Long, slightly ansty post. Read no further unless you are keen for a bit of verbal boxing...
On 01:36 AM 23/07/2002 -0700, JaMi Smith said: ><..snip..> >I find it odd Ian that you like the way that Protel zooms in and out without >"centering about the cursor", like every other cad package I have ever seen, >and even defend it, but you went ahead and wrote a "server" to fix the >problem anyway, and then go on to say "no bug here" I got tired of you complaining about it when you first joined the forum (and began slagging the software and those of us with different points of view) and showed you that you can have it any way you like. I don't use my server and it is not a bug fix in my mind. >Granted, you and some others may have actually grown accustomed to the weird >behaviour of Protel when it zooms in and out, and actually like or prefer >it, but that doesn't make it "intuitive" or "natural". Disagree. having to re-find and refocus on a new location is unnecessary and unnatural. At least I think I could come up with a legitimate argument to that effect. Please stop imposing your preference on me and calling me non-intuitive or unnatural. Please recognise that it is just a simple little preference of yours. Reentering on zoom is *not* a natural law. >For those that don't understand what I am talking about, it is what I call >the "anti-intuitive" manner in which Protel zooms in or out on an area near >the right or left border of the display area. For example: place your cursor >near the right border of your display area and zoom out (PgDn) three times, >and you will still find yourself right up against the right border of the >display area, although you will not see one single bit of real estate to the >right of your boarder, since it remains the same. Now zoom in (PgUp) 3 >times, and you still never get past the original right border of the >display. If you want to zoom or pan anywhere to the right, then you to have >to place your cursom near the left side of the screen and then zoom out and >then place your cursor back to the right and zoom in. Thats why I call it >"anti-intuitive", you have to go left to get right, and it is simply not >something I have ever seen in any other CAD application. This is just poor >design, plain and simple. > >Yes Ian, I could take my fingers off the PgUp and PgDn keys and my eyes off >of the screen to look for the Home key, but why do I have to take my eyes >off what I am doing and hit one extra key. Why can't Protel just be like the >rest of the world on this one. Coz - it is better - at least quite a number of us think so and there is a basis for this preference. I may have a large screen or multiple screens. I prefer the location I am dealing with remain in the same spot on the screen so I do not have to find it again and refocus. It is all about speed. I, think that the other CAD packages have it wrong and protel has it right from a speed and human computer interaction (HCI) point of view. Having to find the edit point and re-focus is a slow down. I am an expert user - I want the package to be as fast as possible. This is one little example of how I think it is faster. Most of the time I am only paging up or down one step as I try to rout/place in a specific region. On the rarer occasions that zoom in or out a long way an occasional "home" is not issue for me. >You may like it, but it is "non-standard" to say the least. The key to progress is questioning the status quo. I am not interested in standards if there is a demonstrably better way of working. Standards have their place but generally for beginner users. Expert users are almost always more interested in shortcuts and speed-ups. >Where again do I go to get the little drivers / servers you wrote to fix the >problem? > >The real problem here Ian is that I shouldn't have to ask you for your >drivers / servers, Protel should fix the problem, or even considering that >you like it the way it is, they should offer the "standard" zoom in and out >for us abnormal folks who learned on everyone elses systems. > >You may not condescend to calling it a bug, but it is unquestionably a >Protel "quirk". Yep - an example of the programmers considering how to speed our work maybe? Or maybe a historical artefact. A quirk, yep. Bug, No. >Is this what happens when you write software applications "down under" when >everyone at Microsoft in Belview Washington is at home in bed and cannot >answer your technical questions about the software? Stupid comment. > > > > >3. ) I am also betting that Protel's "Print Dialogue" box is also still > > >backwards as compared to the rest of the world (For those that don't > > >consider the way that Protel handles printing a bug, go play with Adobe > > >Acrobat (or any other Windows Application) for a while then come back to > > >Protel to see how it it is not done right). > > > > You are not being clear here. What do you see as the issue? I can see > > differences between printing in all sorts of applications. What exactly >do > > you not like in Protels Sch and PCB printing? > > > >Protel has an OK butten in the same location in it's print dialog box as >every on else in the world has the PRINT buttom. I agree with you on this one. ><..snip..> > > >Also, show me one other major > > >application in the Windows world that has a Print Icon on a toolbar that > > >invokes a Printer Dialog Box that will not print anything at all, as the >one > > >in the PCB 3-D View (It only does printer setup). > > > > Minor issue. We know that the 3D viewer, as it stands, is a premature, > > inadequate, bit of marketing fluff. Hardly worth commenting on it. > > > >Minor issue! then why couldn't you solve it for me when I posted to this >forum and said that I couldn't get the PRINT to work in 3D. Go look in the >archive. > >Marketing fluff or not, the PRINT button in the dialog box that appears when >you click on the Printer Icon on the Toolbar DOES NOT WORK - PLAIN AND >SIMPLE - ITS HOSED - ITS A REAL BUG! I LOST A WHOLE DAY ON THIS ONE, AND >NOBODY IN THIS LIST COULD EVEN EXPLAIN THAT THE ONLY WAY TO GET IT TO PRINT >WAS FROM THE FILE MENU. Yep - it is a bug. The problems you had with anyone on this forum not knowing how to answer your problem reflects the disdain most of us have for it and hence never use it. Yep it does seem like a bug - the toolbar icon problem. ><..snip..> As for Sch PCB command commonality... maybe there are some things that differ - but they do have to reflect the differences in the actual entities. I would *hate* a package that tried to be so common across the various editors that it sacrificed functionality. But i do have a gripe about Sch and PCB differences - I want a J-C (Jump-Component) in Sch like in PCB. But that is about the only difference that I regularly hiccup on - oh, and right-click dragging in Sch. <..snip..> > > JaMi, fess up, cobber - you were beta testing (just like I was). Stop > > playing silly games. You know exactly what has been fixed and what >hasn't. > > > > Ian Wilson > > > >You know Ian, this is interesting. I really didnt read this last paragraph >closely the first time thru, before starting to respond to you. > >No, I am not playing games. No, I really dont know what's been fixed and >what hasn't. > >No, I really wasn't beta testing, Heh! Are you saying you did not sign the NDA and you did not participate in the beta? >although I figured you were. > >This really is a bad sign, isn't it. What you're really telling me is that >these and many other things have not been fixed. > >Thats just not what I really wanted to hear. I said nothing of the sort. Do you jump to conclusions so easily when doing engineering design? I would think not. Please read what I wrote and not what you thought I wrote. I simply said that you were in as good a position to know what has changed as anyone since you have been involved in the beta program. There is nothing in this statement about DXP or what is included/fixed or otherwise. Simply a call for you to be a little more transparent. The DXP NDA does not prohibit people admitting they are involved in the beta (I just re-read it), though for one reason or another most of us have not bellowed the fact. Ian Wilson ************************************************************************ * Tracking #: FD4726C3BC5C954F91C372FB57B71A9EC7CDD43B * ************************************************************************ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
