Have you had this problem with Protel 99SE
Robert Walker
after completing a simple circuit and manually routing it, my system reboots
if I try a preview.
If I install SP4 or SP5, the splash screen still says SP2.
I have 128mb on a PIII 500. This is running on Win2k Pro SP1. Any ideas
how I might correct the problem?
Andrew Pearson <apearson@
any major problems with SP5. I run NT SP5. Maybe try reinstalling? Have
you checked out the Protel knowledge base?
Andy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Message is the private opinion, suggestion or question of the
sender and does not represent the views of Jupiters Technology.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Peacock
hardware/driver problem that you've discovered :)
NT is preferred OS.. or WIN98 SE (least ye be brave and sure of heart)
Simon
"Robert Walker" <r04...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Oy7B5.24470$vZ.12...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Robert Walker
log and this is what I found:
Service Control Manager
Event ID 7026
The following boot-start or system start driver(s) failed to load: NetworkX
Could anyone shed some light on my predicament here?
The system is a PIII 500, 128mb, 52gb, Win2K SP1, non-networked.
John Williams
Robert Walker wrote:
> Whenever I hit print / preview, the computer reboots. I checked the even
> log and this is what I found:
>
> Service Control Manager
> Event ID 7026
>
> The following boot-start or system start driver(s) failed to load: NetworkX
>
> Could anyone shed some light on my predicament here?
>
> The system is a PIII 500, 128mb, 52gb, Win2K SP1, non-networked.
>
I believe that NetworkX is a device driver associated with the CrypKey copy protection scheme used by Protel. Check your "Devices" control panel (in the Windows control panels folder) to make sure that the NetworkX device is not set to "Disabled".
John Williams
Rene Tschaggelar
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * This message sent by: PROTEL EDA USERS MAILING LIST
> *
> * Use the "reply" command in your email program to
> * respond to this message.
> *
> * To unsubscribe from this mailing list use the form at
> * the Association web site. You will need to give the same
> * email address you originally used to subscribe (do not
> * give an alias unless it was used to subscribe).
> *
> * Visit http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
> * to unsubscribe or to subscribe a new email address.
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
the adress for the questions is : <protele...@techservinc.com>
It floods your mailbox with a dozend messages each day.
But, as there is no alternative yet ...
Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
Robert Walker
I am trying to PRINT / PREVIEW. Further examination of the event log tells
me:
WMI ADAP was unable to load the Winspool.drv
Any ideas now?
"Robert Walker" <r04...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oFnB5.25757$vZ.13...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> That seems rather peculiar for a program that is suppose to be fully
> functional for 30 days!
>
> "Bugs" <bu...@mindless.cm> wrote in message
> news:07rbts8cou383tr18...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:05:08 -0700, John Williams
> > <john.w...@alumni.stanford.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >I believe that NetworkX is a device driver associated with the CrypKey
> copy protection scheme used by Protel.
> >
> > Oh dear, another CAD program made fragile with 'protection'.
> >
> > bugs
>
>
Erik Hermann
> I have been fooling around with Protel 99SE [trial version]. Every time,
> after completing a simple circuit and manually routing it, my system reboots
> if I try a preview.
I'm testing Protel because we will perhaps buy several CAD stations.
Results so far:
- Protel in't really a complete integrated suite, merely an assortment of
different
programs that use the same gui. The interface between the schematics and
the layout module is clumsy in my opinion. Forth and back annotation is
complicated compared to other ecad systems.
- Protel produces sometimes protections faults. Some are reproduceable, some
not. This was a big Problem with SP1 and has gone better with SP5 but it's
still
a problem. It seems that protel catches the faults somehow, because it doesn't
crash, but there are orphan processes in the task list afterwards.
- Protel has memory leaks.
- Some other problems that I don't remember.
Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
Russ.Shaw
Vutracks?
--
*******************************************
* Russell Shaw, B.Eng, M.Eng(Research) *
* email: rus...@webaxs.net *
* Victoria, Australia *
*******************************************
Robert Walker
that the command USE -*; c:\eagle\lbr; will dump any loaded libraries and
then load all the libraries in the specified path. If you run USE under
LIBRARY in the file menu, this does not work! You can select one at a time.
Is there another place where I can execute the USE command?
"Russ.Shaw" <rus...@webaxs.net> wrote in message
news:39D914E1...@webaxs.net...
Nick Dolling
> - Protel produces sometimes protections faults. Some are reproduceable,
> some not. This was a big Problem with SP1 and has gone better with SP5
> but it's still a problem. It seems that protel catches the faults
> somehow, because it doesn't crash, but there are orphan processes in
> the task list afterwards.
The fact that they're up to service pack *5* should tell you something
about how Protel work, although I guess they're not much different to
any other software company these days. IIRC SP1 was released within days
of the original version. You're lucky they've gone to SP5 and haven't
released "Protel2000" and asked for another grand to "upgrade" to the
"new improved" which still has the same bugs as versions which are 10
years old.
> Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
Not by a long shot... still, I use it because it works.. I just have to
live with the bugs.
Nick
--
o--- Nick Dolling ------------------------------------------o
o--- Apexus Engineering Pty Ltd ----------------------------o
o--- ndol...@apexus.com.au --------------------------------o
o--- Ph : +618 8266 6222 Fax : +618 8266 6333 --------------o
Erik Hermann
Nick Dolling wrote:
> > Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
>
> Not by a long shot... still, I use it because it works.. I just have to
> live with the bugs.
>
Is orcad better?
Nick Dolling
>
> Nick Dolling wrote:
>
> > > Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
> >
> > Not by a long shot... still, I use it because it works.. I just have to
> > live with the bugs.
> >
>
No idea - never tried it.
Roy Battell
<rus...@webaxs.net> writes
>Eagle is more integrated...
>Vutracks?
>
http://www.vutrax.co.uk
>Erik Hermann wrote:
>>
>> Robert Walker wrote:
>>
>> > I have been fooling around with Protel 99SE [trial version]. Every time,
>> > after completing a simple circuit and manually routing it, my system reboots
>> > if I try a preview.
>>
>> I'm testing Protel because we will perhaps buy several CAD stations.
>> Results so far:
>>
>> - Protel in't really a complete integrated suite, merely an assortment of
>> different
>> programs that use the same gui. The interface between the schematics and
>> the layout module is clumsy in my opinion. Forth and back annotation is
>> complicated compared to other ecad systems.
>>
>> - Protel produces sometimes protections faults. Some are reproduceable, some
>> not. This was a big Problem with SP1 and has gone better with SP5 but it's
>> still
>> a problem. It seems that protel catches the faults somehow, because it
>doesn't
>>
>> crash, but there are orphan processes in the task list afterwards.
>>
>> - Protel has memory leaks.
>>
>> - Some other problems that I don't remember.
>>
>> Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
>
--
Roy Battell.
To use this address remove the digits included to remove Spam ...
Mail: ne...@vutrax666.co.uk
Slavisa Zigic
(Protel 99SE)?
Thanks in advance.
Slavisa
Russ LeMaster
Later,
Russ
Robert Walker wrote:
> Actually, I don't think I was getting that error with Protel. Remember that
> I am trying to PRINT / PREVIEW. Further examination of the event log tells
> me:
>
> WMI ADAP was unable to load the Winspool.drv
>
> Any ideas now?
>
> "Robert Walker" <r04...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
AbdulraHman Lomax
>There is an extremely awful listserver for protel :
>> * Visit http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
>> * to unsubscribe or to subscribe a new email address.
>It floods your mailbox with a dozend messages each day.
>But, as there is no alternative yet ...
What alternative is expected?
Sheesh; if the list was inactive, it would be useless; it's active and
someone complains about too many messages. A dozen is too many?
Actually, there are often more than that. But you *don't* have to read
them all! I filter all my mail automatically into a folder for each
list to which I subscribe. But I do read nearly all the Protel mail: I
make my living with this software and I wouldn't pass up any of it.
You should see the Accel-Protel list, formed by Accel users when
Protel acquired Accel. It quickly became a prime source of support.
Unlike Protel users, Accel users pay substantial money for support,
but there is simply no way that a company can provide support as well
as the users. The company may know how the software was designed, but
the users know how to *use* it, which may or may not be the way it was
designed.
By the way, Protel management and employees also read the list, we are
informed. They've been quite responsive since the list became
pro-active instead of being just an extended gripe session. The result
is that there is much less to gripe about.
Anyway, this list is *the* place to ask Protel questions. There are
well over a thousand Protel users subscribed -- I haven't seen the
numbers lately --, and questions get answered quickly.
Abd ulRahman Lomax
Printed Circuit Consulting since 1975, Training, Protel license resales.
www.lomaxdesign.com
AbdulraHman Lomax
>- Protel in't really a complete integrated suite, merely an assortment of
>different
> programs that use the same gui. The interface between the schematics and
> the layout module is clumsy in my opinion. Forth and back annotation is
> complicated compared to other ecad systems.
It has become one-button (with the Synchronizer), but Protel still
supports the net-list, was-is list form of communication. Protel does
give you much more control over the interface; to some people that
might seem clumsy, but once you know the settings you want, you can
forget about it. Many users continued to use the old way, not
realizing the new features. I was one of them, until I saw the
Synchronizer in use at PCB Design Conference West.
When Protel communicates schematic changes to a PCB, a list of
"macros" is created; the actual changes are accomplished from this
list. There are other CAD systems out there which are not so polite,
as I learned to my chagrin when what was supposed to be a minor change
ate all my footprints because they were not correct in the schematic,
and there was no warning that they would all be replaced.
Protel gives you the choice: you can accept the existing footprints,
or update them, or you can selectively accept or update.
>- Protel produces sometimes protections faults. Some are reproduceable, some
> not. This was a big Problem with SP1 and has gone better with SP5 but it's
>still
> a problem. It seems that protel catches the faults somehow, because it doesn't
> crash, but there are orphan processes in the task list afterwards.
>
>- Protel has memory leaks.
>
>- Some other problems that I don't remember.
Protel does note that the recommended operating system is NT. Users
have also reported good results with W2000. Protel does work with W98,
but it is a resource hog and most crashes appear to result from
running out of resources. If you must use W98, and especially if you
run other applications at the same time, use a resource meter and if
resources get low, shut down other apps or shut down Protel and start
over. The Design Rule dialog boxes are famous for taking great gulps
of the limited resource memory.
Actually, however, I'm running W98 and have had no problems since I
stopped running Norton Utilities in the background. The bad news? I'm
no longer running CrashGuard. The good news? I don't seem to need it
any more.
>Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
No, you're just in the minority. Protel seems to be, in the U.S.,
where it got off to a bad start with the Accel/Tango fiasco, quitely
becoming the majority CAD system in terms of numbers of companies.
It's not the majority in terms of numbers of seats; that would be, I
would think, Cadence Allegro. In the U.S. Protel is very strong in
other countries, I think.
Yes, it's got problems. But so does every other CAD system I know. You
can easily pay five times as much for problems just as irritating.
PADS was just giving away licenses to attempt to attract Protel and
Accel PCAD users. Seriously, the licenses were free, all you had to do
was pay for one year's support. It was too good an offer to pass up;
as a service bureau it is very useful to be familiar with and able to
interface with other CAD systems. And Protel just came out with
translators for PCAD and PADS. So I now have a PCAD seat, courtesy of
a client, and a PADS seat, courtesy of PADS' desperation. Ah, yes,
they aren't PADS any more, they were just eaten by Innoveda.
It's a bit ironic, seeing how they advertised the Protel/Accel offer,
trying to stir up anxiety about the future, especially among Accel
users. But what has *actually* happened is that Protel USA is moving
to San Diego; the Accel facility is becoming the U.S. hub for Protel.
But as I noted on the Protel list, where Protel is location makes very
little difference, since the best source of support is the user group
list. I've never called the Protel office for support, though I have
made bug reports when I was a beta site for Protel 99SE.
AbdulraHman Lomax
>The fact that they're up to service pack *5* should tell you something
>about how Protel work, although I guess they're not much different to
>any other software company these days.
Look, you've got two choices: a software company can save up all the
bug fixes and improvements -- and service packs have included feature
improvements, they are not only fixes -- or it can release them in
smaller bundles as each set of items is tested. Protel, with a lot of
encouragement from the users, has started to do the latter. We LIKE
it. We don't have to wait for a year while a major revision is tested.
>You're lucky they've gone to SP5 and haven't
>released "Protel2000" and asked for another grand to "upgrade" to the
>"new improved" which still has the same bugs as versions which are 10
>years old.
It's been about two years since the last major release, which was $1K
and which, indeed, added many major improvements. The SE release
(which, as I recall, was basically SP3) really made changes, and it
was free to 99 licensees. That package was worth an extra $1K, but
they did not charge it. If Protel comes out with a new release, and
I'd be surprised if they don't, and if it costs $1K, that will be
about eight percent per year for what other companies call
"maintenance."
That "same bugs" comment is not being made so often on the user group.
It is apparently obsolete. However, the autorouter is still pretty
bad. It's better than some others I've seen, but it is the autorouter
which is really the odd part; it was bought and integrated, so to
speak, with the PCB editor. My understanding is that the next major
improvement to the package will be the autorouter. It will be welcome,
and, yes, I'd be happy to cough up another grand for a better router.
>> Am I the only one who doesn't like protel?
>
>Not by a long shot... still, I use it because it works.. I just have to
>live with the bugs.
Why use a package that one does not like? The only answer I can
conceive is that one does not like *any* package, or at least not any
package that one can afford.
I can easily complain about Protel. I just stayed up all night
manually routing a board that I had hoped to autoroute, but it gave
the router indigestion. To be fair, it was two-sided, highdensity
fine-pitch SMT stuff. That's the bad news. The good news is that
Protel's manual routing tools are truly excellent. A lot of long-time
users don't know how excellent they are because they simply have not
realized the implications of some of the changes.
Like loop removal. Who cares about loops, anyway, and sometimes I
*want* loops, so I could imagine thinking that I'll just keep loop
removal turned off. (I never did figure out how to turn off loop
removal in OrCAD, is there a way?) The real news about loop removal is
that it makes editing track really easy. Don't like a route? Want to
shift it a bit? Just draw the new route and when a loop is created,
the old path is automatically ripped up. It's really fast because
there is usually no need to delete in order to clean up a route. (This
is also a good way to clean up messes made by the autorouter, but
hopefully we will have an autorouter that won't be so unnecessarily
messy!)
Nick Dolling
> >The fact that they're up to service pack *5* should tell you something
> >about how Protel work, although I guess they're not much different to
> >any other software company these days.
>
> Look, you've got two choices: a software company can save up all the
> bug fixes and improvements -- and service packs have included feature
> improvements, they are not only fixes -- or it can release them in
> smaller bundles as each set of items is tested. Protel, with a lot of
> encouragement from the users, has started to do the latter. We LIKE
> it. We don't have to wait for a year while a major revision is tested.
This is a fair point, I should have elaborated on mine. We bought P98,
and installed various service packs (3) as they became available. We
discovered several bugs, which Protel's tech support assured us would be
fixed in the next service pack. The next service pack never happened,
instead, they released P99, and asked for more money to upgrade.
> I'd be surprised if they don't, and if it costs $1K, that will be
> about eight percent per year for what other companies call
> "maintenance."
Saying, "well, they're not as bad as the alternative" is a poor excuse.
unfortunately it seems to be accepted by the consumer. I don't think
it's unreasonable to expect that known bugs that have been around to a
long time should be fixed in the process of all these new versions.
> > Not by a long shot... still, I use it because it works.. I just have
> >to live with the bugs.
>
> Why use a package that one does not like? The only answer I can
> conceive is that one does not like *any* package, or at least not any
> package that one can afford.
I don't really dislike the product, I do dislike the company. I'm not a
professional PCB designer, and Protel does the job. I don't have time to
investigate all the alternatives. That doesn't mean I can't voice my
annoyances with the product.
> The good news is that Protel's manual routing tools are truly
> excellent.
I agree with this - I do all my routing by hand, mainly because I don't
have time to learn how to set up and use the autorouter properly.
Rob Walker
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 11:37 PM
Subject: Attn: Colby Seimer
Dear Colby:
I can't begin to express how disappointed and frustrated I am with Protel
98SE. Before I elaborate on this, I would also like to convey my distaste
for the comments from Scott, "This sounds like a Windows 2000 problem." That
is such an over stated and unsubstanciated excuse and I would expect to hear
that from a street-corner computer vendor, not the engineering and technical
support division of Protel. Windows 2000 is touted as a signifigant
improvement over NT 4.0, is widely recognized as a leading industry
standard, and is certainly one of the most stable applications developed by
Microsoft. Almost 1 year has past since I started to use Windows 2000 for my
industrial designs, and with the exception of a shortage of 3rd party
drivers (that was short lived), Windows 2000 continues to serve me well with
CAD and modeling software. Now down to business:
If you read down the documentation, you will note that I did reformat and
fresh install of Windows 2000 and Protel. All worked fine with exception of
the peculiar behavior of the print/preview. After receiving your e-mail of
October 5, I decided that this should not be a hinderance.
Over the past 5 days, I was required to move on to other agendas while at
the same time, casually putting my system back together. I run a rather
benign setup, Pentium III 500, 128mb, 52gb, scanner, CD-R, ADSL, CalComp
Tablet, etc. My aplications are pretty much out-of-the-box. They include
Office 2000, 3D Studio Max, AutoCad 2000, CR-R recording software,etc. There
is nothing obscure about this setup other than it runs excellent with my
applications, never lets me down and never crashes. All my drivers and BIOS
are up to date as well as any application compatibility updates and service
packs from Microsoft.
Tonight I sat down and fired up Protel for the first time since I received
your e-mail below. I opened up the PCBOARD1 file from the auto-route folder,
the last file I had opened previously, After a few seconds of "Scanning
design documents", the computer shut down and restarted on its own. This was
the same problem I had when I tried to print/preview before I reformatted
and reinstalled Windows 2000. The information on this is at the very end of
this e-mail.
I then restarted Protel, and instead of opening a PCB document that came
with Protel, I captured a small 555 timer circuit, created the net list,
updated the PCB and then went to print/preview. Once again, the computer
rebooted on its own - right back to the original problem!
So Colby, here I am with what looks like a fantastic piece of software that
does not behave well. I discovered many unfavourable comments about the
stability of Protel in the sci.electronics.cad and also
sci.electronics.design newsgroups. I then had the pleasure of stumbling
across Chris Morris, a former employee of Protel. Through correspondence
with Chris, I drew a conclusion that maybe the problem is not with my system
or with Windows 2000.
Colby, I am going to venture to guess that the problem I am experiencing is
not the first time Protel has heard of this. I would like to give every
effort to seeing the program fill my needs for several large contracts I
have on the table right now. My efforts are contingent on the success of you
and your staff getting me up and running and addressing some of anomalies
that might be present.
Are there issues I should be aware of? For example, does Protel behave with
USB devices or SCSI/RAID Host controllers? Are there certain Executive
Services that other programs are dependant on that might conflict with
Protel? Has there been a conflict with 3rd party WinAspi drivers and the
WinAspi Layer?
I thank you for your time and look forward to your reply.
Fabian Hartery
If you do not like the on board auto router for Protel, at least with 99SE
you can interface to the Spectra autorouter, if you buy it. Most E-CAD
packages cost a hell of alot more than Protel (x3) and personally I don't
sniff to the quality they stink.
There are companies out there, who I will not name, are only as good as
showing up for their licensing fees. Their support is shit, their service
packs (if any) are shit. Can I import this ? (shit) With that, you create
all your own parts and footprints. What have you paid for ? You might as
well by Autocad and go from scratch.
Many computer problems are blamed on the SW can be due to computer
illeratacy. A corrupt registeries often nails a machine. Overlays will not
cut it. I recommend to know your machine to the MB level and chipset issues.
Can you say you have done a machine SW rebuild from a HD zero writer ??? The
machine itself can be the issue. Blacklisting the SW is not my approach. My
opinion is that Protel is fair for the dollar value. For what I seen on the
product I would wish they would charge more so I can face my bean counters
with 1K update expenses. That's just an opinion.
Fabe
Robert Walker
"Fabian Hartery" <fa...@thezone.net> wrote in message
news:8srck2$db4$1...@nova.thezone.net...
AbdulraHman Lomax
>This is a fair point, I should have elaborated on mine. We bought P98,
>and installed various service packs (3) as they became available. We
>discovered several bugs, which Protel's tech support assured us would be
>fixed in the next service pack. The next service pack never happened,
>instead, they released P99, and asked for more money to upgrade.
There was a Protel 98 service pack issued after the release of Protel
99. That doesn't mean that a specific bug was fixed in that service
pack, but the history does not match Mr. Dolling's account.
Protel 99 (which ultimately included the SE release at no additional
charge) was a major upgrade, not merely a bug fix. Given that Protel
does not directly charge for maintenance, *and* the price is
relatively low, it's quite reasonable to expect that there *would* be
a charge for upgrades.
>> I'd be surprised if they don't, and if it costs $1K, that will be
>> about eight percent per year for what other companies call
>> "maintenance."
>
>Saying, "well, they're not as bad as the alternative" is a poor excuse.
It's not an excuse, rather it is a comment which puts upgrade costs
and maintenance costs in perspective.
>unfortunately it seems to be accepted by the consumer. I don't think
>it's unreasonable to expect that known bugs that have been around to a
>long time should be fixed in the process of all these new versions.
It's not unreasonable to expect it, but it is unreasonable to demand
it, if the bugs are not mission-critical. Further, as to all the
unfixed bugs I have encountered, I greatly appreciate improved
performance instead of those particular bugs being fixed. Yes, it
would be nice if they were fixed. But I make my money from the design
of printed circuit boards, not from gazing at the beauty of perfect,
bug-free software.
It's easy to write a bug-free program. What is not so easy is to write
one that also accomplishes a whole series of complex tasks.
Protel issues are thoroughly discussed on the user group mailing list
(see www.techservinc.com and follow the users link); this one is
frequently discussed. The consensus is frequently, yes, we would like
this bug or that bug fixed, but please don't delay any major upgrades
in order to do it.
Mr. Dolling writes as if there were some absolute standard by which
software performance can be judged. There is no such standard. Rather,
the only standard we really have is the market: if it is better than
what else is out there, or better in cost/performance, then the
software is good, it doesn't really matter if it still has 300 bugs. A
professional does not blame his hammer if the nail bends, even though
a hammer can be improved so that nails won't bend. If the software is
not good enough to use, then don't buy it or don't use it!
But Protel is far better than merely usable.
>I don't really dislike the product, I do dislike the company. I'm not a
>professional PCB designer, and Protel does the job. I don't have time to
>investigate all the alternatives. That doesn't mean I can't voice my
>annoyances with the product.
Of course Mr. Dolling can voice his annoyances. But if he'd actually
like to end up with better software, he might discover that there are
better ways to get an employee to work for you than to disparage the
quality of their work. Why should it be any different with a vendor?
>> The good news is that Protel's manual routing tools are truly
>> excellent.
>
>I agree with this - I do all my routing by hand, mainly because I don't
>have time to learn how to set up and use the autorouter properly.
The autorouter works for certain classes of jobs; in fact, I'd say
that it works well, compared to older products I used. But it has
become the most obsolete part of the package, in my opinion; Protel
knows this. I expect that right now a major part of their programming
effort is going into a better autorouter, which is something I would
greatly prefer to fixes for the minor bugs that remain, very few of
which are mission-critical. I can think of one or two, and they only
bite in rare circumstances, which is why they have escaped notice
until recently.
There are other, ah, "issues," which any Protel designer should know.
The best way to become familiar with these, together with the
workarounds, is to read the Protel user mailing list regularly....
jeff_sr
afraid to install it.
--
R&D hardware design. 30yrs in audio,analog,video,rf,digital,
electro-mechanical design. Burglar & Security systems.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
AbdulraHman Lomax
>I just received the protel 99SE cd. After reading these posts, I'm
>afraid to install it.
Don't be. But there are some precautions that it might be good to
take.
First of all, there are thousands of Protel users who are not seeing
the reported problem.
Secondly, it is not unusual to hear reports of system crashes while
Protel is operating. Users have very often found that these problems
disappeared with a different video card. Some cards apparently have
bugs; in the case of an ATI card that was apparently causing problems
for me, I found an indication on the ATI site that there was a known
bug that could produce the kind of error messages I was seeing. I
bought a Matrox Millenium card and the problem disappeared.
Protel very seriously exercises the video system, it appears, but not
necessarily in the same way as other video-intensive applications. I
did, in fact, have problems with other applications, but they were
rare.
I also had other problems eventually traced to a sound card. I pulled
the sound card, no more problems.
Again, most users don't have any problem like this at all. So:
Install the Protel 99SE demo with no other unnecessary programs
running, so that if you experience a crash, you won't lose data. Then
install service pack 5, available by download. See if Protel runs
without problem. Most likely it will.
But if it doesn't work, try borrowing a different video card. It's
good to check with the Protel User Group mailing list about what cards
work well with Protel.
About the mailing list, don't leave home without it! :-)
Any sophisticated CAD program will have anomalies that will puzzle
newcomers. It's fine to try to find your own way around, but don't let
it get to the point that you are beating your head against the wall.
Ask, and you will generally find that there is something obvious that
you simply overlooked.
To join the user group mailing list -- and demo users are welcome --
go to www.techservinc.com and follow the "Protel Users" link.
zzzz
concept of releasing a new version without fixing the bugs annoying
(especially when the bugs have been around years & years!!!). We still use
their software and it _does_ do the job as long as you don't try and push
the boundaries. I have yet to install 99 we are still using EDA client 98,
our Senior Design Engineer & Network Administrator had his task schedular
taken down by Protel 99 on NT workstation.
As these bug are not major, Protel can get by without fixing them & we can
survive without them being fixed. However if they would show some more
respect for their customers by modifying their knowledge base so that they
were _honest_ about the status of particular bugs. eg) Remove all "This
problem is currently being investigated" and replace with "This problem is
considered low priority and will not be fixed in the near future" then I for
one would be much happier.
Bitching about Protel is almost as popular a past time as bitching about
Microsoft or wishing Linux would take off, at our company.
Tip for successful Protelling: let others do the beta release (aka new
release) testing not you.
zzz.
Gilissen Erno
<r04...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have been fooling around with Protel 99SE [trial version]. Every time,
>after completing a simple circuit and manually routing it, my system reboots
>if I try a preview.
>
>If I install SP4 or SP5, the splash screen still says SP2.
>
>I have 128mb on a PIII 500. This is running on Win2k Pro SP1. Any ideas
>how I might correct the problem?
>
>
I'm a registered Protel 99SE user, and I've installed the software
(SP5) on 3 machines so far (to test if the errors are related to the
PC variations (different CPU, VGA card,..)):
- AMD Athlon 700MHz, 196Mby, G400-16Mby.
- P3-450, 128Mby, Viper-550-16Mby.
- Hitachi P150 Visionbook, 80Mby.
All of these use Win98SE Dutch version.
The problems mentioned here, arise on ALL the computers.
I create the full electronics & sw for our system. I must take a lot
into account when designing sch+pcb:
1. Board space limit: the (smaller) previous design had about 750
trough-hole component drills on a 160*100mm board.
2. Board components height limit: a lot of areas restrict the use of
components higher then 17mm.
3. Sensitive Analog, digital, Power supply and line voltage (TRIACs
driving as much as 12A on a 110V supply) on the same board.
4. A lot of connectors: 3 edges of the PCB are completely covered by
connectors.
I've used a lot of Electronic Work Bench versions prior to using
Protel. EWBs greatest disadvantage is: Pad properties are set based
on a pad number. If you create a new component that has different pad
sizes, you'll need to find an unused pad designator. In addition,
Protel can use a pad stack for each pad: the shape of the pad can be
different on CU, Comp side and inner layers. Protel also has the
ability to rotate components, all my EWB versions weren't capable
doing this.
Protels library operation is superb: each pad can be defined by X,Y
and drill parameters (so you don't need to search all the pads first
to find a matching one, or search for a non-used pad number).
Another greath option of Protel99SE: it's ability to add Mechanical
Layers. I've used 9 of them so far in my designs/libraries:
- Relative: holds sizes of drills and outline of the component.
- Absolute: holds absolute board positions (-> test needle bed).
- Signal: pin numbers of components.
- Remark layer.
- High Component Indicator.
- Wave direction.
- Rotation: component angle indicator.
- Metal object indicator.
- No Metalization indicator -> I need this one to correct Protel's
Gerber output errors.
Both EWB and Protel (has less errors then EWB) libraries are often
incomplete, unreliable or ... So I've spent 2 months drawing my own
libraries (for instance: the TO3 case in a Protel lib is rediculous,
SMD resistors have insufficient space to avoid shorts during wave
soldering).
To give an idea of the purpose for some MechLayers:
- Relative: by printing this layer to a PDF, the purchase dep can
decide to buy other compatible components, related to sizes and
experience of the FAE (electronic component supplier). If you check
the ULN2803 from Motorola, and the TDS62083 (Toshiba): pin & function
compatible, but the TDS is 2mm longer. If this space isn't available,
you better not buy the TDS.
- Absolute: this layer (in adobe's PDF format) is supplied to the
needle bed designer to indicate the location of the test needles.
- Signal: additional signal labels, not printed on the overlays.
- Remark: Jumpers and connectors may require a overlay-label. This
info is stored on the remark layer. Additional, areas where no
components should be mounted will be marked on the template PCB
layout. Another option: I use the Fujitsu MB90F574 processor. The
remark layer also indicates the size of the ICE-socket (a lot larger
then a real MCU).
- High component layer reminds not to place higher components at
height-critical areas.
- Metal: This reminds that some components have metal parts. For
instance: a horizontal mounted crystal, the back-side of a TO126
transistor (in free air -> in such a case, it may short to something
else if the back side views in a critical direction). So this layer
may -for instance- remind you not to place via's near a crystal.
- No Metal: indicates the PCB manufacturer that some drills should not
contain metalization. For instance, if you use a TO3, it may be
usefull not to metalize the drill, and only have a large CU plane at
the bottom layer (to mount the screws).
Now the Protel Problems:
1. Because production sometimes mistakenly took vias for trough-hole
component pins, I took octogonal shapes at the CU and component layers
(1st pin however: square). This mistake often happens when -for
instance- a TO92 pin had been located near a via. The octogonal pins
is shown correctly on-screen, but may be round on the gerber outputs.
Worst case, it's an octagonal pin on the gerber, but rotated by 45
degree. If you have polygons surrounding the pin, the clearance is
incorrect (the polygon is based on a non-rotated pad).
2. Connectivity problems:
2a. If a schematic label occurs only once in a multi-sheet project,
electrical rule check doesn't warn or errors an output to indicate
this (all errors/warnings enabled, ports & labels global).
2b. There's no guarantee at all, that connections drawn in SCH are
actually present on the PCB. My latest PCB missed 7 connections
present at the SCH. The PCB checks reported: no errors.
2c. It's possible within PCB (after reloading the nets of a corrected
SCH) that all present traces become labeled 'no-net'. As a result,
these traces are reported to be shorts with pins belonging to a net.
And at the same time, errors are reported to indicate the 'not
connected status' of the label.
3. Protel uses often the imperial system. However, I use a lot of
components based on the metric system (the MB90F574 has 0.5mm between
pins, allmost all our connectors have 0.25 or 0.5mm spacing). But
editing a lot of properties is only possible using the imperial system
(and I can assure you I'm not used to it).
4. If you use "()" in a component or library name, and place this in a
menu-button, Protel cuts the command label there. As a result, the
label can't be executed.
5. I should be able to draw components with some duplicate pad labels.
For instance: if you use a shielded connector (having multiple shield
pins). Another example: opto couplers. Functionally, it's possible
(in our case) to use both the CNY74-4 or PC847. But the pin-layout is
different. In such a case I've created two overlaying 16-pin DIL ICs,
shifted by a few millimeters (overlapping each-other). The "A" pins
related to the first, the "B" to the second type. The lost board
space is 2.54mm * 16 pins. But I don't want to draw the "A" and "B"
connections separate on the SCH. I'd expect PCB would recognize it
has all 16 pins twice: in such a case, connection is totally
unreliable (one, both or none is made).
6. If Protel is able to correct these errors, it's only disadvantage
to EWB is the "use of a question mark in a component spec". Suppose
you'll use the LM317 in TO220, TO92 and SO8 case. The pin numbers
aren't identical related to the footprints, so I use the pin labels
instead (the SCH representation is always the same, regardless of the
used footprint). Protel supports a choice between 4 library-specified
footprint names. EWB only one, but you can precede the name with a
question mark (for instance ?SO08).
By placing the component, EWB asks a confirmation (you will need to
type another name without any selection option). Protel supports 4
selectable footprints, but you need to press <TAB> several times prior
to placing the component (consumes a lot of time compared to EWB: it
auto pops-up a message box to confirm / enter the required info).
For instance, resistors exist in several 100's of different values,
and several different cases (based on power rating). This results in
1000s of different combinations. If Protel would be able to input the
resistor value after placing it, the time-spent changing the value
decreases.
Protel supports im/export the schematic values to a spread, but again:
you'll almost need to print the schematics to find the purpose of the
resistor (and adjust it's value / footprint).
Protel Switserland has been informed by these errors from the moment
SP4 came out (and I've mailed them my databases about 4 months now).
However, the errors are still present after installing SP5 (and
because I had to reinstall everything after a HD malfunction, I'm
pretty sure only installing SP5 doesn't solve the problems either).
Some of these problems should require minimal attention to correct.
When done, Protel is worth the price. In it's present form, I
wouldn't recommend the software at all (missing tracks or incorrect
clearance require a lot of additional work / PCBs).
I would like test if the problems arise on a US version of
Windows98SE, but I can't get in Belgium. Maybe a Protel
representative could send me one to compensate for the inconvenience?
Note: my own libraries can be obtained free of charge (without
warranties) by prepaying the related costs (CD-R, packing &
transportation).
Gilissen Erno
Groot Bergerveld 12
3583 Beringen-Belgium
Er...@online.be
Robert Walker
"AbdulraHman Lomax" <mar...@vom.com> wrote in message
news:39f72963...@news2.vom.com...
> jeff_sr <jef...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >I just received the protel 99SE cd. After reading these posts, I'm
> >afraid to install it.
>
AbdulraHman Lomax
>Do you have an address for the Protel Users Group?
The subscription address was included in my original post. If anyone
has difficulty subscribing (sometimes Techserv, which is a design
house, not a service provider, is a bit slow to deal with problems),
please write me.
>
>"AbdulraHman Lomax" <mar...@vom.com> wrote in message
[...]
AbdulraHman Lomax
>Now the Protel Problems:
>
>1. [...] The octogonal pins
>is shown correctly on-screen, but may be round on the gerber outputs.
>Worst case, it's an octagonal pin on the gerber, but rotated by 45
>degree. If you have polygons surrounding the pin, the clearance is
>incorrect (the polygon is based on a non-rotated pad).
This is a well-known problem. Partly it may be Protel and partly it is
with those who interpret the gerber. The proof of that is in what Mr.
Erno wrote.
Basically, don't use octagonal pads unless you know what you are
doing. At some point I hope to investigate this further, because
octagonal pads can be useful.
>2. Connectivity problems:
>2a. If a schematic label occurs only once in a multi-sheet project,
>electrical rule check doesn't warn or errors an output to indicate
>this (all errors/warnings enabled, ports & labels global).
Protel does not consider this an error because it is often not an
error. Generally a missing label will produce an unconnected input or
passive error, but not always. For this reason, it would be good to
have a warning option where a label produces no connectivity. I
certainly would not wish it to be routine.
If ports-only connectivity is used, this problem does not exist; it's
a good argument for using port-only or hierarchical connectivity.
>2b. There's no guarantee at all, that connections drawn in SCH are
>actually present on the PCB. My latest PCB missed 7 connections
>present at the SCH. The PCB checks reported: no errors.
This is not a normal condition. It can be created through a number of
user errors. Schematic synchronization is not automatic in Protel; the
cause of the problem was not stated by Mr. Erno, so it is impossible
to comment further.
I have never seen such a problem except when I deleted nets or
components or altered the net assignments myself, or when connectivity
was interrupted by blowouts on a negative plane. Protel, like most CAD
systems, especially those in its price range, does not check negative
planes for connectivity beyond verifying that the pad is in the
appropriate area of the plane.
>2c. It's possible within PCB (after reloading the nets of a corrected
>SCH) that all present traces become labeled 'no-net'. As a result,
>these traces are reported to be shorts with pins belonging to a net.
>And at the same time, errors are reported to indicate the 'not
>connected status' of the label.
Yes, it's possible. In fact, this can be the desired behavior.
Inexperienced users often come up with this as a "problem." They have
not realized that there is a command to assign free primitive
connectivity based on connected pad nets. Its found under the Menu
button on the Netlist Manager.
>3. Protel uses often the imperial system. However, I use a lot of
>components based on the metric system (the MB90F574 has 0.5mm between
>pins, allmost all our connectors have 0.25 or 0.5mm spacing). But
>editing a lot of properties is only possible using the imperial system
>(and I can assure you I'm not used to it).
Most if not all dialog boxes do use both systems. Certainly one can
make components in metric and work on the board in metric. It may be
that something, somewhere, does not allow metric dimensions, but no
example comes to mind. What properties? One needs to set the dimension
choice in the Library editor as well as in the PCB editor.
>4. If you use "()" in a component or library name, and place this in a
>menu-button, Protel cuts the command label there. As a result, the
>label can't be executed.
This is an obscure problem, to be sure. It is not uncommon in many
programs that special characters are ignored or cause unusual
difficulties.
>5. I should be able to draw components with some duplicate pad labels.
>For instance: if you use a shielded connector (having multiple shield
>pins). Another example: opto couplers. Functionally, it's possible
>(in our case) to use both the CNY74-4 or PC847. But the pin-layout is
>different. In such a case I've created two overlaying 16-pin DIL ICs,
>shifted by a few millimeters (overlapping each-other). The "A" pins
>related to the first, the "B" to the second type. The lost board
>space is 2.54mm * 16 pins. But I don't want to draw the "A" and "B"
>connections separate on the SCH. I'd expect PCB would recognize it
>has all 16 pins twice: in such a case, connection is totally
>unreliable (one, both or none is made).
There is a known bug in SP5 that is the source of this. The behavior
is actually quite consistent. On initial load, the nets are correctly
assigned to multiple pins with the same name. On reload, however,
there is a bug that creates a removal macro which, if executed, will
remove the net assignments from all these pads. Essentially, Protel
improved the program by making multiple assignments work as we desired
(this was a change we requested), but overlooked what happens when the
net list is reloaded; they became informed of this too late to make it
into SP5.
Two workarounds: (1) Do it the old way, which involves making a
special schematic part that includes all pads and which assigns them
unique pin numbers. This can be done visibly, or there are ways to do
it where the extra pins do not show (*NOT* by "hiding" the pins, which
will assign them a global net). (2) Delete the macros.
Also, it is recommended, before releasing a design, to reload the net
list and examine the macros that are created, if any. Generally, with
the exception given above, any macro created at this time represents
some kind of error. And this error, by definition, will not show on
DRC (since the error is in netlist assignment and the DRC assumes that
what is assigned is correct).
>6. [...]If Protel would be able to input the
>resistor value after placing it, the time-spent changing the value
>decreases.
>Protel supports im/export the schematic values to a spread, but again:
>you'll almost need to print the schematics to find the purpose of the
>resistor (and adjust it's value / footprint).
This is simply not true. First of all, you can generate a BOM from a
PCB file, but it is not recommended, because you get better
information from the Schematic file. You can change part values and
footprints after placing them, both on the PCB and in Schematic.
>Protel Switserland has been informed by these errors from the moment
>SP4 came out (and I've mailed them my databases about 4 months now).
>However, the errors are still present after installing SP5 (and
>because I had to reinstall everything after a HD malfunction, I'm
>pretty sure only installing SP5 doesn't solve the problems either).
Mr. Erno should realize that Protel is receiving problem reports from
thousands of users all over the world, many of them more coherent and
a few of them more serious than what he reported here. The users are
organized and present Protel with lists of what we want changed.
Generally Protel follows our recommendations. But to do a new service
pack on a program as complex as Protel 99SE is not something
accomplished in four months. Beta testing alone is up to two months or
so. It is quite easy, if one is not careful, to introduce a new
problem when fixing an old one or making an improvement. We saw an
example of this above, with the multiple-pad assignment problem.
>Some of these problems should require minimal attention to correct.
>When done, Protel is worth the price. In it's present form, I
>wouldn't recommend the software at all (missing tracks or incorrect
>clearance require a lot of additional work / PCBs).
Protel is "done" in the sense that it is a professional-level design
system being successfully used by engineers and designers all over the
world. It is, by far, the best design system *for its price.* That's
now, without any changes, not at some time in the future.
I *never* see "missing tracks or incorrect clearance." Never. But I've
only been using Protel for two years. I do follow the user group
mailing list closely, however, and reports of bad DRC always have
turned out to be user error or incorrect assumption. (Such as an inner
plane island. There is a workaround, but you have to know that it is
necessary or be willing to do a manual inspection of inner planes.
Automatically checking them is *not* a simple process. If it were it
would be found in all CAD systems. But I do expect this kind of
checking in Protel soon.)
>I would like test if the problems arise on a US version of
>Windows98SE, but I can't get in Belgium. Maybe a Protel
>representative could send me one to compensate for the inconvenience?
P99SE has known problems running on W98SE due to the resource
limitations of the latter. NT or W2000 are the preferred systems for
using Protel. It's quite usable with W98SE (that's what I'm running),
but you have to know to watch the resource meter and not let resources
get too low.
In general, I recommend that all Protel users, including and
*especially* demo users, join the Protel user's mailing list. Otherise
you *will* beat your head against the wall trying to solve problems
that one question would quickly resolve. Protel itself cannot possibly
give support as good as is provided by the users. Especially for free!
join the mailing list by following the user link at
www.techservinc.com.