> -----Original Message----- > From: RogerHead [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 1:50 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PEDA] Ver 3.x --> 99SE or DXP?? > > I've used Protel since the V1.1 days. We stopped upgrading > after buying a couple of licenses for 3.x, mainly because it > does about 99% of our needs.
Roger I did not use V3, Autotrax was my last adventure before P98. But I would say that if V3 still fits your needs then stick with it. > I've had cursory looks at other versions as they came out, > but nothing really grabbed me. Now I'm looking hard (using a > trial cd with SP2), but I detest the DXP interface - maybe > just a personal thing, but it seems like a lot of froth and > bubble, done (not particularly well) by programmers for their > own gratification, instead of as a straightforward, > hardworking, everyday tool. No you are not alone, many people have commented on the UI. How much of the users views on the poor UI Altium have taken on board, who knows, but they do listen. In some ways it is actually functionally better but I prefer to view it without all the WinXP finishing touches which makes it look worse than it is. Yes I think the developers could have made better use of the panels features and cut down on multiple panels with similar, sometimes overlapping functions, but who are us users really to spoil their fun :-) > Am I missing something?? I certainly don't want 'integrated > tools'. I'll always use the manufacturer's tools for > CPLD/FPGA/..., because I believe that they will be more > up-to-date, and with less 'gotchas" than when a third party > tries to shoehorn it into their own product. Again I might be > wrong, but it can be very time-consuming to find whose fault > it is when something doesn't work, and even harder to get it fixed. If you do not want to use the tools don't, I do not use the FPGA tools at all, but I have tried them. Leaving the additional tools redundant does not effect other functions. You still need the vendor tools anyway to do the real work, DXP2004 really just adds a capture & sim shell. The IP is nice, but not essential. > So, my question... although I haven't put 99SE up yet (I have > a trial cd), what little I have seen leads me think that I > will feel more comfortable with it than DXP. Is there > *anything* in DXP that would make it a must-have over 99SE? If you want to change packages to a current one with a future roadmap then save yourself some time and go straight to DXP2004. But consider the roadmap if PCB design is your primary objective and the words in the article that Mike posted earlier where Altium quoted on their view of how much more important FPGA integration was over PCB tool development, "..view as a more important shift than higher speeds, embedded passives or differential pair routing". There were changes P98>P99SE so I am assuming V3.5 would be a bit more of a change. So if you have to invest in retraining then try and do it only once, not twice if you decide later on DXP2004 because 2004 will be a big change and better tackled "head on and up front" and not as a part time expedition. I am pretty sure no-one will knock 99SE SP6 for stability, still has some bugs but they are well known and at least a lot of the UI will be familiar for you. I am still using it every day (legacy design support for external clients) as well as 2004, if I used 2004 all the time I could work with it, but going back to a familiar 99SE environment so often is just a reminder of how much easier 2004 could be to use. > I recall many unhappy posts related to the database system in > 99SE, and it seems that has been dumped in DXP. Do you lose > any significant features in 99SE if you just use the Windows > file system? There were some bugs that could kill the database, all well cleared by P99SE SP6 and it is stable, you can always export the contents back to a file system for backups > Of course, when they have an auto router that *really* works, > then I'll be there... Now, others have much more experience on the comparisons than me, but my impressions are that Situs still has a long way to go just to be on par with some other router offerings and still much in development. John * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
