ANNOUNCE:-- TimingAnalyzer Free Version -- Draw timing diagrams
timinganalyzer
The TimingAnalyzer can be used to quickly and easily draw timing
diagrams.
Signals, clocks, buses, delays, constraints, and states are easily
added
from the GUI.
It can also be used to quickly do a timing analysis and check for
timing faults. Minimum, typical, and worst case analysis can be
performed.
Delays and constraints are easily specified and changed to see if
faster
clocks or slower parts can be used without any timing faults.
There are 3 editions planned. The Free Edition(FE), the Standard
Edition(SE),
and the Professional Edition(PE).
You can download the Free Edition now and read all about the
TimingAnalyzer at:
Comments and feedback are welcome at
Andy Peters
Hey, it's back!
It's good to see that this hasn't died. The commercial alternatives
are WAAAAAY too expensive.
-a
timinganalyzer
Yes, it's alive and doing well, and yes the competition is expensive.
The TimingAnalyzer will not be. I'm trying very hard to make it as
easy as
possible to use.
Please feel free to request new features or suggest feature
improvements.
Regards,
Dan
rickman
> On Jun 2, 5:40 pm, Andy Peters <goo...@latke.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 5:58 am,timinganalyzer<timinganaly...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Hello All,
>
> > > diagrams.
> > > Signals, clocks, buses, delays, constraints, and states are easily
> > > added
> > > from the GUI.
>
> > > It can also be used to quickly do a timing analysis and check for
> > > timing faults. Minimum, typical, and worst case analysis can be
> > > performed.
> > > Delays and constraints are easily specified and changed to see if
> > > faster
> > > clocks or slower parts can be used without any timing faults.
>
> > > There are 3 editions planned. The Free Edition(FE), the Standard
> > > Edition(SE),
> > > and the Professional Edition(PE).
>
> > > You can download the Free Edition now and read all about the
> > >TimingAnalyzerat:
>
> > >www.timing-diagrams.com
>
> > > Comments and feedback are welcome at
>
> > > supp...@timing-diagrams.com
>
> > Hey, it's back!
>
> > It's good to see that this hasn't died. The commercial alternatives
> > are WAAAAAY too expensive.
>
> > -a
>
> Yes, it's alive and doing well, and yes the competition is expensive.
> easy as
> possible to use.
>
> Please feel free to request new features or suggest feature
> improvements.
>
> Regards,
> Dan
I installed the program and it ran once. But when I try to run it a
second time, it will not start. Any ideas?
rickman
To get some info on why it won't run I ran it in a DOS box.
TimingAnalyzer Version 0.82 Free Edition(FE)
OS Name = Windows 2000
OS Version = 5.0
OS Arch = x86
Java Version = 1.6.0_03
installDir = C:\Program Files\TimingAnalyzer_b82
Settings File = C:\Program Files\TimingAnalyzer_b82\settings
\ta_defaults
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException
at org.dmad.ta.TimingDiagram.findEdge(TimingDiagram.java:2238)
at org.dmad.ta.TimFileIO.readDelay(TimFileIO.java:481)
at org.dmad.ta.TimFileIO.processFileRequest(TimFileIO.java:
1245)
at org.dmad.ta.TimFileIO.<init>(TimFileIO.java:103)
at org.dmad.ta.TimingDiagram.openFile(TimingDiagram.java:3641)
at
org.dmad.ta.TimingAnalyzer.openRecentFile(TimingAnalyzer.java:1682)
at
org.dmad.ta.TimingAnalyzer.loadOpenFileList(TimingAnalyzer.java:1511)
at org.dmad.ta.TimingAnalyzer.<init>(TimingAnalyzer.java:314)
at org.dmad.ta.TimingAnalyzer.main(TimingAnalyzer.java:138)
rickman
I spent about 5 minutes working with this program before I gave up.
My reason is not the problem posted below, but because of the user
interface decisions made. I don't know why every new program has to
reinvent something about the user interface. There is a standard call
Common User Interface (CUI) that is even documented by Microsoft,
IIRC.
The one big difference that hit me up side my head was the way the
Cntl key is used counter-intuitively with mouse clicks for
selections. If you click on one item it is selected. If you click on
an second item, it is *added* to the selections. To deselect
something you have to either press the Cntl key while clicking on it
or you have to use the ESC key. I have *never* seen a program use
this sort of selection mechanism. I have seen variations on how you
select multiple, but every other program I have ever worked with, the
default action of clicking a new thing while an old thing was selected
was to deselect the first thing and to select the new thing.
It was more than once that I tried to move some things and ended up
with a mess because extra moves kept happening. Combine this with the
lack of a working undo feature and I ended up rather frustrated and
gave up. I was looking for something that would save me time over a
program like Visio.
I suggest that the author get some references on CUI or better yet,
use some other programs with graphical interfaces and go with the
flow. It is so much more productive than trying to retrain the
world... if you don't believe me, just look down at your keyboard. Do
you think the keyboard layout we all use was a good idea? It's just
easier to continue to use it than it is to retrain everyone that is
using it now.
Rick
timinganalyzer
Hello Rick,
The goal is to make drawing timing diagrams as easy as possible, and
I do agree about sticking to standard GUI practices, and that should
be
done for each OS.
The program is in beta testing and I know it's not perfect but don't
forget to look at the big picture. Not only can you draw timing
diagrams,
you can do timing analysis and show margins and find faults in
designs,
you can write scripts that automatically draw the diagrams so complex
diagrams can be made with one command, or test vectors or testbenches
can
be generated with one command. If you need to document simulation
results,
it can read VCD formated files, then you can make annotated timing
diagrams from
simulations and include them in design documentation. With actual
logic
functions you can simulate gates, registers, counters, shift
registers, and
other logic functions which can help when deciding if the logic if
fast
enough or the clocks are to fast.
So, keeping all that in mind, if beta users make valid and
constructive suggestions
for improvements and new features, they will incorporated into the
program. Most all
of them will be added before the final release 1.0.
-Dan
Brian Drummond
wrote:
>On Jun 2, 8:58 am, timinganalyzer <timinganaly...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> The TimingAnalyzer can be used to quickly and easily draw timing
>> diagrams.
>> Signals, clocks, buses, delays, constraints, and states are easily
>> added
>> from the GUI.
>>
>> Comments and feedback are welcome at
>>
>> supp...@timing-diagrams.com
>
>I spent about 5 minutes working with this program before I gave up.
>My reason is not the problem posted below, but because of the user
>interface decisions made. I don't know why every new program has to
>reinvent something about the user interface. There is a standard call
>Common User Interface (CUI) that is even documented by Microsoft,
>IIRC.
Do you work in the NHS, or for one of their equipment suppliers?
All the CUI references (including http://www.mscui.net/ seem to be
associated with the health care sector.
If you are thinking of some other user interface specification, can you
help find it?
(Not that a specification for the medical industry couldn't be more
generally useful, but it seems unlikely to cover complex drawing tools)
- Brian
rickman
wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:44:03 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jun 2, 8:58 am, timinganalyzer <timinganaly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hello All,
>
> >> The TimingAnalyzer can be used to quickly and easily draw timing
> >> diagrams.
> >> Signals, clocks, buses, delays, constraints, and states are easily
> >> added
> >> from the GUI.
> >>www.timing-diagrams.com
>
> >> Comments and feedback are welcome at
>
> >> supp...@timing-diagrams.com
>
> >I spent about 5 minutes working with this program before I gave up.
> >My reason is not the problem posted below, but because of the user
> >interface decisions made. I don't know why every new program has to
> >reinvent something about the user interface. There is a standard call
> >Common User Interface (CUI) that is even documented by Microsoft,
> >IIRC.
>
> Do you work in the NHS, or for one of their equipment suppliers?
> associated with the health care sector.
I have no idea what you are talking about... I am an electronic
design engineer and have never worked in the health care sector. What
exactly is NHS? Is that a government agency or a company? BTW, I
typoed above "call" should have been "called". CUI is a windows
standard as far as I know. I guess maybe it is more general, but I
have only heard the term used in the context of Windows.
> If you are thinking of some other user interface specification, can you
> help find it?
Doesn't Microsoft provide a CUI for Windows? If nothing else, all you
have to do is fire up most *any* program to learn how mouse clicks
work to select items. Having the default action of a click to be
"adding" items to the selection is a new twist. Most programs use
Cntl-Left Click to cumulatively select items (or often to unselect
them too). Unselection is typically done by clicking on *anything*
else including nothing. So if I click on object A and then click on
object B and drag, I would not expect object A to be dragged along
with B. This happened to me with this program. Object A was dragged
off the view and the undo didn't work. I couldn't find a way to
expand the view, so I ended up with a drawing that had things in it
that I couldn't delete or see. I ended up closing the program (partly
out of frustration and partly out of time constraints) and let it save
the file. I tried to start the program up again and it would not
run. The author says the drawing file is now corrupt. When the
program auto-opens it on startup, it crashes.
Independant of the UI issues, a program really shouldn't crash when it
reads a data file... of any nature. Of course that is a theoretical
goal and can be difficult to achieve in practice. But certainly
crashing on startup without visible error messages is not a good thing
either. I had to start it from a DOS box to get anything useful from
it... maybe that is more of a Java issue... and don't get me started
complaining about Java. Does *anything* written in Java actually
work?
I'm really not trying to bash the tool. I expect there are those who
like it and use it. I have often wanted a good tool for drawing
waveforms and timing diagrams. But the very first and most important
feature is that it has to be easy and intuitive to use. I feel that I
should be able to sit down and use it without reading a manual or
taking a tutorial. Many years ago I did that with a Mac! I expect
most people do that with the iPhone and iPod. A timing diagram editor
is not a complex tool. I should be able to draw simple waveforms
without learning a complex interface. I currently use Visio and I
find that to be a burdensome tool for simple things. It also has its
own ways in which it doesn't work. I just wanted something a bit
simpler.
> (Not that a specification for the medical industry couldn't be more
> generally useful, but it seems unlikely to cover complex drawing tools)
I agree. I'm not sure why you mention this, but it sounds right.
Do you know of a common denominator for tools with graphical
interfaces?
BTW, as long as I am ragging on the world of software. I don't like
excessive movements of the mouse and switching back and forth with the
keyboard. One of the things I have done to minimize movements is to
move my windows toolbar to the top of the screen next to the menu of
most programs. I find this so much easier to use than dragging the
mouse around from top to bottom of the screen when I want to select
between programs (which I seem to do a lot).
The problem is that *many* programs (including Visio) don't understand
that the windows toolbar is at the top now. New windows open with the
title bar at the top of the screen, under the toolbar. Worse, some
programs remember that they were at the top of screen, but remember it
correctly (as being X pixels above the visible edge). Then when they
restart incorrectly (or the dialog is reopened) the window is that
much *more* off the top of the screen!!! With those applications I
have to drag them well back onto the visible screen and try to
remember to drag them back toward the middle before I close when they
start drifting off the top again.
Is it time to start cutting off fingers of programmers who continually
mess up things like this? After a few mistakes they will be much less
proficient at pumping out code (producing fewer bad programs) and
after 10 mistakes... well I guess they could still type with their
noses... 8^*
Just a thought...
Rick
PS I am currently struggling with the Aldec simulator which has it's
own set of problems. I'm actually here to complain about that, but
I'll do it in another thread.
Robert Miles
"rickman" <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3253a340-9804-4fd5...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
> Independant of the UI issues, a program really shouldn't crash when it
> reads a data file... of any nature. Of course that is a theoretical
> goal and can be difficult to achieve in practice. But certainly
> crashing on startup without visible error messages is not a good thing
> either. I had to start it from a DOS box to get anything useful from
> it... maybe that is more of a Java issue... and don't get me started
> complaining about Java. Does *anything* written in Java actually
> work?
>
start with a check to see if Java is even installed, and if so, whether
the version installed is suitable for what the program needs. My version
of Vista came without Java, and the Microsoft version is no longer
available. I installed the Sun version, but still have problems with
getting
all the programs that use Java to run correctly.
Robert Miles
"Robert Miles" <rober...@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:_tU1k.736$RY....@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
a version of Java newer than the one I had before, and decided to install
this update. The Google Toolbar program is offered at the same site,
so I thought I'd let you know that if you're using the Windows Mail
program that comes with Vista, you should avoid installing the Google
Toolbar program unless you want to see what problems it causes in
Windows Mail, although it often doesn't cause them immediately.
Web sites that offer to let you do Google searches don't cause the same
problems.
KJ
> associated with the health care sector.
>
Access' or 'CUA' developed by IBM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_User_Access
KJ
KJ
> associated with the health care sector.
>
rickman
> On Jun 5, 9:14 am, Brian Drummond <brian_drumm...@btconnect.com>
> wrote:> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:44:03 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnu...@gmail.com>
>
> > Do you work in the NHS, or for one of their equipment suppliers?
> > associated with the health care sector.
>
> I think what rickman was trying to remember was the 'Common User
> Access' or 'CUA' developed by IBM.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_User_Access
>
> KJ
I had the initials right, but the name wrong. The wiki article you
link to calls it...
Windows Consistent User Interface standard (CUI),
Notice the wiki note that
CUA has never had significant impact on Unix terminal applications.
That explains a lot of why people don't tend to migrate between
Windows and *nix. I know that most open source programs that I have
tried seemed to me to have a bizarre user interface. I know that I am
more sensitive to this sort of thing than most people, but once I see
something that works well, I really, really hate to go back to poor
practices.
For the most part any new program should try to emulate the UI of the
other common programs out there, only altering features if it *really*
has a positive impact.
Jim Granville
>
> Doesn't Microsoft provide a CUI for Windows? If nothing else, all you
> have to do is fire up most *any* program to learn how mouse clicks
> work to select items. Having the default action of a click to be
> "adding" items to the selection is a new twist. Most programs use
> Cntl-Left Click to cumulatively select items (or often to unselect
> them too). Unselection is typically done by clicking on *anything*
> else including nothing.
Yes, certainly the common EDA/CAD model is Click Selects, and ^Click
toggles the Selected flag on eash item. So you can add/delete
at will, from a selected set.
Some systems also then allow right-click Combine into a Group/Block.
> So if I click on object A and then click on
> object B and drag, I would not expect object A to be dragged along
> with B. This happened to me with this program. Object A was dragged
> off the view and the undo didn't work. I couldn't find a way to
> expand the view, so I ended up with a drawing that had things in it
> that I couldn't delete or see.
Better pgms have a Zoom Extents, to cover this type of problem.
> I ended up closing the program (partly
> out of frustration and partly out of time constraints) and let it save
> the file. I tried to start the program up again and it would not
> run. The author says the drawing file is now corrupt. When the
> program auto-opens it on startup, it crashes.
If this is easily reproduced, it should also be easy to fix.
-jg
Andrew Smallshaw
> On Jun 5, 9:14 am, Brian Drummond <brian_drumm...@btconnect.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Do you work in the NHS, or for one of their equipment suppliers?
>> All the CUI references (includinghttp://www.mscui.net/seem to be
>> associated with the health care sector.
>
> I have no idea what you are talking about... I am an electronic
> design engineer and have never worked in the health care sector. What
> exactly is NHS? Is that a government agency or a company?
NHS = National Health Service, the state run healthcare provider
here in the UK. Unlike state healthcare provision in the US the
NHS is fairly comprehensive and covers the entire population (paid
for out of general taxation). As a result it is a massive organisation
- it dwarfs the entire Ministry of Defence, for instance. ISTR it
is Europe's biggest employer.
> I'm really not trying to bash the tool. I expect there are those who
> like it and use it. I have often wanted a good tool for drawing
> waveforms and timing diagrams. But the very first and most important
> feature is that it has to be easy and intuitive to use. I feel that I
> should be able to sit down and use it without reading a manual or
> taking a tutorial. Many years ago I did that with a Mac! I expect
> most people do that with the iPhone and iPod. A timing diagram editor
> is not a complex tool. I should be able to draw simple waveforms
> without learning a complex interface. I currently use Visio and I
> find that to be a burdensome tool for simple things. It also has its
> own ways in which it doesn't work. I just wanted something a bit
> simpler.
Interesting that you mention Macs. For many years Apple have
published user interface guidelines that document exactly how UIs
should behave. I recall looking through the one for the Newton a
few years ago and it was very prescriptive and quite forceful in
places. I remember it was full of things like "This UI component
has square corners. This other component has rounded corners. If
you need to reimplement them for some reason you stick to those
conventions or your users will be swamping your helpdesk with
support enquiries." This might not give designers as much leeway
to create "really cool" interfaces but I suspect it is more in
tune with what many users actually want.
This is also an area where Microsoft have completely lost the plot.
Since Windows 95 every major release of Windows has been accompanied
by a new interface. Applications are even worse - I don't know
how many style of toolbar have been played with over the last 15
years. Microsoft always make great play of the new interface but
who exactly does it benefit? Users are forced to learn new interfaces
every upgrade and application developers are forced to 'upgrade'
their programs with the new UI or risk being considered outdated.
The only people I can see benefiting are Microsoft themseleves (it
provides a very obvious reason to upgrade, even if it does lack
clear benefits) and hardware manufacturers (the upgrade needs newer
faster hardware). For all the talk of enhancing the user's experience
it seems obvious to me that MS don't give a shit about users. All
that matters is ensuring that the revenue keeps coming in from
repeated meaningless upgrades.
--
Andrew Smallshaw
and...@sdf.lonestar.org
Randy Yates
> [...]
> For all the talk of enhancing the user's experience it seems obvious
> to me that MS don't give a shit about users.
Have you ever met Tux? :)
--
% Randy Yates % "Maybe one day I'll feel her cold embrace,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % and kiss her interface,
%%% 919-577-9882 % til then, I'll leave her alone."
%%%% <ya...@ieee.org> % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Andrew Smallshaw
> Andrew Smallshaw <and...@sdf.lonestar.org> writes:
>> [...]
>> For all the talk of enhancing the user's experience it seems obvious
>> to me that MS don't give a shit about users.
>
> Have you ever met Tux? :)
I prefer Beastie myself. Shackleton had the right idea about
penguins. ;-)
Seriously though the situation on Unix platforms is getting worse
by the minute. 10-15 years the toolkit wars were over and Motif
was the winner. Most apps were shifting to Motif and CDE was coming
to further standardise the UI.
However, as soon as Linux started to gain traction things started
to deteriorate again, quite probably becasue Motif wasn't free.
Now you need any number of different toolkits to cover a broad
range of apps and things like Gnome and KDE are far more substantial
bits of code than anything that went before. The net result is
that each app has a completely different appearance, works in a
different way, and the whole assembly is one great waste of memory
and processor time.
--
Andrew Smallshaw
and...@sdf.lonestar.org
Andrew Jackson
> Since Windows 95 every major release of Windows has been accompanied
> by a new interface. Applications are even worse - I don't know
> how many style of toolbar have been played with over the last 15
> years. Microsoft always make great play of the new interface but
> who exactly does it benefit? Users are forced to learn new interfaces
> every upgrade and application developers are forced to 'upgrade'
> their programs with the new UI or risk being considered outdated.
>
> The only people I can see benefiting are Microsoft themseleves (it
> provides a very obvious reason to upgrade, even if it does lack
> clear benefits) and hardware manufacturers (the upgrade needs newer
> faster hardware). For all the talk of enhancing the user's experience
> it seems obvious to me that MS don't give a shit about users. All
> that matters is ensuring that the revenue keeps coming in from
> repeated meaningless upgrades.
>
An excellent example of this is Office 2007. The UI for all the major
applications have been changed completely with Ribbon bars, etc. It
takes ages to work out where on earth really simple things are and they
are now buried in (even more) obscure locations. Microsoft's
advertising will have you believe "easy" but I disagree.
Andrew
David Brown
> On Jun 5, 9:14 am, Brian Drummond <brian_drumm...@btconnect.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:44:03 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I spent about 5 minutes working with this program before I gave up.
>>> My reason is not the problem posted below, but because of the user
>>> interface decisions made. I don't know why every new program has to
>>> reinvent something about the user interface. There is a standard call
>>> Common User Interface (CUI) that is even documented by Microsoft,
>>> IIRC.
>> Do you work in the NHS, or for one of their equipment suppliers?
>> All the CUI references (includinghttp://www.mscui.net/seem to be
>> associated with the health care sector.
>
> I have no idea what you are talking about... I am an electronic
> design engineer and have never worked in the health care sector. What
> exactly is NHS? Is that a government agency or a company? BTW, I
> typoed above "call" should have been "called". CUI is a windows
> standard as far as I know. I guess maybe it is more general, but I
> have only heard the term used in the context of Windows.
>
I'm guessing (from your time zone) that you're in the USA.
The "NHS" is the British "National Health Service". To people from the
UK, "medical", "health care", and "NHS" are synonymous - the private
health care is a very small minority there (mostly for people who want
to pay for comfier beds and better food, or vanity surgery).
Jack
> There are 3 editions planned. The Free Edition(FE), the Standard
> Edition(SE),
> and the Professional Edition(PE).
>
> You can download the Free Edition now and read all about the
> TimingAnalyzer at:
>
> www.timing-diagrams.com
>
> Comments and feedback are welcome at
>
Very, very interesting.
Thanks
Bye Jack
Brian Drummond
wrote:
Probably was; that makes more sense.
All I could find searching for Microsoft and CUI (or Common User
Interface) was that healthcare stuff.
- Brian
Everett M. Greene
> This is also an area where Microsoft have completely lost the plot.
> Since Windows 95 every major release of Windows has been accompanied
> by a new interface. Applications are even worse - I don't know
> how many style of toolbar have been played with over the last 15
> years. Microsoft always make great play of the new interface but
> who exactly does it benefit? Users are forced to learn new interfaces
> every upgrade and application developers are forced to 'upgrade'
> their programs with the new UI or risk being considered outdated.
Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
outdated? This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
ignore them.
Jerry Avins
> Andrew Smallshaw <and...@sdf.lonestar.org> writes:
>
>> This is also an area where Microsoft have completely lost the plot.
>> Since Windows 95 every major release of Windows has been accompanied
>> by a new interface. Applications are even worse - I don't know
>> how many style of toolbar have been played with over the last 15
>> years. Microsoft always make great play of the new interface but
>> who exactly does it benefit? Users are forced to learn new interfaces
>> every upgrade and application developers are forced to 'upgrade'
>> their programs with the new UI or risk being considered outdated.
>
> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
> outdated? This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
> ignore them.
It's not that simple. Others upgrade, then you can't read what they send
you. MS sees to that.
>> The only people I can see benefiting are Microsoft themseleves (it
>> provides a very obvious reason to upgrade, even if it does lack
>> clear benefits) and hardware manufacturers (the upgrade needs newer
>> faster hardware). For all the talk of enhancing the user's experience
>> it seems obvious to me that MS don't give a shit about users. All
>> that matters is ensuring that the revenue keeps coming in from
>> repeated meaningless upgrades.
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
rickman
Greene) wrote:
> Andrew Smallshaw <andr...@sdf.lonestar.org> writes:
> > This is also an area where Microsoft have completely lost the plot.
> > Since Windows 95 every major release of Windows has been accompanied
> > by a new interface. Applications are even worse - I don't know
> > how many style of toolbar have been played with over the last 15
> > years. Microsoft always make great play of the new interface but
> > who exactly does it benefit? Users are forced to learn new interfaces
> > every upgrade and application developers are forced to 'upgrade'
> > their programs with the new UI or risk being considered outdated.
>
> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
> outdated? This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
> ignore them.
You seem naive. I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
computer. If I build another it will also run Windows 2000. But if I
want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP (for the
next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
Rick
Jim Granville
> You seem naive. I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
> computer. If I build another it will also run Windows 2000. But if I
> want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP (for the
> next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
It seems many designers ARE using Win2000, and are happy with the
quirks-they-know, and do NOT want to buy into another round of
learn-the-quirk. [I have Win2000 here, on 2 machines!]
Sadly, not all EDA companies see this, and Win2000 is moving off some
radars.
Given that XP and expecially Vista, will not install on
hardware too out-of-phase with the release date, that will also mean
retiring functional PCs to a land-fill somewhere
(and those PCs probably pre-date Lead-free).....
I did hear Dell were running XP supply to 2011 (or something like that
? )- because of customer demand, not Microsoft's.
-jg
Randy Yates
> [...]
> But if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
> (for the next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
You do. I have successfully installed Fedora 8 on an HP Pavillion
DV9620US.
However one thing to be careful of in running linux on laptops is
Broadcom's stubborn refusal to open up their wireless card
specifications so that open source drivers can be developed. Translated:
don't buy a laptop with a Broadcom wireless card (or chipset) if you
want to run linux on it. Atheros I've heard is very good and supported
by madwifi.org.
But, even though Broadcom is stubborn, I have still been successful at
getting the card to work on my home network. Unfortunately the reverse
engineered drivers (b43-fwcutter...) do not seem to support the Master
modes used in public hotspots.
--
% Randy Yates % "The dreamer, the unwoken fool -
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % in dreams, no pain will kiss the brow..."
%%% 919-577-9882 %
%%%% <ya...@ieee.org> % 'Eldorado Overture', *Eldorado*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
CBFalconer
>
>> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
>> outdated? This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
>> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
>> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
>> ignore them.
>
> You seem naive. I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
> computer. If I build another it will also run Windows 2000. But
> if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
> (for the next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
Seriously consider Linux, especially Ubuntu. You do have a
choice. A better choice.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Didi
>...
> Atheros I've heard is very good and supported by madwifi.org.
Here is what I found on that madwifi.org:
" The About/HAL: Hardware Abstraction Layer. All access to the
hardware has to go thru this closed source component which is
maintained by Atheros. Unfortunately there is no documentation
for it except the public interfaces in hal/ah.h."
I can understand they want to have something working with linux,
but I definitely lose all sympathy when those of the "open source"
community begin to get involved in the wifi secrecy scenario.
It is not just hypocrytic, it is of course fuelling the monopoly over
wifi related software.
I would much rather have something with closed sources but
documented rather than open source here and there and closed
key parts.
If such cooperation to blackmail companies (like MS and those
making wifi parts usable only for MS) is OK with linux and GNU
then they should certainly shut up with their claim about openness.
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/36859f5adcc6089e?dmode=source
rickman
> rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> writes:
> > [...]
> > But if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
>
> You do. I have successfully installed Fedora 8 on an HP Pavillion
> DV9620US.
>
> However one thing to be careful of in running linux on laptops is
> Broadcom's stubborn refusal to open up their wireless card
> specifications so that open source drivers can be developed. Translated:
> don't buy a laptop with a Broadcom wireless card (or chipset) if you
> want to run linux on it. Atheros I've heard is very good and supported
> by madwifi.org.
>
> But, even though Broadcom is stubborn, I have still been successful at
> getting the card to work on my home network. Unfortunately the reverse
> engineered drivers (b43-fwcutter...) do not seem to support the Master
> modes used in public hotspots.
I knew someone would mention Linux. Linux is still an alien platform
to me and there is any amount of software that is not supported under
it... or I should say that there is any amount of software that is
only supported on specific versions of Linux. If I run Fedora 8,
maybe vendor X gives me support and vendor Y doesn't. I run Redhat
and vendor X gives me support and vendor Z doesn't... etc, etc, etc.
The reason that I still run windows at all is because for me, it is
the only option. Currently Win2000 is the best that runs the minimum
required set of software. If I want a laptop, my only choice
currently is to buy a machine running XP which I can do for the next
few weeks. After that there will be no choice on a new machine except
for Vista. With a number of vendors not supporting that still, I will
not have the option of buying a new laptop with an installed OS that
runs the software I need.
Rick
Randy Yates
I have been able to operate just fine for 3 years without most of the
Microsoft-specific software. Most notably, OpenOffice replaces Microsoft
Office. And for those occasions that I do need a MS-based OS, such as
once a year to run TaxCut, or when I need to run TI Code Composer
Studio, I use Win2000 running in a virtual machine under a linux host.
I previously used VMWare and currently use VirtualBox for this.
What software do you use that demands a MS OS?
--
% Randy Yates % "She has an IQ of 1001, she has a jumpsuit
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % on, and she's also a telephone."
%%% 919-577-9882 %
rickman
Various CAD/CAE tools. I am sure that it is possible to run most of
them under WINE or something similar, but they are not supported that
way. I am very happy with Win2000 and I see no need to switch to a
*nix flavor. Even if I buy the *nix version of the various tools,
they only support the version of *nix that they indicate. The CAE
tools are pretty flaky compared to general software and I don't need
the headache of trying to get support while running under an
unsupported OS.
My only problem is buying a laptop. You can't build one yourself and
the vendors don't offer Win2K anymore. Next month even Dell says they
will no longer offer XP. This is a double whammy because most of the
tools are not supported under Vista yet AFAIK.
rickman
> rickman wrote:
> > moja...@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (Everett M. Greene) wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
>
> >> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
> >> outdated? This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
> >> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
> >> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
> >> ignore them.
>
> > You seem naive. I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
> > computer. If I build another it will also run Windows 2000. But
> > if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
>
> Seriously consider Linux, especially Ubuntu. You do have a
> choice. A better choice.
Only if I want to run programs without support. Most CAD/CAE tools
are unsupported under *nix or only supported on a single flavor and
version. The vendors don't even agree on the flavor and version
supported.
But there is also the issue of knowledge. I have *no* experience with
*nix... well, no good experience. Some years ago I bought a $200
Walmart machine which came with Lindows, a version of Linux. It had a
number of apps which were flaky and I didn't see much utility to it.
I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
installing Win2000 over it. The company was also pretty poor about
meeting the license requirements. I thought they had to make the
sources available in the same manner that they distributed the
binary. When I first asked them about it they feigned ignorance.
After nagging they shipped me a hand copied CD. When I received an
update there were no sources. This time I was told that they were
available on the web site. Yes, they were there, but as individual
files which had to be downloaded one at a time.
I have just never had a positive experience with linux. I don't know
how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the investment
to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate. There is also
the research I would have to do to figure out *which* version of Linux
I would want. How can Linux be standard if there are so many versions
and each software vendor only supports a few?
So what exactly is better about Linux?
Randy Yates
> On Jun 6, 11:46 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> rickman wrote:
>> > moja...@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (Everett M. Greene) wrote:
>>
>> ... snip ...
>>
>> >> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
>> >> outdated? This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
>> >> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
>> >> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
>> >> ignore them.
>>
>> > You seem naive. I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
>> > computer. If I build another it will also run Windows 2000. But
>> > if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
>> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
>>
>> Seriously consider Linux, especially Ubuntu. You do have a
>> choice. A better choice.
>
> Only if I want to run programs without support. Most CAD/CAE tools
> are unsupported under *nix or only supported on a single flavor and
> version. The vendors don't even agree on the flavor and version
> supported.
I don't doubt that - I don't think Orcad runs on any linux platform.
> But there is also the issue of knowledge. I have *no* experience with
> *nix... well, no good experience. Some years ago I bought a $200
> Walmart machine which came with Lindows, a version of Linux. It had a
> number of apps which were flaky and I didn't see much utility to it.
> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
> installing Win2000 over it. The company was also pretty poor about
> meeting the license requirements. I thought they had to make the
> sources available in the same manner that they distributed the
> binary. When I first asked them about it they feigned ignorance.
> After nagging they shipped me a hand copied CD. When I received an
> update there were no sources. This time I was told that they were
> available on the web site. Yes, they were there, but as individual
> files which had to be downloaded one at a time.
That was probably a bad way to experience linux. These days, for
evaluation, you can install it (whatever flavor) in a virtual machine
and play with it that way. The VM takes a piece of your hard drive (10G
would be plenty), but in today's world that's largely negligible.
> I have just never had a positive experience with linux. I don't know
> how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the investment
> to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate. There is also
> the research I would have to do to figure out *which* version of Linux
> I would want. How can Linux be standard if there are so many versions
> and each software vendor only supports a few?
Well, those are all valid reasons to stick with Windows. But that's not
what you said; you said you didn't have an option. The truth is, you
do have an option, but it doesn't seem very appealing to you.
Also note that there are a set of open-source EDA tools available called
gEDA - check then out.
> So what exactly is better about Linux?
1. It's free.
2. It won't watch over your shoulder (Big Brother):
a. You can watch whatever videos or audios you want whenever and
make all the copies you'd ever want.
b. No "phoning home" to tell the Corp. what your spending habits,
eating habits, sex habits, surfing habits, etc. are.
c. No checking to see if this is a valid installation.
3. It's built for global access.
a. It is based on the X11 windows system, which means that you
can run any application (X client) anywhere in the world from
your desktop.
b. It comes with ssh and ssh server out-of-the-box. That means that
you can access (securely) any file on your system from any point on
the internet.
c. It's easy to install Apache (a web server), postgresql (a database
server), subversion (version control software), and a myriad of other
things and access these servers from anywhere there's an internet
connection.
4. It's beautiful. There are several window managers that can be
configured any way you want. I use Gnome.
5. It's fast. The newer linux distros, along with your video card's GL
driver, makes fast work of graphics.
6. It's fun. It comes with a ton of utilities, games, programmer
utilities, a Web server (THE web server - Apache), etc. out-of-the-box.
7. You only have to reboot once a month (if that).
--
% Randy Yates % "So now it's getting late,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % and those who hesitate
%%% 919-577-9882 % got no one..."
%%%% <ya...@ieee.org> % 'Waterfall', *Face The Music*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Vladimir Vassilevsky
rickman wrote:
> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
> installing Win2000 over it.
> So what exactly is better about Linux?
I second your opinion regarding Linux. It is a toy of students and
enthusiasts who are enjoying the process of configuring the computer
instead of getting the actual job done hard and fast.
BTW, why do you prefer Win2k rather then XP?
Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com
CBFalconer
>
... snip ...
>
> I have just never had a positive experience with linux. I don't
> know how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the
> investment to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate.
> There is also the research I would have to do to figure out *which*
> version of Linux I would want. How can Linux be standard if there
> are so many versions and each software vendor only supports a few?
>
> So what exactly is better about Linux?
I think you will find that switching from Winders is much easier
now. Also, you have much less disturbance of your existing system
to simply try it out. If you get the free CD from Ubuntu.com you
will find you can install a working system without using your hard
disk at all (some penalties, obviously), or a dual booting system,
with no penalties except gobbling some disk space, or a complete
replacement. Just fill out the order and wait three or so weeks
for a CD delivery.
The unixy variations are largely in the GUI programs. The old
fashioned easy linkage of CLI programs remains available, largely
unchanged. Ubuntu 8.04 is a long term maintenance version (3
years). I am still running the previouss long term version (6.06).
Expect to invest one to two hours. Also see alt.os.linux.ubuntu.
glen herrmannsfeldt
(snip)
> But there is also the issue of knowledge. I have *no* experience with
> *nix... well, no good experience. Some years ago I bought a $200
> Walmart machine which came with Lindows, a version of Linux. It had a
> number of apps which were flaky and I didn't see much utility to it.
> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
> installing Win2000 over it. The company was also pretty poor about
> meeting the license requirements. I thought they had to make the
> sources available in the same manner that they distributed the
> binary. When I first asked them about it they feigned ignorance.
> After nagging they shipped me a hand copied CD. When I received an
> update there were no sources. This time I was told that they were
> available on the web site. Yes, they were there, but as individual
> files which had to be downloaded one at a time.
That is what wget is good for.
> I have just never had a positive experience with linux. I don't know
> how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the investment
> to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate. There is also
> the research I would have to do to figure out *which* version of Linux
> I would want. How can Linux be standard if there are so many versions
> and each software vendor only supports a few?
I like scientific linux, see http://www.scientificlinux.org/
Albert van der Horst
rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 7, 12:13 am, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > [...]
>> > But if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
>> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista. I only wish I had a choice.
>>
>> You do. I have successfully installed Fedora 8 on an HP Pavillion
>> DV9620US.
>>
>> However one thing to be careful of in running linux on laptops is
>> Broadcom's stubborn refusal to open up their wireless card
>> specifications so that open source drivers can be developed. Translated:
>> don't buy a laptop with a Broadcom wireless card (or chipset) if you
>> want to run linux on it. Atheros I've heard is very good and supported
>> by madwifi.org.
>>
>> But, even though Broadcom is stubborn, I have still been successful at
>> getting the card to work on my home network. Unfortunately the reverse
>> engineered drivers (b43-fwcutter...) do not seem to support the Master
>> modes used in public hotspots.
>
>I knew someone would mention Linux. Linux is still an alien platform
>to me and there is any amount of software that is not supported under
>it... or I should say that there is any amount of software that is
>only supported on specific versions of Linux. If I run Fedora 8,
>maybe vendor X gives me support and vendor Y doesn't. I run Redhat
>and vendor X gives me support and vendor Z doesn't... etc, etc, etc.
Officially Dutch tax forms runs only under certain brands of linux,
not my brand. Guess what? The windows software is reasonably cross-
platform (withing windows that is).
Bottom line, the *windows* version of the tax forms installed and run
under wine on my Ubuntu 64 bit 7.03. (12 Megabyte to fill in 12 zero's
in a a form, but anyway). Including sending the completed form over
a safe channel.
>The reason that I still run windows at all is because for me, it is
>the only option. Currently Win2000 is the best that runs the minimum
>required set of software. If I want a laptop, my only choice
>currently is to buy a machine running XP which I can do for the next
>few weeks. After that there will be no choice on a new machine except
>for Vista. With a number of vendors not supporting that still, I will
>not have the option of buying a new laptop with an installed OS that
>runs the software I need.
My guess:
Windows package intended for XP run better on Ubuntu/wine than
one Windows Vista.
At least you can check it out at no cost.
>
>Rick
--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
Albert van der Horst
Vladimir Vassilevsky <antispa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>rickman wrote:
>
>> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
>> installing Win2000 over it.
>
>> So what exactly is better about Linux?
>
>I second your opinion regarding Linux. It is a toy of students and
>enthusiasts who are enjoying the process of configuring the computer
>instead of getting the actual job done hard and fast.
The OP has not so much on opinion about Linux as wel as bad
experiences, and is willing to learn.
The only hindrance to getting my job done on Linux is
when I meet deliberately created incompatibilities and
deviations from standards originating from you know who.
>
>BTW, why do you prefer Win2k rather then XP?
>
>
>Vladimir Vassilevsky
>DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
>http://www.abvolt.com
Haven't we met? (I'm the guy of the ESO optical delay line
in Paranal Chile, meeting the requirements of 14 nanometer
deviation RMS.)