Talk:Altium

Competing products

Would be good to have a list of main competitors like Allegro and CadSoft Eagle called out. In fact wikipedia doesnt have a very good overview of EDA suites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.254.216 (talk) 05:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

I believe there is an error in one of the dates. It says that Protel for Windows was the first windows-based PCB design system in 1999. However, Allegro for Windows was released in 1998 (I was the product manager). So either the date is wrong, or Protel wasn't first. I believe the date is wrong. -- Steve Chidester — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.73.163 (talk) 11:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes 1999 is definitely incorrect (or the article certainly seems to imply the first Windows version was after 1999). I have the latest non-DXP Windows version on my system (Advanced PCB Design 2.8), and its executable file is dated April 1995, it was the first viable/stable Windows version. It looks like the "PFW" (Protel For Windows) support files date back to April 1993, possibly consistent with the release of the earlier Windows versions (which I never used), I remember this was in the early 90s. The 99SE version is still in use today. In response to the point raised below about neutrality, I think the article is a little biased in Altium's favour, not majorly, but it doesn't convey the fact that things like introduction of the FPGA focus were somewhat controversial at the time with users who demanded improvements to the core PCB tools. Adx (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

This page was updated by WikiWriter2345 (2009-03-06).

Full disclosure: WikiWriter is an employee of Altium Limited. This article was written to be neutral. The writer of this article has been given guidence on these edits on the wikipedia help desk

WikiWriter2345 (talk) 05:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I believe that the article is neutral. There isn't any false information. It seems as though wikipedia cannot accept an article as neutral if there isn't any criticism about the subject. Are we, the editors expected to create some criticism on our own on some pages and cite it as a reference, in order to make the article "neutral"? Mehfoos (talk) 11:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I think so, too. --ACluk90 (talk) 16:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Altium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090219130148/http://asx.com.au/asx/research/CompanyInfoSearchResults.jsp?searchBy=asxCode&allinfo=on&asxCode=ALU to http://asx.com.au/asx/research/CompanyInfoSearchResults.jsp?searchBy=asxCode&allinfo=on&asxCode=ALU

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:03, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Autotrax

Non-notable stub with content worth saving. Kb.au (talk) 00:09, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

We should not merge two competing EDA suites in the same article, also there are many others. Mahjongg (talk) 14:24, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

• Of course, Autotrax is notable for its historical importance as an early PCB CAD program. Therefore it should remain a separate article (ideally expanded). --Matthiaspaul (talk) 19:23, 7 April 2018 (UTC)