of 99SE, and light years ahead of 98, which was SO bad we refused to buy the upgrade!) Jon * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Public open-source PCB software. was-> Changes to the Protel company name
This made me think of an interesting question. Is there a public domain open source PCB & schematic capture software? This way, users have the ability to make significant changes themselves & publicly post them. Brian Guralnick - Original Message - From: "Brad Velander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Forum'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Changes to the Protel company name | Hi all, | I think that the paragraph below, in their own words, says it all. | No changes, no significant fixes, the same old bugs, inefficient code and | glorious marketing driven additions that nobody wants. No changes, no | improvements, just the same old crap under a new name. Is this what the | statement means if taken literally, jeeesh, they can't even write good press | releases. | I find it amazing that Protel not once ever makes any promises to | the users of the product to improve things. Nope can't do that, just | maintain the status quo. Thus we (users) are still working around bugs, | issues and inefficient coding that has existed within the product for 2 - 3 | years at least. Give up, there is no hope! | | Brad Velander, | Lead PCB Designer, | Norsat International Inc., | #300 - 4401 Still Creek Dr., | Burnaby, B.C., V5C 6G9. | Tel. (604) 292-9089 direct | Fax (604) 292-9010 | website www.norsat.com | | | > -Original Message- | > From: Piers Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 12:26 AM | > To: Protel EDA Forum | > Subject: [PEDA] Changes to the Protel company name | > | > | > Hi Everyone, | > | > Further to yesterday's announcement that Protel International | > Limited has changed its name to Altium Limited, we would like | > to clarify that this will not affect the Protel product line | > or its development in any way. | | > | > Best regards, | > | > Altium Limited | > | | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
