Re: gEDA-user: My trolling, gerbv, gattrib

[Dave N6NZ <n6nz@xxxxxxxx>]

Peter Clifton wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
> 
> Sorry for the thread of flames I managed to start. 

Darn.  I've been deleting mail rather aggressively lately because I've 
been too busy doing actual work.  It appears I have missed an 
entertaining flame war.  I haven't seen a word of it.

> Yes, I suspect he wants things which are unrealistic (a full commercial
> grade integration with whatever simulator he happens to be running. Come
> to think of it, I've not seen such integration even in commercial
> packages).

In past lives, I've worked at a couple of different EDA companies, both 
selling products in the 6-7 figure range (in $US).  The CEO of one 
start-up (now a VC, who shall remain nameless) said to me 'round about 1984:

"If you ask users to give their CAD tools a letter grade, most would get 
D's and F's.  If users give us a C we'll have a run-away hit."

That quote helps me keep my perspective about things.  There are always 
things about CAD tools that can be better.  The important thing is to 
make sure that a path exists to get from point A to point B.  Smoothing 
speed bumps is a never ending chore that should not get in the way of 
shipping the most useful thing you can bundle up today.  CAD users want 
to ship *their* products, so a tool that can get them there, even with 
band-aids, always beats elegance that falls short.  Those who demand 
elegance at the risk of schedule are not designing products, they are 
still in graduate school.

A second important lesson I learned as a CAD developer comes from 
another EDA startup.  The VP of sales asserted that there is a two week 
fuse for benchmarking, even for a $350K product.  If even a very complex 
tool can't be installed, evaluated, and benchmarked (and win the 
benchmark or at least score well) in two weeks, start to finish, *NO SALE*.

As developers of free EDA software, both are relevant to us.  The path 
from point A to point B must exist for our users.  We must also take 
ownership for our cruft, and keep plugging away at the never ending 
chore of reducing it. Cruft is normal.  If we can keep the cruft below 
the "threshold of benchmarking pain" and also keep the cruft from being 
a barrier to accomplishing reasonable goals, we can get a "C" or better.

-dave


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