Altium Limited closing up shop - Altium Designer discontinued

On Apr 12, 1:32=A0pm, Ed McGettigan <ed.mcgetti...@xilinx.com> wrote:
> On Apr 11, 4:18=A0pm, Rob Irwin <rob.ir...@altium.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 11, 11:10=A0pm, "Nial Stewart"
>
> > <nial*REMOVE_TH...@nialstewartdevelopments.co.uk> wrote:
> > > I'm posting as an AD user, concerned for the long term future of the =
tool.
>
> > > > This is not an April fools comment, this is real. 3 out of 4 of the
> > > > main architects Marc Depret, Dejan Stankovic and Benjamin Wells wil=
l
> > > > not be making the move as such have tendered their resignation, =A0=
but
> > > > have been requested by Altium management to not make it public unti=
l
> > > > after the June EOY ASX fillings have been made.
> > > > The reality is there is no guarantee that Altium as a company will =
be
> > > > around this time next year, so who knows what will happen to multi-
> > > > year subscriptions and promised upgrade cycles.
>
> > > This _could_ be interpreted as FUD by a competitor.
>
> > > Rikard, who are you and what's your source for the detailed informati=
on
> > > above?
>
> > > Nial
>
> > Hi Nial. Not sure if this is FUD by a competitor, but it certainly is
> > ill-informed comment. I work at Altium, currently in the Australian
> > office, and can assure everyone that Altium Designer is not being
> > discontinued in ANY way. The move of HQ to China (we will remain an
> > Australian company) is actually aimed at allowing us to ramp up our
> > development schedule, and to get Altium Designer on to the desktops of
> > more designers and engineers around the world.
>
> > So, yes. Perhaps Rikard needs to declare who he is and who he works
> > for. Otherwise his comments can be disregarded.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The post came from a DSL line in New South Wales, Sydney.

Yes, the message traces to the Hornsby area in Sydney, via a TGP
Internet account.

Dave.

On Apr 10, 2:10=A0pm, Rikard Astrof <rikard.ast...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 8:00=A0pm, "PovTruffe" <PovTa...@gaga.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I have found this:http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/altium-relocat=
es-from-sydney-t...
>
> > Nothing was mentioned about Altium Designer being discontinued
>
> If you read the comments at the end of the article, specially those
> made by Alan Smith, he's saying last week they retrenched most of the
> AU staff (http://www.google.com/search?q=3Dsite%3Alinkedin.com+altium
> +limited) with the hope of setting up a team in China, well since then
> inside sources have confirmed that the vast majority of the people
> that were supposedly meant to head off to china to setup the new
> offices/team have decided to take voluntary redundancy, which means as
> of today Altium Limited and their product Altium designer is in limbo.
>
> To furthermore, lay-offs will be made this week in the San Diego
> offices, this will include transfering all support calls to the China
> offices.

What rubbish.  I *am* one of the management team for Altium, managing
North America and there is no plan to push support calls into China.
This is completely baseless.  We have development in the US, China,
Kiev, Australia and the Netherlands.  Altium Designer is not going
away and some development will continue to be done in our two
development centers in Australia (Sydney and Hobart).  Do some
research on any major software vendor's global development centers and
you'll find development going on all over the world.  No major EDA/CAD/
CAM company that I know of has a single development center in any
single country.  True there has been some retrenchment but the sky is
well and truly, *not* falling.

Matt Berggren
Altium

Blue Banshee <bluebansh3e@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2:10&#4294967295;pm, Rikard Astrof <rikard.ast...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 10, 8:00&#4294967295;pm, "PovTruffe" <PovTa...@gaga.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > I have found this:http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/altium-relocates-from-sydney-t...
>>
>> > Nothing was mentioned about Altium Designer being discontinued
>>
>> If you read the comments at the end of the article, specially those
>> made by Alan Smith, he's saying last week they retrenched most of the
>> AU staff (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Alinkedin.com+altium
>> +limited) with the hope of setting up a team in China, well since then
>> inside sources have confirmed that the vast majority of the people
>> that were supposedly meant to head off to china to setup the new
>> offices/team have decided to take voluntary redundancy, which means as
>> of today Altium Limited and their product Altium designer is in limbo.
>>
>> To furthermore, lay-offs will be made this week in the San Diego
>> offices, this will include transfering all support calls to the China
>> offices.
>
> What rubbish.  I *am* one of the management team for Altium, managing
> North America and there is no plan to push support calls into China.
> This is completely baseless.  We have development in the US, China,
> Kiev, Australia and the Netherlands.  Altium Designer is not going
> away and some development will continue to be done in our two
> development centers in Australia (Sydney and Hobart).  Do some
> research on any major software vendor's global development centers and
> you'll find development going on all over the world.  No major EDA/CAD/
> CAM company that I know of has a single development center in any
> single country.  True there has been some retrenchment but the sky is
> well and truly, *not* falling.

As far as I'm concerned the sky started falling on on Altium when they
abandoned PCad.  But then I'm still bitter and twisted about that ;-)

Nobby
A happy PCad 2006 user.

On Apr 13, 7:29=A0am, Nobby Anderson <no...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Blue Banshee <bluebans...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 10, 2:10 pm, Rikard Astrof <rikard.ast...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 10, 8:00 pm, "PovTruffe" <PovTa...@gaga.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> > I have found this:http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/altium-relo=
cates-from-sydney-t...
>
> >> > Nothing was mentioned about Altium Designer being discontinued
>
> >> If you read the comments at the end of the article, specially those
> >> made by Alan Smith, he's saying last week they retrenched most of the
> >> AU staff (http://www.google.com/search?q=3Dsite%3Alinkedin.com+altium
> >> +limited) with the hope of setting up a team in China, well since then
> >> inside sources have confirmed that the vast majority of the people
> >> that were supposedly meant to head off to china to setup the new
> >> offices/team have decided to take voluntary redundancy, which means as
> >> of today Altium Limited and their product Altium designer is in limbo.
>
> >> To furthermore, lay-offs will be made this week in the San Diego
> >> offices, this will include transfering all support calls to the China
> >> offices.
>
> > What rubbish. =A0I *am* one of the management team for Altium, managing
> > North America and there is no plan to push support calls into China.
> > This is completely baseless. =A0We have development in the US, China,
> > Kiev, Australia and the Netherlands. =A0Altium Designer is not going
> > away and some development will continue to be done in our two
> > development centers in Australia (Sydney and Hobart). =A0Do some
> > research on any major software vendor's global development centers and
> > you'll find development going on all over the world. =A0No major EDA/CA=
D/
> > CAM company that I know of has a single development center in any
> > single country. =A0True there has been some retrenchment but the sky is
> > well and truly, *not* falling.
>
> As far as I'm concerned the sky started falling on on Altium when they
> abandoned PCad. =A0But then I'm still bitter and twisted about that ;-)
>
> Nobby
> A happy PCad 2006 user.

Hi Nobby,

Having come from the Accel / PCAD camp myself I can appreciate the
sense of loyalty toward PCAD as it was and in some ways continues to
be a fantastic product.  Without steering this thread off course (and
without making this a sales pitch) I know we've transitioned a number
of customers (willingly) over the altium designer, with great
success.  It may be that we need to spend some time with you, hooking
you and one of our support teams up to show you the differences and
get you spun up on the benefits (this assumes of course that we
haven't already :).  A lot of work went into incorporating PCAD
capabilities into AD.  Again, I'm not going to try and sell you on it,
but may be worth contacting our support centers (specific to each
region) and get some face time with an Apps Engineer / the tool.

Kind Regards,

Matt

slight_return <matthew.berggren@altium.com> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 7:29&#4294967295;am, Nobby Anderson <no...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> As far as I'm concerned the sky started falling on on Altium when they
>> abandoned PCad. &#4294967295;But then I'm still bitter and twisted about that ;-)
>>
>> Nobby
>> A happy PCad 2006 user.
>
> Hi Nobby,
>
> Having come from the Accel / PCAD camp myself I can appreciate the
> sense of loyalty toward PCAD as it was and in some ways continues to
> be a fantastic product.  Without steering this thread off course (and
> without making this a sales pitch) I know we've transitioned a number
> of customers (willingly) over the altium designer, with great
> success.  It may be that we need to spend some time with you, hooking
> you and one of our support teams up to show you the differences and
> get you spun up on the benefits (this assumes of course that we
> haven't already :).  A lot of work went into incorporating PCAD
> capabilities into AD.  Again, I'm not going to try and sell you on it,
> but may be worth contacting our support centers (specific to each
> region) and get some face time with an Apps Engineer / the tool.

WE (well, I, as it's mostly me that uses it) did make the transition to
AD and we used it for a few PCBs at the time, and I still have one of the
2009 releases installed here (summer I think).  However for our purposes
(for our purposes being important) it was not great for a number of
reasons.  Firstly, it tried to be all things for all men, integrating
schematic capture, PCB layout, FPGA design, software and even I think
mechanical design in the later releases (can't remember) and it did
none of the things we used PCad for well.  I only want schemtic capture
and PCB layout, ie exactly what PCad does, and nothing else. The PCB
layout capabilities of PCad were, even by summer 2009, far in advance 
of anything that AD could do, it was just so much easier to use (all
manual routing here, nothing particularly complicated, max 4 tracked layer
double sided designs).  Schematic capture wasn't as smooth, either, but
there was nothing much in it between the two in real terms.  ADs library,
and some of the more advanced features of component building was better
than PCad's once you got used to it though.

However we just didn't use or want 80% of the features of the package.
We have no need for FPGA integration, the FPGA tools we use from the 
manufacturer do everything we want them to do.  We don't want source code 
integration, our coding methedologies are way ahead of anything it
actually supported and anyway it's the wrong platform.  I don't need
thermal analysis or mechanical integration or any of the other bells and
whistles.  PCad does absolutely everything we need, and by 2006 SP2 it
did it well.

As others have said, we also don't want to pay through the nose for a
constant stream of updates, either.  It was just far too expensive,
and the perception (and I think the reality) is that we were paying for
ongoing development of a product 80% of which we would never ever use.
So, we paid it for a year or two, and then happily returned to PCad and
free forever use. 

PCad was a good, mid-range product, and in my view there is still a
need for something like that, particularly for small outfits like
ours.  We might consider AD again, assuming it really has improved, 
if we could get a version that did schematic capture and PCB layout
only (and other necessary things like library management of course)
but it would have to be significantly less expensive both in terms
of startup cost and ongoing costs than AD is at the moment (or was 
in the 2009 era anyway).

Nobby

On Apr 13, 3:19=A0pm, Nobby Anderson <no...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> slight_return <matthew.bergg...@altium.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 13, 7:29=A0am, Nobby Anderson <no...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> As far as I'm concerned the sky started falling on on Altium when they
> >> abandoned PCad. =A0But then I'm still bitter and twisted about that ;-=
)
>
> >> Nobby
> >> A happy PCad 2006 user.
>
> > Hi Nobby,
>
> > Having come from the Accel / PCAD camp myself I can appreciate the
> > sense of loyalty toward PCAD as it was and in some ways continues to
> > be a fantastic product. =A0Without steering this thread off course (and
> > without making this a sales pitch) I know we've transitioned a number
> > of customers (willingly) over the altium designer, with great
> > success. =A0It may be that we need to spend some time with you, hooking
> > you and one of our support teams up to show you the differences and
> > get you spun up on the benefits (this assumes of course that we
> > haven't already :). =A0A lot of work went into incorporating PCAD
> > capabilities into AD. =A0Again, I'm not going to try and sell you on it=
,
> > but may be worth contacting our support centers (specific to each
> > region) and get some face time with an Apps Engineer / the tool.
>
> WE (well, I, as it's mostly me that uses it) did make the transition to
> AD and we used it for a few PCBs at the time, and I still have one of the
> 2009 releases installed here (summer I think). =A0However for our purpose=
s
> (for our purposes being important) it was not great for a number of
> reasons. =A0Firstly, it tried to be all things for all men, integrating
> schematic capture, PCB layout, FPGA design, software and even I think
> mechanical design in the later releases (can't remember) and it did
> none of the things we used PCad for well. =A0I only want schemtic capture
> and PCB layout, ie exactly what PCad does, and nothing else. The PCB
> layout capabilities of PCad were, even by summer 2009, far in advance
> of anything that AD could do, it was just so much easier to use (all
> manual routing here, nothing particularly complicated, max 4 tracked laye=
r
> double sided designs). =A0Schematic capture wasn't as smooth, either, but
> there was nothing much in it between the two in real terms. =A0ADs librar=
y,
> and some of the more advanced features of component building was better
> than PCad's once you got used to it though.
>
> However we just didn't use or want 80% of the features of the package.
> We have no need for FPGA integration, the FPGA tools we use from the
> manufacturer do everything we want them to do. =A0We don't want source co=
de
> integration, our coding methedologies are way ahead of anything it
> actually supported and anyway it's the wrong platform. =A0I don't need
> thermal analysis or mechanical integration or any of the other bells and
> whistles. =A0PCad does absolutely everything we need, and by 2006 SP2 it
> did it well.
>
> As others have said, we also don't want to pay through the nose for a
> constant stream of updates, either. =A0It was just far too expensive,
> and the perception (and I think the reality) is that we were paying for
> ongoing development of a product 80% of which we would never ever use.
> So, we paid it for a year or two, and then happily returned to PCad and
> free forever use.
>
> PCad was a good, mid-range product, and in my view there is still a
> need for something like that, particularly for small outfits like
> ours. =A0We might consider AD again, assuming it really has improved,
> if we could get a version that did schematic capture and PCB layout
> only (and other necessary things like library management of course)
> but it would have to be significantly less expensive both in terms
> of startup cost and ongoing costs than AD is at the moment (or was
> in the 2009 era anyway).
>
> Nobby

Hi Nobby,

Good feedback!  Thank you.  Again, I'm trying to avoid hijacking this
thread and turning it into a sales pitch however...  :)  I know at one
stage our pricing had risen to something dangerously close to the old
Accel a'la cart pricing model for PCAD (AD rose to almost $15K where
at one point even Accel/PCAD ran ~$20K).  This found us creeping
closer and closer to the price of our competitor's tools (if you can
get clear pricing from them).  And it was at this point that we
pressed the proverbial reset button and decided this ran counter to
our core mission of providing a comprehensive range of technologies
priced at a point that would put them in the reach for every
engineer.  This resulted in a >60% drop in pricing and a moving to
total pricing transparency by putting the pricing out there on the
website.

Now others (competitors) have somewhat followed suit however the
difference we found was when we mentioned our price, we were talking
about pricing for every aspect of the tool (an out-of-the-box-you-get-
everything price), where others were still holding back and reserving
additional features for sale as add-ons.  So where you found that you
might not use 80% of Altium Designer, that to us is perfectly fine, if
that suits your needs.  The pricing is low enough now to make that 20%
you *do* use, still *very* competitively priced, relatively speaking.
And as time goes on, you might use more areas of the software
*however* the difference is that those areas of the software are
already installed on your desktop and there's no additional add-ons to
buy (for example, where others proffer things like pin swapping tools
as an add-on starting at ~$10K and up...for us, this seems silly.
Though you might not need it today, you may someday and it should just
be there, in the box for when you do need it).

To the differences in performance and usability, this is somewhat more
difficult to discuss the specifics on a forum such as this but I'd
welcome a chance to chat about it as I feel like if there are weak
points or points where you feel PCAD was faster or easier to use, then
we want to be sure to capture these.  I was on the team that evaluated
the transition from PCAD to Altium Designer and though the workflow
was different (and indeed there were some additional features that
both packages had that the other did not) I'd suspect we pretty much
closed the gap on these over the years.  Afterall, we still have a
large percentage of the team that developed PCAD 2006 in our R&D org,
working on Altium Designer today.  All friends and colleagues of mine
for many years and all still infusing the software with the best-in-
class sorts of capabilities that made PCAD PCB so strong.

Anytime you feel like chatting, drop me a note.  As I'd said, I'd love
to know your concerns and issues that you experienced at the time.  My
email is simply first name . last name at altium dot com.

Cheers,

Matt Berggren
Altium

slight_return <matthew.berggren@altium.com> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 3:19&#4294967295;pm, Nobby Anderson <no...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> slight_return <matthew.bergg...@altium.com> wrote:
>> > On Apr 13, 7:29&#4294967295;am, Nobby Anderson <no...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> >> As far as I'm concerned the sky started falling on on Altium when they
>> >> abandoned PCad. &#4294967295;But then I'm still bitter and twisted about that ;-)
>>
>> >> Nobby
>> >> A happy PCad 2006 user.
>>
>> > Hi Nobby,
>>
>> > Having come from the Accel / PCAD camp myself I can appreciate the
>> > sense of loyalty toward PCAD as it was and in some ways continues to
>> > be a fantastic product. &#4294967295;Without steering this thread off course (and
>> > without making this a sales pitch) I know we've transitioned a number
>> > of customers (willingly) over the altium designer, with great
>> > success. &#4294967295;It may be that we need to spend some time with you, hooking
>> > you and one of our support teams up to show you the differences and
>> > get you spun up on the benefits (this assumes of course that we
>> > haven't already :). &#4294967295;A lot of work went into incorporating PCAD
>> > capabilities into AD. &#4294967295;Again, I'm not going to try and sell you on it,
>> > but may be worth contacting our support centers (specific to each
>> > region) and get some face time with an Apps Engineer / the tool.
>>
>> WE (well, I, as it's mostly me that uses it) did make the transition to
>> AD and we used it for a few PCBs at the time, and I still have one of the
>> 2009 releases installed here (summer I think). &#4294967295;However for our purposes
>> (for our purposes being important) it was not great for a number of
>> reasons. &#4294967295;Firstly, it tried to be all things for all men, integrating
>> schematic capture, PCB layout, FPGA design, software and even I think
>> mechanical design in the later releases (can't remember) and it did
>> none of the things we used PCad for well. &#4294967295;I only want schemtic capture
>> and PCB layout, ie exactly what PCad does, and nothing else. The PCB
>> layout capabilities of PCad were, even by summer 2009, far in advance
>> of anything that AD could do, it was just so much easier to use (all
>> manual routing here, nothing particularly complicated, max 4 tracked layer
>> double sided designs). &#4294967295;Schematic capture wasn't as smooth, either, but
>> there was nothing much in it between the two in real terms. &#4294967295;ADs library,
>> and some of the more advanced features of component building was better
>> than PCad's once you got used to it though.
>>
>> However we just didn't use or want 80% of the features of the package.
>> We have no need for FPGA integration, the FPGA tools we use from the
>> manufacturer do everything we want them to do. &#4294967295;We don't want source code
>> integration, our coding methedologies are way ahead of anything it
>> actually supported and anyway it's the wrong platform. &#4294967295;I don't need
>> thermal analysis or mechanical integration or any of the other bells and
>> whistles. &#4294967295;PCad does absolutely everything we need, and by 2006 SP2 it
>> did it well.
>>
>> As others have said, we also don't want to pay through the nose for a
>> constant stream of updates, either. &#4294967295;It was just far too expensive,
>> and the perception (and I think the reality) is that we were paying for
>> ongoing development of a product 80% of which we would never ever use.
>> So, we paid it for a year or two, and then happily returned to PCad and
>> free forever use.
>>
>> PCad was a good, mid-range product, and in my view there is still a
>> need for something like that, particularly for small outfits like
>> ours. &#4294967295;We might consider AD again, assuming it really has improved,
>> if we could get a version that did schematic capture and PCB layout
>> only (and other necessary things like library management of course)
>> but it would have to be significantly less expensive both in terms
>> of startup cost and ongoing costs than AD is at the moment (or was
>> in the 2009 era anyway).
>>
>> Nobby
>
> Hi Nobby,
>
> Good feedback!  Thank you.  Again, I'm trying to avoid hijacking this
> thread and turning it into a sales pitch however...  :)  I know at one
> stage our pricing had risen to something dangerously close to the old
> Accel a'la cart pricing model for PCAD (AD rose to almost $15K where
> at one point even Accel/PCAD ran ~$20K).  This found us creeping
> closer and closer to the price of our competitor's tools (if you can
> get clear pricing from them).  And it was at this point that we
> pressed the proverbial reset button and decided this ran counter to
> our core mission of providing a comprehensive range of technologies
> priced at a point that would put them in the reach for every
> engineer.  This resulted in a >60% drop in pricing and a moving to
> total pricing transparency by putting the pricing out there on the
> website.
>
> Now others (competitors) have somewhat followed suit however the
> difference we found was when we mentioned our price, we were talking
> about pricing for every aspect of the tool (an out-of-the-box-you-get-
> everything price), where others were still holding back and reserving
> additional features for sale as add-ons.  So where you found that you
> might not use 80% of Altium Designer, that to us is perfectly fine, if
> that suits your needs.  The pricing is low enough now to make that 20%
> you *do* use, still *very* competitively priced, relatively speaking.
> And as time goes on, you might use more areas of the software
> *however* the difference is that those areas of the software are
> already installed on your desktop and there's no additional add-ons to
> buy (for example, where others proffer things like pin swapping tools
> as an add-on starting at ~$10K and up...for us, this seems silly.
> Though you might not need it today, you may someday and it should just
> be there, in the box for when you do need it).
>
> To the differences in performance and usability, this is somewhat more
> difficult to discuss the specifics on a forum such as this but I'd
> welcome a chance to chat about it as I feel like if there are weak
> points or points where you feel PCAD was faster or easier to use, then
> we want to be sure to capture these.  I was on the team that evaluated
> the transition from PCAD to Altium Designer and though the workflow
> was different (and indeed there were some additional features that
> both packages had that the other did not) I'd suspect we pretty much
> closed the gap on these over the years.  Afterall, we still have a
> large percentage of the team that developed PCAD 2006 in our R&D org,
> working on Altium Designer today.  All friends and colleagues of mine
> for many years and all still infusing the software with the best-in-
> class sorts of capabilities that made PCAD PCB so strong.
>
> Anytime you feel like chatting, drop me a note.  As I'd said, I'd love
> to know your concerns and issues that you experienced at the time.  My
> email is simply first name . last name at altium dot com.

I will.  However I don't buy the "might not need it today, you may 
sometime need it" though.  I'd prefer to pay 20% now for the 20% I use 
(OK, I might pay 40% for the first 20%) and the remainder if I ever
do decide to use the other stuff.  We've been doing this for a long
time now and we're pretty sure we won't need to do the other stuff in
the forseeable future.

I accept that I haven't looked at your pricing here in the UK in a few 
years and it's possible you're much more competitive although of course
it's hard to compete against a product that does everything we need at
the moment, still works, and costs us nothing.  There is just no reason
for us to upgrade, and nothing that AD does currently will persuade us
to do so so long as PCad continues to work on whatever version of
Windows we currently use.  To make you feel better, though, if I had 
to upgrade for whatever reason I'd almost certainly go the AD route,
especially if it had inherited the better features of PCad in the
meantime.

Now if you were to develop a linux port I'd be there tomorrow.  Well,
AutoDesk might have to do the same with AutoCAD too, I guess, to make
it a viable move. :)

Nobby

I just wanted to point out that we've evaluated Altium and the reason we 
didn't buy it (this time) is the yearly support fee, and my experience with 
large companies and their support is that it's tedious and you have to get 
past the support team answering the idiots first before you get anywhere. 
That usually results in a few days of wasteing time trying stuff instead of 
getting the answer when you need it, and when you get the reply you want, 
you have found out yourself.
I am currently using Eagle and is happy with it, cause the things it can't 
do, we can program it to do. And I can do advanced stuff with it. And the 
support is out of this world (tell me if you know other companies where you 
get to talk to the developers directly just by posting a case on their nntp 
server).
If Altium had monthly support fee's (at 1/12'th of the cost) where you could 
jump in and out for a month at a time it would be more interesting, but 
maybe not economical viable for Altium..
I know Altium has advantages (especially on teamwork) and I like the idea of 
it. But complexity is very high with all those drawbacks.