Affordable PCB Layout Software ???
Blackwater
the past few years to totally drain the marketplace of
decent PCB layout/routing software ???
Circuitmaker, Protel, Traxmaker ... the sub-$200 kind of
goodies that combined all the good features with intuitive
no-BS interfaces - gone. Seems they've all been bought-up
and destroyed by Altium - which will now generously sell you
their "complete system" for more than your slightly-used
SUV will get you at trade-in nowadays.
Well, I don't *need* a "complete system" ... I just need to
be able to blast out smallish PCBs using mostly manual routing
and create files that the cheap commercial boardmakers can
use with their latest machines (lately we seem to see a lot
more boards produced by milling technology).
Oh sure, some of those boardmakers will generously let you
use THEIR layout software ... "theirs" in that they've tweaked
it so you can only send the design to THEIR company instead
of a competitors - unless you want to toss all your old
designs and start from scratch.
Conspiracy, or racket ?
For now I'm using my creaky old TraxMaker-3 program. GREAT
package, EASY to use, LOTS of options, point-n-click and
spin and drag stuff anywhere you want ... but it's OLD and
can't do the trick for milled boards. OK if I want to make
phototemplates and do a few prototype boards myself, but ...
I've looked at some of free/cheap stuff - Vutrax, Pad2Pad,
Eagle etc and frankly they STINK. Not intuitive or overly
attached to autorouting or miniscule component libraries
or mostly some combo of "all of the above".
Is there some middle ground left out there SOMEWHERE ?
I'd love something that has much the look & feel & ease
of Traxmaker but a more modern selection of capabilities,
libraries and export options. My wallet isn't that deep
however... I could afford maybe $250-$350, somewhere in
there.
Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
Rüdiger Leibrandt
For free in use for private, noncommercial and with limited capabilites in
PCB-size and layers. I use it professionayl at work in a payed-for version
able to do bigger PCBs and more layers than the outer two.
David Gravereaux
Emanuele
a7yvm1...@netzero.com
"CAD tools for the electronics sector are generally a nuisance for the
user. For no other piece of software would it be accepted to pay such
horrendous sums of money for such poorly programmed, poorly documented
and faulty programs. Only to give an example: For a mechanical
engineer it is absolutely incomprehensive that a certain tool can
survive on the market which cannot produce output that can be
processed by a manufacturer."
http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu/People/Grad_Students/jbeutel/cad_tools_e.html
I use Cadence for work and I find it to be abysmal; an archaic,
outdated and buggy pile of crap. And slow.
There is definitely something weird in that industry, it is full of
masochists of the highest order. I mean already EEs have to be
masochists, but PCB designers are the next level up.
Why we are stuck with atrocious expensive software is a mystery.
Joel Koltner
news:489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> Circuitmaker, Protel, Traxmaker ... the sub-$200 kind of
> goodies that combined all the good features with intuitive
> no-BS interfaces - gone.
Yeah, although many of them still work OK under Windows XP if you can find a
copy.
Beside Eagle and KiCAD that others mentioned, gEDA is the "heavyweight" of
100% free schematic capture/PCB layout software. Probably doesn't fit your
"good features with intuitive no-BS interfaces," but you might check it out
anyway (it's more "tons of features, interface requires a fair learning curve,
it won't necessarily be easy, but it does get the job done...").
Pulsonix has been slowly upping their prices as they've added features, but
their "performance per dollar" ratio is still quite good -- certainly many
times that of something like OrCAD. (Although some of their "upping the
price" apparently has to do with the weakness of the U.S. dollar...)
This topic comes up regularly here (and on sci.electronics.cad) -- if you
search the archives you'll find long threads discussing the various packages,
pricing, etc.
> Oh sure, some of those boardmakers will generously let you
> use THEIR layout software ... "theirs" in that they've tweaked
> it so you can only send the design to THEIR company instead
> of a competitors - unless you want to toss all your old
> designs and start from scratch.
Some of them (e.g., Advanced Circuits) will give or sell you the regular
Gerber files after you've placed an order through them.
Many packages let you import files from other packages, although it's often a
less-than-perfect translation based on the differing feature sets in each
package (and just bugs in the code that does the import).
> Conspiracy, or racket ?
Schematic capture/PCB layout is a nichey enough market that I think it's
rather difficult to make a living if you're selling the software for a couple
hundred bucks. You do have the occasional individual and small company (e.g.,
Eaglesoft) that's noticeably more efficient than most and can do so, but if
you just round up a bunch of average programmers these days and ask them to
write EDA tools it's not surprising to me what sorts of prices you get by the
time they're done.
> I've looked at some of free/cheap stuff - Vutrax, Pad2Pad,
> Eagle etc and frankly they STINK. Not intuitive or overly
> attached to autorouting or miniscule component libraries
> or mostly some combo of "all of the above".
My only comment here is that "intuitive" is somewhat subjective and "miniscule
component libraries" might actually be a plus -- in most cases you'd want to
build your own component library anyway. :-)
---Joel
Joel Koltner
news:6f73a65d-098a-43dc...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> There is definitely something weird in that industry, it is full of
> masochists of the highest order. I mean already EEs have to be
> masochists, but PCB designers are the next level up.
> Why we are stuck with atrocious expensive software is a mystery.
1) Most companies stick with what they started with, because once something
has become "the company standard" anything different has to be overwhelmingly
better to get most companies to change. Some of the reluctance to change is
legitimate -- there are real re-training/re-entry costs involved -- but much
of it is just human nature: Many people prefer to stick with what's
comfortable for them at the expense of their employer, a couple of very loud
"no, let's not change!" voices are often allowed to outweigh a dozen, "yes, we
should change!" ones, etc.
2) It's not just EDA tools. It's a lot of somewhat nichey industries where
automation software was introduced back in the '80s/early '90s, and often
times the *only* solutions available weren't particularly stellar, but OK for
the day. These programs became entrenched, leaving you with problem #1, even
as far better programs were brought to the market in the late '90s/early otts.
As an example, customer care/billing databases (and their front-ends)
originally designed for small, independent doctor's clinics (and dentist's
offices) have a similar problem: Many still have antiquated user interfaces
with proprietary data formats with few or no options to import/export the
data. The later is often used as a means to try to lock in customers from
switching, by making it much, much more expensive to do so than to stick with
the same program, paying maintenance year after year, rather than changing
ships.
---Joel
Leon
James Arthur
I've done several boards with Sprint-Layout 5.0.
http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
39 Euros, download and go.
(sPlan, their schematic editor, is available for the same
price, but I haven't used it.)
I like Sprint-Layout quite a lot. Particularly, I find the
menus and functions clear, fast, and logical. It's compact,
and easy to make footprints, outputs Gerbers, etc. Control
of trace widths and pads is wonderfully simple.
I've never had it hang or crash.
Its only failing so far is the pin-to-pin autorouter,
which does crappy routings. Protel's EasyTrax did that
very well, and I miss it, but hand-routing isn't difficult.
I love the rubber-banded wiring feature: quickly click
in wires you plan to place and a blue trace appears to
remind you to make each connection.
I mean to try gEDA some time, but this is what I use now.
HTH,
James Arthur
Rüdiger
Well, someone else meantioned it here:
GEDA
Indeed, that's a fine piece of software, and I would have preferred it over
Eagle, but after four years of using Eagle I'm satisfied with what it does
and have all my libraries made in it, so , for GEDA I'd have to redo most
of the stuff. Well, so I stay with Eagle. But when they would rise the
price I'd be gone.
--
Sincerely
Ruediger
JeffM
>[...]Beside Eagle and KiCAD that others mentioned,
>gEDA is the "heavyweight" of 100% free[...]
>
>[...]You do have the occasional individual and small company
>(e.g., Eaglesoft) [...] write EDA tools
>
Eaglesoft writes *flight simulator* software.
The company that produces
the Easily Applicable Graphical Layout Editor
(acronym: EAGLE--all caps) is *Cadsoft*.
>This topic comes up regularly here (and on sci.electronics.cad)
>-- if you search the archives you'll find long threads
>discussing the various packages, pricing, etc.
>
Joel Koltner
news:0b1611f2-5666-4dab...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Eaglesoft writes *flight simulator* software.
Oops! Thanks for the correction, Jeff. :-)
> The company that produces
> the Easily Applicable Graphical Layout Editor
> (acronym: EAGLE--all caps) is *Cadsoft*.
I didn't know it was an acronym before either.
---Joel
Joel
about a 7 out of 10 but have still never seen anything better.
rickman
>
> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
One that is not as well known, but works very well is FreePCB at
freepcb.com. I have used if for commercial boards including a very
dense six layer mixed signal board which I going into production as we
speak!
Rick
wzab
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcb
with gschem (from gEDA) for schematics.
--
HTH, Wojtek
Nico Coesel
>Blackwater wrote:
>> Um ... has there been some kind of conspiracy at work over
>> the past few years to totally drain the marketplace of
>> decent PCB layout/routing software ???
>>
>> Circuitmaker, Protel, Traxmaker ... the sub-$200 kind of
>> goodies that combined all the good features with intuitive
>> no-BS interfaces - gone. Seems they've all been bought-up
>> and destroyed by Altium - which will now generously sell you
>> their "complete system" for more than your slightly-used
>> SUV will get you at trade-in nowadays.
>>
>>
>> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
>> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>>
>
>I've done several boards with Sprint-Layout 5.0.
>
>http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
>
>39 Euros, download and go.
>
>(sPlan, their schematic editor, is available for the same
>price, but I haven't used it.)
Looks nice, but how about importing netlists from other schematic
editors?
--
Programmeren in Almere?
E-mail naar nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
Guy Macon
rickman wrote:
>One that is not as well known, but works very well is FreePCB at
>freepcb.com. I have used if for commercial boards including a very
>dense six layer mixed signal board which I going into production as we
>speak!
Does it have schematic capture? If not, what brand of schematic
capture works well with is?
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
lynchaj
Hi,
I recommend the combination of KiCad and FreeRouting.net. It is an
almost unbeatable combination.
KiCad is free as in beer and speech, runs on Windows and Linux. It
has an interface to use FreeRouting.net for autorouting or manual
routing of PCB traces.
I used KiCad and FreeRouting.net for my N8VEM SBC project. You can
check out a sample on the Google Groups of the SBC PCB and ECB
backplane PCB.
http://groups.google.com/group/n8vem/files?&sort=date
KiCad has large part library support and can import Eagle parts. It
can import and export Specctra and GenCAD as well.
Try KiCad! You'll be happy you did!
Thanks and good luck!
Andrew Lynch
rickman
> rickman wrote:
> >One that is not as well known, but works very well is FreePCB at
> >freepcb.com. I have used if for commercial boards including a very
> >dense six layer mixed signal board which I going into production as we
> >speak!
>
> Does it have schematic capture? If not, what brand of schematic
> capture works well with is?
It is schematic capture agnostic. It only cares about the net list
which should be PADS compatible, IIRC. I used Orcad with it and many
users use TinyCad which is another open source program. I didn't find
TinyCad suitable for my needs, but I am still looking... Orcad is ok,
but I would prefer something open source.
Rick
James Arthur
I don't know. In fact, I'm not even sure either package supports
netlists. I poked around the menus and help, but couldn't find
"import."
That's not a drawback to me--I've been doing large layouts by
hand since I was a kid--but you might find it so.
The OP said he wanted to do quickie boards and get fab files
out. Sprint-Layout does that great, the .EXE is just 2MB,
and it's flaming fast. I love that.
Please don't consider mine the last word on the netlist thing--
I really don't know.
Cheers,
James Arthur
john jardine
"James Arthur" <bogus...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:As2kk.561$rb5.462@trnddc04...
[...]
> I've done several boards with Sprint-Layout 5.0.
>
> http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
>
> 39 Euros, download and go.
>
> (sPlan, their schematic editor, is available for the same
> price, but I haven't used it.)
>
> I like Sprint-Layout quite a lot. Particularly, I find the
> menus and functions clear, fast, and logical. It's compact,
> and easy to make footprints, outputs Gerbers, etc. Control
> of trace widths and pads is wonderfully simple.
>
> I've never had it hang or crash.
>
> Its only failing so far is the pin-to-pin autorouter,
> which does crappy routings. Protel's EasyTrax did that
> very well, and I miss it, but hand-routing isn't difficult.
>
> I love the rubber-banded wiring feature: quickly click
> in wires you plan to place and a blue trace appears to
> remind you to make each connection.
>
> I mean to try gEDA some time, but this is what I use now.
>
> HTH,
> James Arthur
'Till your mention, hadn't come across it before.
Just trying the demo'. Seems fast, no fluff. I really like the milling and
HPGL stuff , though can't seem to find any library items.
James Arthur
The library is extensive, and super-easily accessed, extended,
and modified: items pop up in a toolbar on the right-hand side
of the screen.
Options-->Show Macro-Library.
(I'm not sure how much library you get with the demo.)
Oh, it's limited to four trace layers, if that's a problem
for some. It's not for me. Large boards are fine, metric
or english units, etc.
I've more than recouped my 39 euros just in the time saved
learning the program and its ease of use -- it's logical and
clean to where I've scarcely needed to check the help files.
Just click the icons, and it does what I want. Fast.
It really is a sweet program.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Robert Lacoste
more expensive packages a couple of years ago and we are delighted.
Especially with the mixed signal VSM simulator of course but the PCB design
suite has all the features we need even for quite complex RF designs.
Robert
"Blackwater" <b...@barrk.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
Meindert Sprang
news:4891aae3$0$883$ba4a...@news.orange.fr...
> Give a try to Proteus (www.labcenter.co.uk), we have switched to it from
> more expensive packages a couple of years ago and we are delighted.
> Especially with the mixed signal VSM simulator of course but the PCB
design
> suite has all the features we need even for quite complex RF designs.
How would Proteus compare to the combo OrCAD Schematich and PCB? I am still
running V9.2 here and am very reluctant to upgrade to Cadence.
But I also have a lot of designs in OrCAD....
Meindert
Nico Coesel
>On Jul 30, 11:27=A0am, b...@barrk.net (Blackwater) wrote:
>> Um ... has there been some kind of conspiracy at work over
>> the past few years to totally drain the marketplace of
>> decent PCB layout/routing software ???
>>
>> Circuitmaker, Protel, Traxmaker ... the sub-$200 kind of
>> goodies that combined all the good features with intuitive
>> no-BS interfaces - gone. Seems they've all been bought-up
>> and destroyed by Altium - which will now generously sell you
>> their "complete system" for more than your slightly-used
>> SUV will get you at trade-in nowadays.
>>
>> Well, I don't *need* a "complete system" ... I just need to
>> be able to blast out smallish PCBs using mostly manual routing
>> and create files that the cheap commercial boardmakers can
>> use with their latest machines (lately we seem to see a lot
>> more boards produced by milling technology).
>>
>>
>> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
>> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>
>Hi,
>
>I recommend the combination of KiCad and FreeRouting.net. It is an
>almost unbeatable combination.
>
>KiCad is free as in beer and speech, runs on Windows and Linux. It
>has an interface to use FreeRouting.net for autorouting or manual
>routing of PCB traces.
I tried KiCad last night, but I'm not that impressed. The user
interface is a bit clumsy and I can't find shortcuts. I like CAD
software where most elementary operations have shortcuts so you don't
need the mouse too much.
rickman
Take a look at FreePCB. Nearly all of the commands are through the Fx
keys. In fact, the original versions did not support many commands
via the right mouse button or through the menus. In fact, you
couldn't even click the hot key labels at the bottom of the screen.
That has been changed so that you typically have three options on how
to invoke a command and many have four (menu, right click menu,
clickable hot key label and the hot key itself).
I have been using it enough that I am used to it. There were a few
things I had to get used to, but *nothing* like learning Eagle. I
think the one that bothered me the most is that when you click
something on the screen, if there is overlap it will select a part
first. This can make it hard to select a net or vertex. But that is
solved by using the selection mask on the left side of the screen. So
it works pretty well and a lot of the rough edges have been smoothed
off.
Since it is not commercial software, but rather a program that was
written for the author to use, it gets changed when a rough edge is
pointed out. You don't have to deal with a bureaucracy to get
something improved.
There is a Yahoo group for support, or better, the forum on the
freepcb.com web page which is very active. A couple of people write
supporting software to provide XYRS files, documentation and the
like. All in all it is pretty sweet!
Rick
Scott Seidman
@news.east.earthlink.net:
> Um ... has there been some kind of conspiracy at work over
> the past few years to totally drain the marketplace of
> decent PCB layout/routing software ???
4pcb has a decent free package. Slightly cripple until after your first
order of a board with them, but fully enabled afterward.
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply
Guy Macon
Robert Lacoste wrote:
>Give a try to Proteus (www.labcenter.co.uk), we have switched
>to it from more expensive packages a couple of years ago and
>we are delighted. Especially with the mixed signal VSM simulator
>of course but the PCB design suite has all the features we
>need even for quite complex RF designs.
Interesting product! The prices seem quite reasonable
for what you get.
Current prices:
For 150 Pounds Sterling (~300 UD Dollars) you get:
500 pins maximum,
One Power Planes per layer
Standard Autorouting (not Rip-up and Retry)
No 3D Board Visualisation
No ODB++ Manufacturing Output
No Gate-Swap Optimizer
No Autoplace
For 295 Pounds Sterling (~590 US Dollars) you get:
The above features, except 1000 pins maximum.
For 395 Pounds Sterling (~790 US Dollars) you get:
The above features, except 2000 pins maximum.
For 595 Pounds Sterling (~1190 US Dollars) you get:
1000 pins maximum,
Unlimited Power Planes per layer,
Rip-up and Retry Autorouting
3D Board Visualisation
ODB++ Manufacturing Output
Gate-Swap Optimizer
Autoplace
For 995 Pounds Sterling (~1980 US Dollars) you get:
The above features, except 2000 pins maximum.
For 1225 Pounds Sterling (~2450 US Dollars) you get:
The above features with unlimited pins.
All of the above come with basic simulation.
For advanced simulation, add 195 Pounds Sterling
(~390 US Dollars).
Thet also offer Microcontroller Simulation for
ARM, AVR, HC11, PIC, 8051, Basic Stamp and USB
at prices ranging from 150 Pounds Sterling
(~300 US Dollars) to 395 Pounds Sterling
(~790 US Dollars).
A free demo is available (save and print disabled).
References:
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/ordering/cprices.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/products/pcb_overview.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/products/schematic.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/products/pcblayout.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/products/basicsim.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/products/advancedsim.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/products/vsm_overview.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/vmodels/peripherals.cfm
http://www.labcenter.co.uk/download/prodemo_download.cfm
Leon
wrote:
The Pulsonix software I use does a good job importing OrCAD designs:
Leon
rickman
I have to say that is one of the stranger marketing concepts I have
ever heard of. Provide free software so that your potential customers
can use your services, but cripple it for their first order!
When you say crippled, is that in terms of functionality or working
with a third party?
Rick
Scott Seidman
34fc73...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
It starts out fully functional for use with 4PCB, but it won't produce
Gerber files. After you purchase one board from 4PCB, it will produce
Gerber files.
It's not that bad an idea. You have to produce a reasonably-priced board
with 4pcb, the guys that gave you the software, then you can use it with
whoever you want.
Guy Macon
Scott Seidman wrote:
>
>rickman wrote:
>
>>Scott Seidman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 4pcb has a decent free package. Slightly cripple until
>>> after your first order of a board with them, but fully
>>> enabled afterward.
>>
>> I have to say that is one of the stranger marketing concepts I have
>> ever heard of. Provide free software so that your potential customers
>> can use your services, but cripple it for their first order!
>>
>> When you say crippled, is that in terms of functionality or working
>> with a third party?
>
>It starts out fully functional for use with 4PCB, but it won't produce
>Gerber files. After you purchase one board from 4PCB, it will produce
>Gerber files.
>
>It's not that bad an idea. You have to produce a reasonably-priced
>board with 4pcb, the guys that gave you the software, then you can
>use it with whoever you want.
It has another advantage; some corporations make it really hard
to buy software, but have no problem with buying PCBs. :)
cbarn...@aol.com
> Um ... has there been some kind of conspiracy at work over
> the past few years to totally drain the marketplace of
> decent PCB layout/routing software ???
>
> goodies that combined all the good features with intuitive
> no-BS interfaces - gone. Seems they've all been bought-up
> and destroyed by Altium - which will now generously sell you
> their "complete system" for more than your slightly-used
> SUV will get you at trade-in nowadays.
>
> Well, I don't *need* a "complete system" ... I just need to
> be able to blast out smallish PCBs using mostly manual routing
> and create files that the cheap commercial boardmakers can
> use with their latest machines (lately we seem to see a lot
> more boards produced by milling technology).
>
> use THEIR layout software ... "theirs" in that they've tweaked
> it so you can only send the design to THEIR company instead
> of a competitors - unless you want to toss all your old
> designs and start from scratch.
>
> Conspiracy, or racket ?
>
> For now I'm using my creaky old TraxMaker-3 program. GREAT
> package, EASY to use, LOTS of options, point-n-click and
> spin and drag stuff anywhere you want ... but it's OLD and
> can't do the trick for milled boards. OK if I want to make
> phototemplates and do a few prototype boards myself, but ...
>
> I've looked at some of free/cheap stuff - Vutrax, Pad2Pad,
> Eagle etc and frankly they STINK. Not intuitive or overly
> attached to autorouting or miniscule component libraries
> or mostly some combo of "all of the above".
>
> Is there some middle ground left out there SOMEWHERE ?
> I'd love something that has much the look & feel & ease
> of Traxmaker but a more modern selection of capabilities,
> libraries and export options. My wallet isn't that deep
> however... I could afford maybe $250-$350, somewhere in
> there.
>
> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
Have a look at bartels lite. http://www.bartels.de/bae/bae_en.htm
Jim Granville
Quite a few systems can Import OrCAD SCHs, and some
can import OrCAD PCBs, tho OrCAD PCB is much less common
than the SCH, so fewer bother with that conversion.
-jg
jo...@jjdesigns.fsnet.co.uk
James Arthur wrote:
[...]
> > 'Till your mention, hadn't come across it before.
> > Just trying the demo'. Seems fast, no fluff. I really like the milling and
> > HPGL stuff , though can't seem to find any library items.
> >
> >
>
> The library is extensive, and super-easily accessed, extended,
> and modified: items pop up in a toolbar on the right-hand side
> of the screen.
>
> Options-->Show Macro-Library.
>
> (I'm not sure how much library you get with the demo.)
>
> Oh, it's limited to four trace layers, if that's a problem
> for some. It's not for me. Large boards are fine, metric
> or english units, etc.
>
> I've more than recouped my 39 euros just in the time saved
> learning the program and its ease of use -- it's logical and
> clean to where I've scarcely needed to check the help files.
> Just click the icons, and it does what I want. Fast.
>
> It really is a sweet program.
>
> Cheers,
> James Arthur
Found it thanks!. Has all the bits I was looking for.
My specific needs tend to revolve around knocking up (sodding!)
surface mount chip adapters, with maybe one or two extra components
added for convenience.
For the sake of an hours work with the PC, printer and some etchant I
can have a prototype in hand.
My existing PCB prog' is still a ballache to use even though I've
done a dozen adapters on it over the past year.
Looks like I'll be spending cash on Sprint :)
James Arthur
You'll like the Footprint Wizard then. Specify or design a pad,
enter horizontal and vertical spacings, number of rows and cols,
hit 'go', and the program generates the pattern, with perfect spacing.
Select the lot with the mouse, store it as a macro, and you've got
a new footprint.
Great for BGAs, SMD ICs, connectors, etc.
> For the sake of an hours work with the PC, printer and some etchant I
> can have a prototype in hand.
Yep. For that use and this price it's hard to go wrong.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Frithiof Jensen
"Blackwater" <b...@barrk.net> skrev i meddelelsen
news:489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> Is there some middle ground left out there SOMEWHERE ?
> I'd love something that has much the look & feel & ease
> of Traxmaker but a more modern selection of capabilities,
> libraries and export options. My wallet isn't that deep
> however... I could afford maybe $250-$350, somewhere in
> there.
>
> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>
TARGET perhaps? http://www.pcb-pool.com/ppuk/service_downloads.html or
http://server.ibfriedrich.com/wiki/ibfwikien/index.php?title=Main_Page
This is a German outfit & therefore weird; Who else would slap titties &
latex onto the sales slip of a CAD package ;-)
The product itself is, IMO, solid enough. The freebie (full) version is
bound to pcb-pool though.
Grant Edwards
> TARGET perhaps?
> http://www.pcb-pool.com/ppuk/service_downloads.html or
> http://server.ibfriedrich.com/wiki/ibfwikien/index.php?title=Main_Page
>
> This is a German outfit & therefore weird; Who else would slap
> titties & latex onto the sales slip of a CAD package ;-)
It looks to me like it's supposed to be metal rather than
latex, but it is indeed odd.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I feel partially
at hydrogenated!
visi.com
Mark Borgerson
gra...@visi.com says...
> On 2008-08-02, Frithiof Jensen <frithio...@diespammerdie.jensen.tdcadsl.dk> wrote:
>
> > TARGET perhaps?
> > http://www.pcb-pool.com/ppuk/service_downloads.html or
> > http://server.ibfriedrich.com/wiki/ibfwikien/index.php?title=Main_Page
> >
> > This is a German outfit & therefore weird; Who else would slap
> > titties & latex onto the sales slip of a CAD package ;-)
>
> It looks to me like it's supposed to be metal rather than
> latex, but it is indeed odd.
>
>
Mark Borgerson
Didi
> ....
> You'll like the Footprint Wizard then. Specify or design a pad,
> enter horizontal and vertical spacings, number of rows and cols,
> hit 'go', and the program generates the pattern, with perfect spacing.
>
> Select the lot with the mouse, store it as a macro, and you've got
> a new footprint.
>
> Great for BGAs, SMD ICs, connectors, etc.
I thought most if not all could do that - looks like I have been
overestimating
the development over the years....
I use my (own written back in the 80-s) graphics editor, selecting
some
stuff then repeating it like an array is a basic feature. Then
selecting some
objects and defining that as a block - insertable at various scale
factors
and angles - is also inherent...
Like you said you were used to I am doing all the routing by hand,
just
using the editor. Here is a demo-mess picture I did not so long ago,
shows
a board and my 20+ years old editor (runing under an old system
emulated
in a DPS window, though - much faster than back then):
http://tgi-sci.com/dsv/dsvdemo.gif
Didi
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/
Original message: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.arch.embedded/msg/0adb3774bdcf553e?dmode=source
john jardine
> jo...@jjdesigns.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
[...]
>
> You'll like the Footprint Wizard then. Specify or design a pad,
> enter horizontal and vertical spacings, number of rows and cols,
> hit 'go', and the program generates the pattern, with perfect spacing.
>
> Select the lot with the mouse, store it as a macro, and you've got
> a new footprint.
>
> Great for BGAs, SMD ICs, connectors, etc.
>
> > For the sake of an hours work with the PC, printer and some etchant I
> > can have a prototype in hand.
>
> Yep. For that use and this price it's hard to go wrong.
>
> Cheers,
> James Arthur
Yep. Bought one.
Did an adapter PCB. Pleasure to not need the help file.
Methinks Sprint and I will be friends.
Alt Beer
"Blackwater" <b...@barrk.net> wrote in message
news:489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
CIRCAD Version 5 (OmniGlyph)
http://www.holophase.com/index.html
One of the easiest to learn. I was laying out boards after a few mins.
Logical user interface. Eagle V4 it drives me nuts, tried it several times
and gave up each time. The user manual and tutorial also crap.
rickman
> "James Arthur" <bogusabd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
I'm curious, what does this package do that FreePCB doesn't?
Rick
Grant Edwards
At least Eagle isn't a "windows-only" product. Even if it
takes a bit longer to learn Eagle, it's certainly nothing in
comparison to the time/money one would have to waste installing
Windows and learning to use and maintain it. :)
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! If I had a Q-TIP, I
at could prevent th' collapse
visi.com of NEGOTIATIONS!!
rickman
> On 2008-08-03, Alt Beer <exam...@example.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Blackwater" <b...@barrk.net> wrote in message
> >news:489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> >> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
> >> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>
> > CIRCAD Version 5 (OmniGlyph)
> >http://www.holophase.com/index.html
> > One of the easiest to learn. I was laying out boards after a few mins.
> > Logical user interface. Eagle V4 it drives me nuts, tried it several times
> > and gave up each time. The user manual and tutorial also crap.
>
> At least Eagle isn't a "windows-only" product. Even if it
> takes a bit longer to learn Eagle, it's certainly nothing in
> comparison to the time/money one would have to waste installing
> Windows and learning to use and maintain it. :)
There are any number of better options that run under other operating
systems. My understanding is that there aren't many programs that
won't run under MacOS or Linux using available tools. I am told that
FreePCB works just fine on both of these systems.
Rick
Guy Macon
Grant Edwards wrote:
>At least Eagle isn't a "windows-only" product. Even if it
>takes a bit longer to learn Eagle, it's certainly nothing in
>comparison to the time/money one would have to waste installing
>Windows and learning to use and maintain it. :)
Alas, there are still a number of important CAD packages that
run only on Windows (I am looking at you, AutoCAD) so I run
windows in a VMWare virtual Machine under Linux. With a
stripped-down version of Windows (using XPLite) and only one
application that loads full-scree from the startup folder,
you hardly have to think about the fact that the application
is running under Windows. And the VMWare snapshot feature
lets you go back when Windows becomes corrupted or flaky.
James Arthur
> I use my (own written back in the 80-s) graphics
> editor, selecting some stuff then repeating it like
> an array is a basic feature. Then selecting some
> objects and defining that as a block - insertable
> at various scale factors and angles - is also inherent...
>
> Like you said you were used to I am doing all the
> routing by hand, just using the editor. Here is a demo-mess
> picture I did not so long ago, shows a board and my 20+ years
> old editor (runing under an old system emulated
> in a DPS window, though - much faster than back then):
>
> http://tgi-sci.com/dsv/dsvdemo.gif
>
> Didi
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
>
> http://www.tgi-sci.com
That's very nice artwork Dimiter. If it's your own
graphics editor, how do you get PCB fabrication information
out of it? (Gerber files, or photoplots, etc.)
Cheers,
James Arthur
James Arthur
Nothing that I'm aware of, except perhaps Sprint-Layout
has a wonderful, sensible menu system that makes it super
easy to use. I loathe wasted multi-level clicks,
mode-changes, etc. I chose Sprint-Layout as being small,
fast, inexpensive, yet professionally supported. Small,
nimble software that really works is a joy to use.
FreePCB looks cool and has lots of extra features. That's
enticing, but not always good--I downloaded it for a look
when I've got the time to learn it--but I'm likely to
keep using Sprint-Layout for the time being. It works,
gets the job done, and it's actually fun.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Didi
> ....
>
> That's very nice artwork Dimiter. If it's your own
> graphics editor, how do you get PCB fabrication information
> out of it? (Gerber files, or photoplots, etc.)
Thanks, the PCB photos are indeed artworked over a DPS
screenshot - I did it just for ad purposes (my idea for that,
that is :-).
The graphics editor has Gerber, hpgl, Excellon and some other
(long dead) output formats. I remember reverse engineering the
Excellon format by looking at piece of punched tape back then
(the fact that is is so simple did help a lot, of course).
It used to run on a 6809 based system - during the 80-s, the PC
based PCB stuff was just unusable compared to it. Now the emulated
incarnation is about 20 times faster (than the 2 x 2MHz 6809 it
used to run on) and is still quite good for my layouts, it waits
for me, I don't have to wait for it at all really.
Didi
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/
Original message: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.arch.embedded/msg/fcf94963a8a59e82?dmode=source
JeffM
>>>>'Till your mention, hadn't come across it before.
>>>>Just trying the demo'. Seems fast, no fluff. I really like the milling
>>>>and HPGL stuff , though can't seem to find any library items.
>>>>
>>James Arthur wrote:
>>>The library is extensive, and super-easily accessed, extended,
>>>and modified: items pop up in a toolbar on the right-hand side
>>>of the screen.
>>>
>>>Options-->Show Macro-Library.
>>>
>>>(I'm not sure how much library you get with the demo.)
>>>
>>>Oh, it's limited to four trace layers, if that's a problem
>>>for some. It's not for me. Large boards are fine,
>>>metric or english units, etc.
>>>
>>>I've more than recouped my 39 euros just in the time saved
>>>learning the program and its ease of use -- it's logical and
>>>clean to where I've scarcely needed to check the help files.
>>>Just click the icons, and it does what I want. Fast.
>>>
>>>It really is a sweet program.
>>>
>>Found it thanks!. Has all the bits I was looking for.
>>My specific needs tend to revolve around knocking up (sodding!)
>>surface mount chip adapters, with maybe one or two extra components
>>added for convenience.
>>
>You'll like the Footprint Wizard then. Specify or design a pad,
>enter horizontal and vertical spacings, number of rows and cols,
>hit 'go', and the program generates the pattern, with perfect spacing.
>
>Select the lot with the mouse, store it as a macro,
>and you've got a new footprint.
>
>Great for BGAs, SMD ICs, connectors, etc.
>
>>For the sake of an hours work with the PC, printer
>>and some etchant I can have a prototype in hand.
>
>Yep. For that use and this price it's hard to go wrong.
For all that you guys *did* blockquote in this bit of salesmanship,
you managed to snip out the _name_ of the app
for those who would stumble upon this post: Sprint-Layout.
Alt Beer
> you managed to snip out the _name_ of the app
> for those who would stumble upon this post: Sprint-Layout.
Just tried the demo. Managed to create a layout without reading the manual.
The icons and mouse clicks work the way you think they should... well they
did for me. I'll continue trying it.
rickman
>
> >john@ jjdesigns.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
> >>Found it thanks!. Has all the bits I was looking for.
> >>My specific needs tend to revolve around knocking up (sodding!)
> >>surface mount chip adapters, with maybe one or two extra components
> >>added for convenience.
>
> James Arthur wrote:
> >You'll like the Footprint Wizard then. Specify or design a pad,
> >enter horizontal and vertical spacings, number of rows and cols,
> >hit 'go', and the program generates the pattern, with perfect spacing.
>
> >Select the lot with the mouse, store it as a macro,
> >and you've got a new footprint.
>
> >Great for BGAs, SMD ICs, connectors, etc.
>
> >>For the sake of an hours work with the PC, printer
> >>and some etchant I can have a prototype in hand.
>
> >Yep. For that use and this price it's hard to go wrong.
>
> For all that you guys *did* blockquote in this bit of salesmanship,
> you managed to snip out the _name_ of the app
> for those who would stumble upon this post: Sprint-Layout.
When using copper pour, does this program tell you if any sections of
the copper are not connected to the others? Does it do a proper job
of keeping track of pin connectivity when pins are connected to the
copper pour (same thing really)?
I used FreePCB and it did not do this. You could have traces cut up a
copper plane and it would not warn you that they were disconnected.
It would also not warn you if this resulted in pins being unconnected
from the rest of the net. Once you connect a pin to the copper plane,
it considers it connected to the entire net.
I don't recall FreePCB having any other issues that concerned me. It
also has a pretty nice user interface and did not require a lot of
learning except for how to do a few things like connect pins to copper
pours. But it has a very helpful bunch of users and an active support
forum. The support is actually ***MUCH*** better than any commercial
product I have ever used!
Rick
Guy Macon
Alt Beer wrote:
>Just tried the demo. Managed to create a layout without reading the manual.
>The icons and mouse clicks work the way you think they should... well they
>did for me. I'll continue trying it.
Find it here:
http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
sPlan: schematic editor
Sprint-Layout: PWB Layout
LochMaster: tool for strip board projects
FrontDesigner: front panel CAD
DMM-ProfiLab / Digital-ProfiLab / ProfiLab-Expert
/ AudioWave" a seroes of products somewhat like labview
Each costs 39.9 Euros (roughly 61.6 US Dollars).
Alt Beer
news:HOCdnTwj94H...@giganews.com...
The people at Eagle should try it out and learn something from the
experience.... icons and mouse clicks working the way you think they should
Chris Maryan
Actually, the latest version of Eagle (5.x) goes a long way towards
being more standard-behaviour compliant (right click context menu,
ctrl-z for undo, etc.)
Joel Koltner
news:nHzmk.50191$hR4...@newsfe24.ams2...
> The people at Eagle should try it out and learn something from the
> experience.... icons and mouse clicks working the way you think they should
I fully expect that the folks at Eagle know how most people think icons and
mouse clicks should work and are simply convinced that there way is better.
:-)
I used ProBoard/ProNet way-back-when on an Amiga computer and it was the same
way -- made little attempt to use the standard Amiga OS conventions of
"mousing around," instead substituting what they thought was "better."
Robert Baer
requisite Gerbers?
Guy Macon
Yup. Gerber for the traces, Excellon for the drilling, and HPGL
with tool path calculation if you prefer isolation milling.
They also have a .lay file format with some vague talk of extra
dimensioning info.
Alt Beer
>>>
>>>>Just tried the demo. Managed to create a layout without reading the
>>>>manual.
>>>>The icons and mouse clicks work the way you think they should... well
>>>>they
>>>>did for me. I'll continue trying it.
>>>
>>> Find it here:
>>requisite Gerbers?
>
> Yup. Gerber for the traces, Excellon for the drilling, and HPGL
> with tool path calculation if you prefer isolation milling.
> They also have a .lay file format with some vague talk of extra
> dimensioning info.
> --
> Guy Macon
> <http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
Re Sprint-Layout
I am trying to make a standard 16 pin dil footprint with rectangular pads
with through hole. There doesn't seem to be a way to specify a drill hole
for other than a round pad? Rectangular pads are assumed to be smt.
Am I doing something wrong?
James Arthur
I can edit any pad, and make it any size/shape I want,
with any drill size.
Sprint-Layout comes with a bunch of DIP patterns pre-defined,
so I'm not sure exactly why you need a custom one, but here's
one way to do it:
1) Open the Macro toolbar by clicking on the icon, then
2) choose a DIP pattern from the list.
The pattern will appear in the bottom of the window.
3) Drag and drop the pattern onto your board.
4) Unlock the pattern by clicking on the Unlock icon.
This breaks the DIP pattern into individual pads. Now
you can edit each pad however you want.
If the Properties sidebar isn't visible, right-click a
pad to turn it on.
There you can adjust the pad shape, dimensions, and
drill size.
If you want to save the edit as a new pattern, select
the whole, lock it all together with the "Lock" icon,
then copy at will, or save as a new macro.
HTH,
James Arthur
Alt Beer
Excellent, many thanks.
This is the best layout program I've tried.
john jardine
Delightfully straightforward.
As it happens, I've just finished a design for an industrial test unit and
not looking forward to building up a prototype for demonstrating.
The prog' has proved easy to use, so thought I'd quickly lay down two
relays and a connector strip on a PCB, as these are a ballache to wire up
by hand. 3 hours of 'might as well just add this other bit' and the
complete PCB popped out.
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/3205/freday3.gif
It's 'iffy' but I don't really enjoy this kind of thing and there is no way
I plan to do anything bigger,( 3 hours sat in front of a screen and I'm
chewing carpet) but I'm surprised how much could be done in the time. Sprint
was obviously written by some kind of engineering person.
Normally sub' out PCB designs but as this test unit is a one-off, then may
as well use the layout and save a few bob :).
Joerg
Neat. Hint: If this is for your typical 13A UK mains circuit make the
traces fatter and mind the limitations of thermal reliefs if used.
[...]
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
James Arthur
<snip Sprint-Layout DIP-pattern-making directions>
> As it happens, I've just finished a design for an industrial test unit and
> not looking forward to building up a prototype for demonstrating.
> The prog' has proved easy to use, so thought I'd quickly lay down two
> relays and a connector strip on a PCB, as these are a ballache to wire up
> by hand. 3 hours of 'might as well just add this other bit' and the
> complete PCB popped out.
> http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/3205/freday3.gif
> It's 'iffy' but I don't really enjoy this kind of thing and there is no way
> I plan to do anything bigger,( 3 hours sat in front of a screen and I'm
> chewing carpet) but I'm surprised how much could be done in the time. Sprint
> was obviously written by some kind of engineering person.
Nice looking board. I'm due for a layout or two myself.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Robert Baer
> Um ... has there been some kind of conspiracy at work over
> the past few years to totally drain the marketplace of
> decent PCB layout/routing software ???
>
> Circuitmaker, Protel, Traxmaker ... the sub-$200 kind of
> goodies that combined all the good features with intuitive
> no-BS interfaces - gone. Seems they've all been bought-up
> and destroyed by Altium - which will now generously sell you
> their "complete system" for more than your slightly-used
> SUV will get you at trade-in nowadays.
>
> Well, I don't *need* a "complete system" ... I just need to
> be able to blast out smallish PCBs using mostly manual routing
> and create files that the cheap commercial boardmakers can
> use with their latest machines (lately we seem to see a lot
> more boards produced by milling technology).
>
> Oh sure, some of those boardmakers will generously let you
> use THEIR layout software ... "theirs" in that they've tweaked
> it so you can only send the design to THEIR company instead
> of a competitors - unless you want to toss all your old
> designs and start from scratch.
>
> Conspiracy, or racket ?
>
> For now I'm using my creaky old TraxMaker-3 program. GREAT
> package, EASY to use, LOTS of options, point-n-click and
> spin and drag stuff anywhere you want ... but it's OLD and
> can't do the trick for milled boards. OK if I want to make
> phototemplates and do a few prototype boards myself, but ...
>
> I've looked at some of free/cheap stuff - Vutrax, Pad2Pad,
> Eagle etc and frankly they STINK. Not intuitive or overly
> attached to autorouting or miniscule component libraries
> or mostly some combo of "all of the above".
>
> Is there some middle ground left out there SOMEWHERE ?
> I'd love something that has much the look & feel & ease
> of Traxmaker but a more modern selection of capabilities,
> libraries and export options. My wallet isn't that deep
> however... I could afford maybe $250-$350, somewhere in
> there.
>
> Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
> Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>
Of all mentioned here, the two that seems to stand out are
Circad/OmniGlyph and Sprint-Layout.
Which of these is easiest to use for all PCB aspects from schematic
entry to making all of the requisite Gerbers in industry-standard form
(ie each side properly mirrored or not as required)?
steve
> "Blackwater" <b...@barrk.net> wrote in message
>
> news:489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
>
> > Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
> > Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>
> One of the easiest to learn. I was laying out boards after a few mins.
> Logical user interface. Eagle V4 it drives me nuts, tried it several times
> and gave up each time. The user manual and tutorial also crap.
I had the same experience with Eagle, too bad they can't offer an
optional front end that follows the windows standard (for us folks
that prefer window applications).
Using Eagle is like driving in England on the other side of the rode
while standing on my head with a mirror as my only view of road, I
really have no interest in learning how to do that.
Chris H
<f3a5a323-b309-4431...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
steve <bungalo...@yahoo.com> writes
Point of order we drive on the right side of the road. It's you who you
drive on the other side..... :-)
I use Proteus from Labcenter (www.labcenter.co.uk) Good systems
very well featured and not expensive.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
James Arthur
I have, like, and recommend Sprint-Layout, but AFAICT it does
not support netlists or netlist import from a schematic program.
I throw up the parts an' route 'em manually, which is what I'd do
anyhow (autorouters have never pleased me).
S-L lets you quickly click in rats-nest wiring to remind you
of where and what to route; I like that feature a lot.
If you want netlists don't forget FreePCB (www.freepcb.com), mentioned
by rickman. That looks pretty nice. Also consider
PCB from the gEDA project, http://www.geda.seul.org/
HTH,
James Arthur
Peter Bennett
<dagmarg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I have, like, and recommend Sprint-Layout, but AFAICT it does
>not support netlists or netlist import from a schematic program.
>I throw up the parts an' route 'em manually, which is what I'd do
>anyhow (autorouters have never pleased me).
>
>S-L lets you quickly click in rats-nest wiring to remind you
>of where and what to route; I like that feature a lot.
You say that Sprint-Layout does not support netlists, but the above
paragraph implies to me that there is _some_ transfer of connection
data from the related schematic program.
So, is there, or is there not, the ability to transfer component and
connection data from the schematic to PCB, whether by an explicit
netlist or otherwise? (Protel/Altium links between sch and pcb
without explicitly generating netlists.)
>
>If you want netlists don't forget FreePCB (www.freepcb.com), mentioned
>by rickman. That looks pretty nice. Also consider
>PCB from the gEDA project, http://www.geda.seul.org/
>
>HTH,
>James Arthur
--
Peter Bennett, VE7CEI
peterbb4 (at) interchange.ubc.ca
GPS and NMEA info: http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter
Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vancouver.powersquadron.ca
James Arthur
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:43:40 -0700 (PDT), James Arthur
>
> >I have, like, and recommend Sprint-Layout, but AFAICT it does
> >not support netlists or netlist import from a schematic program.
> >I throw up the parts an' route 'em manually, which is what I'd do
> >anyhow (autorouters have never pleased me).
>
> >S-L lets you quickly click in rats-nest wiring to remind you
> >of where and what to route; I like that feature a lot.
>
> You say that Sprint-Layout does not support netlists, but the above
> paragraph implies to me that there is _some_ transfer of connection
> data from the related schematic program.
>
> So, is there, or is there not, the ability to transfer component and
> connection data from the schematic to PCB, whether by an explicit
> netlist or otherwise? (Protel/Altium links between sch and pcb
> without explicitly generating netlists.)
Not that I can detect.
Here's the website:
http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
What I called call the rats-nest feature they call "connections /
rubberbands"; click point A, click point B, and a fine line appears
from A to B. You then route either manually or with the pin-to-pin
autorouter (not particularly useful, IMO). The feature is described
briefly on the webpage above.
I find it super helpful; it keeps you from forgetting connections or
from forgetting connections. It's manual, but I like it.
Sprint-Layout does have a full complement of output files--
Gerber, Excellon, and isolation paths for PCB milling--
but no import or export of netlists AFAICT.
You could always e-mail them and ask to be
sure. I don't use those features, so I might've
missed something.
>
> >If you want netlists don't forget FreePCB (www.freepcb.com), mentioned
> >by rickman. That looks pretty nice. Also consider
> >PCB from the gEDA project,http://www.geda.seul.org/
Oh yes, another for the "free" list is KiCAD, which I assume
everyone has heard of. I haven't tried it.
http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/
HTH,
James Arthur
James Arthur
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:43:40 -0700 (PDT), James Arthur
> <dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >I have, like, and recommend Sprint-Layout, but AFAICT it does
> >not support netlists or netlist import from a schematic program.
> >I throw up the parts an' route 'em manually, which is what I'd do
> >anyhow (autorouters have never pleased me).
> >S-L lets you quickly click in rats-nest wiring to remind you
> >of where and what to route; I like that feature a lot.
> You say that Sprint-Layout does not support netlists, but the above
> paragraph implies to me that there is _some_ transfer of connection
> data from the related schematic program.
> So, is there, or is there not, the ability to transfer component and
> connection data from the schematic to PCB, whether by an explicit
> netlist or otherwise? (Protel/Altium links between sch and pcb
> without explicitly generating netlists.)
Not that I can detect.
Here's the website:
http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
What I called call the rats-nest feature they call "connections /
rubberbands"; click point A, click point B, and a fine line appears
from A to B. You then route either manually or with the pin-to-pin
autorouter (works, could route better, IMO). Click the "remove
connections" button and the rubberbands for completed routes are
automatically removed (the thin reminder line disappears), leaving
the unfinished routes. The feature is described briefly on the
webpage above.
I find it super helpful; it keeps you from forgetting connections or
from making wrong ones. It's manual, but I like it.
Sprint-Layout does have a full complement of output files--
Gerber, Excellon, and isolation paths for PCB milling--
but no import or export of netlists AFAICT.
You could always e-mail them and ask to be
sure. I don't use those features, so I might've
missed something.
> >If you want netlists don't forget FreePCB (www.freepcb.com), mentioned
> >by rickman. That looks pretty nice. Also consider
> >PCB from the gEDA project,http://www.geda.seul.org/
Oh yes, another for the "free" list is KiCAD, which I assume
everyone has heard of. I haven't tried it.
http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/
Sprint-Layout works well for me so I'm likely
to stick with it, but it would be interesting to
hear reports about the other packages.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Leon
Pulsonix exports netlists in these formats:
Accel PCB
PADS PCB
Zuken Rinf (Cadstar and Visula)
P-CAD PCB
OrCAD II DOS
Viewdraw
Any netlist format can be generated using the Report Maker.
Leon
Joel Koltner
news:a1a115e6-f8bc-485c...@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Pulsonix exports netlists in these formats:
[deleted]
...Except that, unlike many pay-ware schematic capture programs, it can't
import "was/is" (ECO) files to update the schematic based on connectivity and
component changes made in your (non-Pulsonix) layout package of choice.
Granted, for many people this is probably a rather minor quibble -- if you've
already given up cross-probing and pin/gate swapping (as happens with most
scenarios where you're using schematic capture from a different vendor than
PCB layout), not being able to back annotate probably isn't that much more of
a loss.
---Joel
Chris Carlen
> In message
> <f3a5a323-b309-4431...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> steve <bungalo...@yahoo.com> writes
>> On Aug 3, 1:27 pm, "Alt Beer" <exam...@example.com> wrote:
>>> "Blackwater" <b...@barrk.net> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:489081d0...@news.east.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>> > Is there any hope ? Something I've missed ? Winders ? Linux ?
>>> > Address of the "Society For The Prevention of Software Rip-Offs" ???
>>>
>>> CIRCAD Version 5 (OmniGlyph)http://www.holophase.com/index.html
>>> One of the easiest to learn. I was laying out boards after a few mins.
>>> Logical user interface. Eagle V4 it drives me nuts, tried it several
>>> times
>>> and gave up each time. The user manual and tutorial also crap.
>>
>> I had the same experience with Eagle, too bad they can't offer an
>> optional front end that follows the windows standard (for us folks
>> that prefer window applications).
>>
>> Using Eagle is like driving in England on the other side of the rode
>> while standing on my head with a mirror as my only view of road, I
>> really have no interest in learning how to do that.
Heh heh. I have always used Eagle on Linux, and found no confusion. I
think this is due to the fact that just about every program on Linux is
written with a different GUI toolkit. You never even know when
double-click vs. a single-click will make something happen. So you
learn to be flexible. The result is that something as subtle as Eagle's
inconsistency with standard Windoze apps. grammar easily goes unnoticed.
What's even more fun is when the same app. changes GUI toolkits from one
version to another. That seems to have happened with OpenOffice, now
using the KDE dialog boxes. On my newest Linux machines it seems every
program has a different file dialog compared to my older Linux version.
Completely ridiculous. But, at least it's not Windoze.
--
Good day!
____________________________________
CRC
crobcRE...@BOGUSsbcglobal.net
NOTE, delete texts: "REMOVETHIS" and
"BOGUS" from email address to reply.
Joel Koltner
news:esAsk.19328$mh5....@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
> I think this is due to the fact that just about every program on Linux is
> written with a different GUI toolkit. You never even know when double-click
> vs. a single-click will make something happen.
Ding ding ding! Yeah, you've sure got that right. An incosistent user
interface is one of the major hurdles to get "mass market" acceptance of Unix.
Things are much better these days than, e.g., 5-10 years ago, though.
Unix has a similar problem with configuration files... everyone and their
brother invented their own format for storing settings (since there's still no
standard central repository for settings as the registry in Windows provides),
and while most are simple enough to figure out via examination of what's
already there, many are somewhat "brittle" as well (the common example being
how easy it is to break X windows by, e.g., leaving out a semi-colon in
Xorg.conf ... sheesh...)
It took years for those in the Unix world to even get together on something as
simple as how new programs should be programmatically added to a "start" menu;
happily the Gnome and KDE guys both seem to play nice on this issue today.
Michael N. Moran
> Unix has a similar problem with configuration files...
> everyone and their brother invented their own format for
> storing settings (since there's still no standard central
> repository for settings as the registry in Windows
> provides),
Like the registry, which is *so* much better ;)
> and while most are simple enough to figure out via
> examination of what's already there,
[Using a simple text editor]
> many are somewhat "brittle" as well (the common example
> being how easy it is to break X windows by, e.g., leaving
> out a semi-colon in Xorg.conf ... sheesh...)
Fortunately, the Windoze registry is intuitive *and* robust.
> It took years for those in the Unix world to even get
> together on something as simple as how new programs
> should be programmatically added to a "start" menu;
> happily the Gnome and KDE guys both seem to play nice on
> this issue today.
As opposed to the years that it took Mirco$oft to figure out
how to do preemptive multi-tasking?
But I digress :-P
--
Michael N. Moran (h) 770 516 7918
5009 Old Field Ct. (c) 678 521 5460
Kennesaw, GA, USA 30144 http://mnmoran.org
"So often times it happens, that we live our lives in chains
and we never even know we have the key."
"Already Gone" by Jack Tempchin (recorded by The Eagles)
The Beatles were wrong: 1 & 1 & 1 is 1
Joel Koltner
news:%aBsk.16396$kh2....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> Like the registry, which is *so* much better ;)
It's better than the *NIX approach in that there are standard tools and APIs
for creating, editing, and saving individual entries, branchs, etc. Is it
great? No. But I haven't seen any "great" answers to the problem -- storing
configuration settings is such a general problem that there really aren't any
great one-size-fits-all solutions, I expect.
> Fortunately, the Windoze registry is intuitive *and* robust.
Actually, yes -- the arrangement is reasonably intuitive, and it keeps backup
copies of itself around to provide some degree of robustness. (And as with
*NIX text configuration files, you can certainly make as many manual backups
as you feel like.)
> As opposed to the years that it took Mirco$oft to figure out
> how to do preemptive multi-tasking?
No one considered Windows 3.1/95/98 to be in the same class of operating
systems as *NIX, you know. :-) That started with Windows NT, which had plenty
of "real OS" programmers on the team (including David Cutler, who had done
plenty of VMS development... and one might argue he learned from many of his
mistakes there? :-) ).
I wouldn't argue that Microsoft is particularly good at innovation... but they
are good at noticing what's becoming popular in the market and then copying
those features for their own OS.
---Joel
Grant Edwards
>> many are somewhat "brittle" as well (the common example
>> being how easy it is to break X windows by, e.g., leaving
>> out a semi-colon in Xorg.conf ... sheesh...)
>
> Fortunately, the Windoze registry is intuitive *and* robust.
Thanks. That made me laugh out loud. :)
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! An INK-LING? Sure --
at TAKE one!! Did you BUY any
visi.com COMMUNIST UNIFORMS??
AZ Nomad
>"Michael N. Moran" <mnm...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:%aBsk.16396$kh2....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> Like the registry, which is *so* much better ;)
>It's better than the *NIX approach in that there are standard tools and APIs
>for creating, editing, and saving individual entries, branchs, etc. Is it
>great? No. But I haven't seen any "great" answers to the problem -- storing
>configuration settings is such a general problem that there really aren't any
>great one-size-fits-all solutions, I expect.
>> Fortunately, the Windoze registry is intuitive *and* robust.
>Actually, yes -- the arrangement is reasonably intuitive, and it keeps backup
>copies of itself around to provide some degree of robustness. (And as with
>*NIX text configuration files, you can certainly make as many manual backups
>as you feel like.)
>> As opposed to the years that it took Mirco$oft to figure out
>> how to do preemptive multi-tasking?
>No one considered Windows 3.1/95/98 to be in the same class of operating
>systems as *NIX, you know. :-) That started with Windows NT, which had plenty
>of "real OS" programmers on the team (including David Cutler, who had done
>plenty of VMS development... and one might argue he learned from many of his
>mistakes there? :-) ).
Oh yeah, and if it gets corrupted, you lose your entire system.
Fucking wonderful.
bungalo...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> >> Using Eagle is like driving in England on the other side of the rode
> >> while standing on my head with a mirror as my only view of road, I
> >> really have no interest in learning how to do that.
>
> Heh heh. I have always used Eagle on Linux, and found no confusion. I
> think this is due to the fact that just about every program on Linux is
> written with a different GUI toolkit. You never even know when
> double-click vs. a single-click will make something happen. So you
> learn to be flexible. The result is that something as subtle as Eagle's
> inconsistency with standard Windoze apps. grammar easily goes unnoticed.
>
> What's even more fun is when the same app. changes GUI toolkits from one
> version to another. That seems to have happened with OpenOffice, now
> using the KDE dialog boxes. On my newest Linux machines it seems every
> program has a different file dialog compared to my older Linux version.
> Completely ridiculous. But, at least it's not Windoze.
>
> --
> Good day!
>
> ____________________________________
> CRC
> crobcREMOVET...@BOGUSsbcglobal.net
> NOTE, delete texts: "REMOVETHIS" and
> "BOGUS" from email address to reply.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I guess I'll never understand the attraction of linux, guys I know
will spend all afternoon just to get something to start up, usually
some bizarre entry in a config file needs to changed, Windows may be
crappy/buggy/inefficient but at least it works
DJ Delorie
Not to start another flame war, but...
"bungalo...@yahoo.com" <bungalo...@yahoo.com> writes:
> usually some bizarre entry in a config file needs to changed,
As opposed to Windows, where lots of stuff just can't be changed if it
doesn't do what you want.
> Windows may be crappy/buggy/inefficient
A good reason to run Linux ;-)
> but at least it works
In my personal experience, my Linux machines are more reliable than my
Windows machines. And this includes my wife and kids using a blend of
each on a daily basis.
And my Linux DVD player has a "menu" button that *always* brings you
to the menu, even if the DVD author doesn't want you to skip the
commercials.
Even my furnace runs Linux :-)
Chris Carlen
> I guess I'll never understand the attraction of linux, guys I know
> will spend all afternoon just to get something to start up, usually
> some bizarre entry in a config file needs to changed, Windows may be
> crappy/buggy/inefficient but at least it works
That is an understandable sentiment.
For me, the investment in time to get a Linux system functional to the
degree needed for all aspects of my work and home use is tremendous,
often taking months to fully iron out everything. The effort tapers off
somewhat exponentially from full-time for the first couple days, to
hours a day for the first week or two, to a few hours here and there as
items of lesser importance need to be resolved.
Once I am done I tend not to upgrade until I replace the hardware. I
keep my work and personal (home) PCs on about a 3 year replacement schedule.
So that means about 2.75 years of almost zero maintenance operation.
One benefit for me is that the up front investment is less painful than
the distributed pain of lost work and chronic frustration of dealing
with a marginally stable OS. Plus the initial investment has some
intellectual fulfillment value as I learn new things in the process, and
at least there is usually a solution. Thus, there is a systematic
process of discovery and the attendant pleasure in solving the problem.
With an unstable buggy system, there is no solution. You just have to
live with it. So the time is urinated away gradually, but with each
loss, there is no attendant reward or satisfaction.
The other benefits are that I really like the Linux file system concept,
and the multiple desktops really hooked me a long time ago. I started
using Linux as my primary OS in 1996. This was brought about by a
permanently psychologically damaging experience with Windows, in which a
large amount of work was lost despite making backups, as Windows
annihilated both my main hard drive AND the floppy drive backup. 8 out
of 40 hours lost, the whole thing would have been gone had I not also
been backing up to a 2nd hard drive.
It's been Linux ever since and never again have I had a similar
experience. My workhorse applications like Eagle can run all day
without crashing, for months on end. I have had about 2-3 Eagle crashes
I think, in the past 8 years.
Unfortunately I must use some Windows programs, so I use VMware.
Interestingly, Windows tends to run better in VMware than on native
hardware.
--
Good day!
____________________________________
CRC
crobcRE...@BOGUSsbcglobal.net
AZ Nomad
>> Windows may be crappy/buggy/inefficient
And linux doesn't have those maddening delays and lockups that windows has where
the desktop will freeze, or be unable to display stuff like the
desktop/new/folder command in under 10 seconds.
JosephKK
You seem to have a different take on it.
Mark Borgerson
I hope it does so in reasonably prompt fashion.
I think my Motorola cable box/DVR runs embedded linux. It regularly
gets so far behind (15-30 seconds) in processing commands from the
remote control that it's usually best to simply walk away for a few
minutes until it catches up!
> Even my furnace runs Linux :-)
>
Cool---but hopefully not when it's supposed to be warm!
Mark Borgerson
JosephKK
Since MSwin 2000 the tools are reasonably reliable, though well short
of good. One of the biggest problems is doofii getting into the
registry with regedit and mangling their system (often without
protecting themselves nor learning diddly from their misadventures).
Guy Macon
AZ Nomad wrote:
>Oh yeah, and if it gets corrupted, you lose your entire system.
>Fucking wonderful.
Do the smart thing. Set up an automated backup system that does
a full unattended restore with one command. then try it on a
new blank hard disk. If I lose my entire sytem (Windows and Linux
partitions both hosed) I can be up and running in less time than
it takes to get a cup of coffee.
Guy Macon
AZ Nomad wrote:
>And linux doesn't have those maddening delays and lockups that windows has where
>the desktop will freeze, or be unable to display stuff like the
>desktop/new/folder command in under 10 seconds.
Perhaps it's just me, but i expect a quad-core 3GHz machine to
be able to keep up with my typing as well as my Commodore 128 does.
David Brown
> "Michael N. Moran" <mnm...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:%aBsk.16396$kh2....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> Like the registry, which is *so* much better ;)
>
> It's better than the *NIX approach in that there are standard tools and APIs
> for creating, editing, and saving individual entries, branchs, etc. Is it
> great? No. But I haven't seen any "great" answers to the problem -- storing
> configuration settings is such a general problem that there really aren't any
> great one-size-fits-all solutions, I expect.
>
There *are* standard tools for viewing and editing *nix configuration
files - any text editor will do the job. And of course you can use any
other programs that work on text files - backups can be simple copies,
comparisons are done with "diff", version control can be done with
subversion or any other tool you like, etc. Copying configuration
between two computers is just the same as copying any other two files.
Although there are no official standards for /etc configuration files
(or user configuration files in hidden directories or files in the home
directory), there are a number of conventions that are used regularly.
For example, lines starting with # are almost invariably comment lines.
Programs with larger configurations have their own directory under
/etc, while smaller configurations have a simple /etc/prog.conf file.
Programs that need hierarchical settings typically use an apache-style
configuration format.
You are correct that there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. That's
why on *nix, appropriate sizes are used as needed, unlike the windows
registry.
Oh, and one more thing - *nix configuration files are almost always well
documented. How much windows software comes with documentation for the
registry settings?
There is certainly room for improvement in *nix configuration files - a
little more consistency would not do any harm. And while some default
configuration files come with clear comments allowing you to make simple
changes without R'ing TFM, others are much less obvious. But the *nix
system is still decades more advanced than the windows registry - the
move away from .ini files (which had a nice consistent syntax, but had
no good way of storing hierarchical data) was a big step backwards.
>> Fortunately, the Windoze registry is intuitive *and* robust.
>
> Actually, yes -- the arrangement is reasonably intuitive, and it keeps backup
> copies of itself around to provide some degree of robustness. (And as with
> *NIX text configuration files, you can certainly make as many manual backups
> as you feel like.)
>
"Some degree of robustness" - yes, the backups can help a bit, unless
things have gone badly wrong. Then your windows installation is hosed.
You can't keep backups externally - there is no way to restore the
registry using a live boot CD if it gets trashed. I know that a *nix
system can be made unbootable if one of the critical /etc files gets
corrupted - but these critical files are much smaller, and much more
rarely modified than the windows registry. Simple probability gives a
much greater chance of the immense registry files (it's all stored in
three files, IIRC) getting corrupted. And if necessary, you can fix a
50-line text file by hand using a boot CD - with the binary format
registry file of tens of MB, you have no chance.
I have a W2K installation on a PC that got its registry corrupted - no
amount of "repair" from the installation CD helped. The registry is so
fubar that the W2K installation disk refuses even to install a fresh
windows installation to the partition (same directory or another directory).
>> As opposed to the years that it took Mirco$oft to figure out
>> how to do preemptive multi-tasking?
>
> No one considered Windows 3.1/95/98 to be in the same class of operating
> systems as *NIX, you know. :-) That started with Windows NT, which had plenty
> of "real OS" programmers on the team (including David Cutler, who had done
> plenty of VMS development... and one might argue he learned from many of his
> mistakes there? :-) ).
>
No, one might not argue that. One might argue that he tried to make NT
modular and layered, with proper separation of tasks (the gui, screen
drivers, and kernel were all isolated), with multi-platform support and
source code that was independent of details like bit-size and
endianness, and planned support for alternative APIs (Win32, OS/2, and
posix were all to be considered equals). This was NT 3.51. *All* these
solid design decisions were thrown out step by step through NT 4.0, W2K,
XP, and Vista (against Dave Cutler's recommendations, I believe).
> I wouldn't argue that Microsoft is particularly good at innovation... but they
> are good at noticing what's becoming popular in the market and then copying
> those features for their own OS.
>
They are certainly good at making the appearance of their software nice.
And they are good at making the easy stuff easy (for users). But they
are *not* good at the engineering and plumbing that lies underneath.
Boo
> be able to keep up with my typing as well as my Commodore 128 does.
That's just you :-)
--
Boo
AZ Nomad
>AZ Nomad wrote:
It doesn't work with something as primitive as the registry. If you have
executables that require one version of their registry components and
you go back to a old version, you'll fuck everything up. Having a single
monolythin registry is pure insanity.
AZ Nomad
>AZ Nomad wrote:
>>And linux doesn't have those maddening delays and lockups that windows has where
>>the desktop will freeze, or be unable to display stuff like the
>>desktop/new/folder command in under 10 seconds.
>Perhaps it's just me, but i expect a quad-core 3GHz machine to
>be able to keep up with my typing as well as my Commodore 128 does.
The joy of microsoft operating systems that have consistently stayed two steps
ahead of available hardware. Requiring 3 BILLION bytes of memory just to draw a
desktop and run a few relatively simply low performance applications like a word
processor and web browser is an incredible feat.
Just think. In ten years will have 200ghz machines and microsoft will still
make them dog slow.
Jack
news:slrngb7slo.a...@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net:
> The joy of microsoft operating systems that have consistently stayed
> two steps ahead of available hardware. Requiring 3 BILLION bytes of
> memory just to draw a desktop and run a few relatively simply low
> performance applications like a word processor and web browser is an
> incredible feat.
>
> Just think. In ten years will have 200ghz machines and microsoft will
> still make them dog slow.
That's not (only) Microsoft. That's Software Engineer and OO programming.
Bye Jack
--
Eroi non si nasce, ti incastrano
- Jim Belushi
DJ Delorie
Mark Borgerson <mborg...@comcast.net> writes:
> > And my Linux DVD player has a "menu" button that *always* brings you
> > to the menu, even if the DVD author doesn't want you to skip the
> > commercials.
> >
> I hope it does so in reasonably prompt fashion.
> I think my Motorola cable box/DVR runs embedded linux.
It's not embedded linux, it's a dual core desktop. It responds as
fast as the DVD drive can.
> > Even my furnace runs Linux :-)
> >
> Cool---but hopefully not when it's supposed to be warm!
Cool in the summer, warm in the winter ;-)
http://www.delorie.com/house/furnace/
Dombo
The problem with Windows is that out of the box it is pretty easy to
screw it up because for user convenience everyone gets administrative
privileges. You could solve that problem by removing administrative
privileges for those users that are too smart for their own good. With
proper user rights it can be pretty hard to screw up a Windows
installation.
MooseFET
<david.br...@hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote:
[....]
> Although there are no official standards for /etc configuration files
> (or user configuration files in hidden directories or files in the home
> directory), there are a number of conventions that are used regularly.
> For example, lines starting with # are almost invariably comment lines.
> Programs with larger configurations have their own directory under
> /etc, while smaller configurations have a simple /etc/prog.conf file.
> Programs that need hierarchical settings typically use an apache-style
> configuration format.
>
> You are correct that there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. That's
> why on *nix, appropriate sizes are used as needed, unlike the windows
> registry.
>
> Oh, and one more thing - *nix configuration files are almost always well
> documented. How much windows software comes with documentation for the
> registry settings?
You missed an item here.
Most *nix applications are reasonably robust against errors in the
configuration. They generally will give you a hint about where the
problem in the xxx.conf is. This is because it is much easier and
natural to print something meaningful when the file being read is
plain ascii.
> There is certainly room for improvement in *nix configuration files - a
> little more consistency would not do any harm. And while some default
> configuration files come with clear comments allowing you to make simple
> changes without R'ing TFM, others are much less obvious. But the *nix
> system is still decades more advanced than the windows registry - the
> move away from .ini files (which had a nice consistent syntax, but had
> no good way of storing hierarchical data) was a big step backwards.
Many years back I wrote a DOS application that needed to store a
fairly complex configuration into an INI. My solution was, I though
at the time a good one:
The program was object oriented and the objects may point to each
other etc. Each object needed to be stored and loaded and have the
pointers restored without forcing fixed addresses.
I turned the pointers into "name tags" for the objects as I stored
them. Each object grew a "store()" method to do the write and a
"load()" method for the read. The type of the each object was written
as a text string. The result looked like this:
TheObjectType AB_CD_EF_GH (
Item1=12345
Item2="this is some string"
)
... etc ...
[....]
> > Actually, yes -- the arrangement is reasonably intuitive, and it keeps backup
> > copies of itself around to provide some degree of robustness. (And as with
> > *NIX text configuration files, you can certainly make as many manual backups
> > as you feel like.)
>
> "Some degree of robustness" - yes, the backups can help a bit, unless
> things have gone badly wrong. Then your windows installation is hosed.
> You can't keep backups externally - there is no way to restore the
> registry using a live boot CD if it gets trashed.
Yes you can do that. If you keep a Puppy Linux live CD on hand.
Puppy will back up a XP system and a good 50% of the time, you can put
back the damaged files. and get it working again.
It is fairly amazing that they were able to reverse engineer the NTFS
file system. Microsoft hasn't published a standard for it.
You can even back up and restore a password protected file system.
You can take a snapshot of the whole system and put it back to that
point.
If some fool sets it up as a "domain log in" machine. It is harder to
get it going again. You have to put back the local disk and the
directory on the server at the same time.
[....]
> I have a W2K installation on a PC that got its registry corrupted - no
> amount of "repair" from the installation CD helped. The registry is so
> fubar that the W2K installation disk refuses even to install a fresh
> windows installation to the partition (same directory or another directory).
Make a backup of the disk.
Delete the *.reg and try it.
Put back *.reg and instead delete /windows and try it.
By trying with random collections of the existing files I have managed
to get the Windows repair to put basically an whole new install in
place.
[.. Microsoft..]
> They are certainly good at making the appearance of their software nice.
> And they are good at making the easy stuff easy (for users). But they
> are *not* good at the engineering and plumbing that lies underneath.
I have never found Windows easy to use. For some reason I can almost
never double click.
Mark Borgerson
>
> Mark Borgerson <mborg...@comcast.net> writes:
> > > And my Linux DVD player has a "menu" button that *always* brings you
> > > to the menu, even if the DVD author doesn't want you to skip the
> > > commercials.
> > >
> > I hope it does so in reasonably prompt fashion.
> > I think my Motorola cable box/DVR runs embedded linux.
>
> It's not embedded linux, it's a dual core desktop. It responds as
> fast as the DVD drive can.
Did I miss something here? There's no DVD drive in my cable box.
I've seen several references to embedded Linux in Motorola
DCT6412 cable boxes.
>
> > > Even my furnace runs Linux :-)
> > >
> > Cool---but hopefully not when it's supposed to be warm!
>
> Cool in the summer, warm in the winter ;-)
> http://www.delorie.com/house/furnace/
>
Mark Borgerson
Joel Koltner
news:slrngb60hk.i...@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net...
> Oh yeah, and if it gets corrupted, you lose your entire system.
Same thing happens if your configuration files get corrupted on *NIX systems
and, as I mentioned, often far lesser corruption leads to far greater loss of
functionality (e.g., Xorg.conf being a little corrupted completely removes
your ability to get to a GUI desktop.)
Joel Koltner
news:48b40cb4$0$24404$5fc...@news.tiscali.nl...
> The problem with Windows is that out of the box it is pretty easy to screw
> it up because for user convenience everyone gets administrative privileges.
Every *NIX OS I've ever installed requires you to set up an administrative
account too, you know? :-)
That being said, it was of course poor that it wasn't until Windows XP that
the default install didn't make some effort to *not* have you "sign yourself
up" as an administrator, and that until Vista operating as a regular or
"power" user and then occassionally needing to perform administrative actions
was rather klunky; many *NIX distributions (including the Mac's OS X) were
well ahead of Microsoft in this area.
That being said, you have to keep in mind that the "computer model" for *NIX
was always that you'd have multiple users with various skill levels/needs and
therefore it was obvious that a system providing different capabilities to
different users was necessary. With Windows, the model started with "there is
one person using this machine, and they're user, administer, everything" --
and even today this is probably true for 75+% of PCs. Hence, it took time to
get all those "single users" used to the idea of needing too different "access
levels" on their PC, educating them about how always running as an
administrator is a real risk they may very well not want to take. I just
can't imagine that back in 1995 the whole, e.g., Vista user authentication
control (UAC) system would have been successful at all -- look how many people
still bitch about it today. (Granted, Microsoft did go a little too far in
UAC, IMO -- I remember one of the Vista service pack 1 "improvements" was
something like, "only requires 1 UAC activation rather than 4 to rename a file
residing in a system directly." Uggh!)
> With proper user rights it can be pretty hard to screw up a Windows
> installation.
Yes, although poor administrators can and do cause plenty of problems and lost
productivity for regular employees as well... and poor administrators seem a
lot more common in the Windows world than the *NIX world.
---Joel
Joel Koltner
> If you have
> executables that require one version of their registry components and
> you go back to a old version, you'll fuck everything up.
So re-install the software. *NIX has the exact same problem -- if you restore
configuration files for a different version of some applicaiton, it's a toss
up as to whether or not the software will still work.
> Having a single
> monolythin registry is pure insanity.
One monolithic registry, one monolithic file system storing all your
configuration files -- it's really not much different. The registry is just a
database optimized for storing program settings... heck, some *NIX programs
use, e.g., SQLLite these days for their configuration settings...