New query for low cost PCB CAD that *works*
Robert Baer
demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the DOS
Orcad even run - so that is out.
PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene - unreadable
(Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
So what is left?
Roy Battell
Baer <rober...@earthlink.net> writes
Vutrax is available free up to 256 pins, with various
capacity options thereafter (pricing on website).
You can download the whole thing as manageable sized downloads
totalling about 10MB, including a detailed hands-on tutorial
viewed in an HTML browser and a range of libraries and
interface modules from
http://www.vutrax.co.uk (Main UK site)
http://www.bnellis.com/vutrax (Central Europe Mirror)
The basic package includes Schematic Capture, Technical Drawing,
Auto-placement, Auto-routers, Groundplanes, Powerplanes,
Design Checking, EMC, multitudinous outputs.
Available for Windows 95 through XP (x64 by arrangement) and Linux.
--
Roy Battell.
To use this address remove the digits included to remove Spam ...
Mail: ne...@vutrax666.co.uk
Robert Baer
Thanks, will give it a try.
Uwe Bonnes
Have a look at Cadsoft Eagle
--
Uwe Bonnes b...@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de
Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
John Devereux
> Robert Baer <rober...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download the
> > demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
> > And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the DOS
> > Orcad even run - so that is out.
> > PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene - unreadable
> > (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
> > So what is left?
>
> Have a look at Cadsoft Eagle
I heard Eagle is pretty good.
--
John Devereux
PH
Since you don't like Eagle and you want something low cost, you might
want to try out WinQCad from www.winqcad.com. The 499 pin version is
free. I use the schematic editor frequently, and I've found it to be
easy to use and stable. I have an old version of Protel that I prefer
for pcb layout, so I can't speak for the pcb layout part of it.
Ian Bell
Joerg
> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download the
> demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
C'mon, what irked you there? I switched from OrCad to Eagle and it took
very little time to figure it out. The only thing that I find a bit
clumsy versus OrCad is the library editor. That has a long learning
curve and doesn't offer a non-graphical parts generator.
Other than that I was drawing the first schematic within an hour after
download. Another few days of kicking tires won me over and I bought a
license.
Cadsoft is one of the very few companies who set up usenet type forums
for support and exchange between users. You can even pick the language.
Makes me wonder how many more parts TI or National would sell if they
did that.
Regards, Joerg
Robert Baer
> Robert Baer <rober...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download the
>>demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
>> And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the DOS
>>Orcad even run - so that is out.
>> PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene - unreadable
>>(Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
>> So what is left?
>
>
> Have a look at Cadsoft Eagle
Excuse me, did i not say that Eagle does not work (twice burned that
way)???
Robert Baer
I do understand that a number of people are lucky enough to have it
work - but both times i tried it, i could not add parts or delete parts.
I wasted a lot of time on each occasion downloading the progra, etc
and trying to do anything with it (besides waste time), and got nowhere.
That is why i excluded Eagle in my request.
Robert Baer
Thanks, will check it out.
Robert Baer
Thanks; added it to my growing list.
Robert Baer
Like i said before, if one cannot add or delete a part, what use is it?
If it worked / works for you, great.
It was worse than worthless for me.
Uwe Bonnes
> Like i said before, if one cannot add or delete a part, what use is it?
> If it worked / works for you, great.
> It was worse than worthless for me.
So tell us exactly what you do and perhaps we can help you.
Remember that the free version chokes to put anything outside the 100x80 mm
allowed area.
Bye
Chuck Harris
>
> Like i said before, if one cannot add or delete a part, what use is it?
> If it worked / works for you, great.
> It was worse than worthless for me.
Robert,
Computers are remarkably consistent in what they do, geographically. If it
doesn't work for you, it is likely that you are using some strange combination
of software and hardware. What operating system are you using, and about how
old is your computer?
-Chuck
DJ Delorie
Robert Baer <rober...@earthlink.net> writes:
> So what is left?
If you're a little adventerous, there's always gEDA - which is
absolutely free and has no design limits, although running it on a
windows machine might be tricky (it's designed for linux/unix).
I know of at least one person who used gEDA's PCB layout software to
do a 24 layer board, and it supports up to 32x32 inches at 0.01 mil
resolution.
JeffM
> DJ Delorie
Are you or Stuart in touch with Ales?
Any idea how the latest Windows port is coming?
DJ Delorie
"JeffM" <jef...@email.com> writes:
> Are you or Stuart in touch with Ales? Any idea how the latest
> Windows port is coming?
Yeah, we're all on the mailing lists. I work primarily on the PCB
layout program, so if you're asking about the other tools you'll have
to check the archives or ask on the mailing list.
Joerg
> Like i said before, if one cannot add or delete a part, what use is it?
> If it worked / works for you, great.
> It was worse than worthless for me.
I have no problem adding and deleting parts in Eagle.
Regards, Joerg
Robert Baer
Lemme see now; i run different OSes, on different drives, and prefer
to use Win2000, and i have a P5-2200 (GenuineIntel x86 Family 15 Model 2
Stepping 7); 1Gbte RAM.
Robert Baer
1) I downloaded the Vutrax "readme" and loader; VTXsetup.exe bitches
about non-exiatant master files.
Ignore the fact that it was too dumb to *create* a folder, it
certainly is incomplete if it cannot create those master files or "dial
home" for them.
So, what do i do to get it installed (it should be simple and not
require a lot of jumping thru hoops)?
2) I downloaded and sucessfully installed WinQcad. Seems to be useable,
maybe.
I need to create a library (done) and add a dual NPN in a SOT-323
package (well, partly done).
The "part" has the schematic of two NPNs inside the box and oriented
properly so one (theoretically) could draw connections from each element
(E, B, C) to pins of the package, BUT...
I cannot add pins to the package, i cannot even number the element
(assign pin numbers), i cannot change the labels (E1, B1, C1, E2, B2, C2).
The help document is not eXplicit enough to be of any help.
It was hard enough to figure out how to *copy* an NPN over to the new
"part", and it was a PITA doing that, especially with no clue that
closing "new part", opening NPN part, copy, close, open new part, paste,
etc would not lose any old info - much less the hassle.
So, how do i make the darn "part" complete on the electronic dwg side?
And then, i presume more hassle on the dimensioninf side...
Robert Baer
Good for you.
Chuck Harris
Hi Robert,
Ok, that sounds like it is within the range of what should work with Eagle.
I presume that you are using a mouse, and not some strange game console to
do your point and select?
Also, did you read the instructions, and try the demo?
There has to be a clue here somewhere, as tens of thousands use the program,
and find it useful.... and yet you cannot get it to do the simplest most
basic of commands.
-Chuck
Chuck Harris
Perhaps at this point, you should ask Joerg how to add and
delete parts in Eagle. I would bet that he can clear up
your problem. Eagle is intensely popular among hobbiests,
it works for them, it *should* work for you, if you use it
correctly.
-Chuck
James Morrison
> I do understand that a number of people are lucky enough to have it
> work - but both times i tried it, i could not add parts or delete parts.
> I wasted a lot of time on each occasion downloading the progra, etc
> and trying to do anything with it (besides waste time), and got nowhere.
> That is why i excluded Eagle in my request.
That is too bad for you. I also use Eagle almost exclusively (the only
time I don't is when a customer really wants design done in something
else, but that is rare and I often convince them to use Eagle instead).
IMHO, the differentiating factors are:
1) cost
2) support -- for such a low price there is great support
3) running time -- the core of Eagle has been going long before there
was a GUI around it so the algorithms have been used for a very long
time but a lot of people. This means that if there was a bug in there
it is 99.9999% likely to have already been found. That is my biggest
concern with newer, low cost solutions--if its low cost then they
haven't done a ton of testing because testing is expensive and the price
would have to be higher. With Eagle this testing has been done (perhaps
by past users--but that's to my benefit now).
The help is complete but it presupposes that you already know the answer
so that is its one downfall. This has been expressed many times and
will hopefully be addressed soon. Some users have a done a couple of
things to try to form a stop gap.
I use Eagle on Windows and Linux and I"m excited that it now runs on
Mac. Although with their new x86 announcement that isn't the biggest
deal that it once was.
If you want send me your design files and I'll see what is up.
Obviously you can add and delete components so something isn't quite
right.
Cheers,
James.
John Devereux
> Robert Baer wrote:
>
> > Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download
> > the demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
> > And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the
> > DOS Orcad even run - so that is out.
> > PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene -
> > unreadable (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
> > So what is left?
> 1) I downloaded the Vutrax "readme" and loader; VTXsetup.exe bitches
> about non-exiatant master files.
> Ignore the fact that it was too dumb to *create* a folder, it
> certainly is incomplete if it cannot create those master files or
> "dial home" for them.
> So, what do i do to get it installed (it should be simple and not
> require a lot of jumping thru hoops)?
You have to download the "system modules" too.
<http://www.vutrax.co.uk/winsystem.htm>
This information is on the download pages of their web site.
However, I suggest you use something else. Vutrax does, I'm afraid,
have some hoops to be jumped through!
(I have nothing against Vutrax. I have been using it exclusively in
successive incarnations for 15 years. But it is not for the faint
hearted... If you are not able or not prepared to interpret the
download instructions, it seems to me that there is not much chance
you are going to put in the much larger effort that is required to
master the program itself.)
--
John Devereux
PH
I know what you mean about the help file. It isn't very deep. Going
through the tutorial in the help file may help you get started.
When I am making schematic parts, I am usually in a hurry and don't try
to make the part look like a symbol, I just put down the number of pins
I need, name and number the pins, put a polyline rectangle around it to
give it form, and name the part. That only takes a couple of minutes,
and I can get on with the schematic.
If you wish to make a dual NPN that symbolically looks like two NPNs,
that should be fairly simple. Let me see if I can walk you through it.
1) Once I enter the Part Editor, I first selected the NPN_EBC part from
the Device library, and hit Copy beneath the Product column. In the
window that pops up, I enter my personal library, and the new product
name. After it is copied, I highlight my library and the new product
and hit Select.
2) You should see a single NPN on the screen. I then zoom out once or
twice by right clicking and hitting zoom out, just to make it easier to
work on. You'll find that a lot of things are done by right clicking,
which goes quickly once you get used to it.
3) Now left click and hold and draw a window around the part and
release. Select copy from the menu that pops up. Now right click and
select paste. Find a spot where you like the new copy and left click to
drop it.
4) Next you can edit the pins. Put the crosshairs on the pin and right
click and select modify. At the top of the screen you should see the
pin properties. Change those as you need and hit modify.
5) Since you only want one name and reference designator for the part,
right click on the ones you don't want and hit Cut, unless you didn't
copy those from the original in the first place.
6) That should get you a useable schematic symbol, so if you are done,
hit File and Save Product to save it.
Now, if you were making a new part from scratch, you would use the items
on the Object menu to place a pin or text or a polyline (that's the blue
lines). Modifying them works as above. Hope this helps.
PH
Joerg
> Perhaps at this point, you should ask Joerg how to add and
> delete parts in Eagle. I would bet that he can clear up
> your problem. Eagle is intensely popular among hobbiests,
> it works for them, it *should* work for you, if you use it
> correctly.
>
It's simple. Either you use the cross for deleting and the gate sign for
adding or do it via the menus. Since I am old fashioned and have a hard
time with pictograms and icons (ok, I admit it, I hate them...) here is
the classical way:
Edit -> Add (library window pops up to select what's added)
Edit -> Delete
That's pretty straight forward, I think.
Regards, Joerg
Robert Baer
I use a mouse and the demo did not work either.
I quit beating that dead horse after an hour of wasted time, so
forget it and help on the others if you can.
Robert Baer
No, i cannot add or delete parts; do not re-word what i stated
previously.
This was the second time out of the gate that Eagle demo did not
work, and as far as i am concerned, that is three times too many.
Now if someone was wwilling to *pay* me to waste my time f*ing around
with something that does not work, then it would have to be a *lot* of
money to pay my headshrink bills, as that would drive me nuts.
Robert Baer
Robert Baer
*Gack* !! over nine megs over POTS; a bit daunting, but at least it
is broken down.
Thanks.
Any other semi-hidden gotchas?
Like i said, why wasn't there a script that would do a full install
from scratch?
Robert Baer
..."edit the pins" is where i have the problem; new names and pin
numbers do not "stick". See what i said i would like (E1,B1,C1, etc) and
pin numbers as well (1...6).
That way, when i draw the schematic i can connect E2 to C1, B2 to V2,
etc.
> 5) Since you only want one name and reference designator for the part,
> right click on the ones you don't want and hit Cut, unless you didn't
> copy those from the original in the first place.
> 6) That should get you a useable schematic symbol, so if you are done,
> hit File and Save Product to save it.
...i do not remember seeing File or Save in the editing,but did find
that every change i made was saved (automatically?) so that does not
make me concerned.
>
> Now, if you were making a new part from scratch, you would use the items
> on the Object menu to place a pin or text or a polyline (that's the blue
> lines). Modifying them works as above. Hope this helps.
..did not get anywhere from scratch, so tried the copy schems which was
very sucessful.
...Will go back to WinQcad and try some more as you suggest.
John Devereux
> John Devereux wrote:
>
> > Robert Baer <rober...@earthlink.net> writes:
> >
> >>Robert Baer wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>1) I downloaded the Vutrax "readme" and loader; VTXsetup.exe bitches
> >>about non-exiatant master files.
> >> Ignore the fact that it was too dumb to *create* a folder, it
> >>certainly is incomplete if it cannot create those master files or
> >>"dial home" for them.
> >> So, what do i do to get it installed (it should be simple and not
> >>require a lot of jumping thru hoops)?
> > You have to download the "system modules" too.
> > <http://www.vutrax.co.uk/winsystem.htm>
> >
> *Gack* !! over nine megs over POTS; a bit daunting, but at least it
> is broken down.
You've not got broadband yet then... I just downloaded two 4.7GB DVDs
(ubuntu and knoppix linux)!
Seriously, I don't think that is a lot these days... ISTR e.g. the
xilinx web pack was several hundred MB. Vutrax is pretty compact and
efficient, probably because its pedigree dates from DOS days so it had
to be. (Although it has been windows-only for years now!)
> Thanks.
> Any other semi-hidden gotchas?
I imagine your main problem will be getting lost (both in the software
itself and in the documentation). Do the tutorials, look at the
supplied examples. I can help if you get stuck; the author hangs out
here too.
> Like i said, why wasn't there a script that would do a full install
> from scratch?
--
John Devereux
PH
causing a bit of confusion.
I wonder if you are editting the pins in the schematic editor instead of
the part editor. That may be where you are getting stuck. When you
first fire up the program, click on PartEdit instead of SchEdit. Then,
the instructions I gave before should be largely correct. When you are
editting pins, you should see Pin, Electrical Type, Shape, Pin Name, and
Pin Number at the top of the screen. There are also check boxes for
showing the Pin Name and Pin Number. Changing the Pin Number from 3 to
4,for example, and hitting Modify should set the change.
Now, for what you want to do, you probably don't want to show the Pin
Name because that seems to be locked onto the pin and can't be moved
around, and would make for an ugly symbol. You can place text next to
the pin seperately by clicking on the Place Text command on the Object
Menu. Then enter your text and hit place and drop it next to the pin.
Anything you do to the part in the part editor makes a single 'entity',
so to speak, that you move as a whole in the schematic editor, so the
text you are placing will follow the part.
If this still doesn't get you going, perhaps you could send me a picture
of what you are doing.
PH
Robert Baer
> I realized I was using a slightly older version, and that may have been
> causing a bit of confusion.
>
> I wonder if you are editting the pins in the schematic editor instead of
> the part editor. That may be where you are getting stuck. When you
> first fire up the program, click on PartEdit instead of SchEdit. Then,
> the instructions I gave before should be largely correct. When you are
> editting pins, you should see Pin, Electrical Type, Shape, Pin Name, and
> Pin Number at the top of the screen. There are also check boxes for
> showing the Pin Name and Pin Number. Changing the Pin Number from 3 to
> 4,for example, and hitting Modify should set the change.
>
> Now, for what you want to do, you probably don't want to show the Pin
> Name because that seems to be locked onto the pin and can't be moved
> around, and would make for an ugly symbol. You can place text next to
> the pin seperately by clicking on the Place Text command on the Object
> Menu. Then enter your text and hit place and drop it next to the pin.
> Anything you do to the part in the part editor makes a single 'entity',
> so to speak, that you move as a whole in the schematic editor, so the
> text you are placing will follow the part.
>
> If this still doesn't get you going, perhaps you could send me a picture
> of what you are doing.
>
> PH
------------- SNIPped for brevity -------------
I was definitely in Part Edit, and the headings were as you mentioned.
I will just have to set aside some time to work some more at it; been
busy on making a quick and dirty HV regulator tester...
Andy Peters
> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download the
> demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
> And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the DOS
> Orcad even run - so that is out.
> PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene - unreadable
> (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
> So what is left?
This is probably not at all helpful, but I haven't found an inexpensive
PCB layout tool that's worth the money you pay for it.
I found Eagle to be very frustrating, but I suppose that's because the
user interface is completely kooky.
And, I guess my point is that once you're used to better tools --
Protel DXP or PCAD, to name two, and Mentor if you've got VC funding --
you find that the cheap tools don't do what you want them to do, or if
they do, then not as efficiently as more-expensive tools.
-a
Ian Bell
>
> And, I guess my point is that once you're used to better tools --
> Protel DXP or PCAD, to name two, and Mentor if you've got VC funding --
> you find that the cheap tools don't do what you want them to do, or if
> they do, then not as efficiently as more-expensive tools.
>
I don't think this is entirely true. Some years ago we did an extensive
survey of EDA tools covering schematic capture, simulation and PCB layout.
We were not particularly financially restrained, believing it is worth
investing in the right tools. We look at a very wide range of products from
quite low cost up to Mentor and the like.
In the end after extensive tests we decided an a system at the Mentor
level/cost (I won't mention the name). It was a disaster. It was not at all
efficient. After much soul searching we sent it back and got something much
cheaper that was far more intuitive and cheap to run.
Ian
John Devereux
And that was.....??? Come on, don't leave us in suspense!
--
John Devereux
Genome
"John Devereux" <jdRE...@THISdevereux.me.uk> wrote in message
news:87hd9si...@cordelia.devereux.me.uk...
> Ian Bell <ruffr...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>
> And that was.....??? Come on, don't leave us in suspense!
>
> --
>
> John Devereux
I have minimal experience of such things but.... Cadstar.
DNA
Robert Baer
Actually, i liked Ivex WinBoard - took me only a few hours to make it
useful for a small project, and useage grew from there.
Finally bought a pin upgrade, and then another.
Made my own library to add parts not covered; liked the library
compiler/decompiler.
But it does not do SMT on both sides.
However, i do like that one does not have to have a schematic.
Robert Baer
Name of the program please?
Robert Baer
Hmmmm...Cadstar starts nice on price, but is impossible to get via
the net (i am on POTS).
And... where do i find about the price?????????????????
Ian Bell
This is difficult. This process took place about 10 years ago and since then
I have had a couple of nervous breakdowns (not CAD related ;-) ) and my
memory is quite hazy about specifics. Also I retired from that company 5
years ago. Anyway, I cannot remember, but I will email one of my old
colleagues there and ask him.
Ian
Genome
"Robert Baer" <rober...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:36Vjf.4249$A23....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
You might phone up the distributor and ask them to send you a CD.
If you don't want the hassle of being tagged by sales droids then you might
get a local 'mate' with a faster connection to download it...
Failing that, if you want to be really silly give me your address and I'll
snail mail it to you.... I'm in the UK!!!
Mind you, based on past experience I wouldn't recommend it.
DNA
Franck PISSOTTE
> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download the
> demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
> And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the DOS
> Orcad even run - so that is out.
> PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene - unreadable
> (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
> So what is left?
i also don't like eagle, kicad, etc
many have strange insert and delete items.
also poor library with missing common components.
the only who survived is <http://www.diptrace.com/>
but i have not really used it at this time.
--
http://www.pascaland.org/ compilateurs, sources et liens langage pascal, delphi
http://www.maitre-asimov.fr.st/ ma collection des oeuvres d'Isaac Asimov
http://franck.pissotte.perso.cegetel.net/perso/avendre.htm vide grenier: vieux matos, logiciels, livres, revues
Robert Baer
What was it about Cadstar that turned you off?
BTW, i e-mailed them asking how much a CD would cost (amhere in the
US west coast).
Will keep you in mind.
Thanks.
Robert Baer
> Le 26/11/2005 06:24, Robert Baer a ecrit :
>
>> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download
>> the demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
>> And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the
>> DOS Orcad even run - so that is out.
>> PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene -
>> unreadable (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
>> So what is left?
>
>
> i also don't like eagle, kicad, etc
>
> many have strange insert and delete items.
> also poor library with missing common components.
>
> the only who survived is <http://www.diptrace.com/>
> but i have not really used it at this time.
I do not mind incomplete libraries; most waste HD space for me.
But the software must support the creation and editing of new part
footprints.
Robert Baer
> Le 26/11/2005 06:24, Robert Baer a ecrit :
>
>> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download
>> the demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
>> And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the
>> DOS Orcad even run - so that is out.
>> PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene -
>> unreadable (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
>> So what is left?
>
>
> i also don't like eagle, kicad, etc
>
> many have strange insert and delete items.
> also poor library with missing common components.
>
> the only who survived is <http://www.diptrace.com/>
> but i have not really used it at this time.
Thanks for mentioning Diptrace, will check it out.
Ian Bell
>
> i also don't like eagle, kicad, etc
>
> many have strange insert and delete items.
> also poor library with missing common components.
>
One thing to note is that with any EDA package you are going to need to
develop your own parts library. There are so many parts out there it is not
possible or desirable for any vendor (or set of users) to provide library
parts for even a substantial fraction of them all. Rather you should see
the provided libraries only as a starting point to illustrate what can be
done and to provide libraries for very generic parts like resistors and
capacitors.
Ian
Ian Bell
OK, I checked with my old colleague. The one we chose but then went off was
Veribest. The one we changed to was Protel.
Ian
John Devereux
> John Devereux wrote:
>
> >
> > And that was.....??? Come on, don't leave us in suspense!
> >
>
> OK, I checked with my old colleague. The one we chose but then went off was
> Veribest. The one we changed to was Protel.
Thanks.. was curious.
--
John Devereux
Andy Peters
> OK, I checked with my old colleague. The one we chose but then went off was
> Veribest. The one we changed to was Protel.
Veribest was later renamed Mentor Expedition PCB.
It's remarkably powerful, but at the cost of intensive training. It's
probably overkill if you're not doing packed boards with 0402 passives,
BGAs on both sides, and 24 layers of impedance-matched traces.
I find Protel DXP and PCAD to both be very workable, although their
notions of libraries and design rules and other major features are very
different. Neither is inexpensive. Electronics Workbench Ultiboard
works, too (I have the 2001 version and haven't "upgraded"), although
its backannotation feature (changes from layout back to schematics) is
broken.
-a
Stuart Brorson
: i also don't like eagle, kicad, etc
I'd be curious to hear why you don't like Kicad.
Stuart
Robert Baer
Am still experimenting on WinQcad, but i think i am ready to move on
and see if VuTrax is better.
Good thing that VTX has their 9Mbytes split in 3 pieces, because i
lost dial connection in the muddle of one download.
If that had happened in the muddle of a 9Mbyte download, i would have
quit and asked for a CD.
Seems my "try" list is growing...
Got an e-mail response to DipTrace, and ordered a trial CD from them
($9.95).
Got an e-mail response from CadStar with an un-useable password for
their ZIP file which i cannot get (am on POTS).
Genome
> Seems my "try" list is growing...
> Got an e-mail response to DipTrace, and ordered a trial CD from them
> ($9.95).
> Got an e-mail response from CadStar with an un-useable password for
> their ZIP file which i cannot get (am on POTS).
Oh..... I see from your headers that you are running Windows 98. Crapstar
needs Windows 2000 or better to work.
DNA
Jim
very much yet., but it looks to be a pretty easy to use program.
It does not have the complicated library problems that an integrated
Schematic/PCB program has, so it is possible to use the same component
footprint for different parts and not have to create a separate library
entry for each part.
Jim Pennell
--
12:00 Pacific Time Zone
Dec 3 2005
International Time
20:00 UTC
03.12.2005
JeffM
>because i lost dial connection in the muddle of one download.
Tell me you're not serious.
You don't use a Download Manager
that will allow you to resume a broken download?
Ian Bell
> Ian Bell wrote:
>
>> OK, I checked with my old colleague. The one we chose but then went off
>> was Veribest. The one we changed to was Protel.
>
> Veribest was later renamed Mentor Expedition PCB.
>
> It's remarkably powerful, but at the cost of intensive training. It's
> probably overkill if you're not doing packed boards with 0402 passives,
> BGAs on both sides, and 24 layers of impedance-matched traces.
>
> I find Protel DXP and PCAD to both be very workable, although their
> notions of libraries and design rules and other major features are very
> different. Neither is inexpensive.
Depends on your definition of expensive, but relative to Veribest, Protel
was cheap.
Ian
Robert Baer
I run multiple OSes; Win2K is my OS of choice for "large" and/or
"fancy" programs.
I have been running all of my testing on Win2K.
Thanks for the info!
Robert Baer
> Here is a PCB program that is board layout ONLY. I have not used it
> very much yet., but it looks to be a pretty easy to use program.
>
> It does not have the complicated library problems that an integrated
> Schematic/PCB program has, so it is possible to use the same component
> footprint for different parts and not have to create a separate library
> entry for each part.
>
>
>
> http://www.freepcb.com/
>
>
> Jim Pennell
>
Do you mean that only *one* footprint is needed without regard to
which PCB side the SMT is put on?
Or stated differently, can a SMT part be put on either side of a board?
That program may be a welcome "visitor" on my HD!
Thanks; adding it to my list of proggies to test.
**
WOW!
I see that footprints are from Ivex - and i have the Ivex WinBoard,
meaning that (maybe) the footprints inmy created library may work in
FreePCB (!).
Robert Baer
Those work *only* when there is "cooperation" at the other end...
JeffM
>>that will allow you to resume a broken download?
>
>Those work *only* when there is "cooperation" at the other end...
You make that sound like a rare occourance.
I find the inverse to be true.
So, has your preconception kept you from installing one?
Chuck Harris
>>> You don't use a Download Manager
>>> that will allow you to resume a broken download?
>>> JeffM
>> Those work *only* when there is "cooperation" at the other end...
Not so Robert! The website has no idea who or what is asking
for the information. What it does know is the "what" sends
it the location of the file desired (URL), and which block is currently
required. You can ask for the different blocks in the
file in any order you want. The download protocol is supposed
to ask for bad blocks to be repeated until they are successfully
downloaded.
There are a number of nice download managers that will go to
the 7 seas to make sure that a file is downloaded completely.
It shouldn't come as any big surprise that the one included with
Internet Explorer doesn't do a good job. Not even the one that
comes with Mozilla, or Firefox does all that good of a job. At
least with the Mozilla download manager, you can set how tenacious
it is.
-Chuck
JeffM
>>>that will allow you to resume a broken download?
>>> JeffM
>>Those work *only* when there is "cooperation" at the other end...
>> Robert Baer
>You can ask for the different blocks in the file
>in any order you want.
> Chuck Harris
>
That seems logical,
but IME, *Resume* is at the option of the site admin.
.
.
>the one included with Internet Explorer doesn't do a good job.
>
You do a disservice to real Download Managers
by lumping that M$ crap in with the rest.
.
.
>Not even the one that comes with Mozilla, or Firefox
>does all that good of a job.
>
Amen.
GetRight has been around a long time
and has gotten it mostly right since way back.
With GetRight, you sometimes get a warning in the dialog box[1]
that says that the site does not allow *Resume*.
.
.
.
[1] I LOVE the 4th box in the corner (a dot)
that allows you to *Minimize to Tray*.
I wish more apps had that.
Robert Baer
I do not use IE; i *RIPPED* it out by its guts from Win98SE and as
much as possible (but impossible to completely) in Win2K.
Chuck Harris
>> It shouldn't come as any big surprise that the one included with
>> Internet Explorer doesn't do a good job. Not even the one that
>> comes with Mozilla, or Firefox does all that good of a job. At
>> least with the Mozilla download manager, you can set how tenacious
>> it is.
>>
>> -Chuck
> I do not use IE; i *RIPPED* it out by its guts from Win98SE and as
> much as possible (but impossible to completely) in Win2K.
Good, very sensible! I see that you are using Netscape 7.2. Dare I
presume that you are using Netscape 7.2 for downloading files off of
the web?
I had a lot of trouble with Netscape saying that it had downloaded the
complete file, only to find that it had actually quit after being only
part of the way done.
For FTP downloads, I use ProZilla, which unfortunately for you, only
runs under linux, and other unix like operating systems... but what
I describe will give you an idea of what is possible:
ProZilla goes out to the ftp site, and starts up to 4 different requests
for the file. The first asks for the first quarter, the second, the second
quarter, the third, the third quarter, and the fourth, the fourth quarter,
and it merrily sucks all four quarters of the file from the site at one
time. It won't quit until you stop it, or it has successfully downloaded
the entire file.
The server side has no say in whether or not you can resume a download. It
is entirely up to your download manager... and as I said, even the one
in Mozilla, and Firefox is not very good. The one in Netscape seems to be
even worse. The transaction that goes on during a file download is one where
your manager passes the number of the block it wants to the server, and the
server sends the block. Your download manager could ask for the blocks in the
reverse order, or random order if it wanted to. The server side would neither
know, nor care.
Try googling the following words: "download" "manager" "windows"
It should get you a whole pile of download managers that will work under
netscrape on windoze.
One other thing I would suggest you do, is abandon netscape, and download
mozilla suite 1.7 from http://www.mozilla.org
It is a much better implementation than the ad ridden mess that netscape
became after being bought by AOL.
-Chuck
David Brown
> Robert Baer wrote:
>
>>> It shouldn't come as any big surprise that the one included with
>>> Internet Explorer doesn't do a good job. Not even the one that
>>> comes with Mozilla, or Firefox does all that good of a job. At
>>> least with the Mozilla download manager, you can set how tenacious
>>> it is.
>>>
>>> -Chuck
>> I do not use IE; i *RIPPED* it out by its guts from Win98SE and as
>> much as possible (but impossible to completely) in Win2K.
>
> Good, very sensible! I see that you are using Netscape 7.2. Dare I
> presume that you are using Netscape 7.2 for downloading files off of
> the web?
>
> I had a lot of trouble with Netscape saying that it had downloaded the
> complete file, only to find that it had actually quit after being only
> part of the way done.
>
It is IE that has the real reputation for doing exactly that (although
Netscape might do it too).
> For FTP downloads, I use ProZilla, which unfortunately for you, only
> runs under linux, and other unix like operating systems... but what
> I describe will give you an idea of what is possible:
>
> ProZilla goes out to the ftp site, and starts up to 4 different requests
> for the file. The first asks for the first quarter, the second, the second
> quarter, the third, the third quarter, and the fourth, the fourth quarter,
> and it merrily sucks all four quarters of the file from the site at one
> time. It won't quit until you stop it, or it has successfully downloaded
> the entire file.
>
Sounds much like many other download managers. I find Free Download
Manager http://www.freedownloadmanager.org/ a pretty good solution for
windows.
> The server side has no say in whether or not you can resume a download. It
> is entirely up to your download manager... and as I said, even the one
> in Mozilla, and Firefox is not very good. The one in Netscape seems to be
> even worse. The transaction that goes on during a file download is one
> where
> your manager passes the number of the block it wants to the server, and the
> server sends the block. Your download manager could ask for the blocks
> in the
> reverse order, or random order if it wanted to. The server side would
> neither
> know, nor care.
>
That's not actually true. Almost all ftp servers will support resumed
download by default, but it can be disabled and some older servers do
not support it by default. However, these days it is very rare to find
an ftp server that does not support resume (although many will limit the
simultaneous connections to a single IP address). Similarly, http
servers do not necessarily support resume - although most do, there is
still a substantial proportion that do not.
Still, using a decent download manager is strongly recommended.
> Try googling the following words: "download" "manager" "windows"
>
> It should get you a whole pile of download managers that will work under
> netscrape on windoze.
>
> One other thing I would suggest you do, is abandon netscape, and download
> mozilla suite 1.7 from http://www.mozilla.org
>
> It is a much better implementation than the ad ridden mess that netscape
> became after being bought by AOL.
>
You should then abandon the mozilla suite, and download firefox (and
thunderbird for mail, if you want to switch mail client too). The
mozilla suite itself is pretty much dead-end - all its developers are
concentrating on firefox. Opera is another solid choice, if you like
its style.
> -Chuck
Chuck Harris
>>
>> It is a much better implementation than the ad ridden mess that netscape
>> became after being bought by AOL.
>>
>
> You should then abandon the mozilla suite, and download firefox (and
> thunderbird for mail, if you want to switch mail client too). The
> mozilla suite itself is pretty much dead-end - all its developers are
> concentrating on firefox. Opera is another solid choice, if you like
> its style.
Mozilla suite is vastly superior to the firefox/thunderbird combination.
It has a better user interface, a smaller footprint, and it has a chat
(IRC) feature, web development editors (composers), and javascript debuggers
all in one package.
Even combined with thunderbird, firefox cannot do even one half of what
mozilla suite does, and does well. MOFO were idiots for dumping the
suite in favor of the buggy IE/OE clones firefox and thunderbird.
The sole and only reason they did it was because MS had IE and OE separate.
Mozilla suite is currently being developed as the Seamonkey project.
-Chuck
JeffM
>>>that netscape became after being bought by AOL.
>
>Mozilla suite is vastly superior to the firefox/thunderbird combination.
>.
> Even combined with thunderbird, firefox cannot do even one half
>of what mozilla suite does, and does well.
>.
> Mozilla suite is currently being developed as the Seamonkey project.
>
I'm glad I'm late to this part of the thread.
You have done the yeoman work masterfully.
For those who are still (inexplicably) unconvinced:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/19/0424229&threshold=4&mode=nested#13595268
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/19/0424229&threshold=4&mode=nested#13594677
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:gbYGKr8-uJMJ:wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey:Reasons+*-*-*-*-*-*-*-plugins-*-*-*-*-basic-functionality+polished+history-manager+*-was-not-done+*-*-*-*-*-download-plugins-*-provide-*-basic-functionality+Text-only-*-*-*-*-*-icons+history-manager+*-one-set-*-*-libraries+more-*-*-Edit-Preferences+edit-*-*-with-Composer+polished+animated-*+quicklaunch
.
.
:::ProZilla [Linux]...starts up to 4 different requests for the file.
::: Chuck Harris
:::
There you go. GetRight (Windoze) can do up to 6 segments.
There is absolutely no reason
why anyone should struggle with broken downloads.
Robert Baer
I have had zero problems downloading using NS72 - providing the line
stayed connected (dropped only once during a 3Mbyte download).
And i have seen where it had no idea as to the file length - but
still zero problems.
So assuming i find a decent DLM that will be happy with NS, how would
i "inhibit" the NS DLM and "enable" the !foreign! one?
Robert Baer
That free DLM *demands* IE, so it is useless for me.
Robert Baer
...At least GetRight supports NS; they do not say how much and do not
say anything about limitations on the free download version.
Robert Baer
> Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download the
> demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
> And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the DOS
> Orcad even run - so that is out.
> PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene - unreadable
> (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
> So what is left?
So far i have tried WinQcad, VuTrax and DipTrace.
I have nits to pick on all of them, but DipTrace has the fewest and
smallest.
Have e-mail queries out for demo CDs and pricing (why is it that so
few say anything about pricing?).
If there is no response within 5 days, the "option" is dropped.
Chuck Harris
>> One other thing I would suggest you do, is abandon netscape, and download
>> mozilla suite 1.7 from http://www.mozilla.org
>>
>> It is a much better implementation than the ad ridden mess that netscape
>> became after being bought by AOL.
>>
>> -Chuck
> I have had zero problems downloading using NS72 - providing the line
> stayed connected (dropped only once during a 3Mbyte download).
I keep my POTS line and modem up 24/7, for months at a time. I routinely
download files that at hundreds of megabytes in size. I just set them up
to go overnight.
> And i have seen where it had no idea as to the file length - but still
> zero problems.
When I do have problems, I think it is more a matter of the server end
timing out on my download. The server master has set the maximum download
interval to be shorter than the time required to download using a POTS
modem.
>
> So assuming i find a decent DLM that will be happy with NS, how would
> i "inhibit" the NS DLM and "enable" the !foreign! one?
The DLM will have instructions on how to install it. Basically, it is
just a plugin.
Mozilla 1.7.x and Seamonkey are a better browser suite than Netscape. Netscape
is customized adaptation of Mozilla, so they share almost all of the same
code. But many of the things Netscape (AOL) did to customize Mozilla are
not appropriate to folks that don't use AOL, and they left out some interesting
tidbits.
-Chuck
JeffM
>
I use Gecko and GetRight--works for me.
Sometimes I have to do (Copy URL to Clipboard)
File; Enter New URL ; (Auto-Pasted).
.
.
>and do not say anything about limitations on the free download version.
>
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:tJZvFrScneoJ:www.getright.com/statement.html+we-*-only-make-money-if-you-buy-GetRight+For-versions-of-GetRight-higher-than-*-*+*-banner-ads-have-been-removed
Earlier versions:
http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=getright
Note: I use Opera 6 to go to this site.
Mozilla has choked on it before.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=getright
(I think the site has been tweaked since I had problems.)
Robert Baer
I do not use AOL or anything related to it (eg: AIM) and refuse to do
so unless someone wants to pay me $2,000,000 tax free.
John Devereux
> Robert Baer wrote:
>
> > Do not mention Eagle, i wasted a lot of time on POTS to download
> > the demo version, and again, it was totally useless.
> > And i was unable to figure out what files wer needed to make the
> > DOS Orcad even run - so that is out.
> > PCB123 is out, because the manual is worse than obscene -
> > unreadable (Acrobat sez it is corrupted and cannot fix it).
> > So what is left?
> So far i have tried WinQcad, VuTrax and DipTrace.
> I have nits to pick on all of them, but DipTrace has the fewest and
> smallest.
Never heard of DipTrace, but it actually looks pretty nice.
> Have e-mail queries out for demo CDs and pricing (why is it that so
> few say anything about pricing?).
Uh.. click on the "order diptrace" link. Looks like it goes from free
to $495. Downloads from 8.5 to 20.6MB.
> If there is no response within 5 days, the "option" is dropped.
--
John Devereux
Chuck Harris
> Chuck Harris wrote:
>> Mozilla 1.7.x and Seamonkey are a better browser suite than Netscape.
>> Netscape
>> is customized adaptation of Mozilla, so they share almost all of the same
>> code. But many of the things Netscape (AOL) did to customize Mozilla are
>> not appropriate to folks that don't use AOL, and they left out some
>> interesting
>> tidbits.
>>
>> -Chuck
> I do not use AOL or anything related to it (eg: AIM) and refuse to do
> so unless someone wants to pay me $2,000,000 tax free.
Sure you do, you use Netscape. AOL bought Netscape (the company), and then
proceeded to recast Netscape (the browser) in their image. You may not be
using AOL's network services, but you are using their browser.
Mozilla 1.7 suite (no longer supported), and SeaMonkey (fully supported) are
the same browser, but without AOL's "enhancements".
-Chuck
David Brown
<snip>
> That free DLM *demands* IE, so it is useless for me.
Sure, Free Download Manager supports IE - but it also works perfectly
with Firefox (especially with the FlashGot extension), and I'm sure is
happy with Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, or whatever else you want.
David Brown
Well, I guess it's all a matter of personal opinion - and to be honest,
it's a good while since I tried Seamonkey. I don't see browsing and
email as related (nor chat, which I don't use, nor html editing, which I
seldom do). Prior to switching to Firefox, I used Opera as my main
browser - but never it's email client.
There is plenty that could be done to improve Firefox (in particular, it
should be made much easier and clearer to new users how to get
extensions, and there should be a hierarchy of "standard", "specialised"
and "experimental" extensions to make it easier to quickly get what you
need). But it is in no way an IE clone - I have recently been
unfortunate enough to have to use IE, and it is not remotely as
convenient and useful a browser as Firefox or Opera (ignoring little
details like security...).
Seamonkey may be actively developed, but www.mozilla.org relegates it to
"Other software", and www.mozilla.com fails to mention it at all. That
should give a fair idea of the priorities of the Mozilla Foundation.
As for footprints - there is also the download footprint to consider, at
least for Robert - Firefox is much smaller than Mozilla.
But the choice is good - Mozilla for those that want a suite, and
Firefox/Thunderbird for those that don't.
mvh.,
David
Robert Baer
They did not say that; they only said IE, period.
David Brown
You're right - they do say that on the web page. It seems a bit odd,
given that they have explicit support for Opera, Netscape and Firefox in
the program. The website is pretty skimpy on details of the program -
it certainly doesn't make FDM look like a must-have utility. However,
I've tried a few download managers over the years, and FDM is the best
I've used. It does everything I need, integrates well with my browser,
and although it is not open-source, it is free to use (i.e., not
shareware or adware).
Chuck Harris
> Chuck Harris wrote:
>> Even combined with thunderbird, firefox cannot do even one half of what mozilla suite does, and does well. MOFO
>> were idiots for dumping the suite in favor of the buggy IE/OE clones firefox and thunderbird. The sole and only
>> reason they did it was because MS had IE and OE separate.
>>
>> Mozilla suite is currently being developed as the Seamonkey project.
>>
>> -Chuck
>
> Well, I guess it's all a matter of personal opinion - and to be honest, it's a good while since I tried Seamonkey. I
> don't see browsing and email as related (nor chat, which I don't use, nor html editing, which I seldom do). Prior
> to switching to Firefox, I used Opera as my main browser - but never it's email client.
I can't speak to Opera, as the last time I tried it was many years ago, and
I discarded it in favor of Netscape.
>
> There is plenty that could be done to improve Firefox (in particular, it should be made much easier and clearer to
> new users how to get extensions, and there should be a hierarchy of "standard", "specialised" and "experimental"
> extensions to make it easier to quickly get what you need). But it is in no way an IE clone
Firefox is much better than IE... the text based browser lynx is much better than
IE ;-)
Firefox MOFO split up the Mozilla suite into Firefox, and Thunderbird, (and a couple other elements that
have completely vanished) in order to make it appear to be resource equivalent to IE/OE. They
reasoned that the unwashed Microsloth masses were used to having the browser and email/news
client be a smaller separate package, so they felt that they could gain more "market share"
with a split product.
- I have recently been
> unfortunate enough to have to use IE, and it is not remotely as convenient and useful a browser as Firefox or Opera
> (ignoring little details like security...).
>
> Seamonkey may be actively developed, but www.mozilla.org relegates it to "Other software", and www.mozilla.com fails
> to mention it at all. That should give a fair idea of the priorities of the Mozilla Foundation.
MOFO, abandoned Mozilla Suite completely. So, the SeaMonkey project was created
to carry on the development of the Suite. It is independent of MOFO, though it is
lead by several of the original development crew.
>
> As for footprints - there is also the download footprint to consider, at least for Robert - Firefox is much smaller
> than Mozilla.
You only have to download it once. With Firefox, and Thunderbird, the
total download footprint exceeds Seamonkey/Mozilla Suite.
Only if you don't like to keep your email client open while you browse.
I keep my email client active at all times... though it may be in the background.
It is essential that the client be active if you want to be informed when
new email arrives.
About 50% of the code in Firefox and Thunderbird is common to both applications.
When you have both Firefox and Thunderbird active at the same time, there are
duplicate copies of this code running on your computer. Mozilla Suite and SeaMonkey
take advantage of this fact, and only keep one copy of that common code in memory.
This produces a significantly smaller footprint.
>
> But the choice is good - Mozilla for those that want a suite, and Firefox/Thunderbird for those that don't.
Except that the idiots at MOFO decided to remove that choice from their user
base. They decided to direct themselves from "scratching their own itch" to
cowtowing to the unwashed masses that use Microsloth OE and IE.
The Seamonkey project was created to restore the choice that MOFO removed.
-Chuck
David Brown
> David Brown wrote:
>
<snip>
> Only if you don't like to keep your email client open while you browse.
> I keep my email client active at all times... though it may be in the
> background.
> It is essential that the client be active if you want to be informed when
> new email arrives.
>
> About 50% of the code in Firefox and Thunderbird is common to both
> applications.
> When you have both Firefox and Thunderbird active at the same time,
> there are
> duplicate copies of this code running on your computer. Mozilla Suite
> and SeaMonkey
> take advantage of this fact, and only keep one copy of that common code
> in memory.
> This produces a significantly smaller footprint.
>>
>> But the choice is good - Mozilla for those that want a suite, and
>> Firefox/Thunderbird for those that don't.
>
> Except that the idiots at MOFO decided to remove that choice from their
> user
> base. They decided to direct themselves from "scratching their own
> itch" to
> cowtowing to the unwashed masses that use Microsloth OE and IE.
>
> The Seamonkey project was created to restore the choice that MOFO removed.
>
> -Chuck
This apparently seems a strange idea to you, but I *choose* to have
separate applications for email and for browsing. I invariably have
both open at the same time, but whether or not they share a code base is
basically irrelevant to me. At work, I use OE for email - mainly due to
the effort involved in changing, rather than because I think it is
particularly good. With appropriate safeguards, it's done a serviceable
job. I use thunderbird for news, and firefox for most of my browsing.
On linux, I've used a couple of different email clients and a couple of
different browsers. I really don't see why my choice of browser should
in any way influence my choice of email client - saving 10 or 20 MB of
run-time memory footprint is not a good reason.
It seems strange to me that you think the only reason anyone would
prefer firefox and thunderbird is because they are in some way
brainwashed from over-use of Microsoft software, or that this is the
only reason firefox was created in the first place. If anything, it is
far more in keeping with *nix philosophy to have separate applications
for separate purposes, with choices for each job, and far more in
keeping with windows philosophy to have a single monolithic application
doing several partly-related jobs. And just because Microsoft makes a
particular design decision, does not necessarily make that design bad,
nor does it mean that anyone making a similar design is copying them.
Firefox was originally created by people who felt that the development
of Mozilla suite was too slow, the code too large and monolithic, and
the gui system too complicated. They decided to take the rendering
back-end and make a lighter, simpler dedicated browser around it. It
turned out to be so popular that people prefer it to the original.
The people at MOFO were not "idiots", and they did not "remove the
choice from their user base". They looked at what people wanted, and
what people used, and what their developers wanted to work on - and thus
concentrated on Firefox and Thunderbird. These are all open source
applications - no one can remove your choices. As long as there are
people interested in using and developing Seamonkey, then it's
development continues, and everyone has the choice.
Anton Erasmus
wrote:
>Andy Peters wrote:
>
>> Ian Bell wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I checked with my old colleague. The one we chose but then went off
>>> was Veribest. The one we changed to was Protel.
>>
>> Veribest was later renamed Mentor Expedition PCB.
>>
>> It's remarkably powerful, but at the cost of intensive training. It's
>> probably overkill if you're not doing packed boards with 0402 passives,
>> BGAs on both sides, and 24 layers of impedance-matched traces.
>>
>> I find Protel DXP and PCAD to both be very workable, although their
>> notions of libraries and design rules and other major features are very
>> different. Neither is inexpensive.
>
>Depends on your definition of expensive, but relative to Veribest, Protel
>was cheap.
>
When Protel first came out it was very cheap. Once it became popular
the price went up dramatically, and the quality of their support shot
down. It is extremely clear that the current programmers on Protel,
have never used the program to do a real design. They have added
all sorts of fluff that slows everything down, and they keep trying to
forcefeed their idea of how one should organise one's design files.
Regards
Anton Erasmus
Andrzej XTC
> do a 24 layer board, and it supports up to 32x32 inches at 0.01 mil
> resolution.
I'm impressed - really...
Doesn't PCB module have limitation to let's say 12 or 16 layers???
I'm trying to find some usefull software since I switched to linux...
At work I use p99SE&DXP so it's a bit hard for me to "step back" at home
I've tried gEDA - what dissapoints me most is the tone of posts on
forums - where all problems are ended with "the bigger pro is the fact
that this software exists".
When I've read that updating from sch do pcb is so hard because there
are mismatches with footprint names - my eyes started to open widely 8-|
My first problem was "so how can I know what list of footprint is
avaliable?" - I've discovered that many people add elements to PCB
manually so in fact it isn't so important to have correct footprints
definitions at schematic level.
But - I didn't give up yet.
I tried Eagle also - looks very easy to use but somehow different from
flexibility of protel series - I didn't try to define my own elements
so probably I haven't seen many problems yet.
I'll try kicad and vutrax since there are linux ports.
XTC
Ian Bell
>> I know of at least one person who used gEDA's PCB layout software to
>> do a 24 layer board, and it supports up to 32x32 inches at 0.01 mil
>> resolution.
>
> I'm impressed - really...
> Doesn't PCB module have limitation to let's say 12 or 16 layers???
> I'm trying to find some usefull software since I switched to linux...
> At work I use p99SE&DXP so it's a bit hard for me to "step back" at home
> I've tried gEDA - what dissapoints me most is the tone of posts on
> forums - where all problems are ended with "the bigger pro is the fact
> that this software exists".
> When I've read that updating from sch do pcb is so hard because there
> are mismatches with footprint names - my eyes started to open widely 8-|
> My first problem was "so how can I know what list of footprint is
> avaliable?" - I've discovered that many people add elements to PCB
> manually so in fact it isn't so important to have correct footprints
> definitions at schematic level.
Have you tried Kicad? Open source and runs on Windows or linux. Find it
here:
http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
Ian
Andrzej XTC
> here:
>
> http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
In fact - I've heard about kicad today - when I've come to an idea to
look for some newsgroup about gEDA.
I've read this topic and I've downloaded both kicad and vutrax.
I'll try them tommorow.
XTC
DJ Delorie
Andrzej XTC <xtc...@interia.pl> writes:
> Doesn't PCB module have limitation to let's say 12 or 16 layers???
PCB is provided in source form. Change globalconst.c from this:
#define MAX_LAYER 8
to this:
#define MAX_LAYER 24
and recompile, and it just works. There are a few gotchas, like there
are no defined layer colors above 8 at the moment and one binary can't
support both 8 and 24 layer boards (i.e. you just need two binaries,
pcb and pcb24), but I tested it with a 56 layer board. The GUI was
messy but it worked.
If >8 layer boards become more popular with PCB users, we'll make it
easier to do. Until then, it's not at the top of the priority list.
> When I've read that updating from sch do pcb is so hard because
> there are mismatches with footprint names - my eyes started to open
> widely 8-|
I think most of us create our own footprints anyway. It's a big topic
at the moment, especially with the new footprint standards coming out.
There are a couple of developers working on figuring out what to do
about it.
> My first problem was "so how can I know what list of footprint is
> avaliable?"
Well, this should be easy - open the library window in PCB :-)
The old libraries made this difficult, as they were parametric - one
file for all DIP footprints, one file for all SMT footprints, etc.
The new library is one file per footprint, so a simple file listing
tells you what's available.
There are also a few websites with footprint catalogs and generators
so you can add to the "base" library.
> - I've discovered that many people add elements to PCB manually so
> in fact it isn't so important to have correct footprints definitions
> at schematic level.
Well, it's important to have *correct* footprints (although even then
there are multiple ways of making a "correct" footprint). It's less
important to have *all* the footprints, because we realize that we
can't please everyone anyway, so I think we're shooting for the 90%
solution.
> But - I didn't give up yet.
That's the spirit! Plus, the gEDA/PCB developers are very open to
constructive criticism. It only helps us too.
Stuart Brorson
: >Have you tried Kicad? Open source and runs on Windows or linux. Find it
:> here:
:>
:> http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
: In fact - I've heard about kicad today - when I've come to an idea to
: look for some newsgroup about gEDA.
GEDA info is readily available at:
Documentation at:
http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/index.html
FAQs and answers to selected questions at:
http://geda.seul.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=geda
A wonderful step-by-step tutorial for gschem -> PCB is available at:
http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/tutorials/gsch2pcb/tutorial.html
Stuart
xtc
>
> http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/tutorials/gsch2pcb/tutorial.html
My first steps with geda were with this tutorial.
I've encountered some problems - for example footprints definitions.
To be clear - I'm not a fan of "give me all footprints" - no ... for me
1206 0805 and few dips would be
enough since other I'd prefer to define by myself.
Step /gaf/myproject1$ gsch2pcb project didn't work for me...
It looks that I'm not able to convert whole project to PCB.
adding "verbose" attribute - shows that gsch2pcb knows that my project
include those two demo schematics - but - no effect.
I had to convert every schematic and then "load to buffer" and "load
netlist".
Simply when I converted:
gsch2pcb one.sch
and I tried to open the result using:
pcb name.pcb
there was always an error processing such simple file.
I don't know if it's a problem with more complicated elements or
anything else.
I plan to start with simpler structures - for example resistors only -
to see what's going on.
XTC
Dave Boland
Would you keep us posted on the results of your comparison?
Most of my work is embedded software, but sometimes I need
early hardware to write the code. Which means I have to
design some circuits and a PCB. I have used Eagle (free
version that came with a book on card design) for a simple
card, but It won't work for the next one because it is too
large and needs 2 signal layers plus 2 power layers. So I
will need to do something soon and could use your input.
I just read Stuart's article on gEDA in Linux Journal, and
it is a very good over-view, but no details. Hope Stuart
will follow-up in LJ or Circuit Cellar with a detailed
example of a card with an ADC (they typically require a
ground plane under them) and some digital components for a
2S2P design and throw in some analog and digital simulation.
I will also look at the gEDA site for documentation and a
tutorial.
One other comment about the LJ article. Stuart uses the
software design process to describe analogies to the card
design process. I agree with Stuart on most of it, but one
point I don't agree on is the use of separate tools. I have
found that a good IDE can be very productive - more so than
separate tools all with different interfaces. So I hope at
some point the gEDA group will consider doing something like
an IDE for gEDA (like Eagle or LT Switcher from Linear) for
those of us not into card design professionally.
Dave,
Andrzej XTC
First of all - I'm really impressed by the interface.
Looks very good from the first sight.
I didn't install whole package since I didn't read
install documents - I know - my fault.
I've downloaded binaries only (linux ver).
I've created my own R & C schematic symbols and connected them.
Maybe it's quite obvious novadays - but I haven't seen it in eagle
- simple but efficient autojunction feature.
Today I've downloaded whole package - it comes with some standard
libraries so I hope I'll be able to test it more.
The best test will be - to try develop any real world small project
(you know - every program is simple if you do something step by step
in some creator mode or ready made elements - It's always harder
when you try to achieve exact effect).
Anyway - it's quite simple - other aspects I'll probably post them here.
XTC
Ian Bell
If you need support there is now a yahoo group for Kicad users. Find it at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kicad-users/
Ian
xtc
Useless unfortunately... because of Yahoo.
XTC
xtc
It's a little bit tricky - since at start - when you want
to define "zone" area - you should right-click track - only then
You can define netname for zone.
Everything else is ok... maybe - it looks that there is no
possibility to move or reedit zone shape (or maybe I haven't found it yet).
But in my opinion board with 2S2G is very easy to make
(using those zones as planes - there is no "carve" mode for them /I
don't remember
how it's called in Protel/ so propably you'll have to draw shape with
gaps manually).
I'm still impressed with this software.
Automatic loop removal - online DRC (in fact clearnance only), via dragging.
Probably there is no track editing - since they are not treated as in
protel - you can
delete, split in desired place - but I haven't found a possibility to
drag a part of it (but
as I mentioned - when I drag via - tracks are still connected to it).
XTC
xtc
unlocking selected track.
One more thing that is specific (In my opinion).
With online drc - when track is in prohibited area - you just can't set
point for track there
- I mean there is no highlight of tracks - you just cant put it
(probably just a thing
to get used to - but my first impression was "damn my mouse button
doesn't work" :)
XTC
Ian Bell
What are you talking about?
Ian
Andrzej XTC
Mayba I said it in wrong way - it's "read only" for me
since I don't have yaho id and I don't want to have one
giving im my visa details to some "parental control" or else.
Unfortunately I accept only standard newsgroups like this one
and few bboards & forums.
XTC