I’m not sure how many of Upverter users requested that service but I for one would rather see more bug fixes and previously promised features (simulation) in the future. Just my opinion. Would love to hear what others think.
Yes, I unfortunately had to give up on upverter and return to my previous board making system as upverter is simply too bug riddled. I was very disappointed because it has so much promise and it really cool except when you hit a wall and a bug stops you. Focus on getting a completely solid system before adding features.
I have worked for start ups before and a big mistake they make is moving on to new features before solidifying what they have. Just my 2 cents.
1 Like
Well I hope eventually you make your way back. Def the service has bugs and is frustrating to use sometimes. I agree w/ you regarding startups making bad strategic decisions having worked at a couple startups myself. I think there’s enough good with UV to outweigh the bad and I hope they keep iterating forward. I’d rather see a more continuous bug/feature release schedule than the monolithic feature release they’ve been doing so far.
I don’t know if we’ve hit on the same bugs. Right now I’m waiting for bug fixes regarding trace length matching and also trying to get an idea of the timeline for the simulation feature. Length matching is higher priority. I’d love for the UV team to get some more features rolled out that benefit working on high speed digital designs like better interactive routing, push/shove routing, differential pair routing, real-time impedance calculations/matching, etc.
Anyway until next time.