Software roadtests?

I recently got a 30 day trial license of Keysight's "PathWave RF Synthesis". The tool is pretty amazing and I'll probably miss it once the trial ends. This got me thinking that it would be nice if software could also be roadtested. I suspect some of these tools would get as many applications as test equipment (i.e, Who wouldn't like to own a license of Altium Designer?).

Hi Miguel,

From my perspective I think it's a good idea, if it's executed well. I wouldn't want to apply to RoadTest software that would expire! There's a huge learning curve to get the most out of software, and it's a waste if that learning cannot be continued beyond (say) a year.

Personally I would not be interested in roadtesting Altium Designer, the orgs where I have worked have used alternative products, but the Keysight suites are fantastic, but at unobtainable prices for individuals. In reality, some classroom training would also be needed, so it probably needs more commitment from suppliers to organize this, otherwise not all reviews will be as useful as they could. For example, when I reviewed (can't recall if it was a RoadTest or not) XMOS devices and tools, I got a free invite to their HQ in Bristol UK, and attended a training class. It helped loads to make good use of the processor and software tools.

But, also some engineering software is about as niche/specific as it gets, there may be few alternatives, so regardless of how easy/hard it is to drive the software, regardless of bugs, it may be essential to use such software and any review on UI experience for instance, will be very useless, it is what it is, and if you need that software to perform the task, then so be it. Any review of those products, that focussed on (say) install experience, or UI, would be very superficial.

UI is relevant and I think it should be mentioned as it affects your productivity. It could be argued that all PCB designing tools are more or less equivalent in the sense that you can build the same PCBs with any of them. But one may allow you to build the PCB in half of the time than another one. Now, UI of course is just one dimension of many others, of course the main focus of a review should be the features and the core functionality of the tool.

The niche specific software were there are no alternatives of course would not be a good candidate for a roadtest I think, because of the reasons you just mentioned.

UI is relevant and I think it should be mentioned as it affects your productivity. It could be argued that all PCB designing tools are more or less equivalent in the sense that you can build the same PCBs with any of them. But one may allow you to build the PCB in half of the time than another one. Now, UI of course is just one dimension of many others, of course the main focus of a review should be the features and the core functionality of the tool.

The niche specific software were there are no alternatives of course would not be a good candidate for a roadtest I think, because of the reasons you just mentioned.