Re: gEDA-user: OT?: Altium (Protel) Relocates From Sydney Australia to Shanghai China

[Andrew Seddon <seddona@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Evan Foss <evanfoss@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yea, I second the last part of the. If you have a large library of
> parts done in a particular tool you will have to redraft all of them.
> That is not good.
>
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:19 AM,  <gedau@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 10:51:00AM -0400, Bob Paddock wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> The developers always wanted to know "the fastest way" to do something
>>> and had no interest in learning "the best way" to do something.
>>
>> Lately I had the chance to work together with professional software
>> developers from multiple different western countries, and I have to tell
>> you it is not china-specific. I think it's a generic big-company problem
>> that you will see all around the world.
>>
>> Those developers work for money, not for joy, so fastest way is the only
>> way for them, especially combined with the pressure from the management
>> to deliver at deadline _and_ save cost (do it with less developers).
>>
>>>
>>> In the end the company did ship Cellphones that some how did work.  Is
>>> that all that maters?  I hope not...
>>> Is this one company representative of all development in China?  I hope not...
>>
>> because of the above, in that big-copmpany environment it's very common
>> to use duct tape all around. If there is a requirement and some well
>> defined method that will be used to tes if the requirement is met at the
>> end, you can be almost sure the developer will implement something that
>> will work only for that one test case and will ignore the general idea
>> behind th erequirement or the test case. This how sleep(1) kind of
>> "fixes" end up in network code.
>>
>> I don't say it's because those developers are stupid or even
>> inexperienced. It's more like the whole company culture. If you want to
>> make things properly in such an environment, it will take more time and
>> the feedback will not be "cool, you made some really robust, reusable
>> code" but "next time please spend less on the golden knobs and
>> concentrate on the task". Thus the best developers either leave after a
>> while (either to other company or promoted to management) or they will
>> start following the lazy methods knowing that it's not good, but "i have
>> no choice".
>>
>>> Hopefully  this will drive a lot more interest to gEDA and PCB.
>>
>> Honestly, I doubt. At the end once the user got used to whichever tool,
>> he won't switch easily even if quality starts to go down.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tibor
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geda-user mailing list
>> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>

Altium have some great ideas but their execution is dire. They also
spread themselves very thin by trying to encapsulate the whole
embedded dev (Processor/FPGA) process into one tool, personally I
think this was a huge mistake.

As they've been loosing money for the last 10 years I cant say the
move to China is shocking but I cant see it helping their execution
woes. They're also hampered by a massive legacy code base in Delphi
which essentially has no eco-system any more.


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user