advice on selecting new PCB design package

Sat Mar 18, 2006 8:47 pm   

On 2006-03-17, DMBPrescott_at_aol.com <DMBPrescott_at_aol.com> wrote:

I suppose that "well known" is a bit subjective -- the startup I'm
involved in is quite well known to myself and my associates, but I'm
sure that's not what you meant. But what does it matter if we are
well known or not? The projects I've used gEDA on are more than
mission critical -- they are business critical; i.e., if any of these
projects were to go badly, the entire company would pretty much
immediately be out of business. (Such is life in a startup. Second
chances are rare.) And I've got several years of my life invested in
this venture, so this is not something I take lightly. Despite this
fact, I never seriously considered using anything other than gEDA/pcb.
Yes, there is a steep learning curve, but there's a reward at the top
of that hill.

The roughest part of gEDA in my experience has been pcb, the board
layout component, but it has been progressing in leaps and bounds
recently, thanks to the efforts of the developers. Gone is the old
klunky Xaw GUI, replaced by a new HID architecture that allows different
UIs to be plugged into the core engine, plus a shiny new GUI based on
GTK+.

In short, gEDA works for me, and it works well. It runs on my
platform of choice, it is stable, it has all the features I need, the
file formats are open and easy to manipulate in a text editor or with
custom scripts, the price is right, and, most importantly, I know I'll
never be at the mercy of the vendor. One thing gEDA does not do very
well is hold your hand, but there are a number of tutorials out there
that walk you through all the basics. With a little patience (and I
do mean a little), you can put all the pieces together yourself. And
it's getting easier every day, it seems.

So to answer your challenge -- have you ever bothered to actually
learn to use gEDA? Ever designed a board with it? Is there something
in particular it can't do that you really need?

--
Randall

Sun Mar 19, 2006 4:18 am   

Gary,
Was Tango not ACCEL? I don't recall the particulars but I believe that
some called the tool Tango while others just called it ACCEL. One of those
confused identity products that I believe had somehow grown or evolved from
Tango but some people wouldn't let go of the old name.
--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Gary Crowell / VCP" <vcp_at_cableone.net> wrote in message
news:g9hn12lepcaj6j81c0il9p4pqnf0t21pt4_at_4ax.com...

Sun Mar 19, 2006 6:18 am   

Random Notes:


This is a true statement but please, don't lump Pulsonix in with the
rest of the toy software. It is fully a professional-level product and
doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath.


Someone mentioned Accel EDA v14. I found a copy of this on the eDonkey
network and installed it. Splash page shows a copyright of 1998. Wow,
this was some package for 1998! I'm impressed. This copy had the help
and libraries ripped out but another download claims to be a full
install including a tightly integrated SPECCTRA. I'll download that and
give it a spin and maybe update the thread.


Cadstar is at v8 now and it looks to be a peer with PADS as far as
high-speed, SI features. There's a copy of v8 and v7 on eDonkey and
I'll have a look-see what it's all about.


Worst PCB package I've ever seen is WinBoard/WinDraft from IVEX. Bugs
galore, serious ones and annoying ones, that never got fixed or grew
worse. When I saw IVEX finally shut its doors a couple of years ago, I
thought, "good riddance!"


The only problem with Pulsonix is the owner doesn't market his product
worth a crap. This tends to happen when an engineer-type (which I am,
no offense intended) runs the show, in my experience. Whenever I've
mentioned Pulsonix to some very knowledgeable people, their eyes squint
and they say "Pulsonix?" The website looks OK but DIY. Screen shots are
fewer now that they were in v3. And default white background for the
layout tool? Give me a break. How about a selection of color presets to
remind a user of Protel or Orcad Capture? How much work would it
friggin take? Just have an intern or high school kid do it. Nice
product that continues to improve...too bad.

Sun Mar 19, 2006 7:43 am   

Dax,
Yes I had used ACCEL version 14, however my recollection is that V.14
had a number of weaknesses that were addressed in v.15. All I can remember
about is that I was quite pleased with the v.15 improvements and was looking
forward to future versions if they kept on path.

Your comments about it being some package, remember this was most
closely a limited/junior version of PCAD. Yes it was a pretty good package,
I am sure there are those who may disagree but that is mostly personal
preferences and what they like/are used to. If I recall correctly, creating
SCH library parts was not too intuitive, rather complicated and took a bit
of getting used to so that you could properly configure parts for gate or
pin swapping. I was sorry to hear that Altium was discontinuing it after
they bought PCAD and ACCEL, although it made sense business wise because it
could have been too much competition for their Protel tools. By that time i
had moved on to another company and wasn't using ACCEL any longer.

If you find ver. 15, it had a very neat tool for documenting your
design. You could take a snapshot of your PCB, place it within the database,
select layers, change zoom levels, mirror, flip, rotate, etc.. Then you
could do say a PCB assembly print with this snapshot window showing you a
detail view zoomed up, mirrored, flipped, rotated, to clearly show some
complicated or finely detailed area. The best thing is that if you changed
the board, the snapshot was live, it was updated to reflect the real board
changes. No need to redo the snapshot just because you editted the PCB since
creating the initial snapshot.


While I have had my differences with Leon on this group, I have to agree
with you 100%. Pulsonix is seemingly suffering from lack of exposure. They
do not seem to advertise in the industries #1 trade magazine PCD&M and as
far as I know they have never made the trip to the PCB West Design
Conference (PCB East Conference have no idea?). Both of those sources would
do marvels for their marketing if the product is even half as good as some
claim. Name any another source that is specifically marketed straight to PCB
designers. The only other one would be IPC Route magazine directed at
Designer council membership but I don't believe they take paid advertising.
If they sold enough to proffessional PCB designers then they might have
enough money to do some real significant development and grab market share
because there is a shortage of offerings in the lower - mid end of the
tools.

Now that said, if you haven't realized Pulsonix is not a hobbyist or
non-proffessional tool. Pulsonix is a low-end to medium level proffessional
tool, afterall it starts at approx. $2000 US and goes to over $10K with
additional modules and unlimited database elements (pins and layers).

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Dax" <email_demonoid_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142749109.327225.297020_at_p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

Sun Mar 19, 2006 11:31 am   

Joel Kolstad wrote:

[deleted]


Pulsonix has a drill hole option - very useful as I often make
prototype boards at home. Of course, I sometimes forget and one or two
PCB suppliers object to them: Olimex emails a cryptic "No donuts"!
PCB-Pool just ignores them.

Leon

Sun Mar 19, 2006 11:39 am   

Dax wrote:

Pulsonix sales are handled through distributors in various countries,
who also provide support. It's a very configurable package. For
instance: the background can be any colour one wants and individual
nets can have their own colours. There is a colour setting that allows
R, G, B, hue, saturation and luminosity to be selected for various
features.

Leon

Sun Mar 19, 2006 11:56 am   

Leon schrieb:


This is the job of the default color selection box of the widget set
used. I'd be more impressed, if the transparency of objects could be
configured.

---<(kaimartin)>---
--
Kai-Martin Knaak
http://lilalaser.dyndns.org/blog

Sun Mar 19, 2006 2:59 pm   

Some snipping......

PCAD is alive and well, PCAD2004 (Version 18 in Accel speak) is the current
version, and PCAD2006 will supposedly ship later this year.

www.pcad.com

I moderate the user group at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCAD-EDA/

Lukas

Sun Mar 19, 2006 3:48 pm   

Brad,
I don't know anything that transpired between '91-'98, I was never familiar with the Tango product.
I've always assumed that Tango evolved into Windows PCAD because the old PCAD was DOS. No idea
where the name ACCEL came from.

The Windows PCAD was noticably less powerful than the older DOS version, but it has gotten better.

Oh, and come to think of it, ACCEL PCAD was at V12 (not 13) when I started with it in '98.

Gary




On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:18:18 GMT, "Brad Velander" <bveland_at_SpamThis.com> wrote:

Sun Mar 19, 2006 5:04 pm   

Here's the splash from ACCEL EDA P-CAD PCB v14.00.46. I guess it's your
memory vs. this OEM bitmap.

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/6219/accelv140kp.jpg

Accel EDA v15 is just another name for the P-CAD 2000 product, is it
not?
**************************************************************************************
Accel EDA v14
P-CAD 2000 (v15)
P-CAD 2001 (v16)
P-CAD 2002 (v17)
P-CAD 2004 (v18)

Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:57 am   

Never doubted it Lukas,
I was strictly speaking of ACCEL (which is what it says on the box in
big letters, actually ACCEL EDA to be absolutely complete), which was
discontinued in approx. March-May of 2000. About 4 months after Altium
bought ACCEL Technologies.
--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Lukas Louw" <louw1_at_att.net> wrote in message
news:qleTf.8205$bn3.7469_at_bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:30 am   

No Dax,
My memory is not that faulty. I was responsible for the software,
maintenance, use, standards, upgrades, internal support and library
management. Not likely I would forget that it was actually PCAD.

It was a very separate program that just shared some common code with
the real PCAD. It has nowhere near the capabilities of PCAD in terms of
layers and high end PCB design concerns. Thus I will sometimes describe it
as a PCAD Jr.. Simple test, how many PCB copper layers can your downloaded
ACCEL software handle, PCAD was greater than 20 layers (I don't recall the
precise number). I believe that ACCEL EDA is limited to no more than 8 or 10
layers and 6 seems to be ringing a bell somewhere in my head.

Jeesh, just do a web search for ACCEL EDA or ACCEL Technologies. You
will see that there was both ACCEL EDA and PCAD as separate tools.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Dax" <email_demonoid_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142787872.310391.133240_at_e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...

Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:17 am   

Hi Brad,

There is admittedly some confusion about the old Accel software naming
conventions:)

In the pre-Protel/Altium days, Accel Technologies had one product, but it
was known as Accel EDA, with 2 versions. The full unlimited version was
called PCAD, a Windows app, not to be confused with the old DOS Master
Designer PCAD. The limited version, with fewer signal layers, a 400
component limitation, and some other feature limitations, most notably only
one copper pour allowed, was called Tango, not to be confused with the
original DOS Tango. The 2 versions shared the same GUI, identical database
structures, etc.

After Protel, now Altium, bought out Accel Technologies, the product is now
called PCAD200X, this decade anyways, also with 2 versions, full unlimited
and a 2nd, cheaper one with layer and component limitations, no other
features compromised.

Confused yet?

Lukas

Mon Mar 20, 2006 6:23 pm   

Brad Velander wrote:

The tool currently called PCAD is really Accel with newer features. I
remember the switch from Accel to PCAD was pretty seamless.

-a

Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:17 pm   

Hi Leon,

"Leon" <leon.heller_at_bulldoghome.com> wrote in message
news:1142767896.127099.297210_at_e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...

Advanced Circuit's "freedfm.com" site tends to generate many spurious error
messages with the drill holes drawn (i.e., donuts are drawn). Their
suggestion to avoid this is to just avoid drawing them, so they ignore them as
well (when you go to fab).