OrCAD was acquired, and I believe it was out of necessity, by Cadence, then transferred to a subsidiary called EMA, I believe, because OrCAD's original 32-bit autorouter called PCB386+, and costing nominally $2k, was superior in several key ways to Cadence's main product costing over 10x as much.

The OrCAD version that was then the "latest" was the Windows version, which was a true piece of rubbish, built on the recently (then, in '89) acquired Microsim Windows-based schematic editor interface, however, and, though it's been developed considerably, remains MUCH less capable than the '89 version of OrCAD's SDT386+ schematic editor. Their products other than the schematic editor, were all acquisitions tailored to have a slightly similar "look and feel" to the original, very popular, schematic editor. The integration of their "shell", called ESP, products was never complete, and was abandoned with the advent of Windows.

Cadence knew exactly what it was doing when OrCAD was acquired. They knew exactly what they were doing when they abandoned marketing of the DOS-based products. They knew exactly what they were doing when they promoted the Windows-based OrCAD suite, knowing that it was MUCH less capable and productive than OrCAD's Windows-based suite, or, for that matter, theirs.

It's their option to deal with their products, and they certainly still own them. If they choose not to sell one product any longer because they prefer to market and support another, it's their prerogative to do so. They've made the choice to take an extremely good product off the market, in favor of one that's much less capable, useful, and productive. The guys in Detroit do that all the time.

It's their right and responsibility to their shareholders to maximize their profits in whatever way they can. Remember ... they work for their shareholders, and not for their customers.

RE