Darren, Respecting the current subject and initial question, I understand the question to apply to Protel99SE.
I think the initial post, as well as all of the other responses, leave no room for any doubt about the application. I am not quite sure what your attempting to say or do here. While I have not been too active in recent months, I believe that my previous discriptions below respecting the Forum are in fact accurate. I think that the archive can speak for itself. I may be wrong, but I doubt it. The history is there for you to examine. You in fact were a part of that history, and I am not quite sure why you are trying to become an revisionist now. Respecting KLUNK! If it doesn't happen to you then you have your "sounds" set up differently. Go back and check the archive, specifically with respect to KLUNK!, in which several others (not me) in this Forum will tell you how to make sure you have your system setup correctly as a standard system, with respect to standard windows sounds, and that those sounds are in fact working correctly, which will then demonstrate the problem to you. Protel98/99/99SE does not properly exit the application from the internal file menu. Period. Proven fact. Poor Programming. This is really even beyond opinion, and established as fact. Where on earth are you coming from? Go back and read the archive. If I remember correctly, one person at the time brought up the question of it possibly being a Borland Delphi problem, i.e.: that it was a Delphi Error as opposed to a Protel/Altium Error, but nobody could point to or produce any other Delphi programs with the problem. The concensus in the archive is that it is a Protel/Altium Programming ERROR. Respecting Protel/Altium Programming/Software Design, there have been a number of viewpoints expressed here in the past, as to just how Divinly Inspired Protel/Altium Programming is, and as to just how Divinly Inspired Protel/Altium Software Design is, and I for one have taken Altium (and others in this Forum) to task on a number of these issues, on several occasions. I can't speak for or about AD6, but I can speak for other Protel Products previous to AD6, and the failure of Altium as a whole to deliver a product that meets the current needs of the Printed Circuit Board Design Industy as well as many of the other Software Developers in the industry can. Did Altium even show up at PCB East or PCB West this year? I was unable to attend either. I know that they failed to show last year (or was it the year before). They want my money for AD6 or whatever it is called, but they seem to forget that they have never delivered what they promised me before with ATS, DXP, P04. In fact, I am still waiting for SP7. In reality, I do not believe that Altium can really deliver a product that does not have bugs and limitations in it, as compared to others in the industry. My whole point? Never assume anything about Protel/Altium. That is the whole point of the initial question in this subject thread, isn't it. JaMi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Protel EDA Discussion List'" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] HIGH LIGHTING CONNECTIONS > > Hi All, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JaMi Smith > > > If I remember correctly, the primary focus of this Fourm is > > Protel99SE in specific, with Altium Products in General. > > well that's not the case, its any Altium product, but we > could assume. > > > By default, most people assume Protel99SE is the target of > > the question, unless some other version is mentioned. > > assume...hmm > > > I am speaking my below response specifically of Protel99SE, > > but since the initial intent of the initial question delt > > with the assumed intended design of a function, i.e: How > > Altium intended the function to operate, I simply warned > > the person that they _should never assume_ that Altium actually > > intended something to work in a specific manner, since sometimes they > > (Altium) fall far short od even getting something to work properly. > > should never assume.. > > > I don't know who put you up to this, or whether you just "fell into" > > this by simply trying to be good "support personel", but here goes: > > > > Protel98, Protel99, and Protel99SE all have exhibed some real nasty > > stability issues on certain systems. There have been numerous > > discussions over the years with some people stating it was always > > the fault of the operator or his system, and others siding with poor > > programming on the part of Protel/Altium. > > Your assuming yet again as to who is to blame. > > > This all came to a head one day when someone (myself > > actually) noticed that you could start Protel98/99/99SE, and > > then just exit it by the file menu ( File > Exit ), and that > > when you did, you would get this nasty "KLUNK!", > > which is the Microsoft Error sound. > > > > You will get this sound providing that you have not > > redirected your sound output or turned off your speakers. > > > > This was tested extensively here in this Forum, by numerous > > users, and found to be universal, that is it occurred on > > everyone's machine, regardless of the installation. I think > > that there may have been one dissenter to the study, but he > > was told how to check whether or not this "error" feature was > > properly turned on, and he never replied, so I would assume > > that it was unanamous. > > > > Now, for comparison, start Protel98/99/99SE and then exit by > > clicking on the big X in the upper right corner of the application. > > > > No "KLUNK!" . > > > > The point of the whole demonstration being that in this case > > Protel/Altium programmers cannot even "Exit" the Application > > correctly without causing an ERROR! > > FTR it doesn't happen to me here, WIN 2K, P99SE. > > > As I pointed out in the ensuing dialogue in this Forum at the > > time (do a > > search of the Archive on KLUNK!), this is something akin to > > writing your > > first "C" Program, "Hello World", and failing to exit MAIN properly. > > > > By my comment of "Over the years various points have been > > argued pro and con, and all that is for sure is that many > > how many ? Most users I know don't upgrade as 99SE does all > they need. That sounds like a great program to be still up > to the task 6 years after it was released. > > > still believe it to be better than DXP, Protel 2004, or > > any of the newer incarnations." I simply mean that > > if I understand the mainstream thought of the Forum > > correctly, many, if not most, here, prefer to still use > > Protel99SE, over the various newer versions that Altium has > > failed to deliver on. > > Failed, this is your opinion not that of the wider user base. > > > I know that I, being licensed all of the way up thru Protel04 > > SP4 (although I do not believe that I am licensed > > for Designer 6.5), still prefer Protel99SE, notwithstanding > > all of it's shortcommings. By "various points", I mean various > > problems with Protel99SE. > > Well I don't recall many users saying they would prefer to go back > to 99SE after they got over the first 2 months or so of learning > to use Altium Designer. I have heard plenty of users say, after > going back and using 99SE today, I find it very restricting after > AD. AD has awesome power over 99SE, there are layers of stuff it > can now do easy and fast that 99SE just can't do. And with Direct > X graphics now, its much faster. > > This list is close to dead, that to me says how many 99SE users > are still left. And I'm sure some still here would be using a > pirate copy, and so can't upgrade. > > If 99SE does what you need then lucky you, keep using it. > > Regards, > Darren > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum > > To Post messages: > mailto:[email protected] > > Unsubscribe and Other Options: > http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com > > Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > ____________________________________________________________ You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum To Post messages: mailto:[email protected] Unsubscribe and Other Options: http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
