Schematic Entry Tools? (from: Silly Resistor Values)

[krw]

Ok, I'm finally fed up with OrCad Crapture, so am looking for
something that actually works. My basic needs are hierarchical entry
and Allegro back-end compatibility (this is negotiable, but it won't
be an easy sell). Cost is important, but Crapture isn't exactly free
so there is room here. Compatibility (at least import) with Crapture
would be a big bonus. Suggestions?

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Ok, I'm finally fed up with OrCad Crapture, so am looking for
something that actually works. My basic needs are hierarchical entry
and Allegro back-end compatibility (this is negotiable, but it won't
be an easy sell). Cost is important, but Crapture isn't exactly free
so there is room here. Compatibility (at least import) with Crapture
would be a big bonus. Suggestions?

Check out Altium. They've cut their prices substantially (presuably to
build up maintenance income) and you can import OrCad.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[OutsideObserver]

Ok, I'm finally fed up with OrCad Crapture, so am looking for
something that actually works. My basic needs are hierarchical entry
and Allegro back-end compatibility (this is negotiable, but it won't
be an easy sell). Cost is important, but Crapture isn't exactly free
so there is room here. Compatibility (at least import) with Crapture
would be a big bonus. Suggestions?

Mininova bit torrents, and the full bore version of whatever you want
to run.

If you intend to profit, you should probably get or remain legit.


http://www.mininova.org/

 

[Nico Coesel]

Check out Altium. They've cut their prices substantially (presuably to
build up maintenance income) and you can import OrCad.

You like working with Altium? I'd still prefer Capture over Altium. I
did some designs with Altium but I still prefer Capture because IMHO
it is less complicated (even though I have a Protel Autotrax
background).

 

[Joerg]

gEDA - it runs under Linux. IIRR you can import Orcad stuff

http://www.gpleda.org/

But messes up reference designators for multi-part devices upon
annotation, big time. So if Keith is doing analog stuff which I assume
he does I'd (currently) suggest not to.

I've tried gEDA, running Ubuntu in a virtual machine. When mentioning
the deficiency (politely) some folks on the gEDA newsgroup flew off the
handle. That was my sign to hang it up for now and stay with Eagle.
However, I can't recommend Eagle either. While close to perfect it lacks
a very major feature: No hierarchy. Blows my mind how they could have
missed that. So yes, I am also in the market but this time I take all
the time I want, to make this the last CAD switch.

KiCad is a tad better than gEDA, IMHO, but also has some issues with
multi-part devices.

 

[krw]

But messes up reference designators for multi-part devices upon
annotation, big time. So if Keith is doing analog stuff which I assume
he does I'd (currently) suggest not to.

How do you mean "messes up"? Randomizes? Destroys what's already in
concrete? "Messed up" reference designators must be fun when doing
ECOs.

I've tried gEDA, running Ubuntu in a virtual machine. When mentioning
the deficiency (politely) some folks on the gEDA newsgroup flew off the
handle. That was my sign to hang it up for now and stay with Eagle.
However, I can't recommend Eagle either. While close to perfect it lacks
a very major feature: No hierarchy. Blows my mind how they could have
missed that. So yes, I am also in the market but this time I take all
the time I want, to make this the last CAD switch.

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

KiCad is a tad better than gEDA, IMHO, but also has some issues with
multi-part devices.

Good thing my main job will be inside FPGAs, soon. It's looking like
all this stuff sucks worse than Crapture. Maybe that's why Cadence
keeps the cow around.

 

[Jim Thompson]

[snip]

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

The old original Microsim (now PSpice) Schematics does it
magnificently. I use it to design ASIC's... ask Charlie ;-)

[snip]

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food

 

[krw]

[snip]

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

Capture certainly does do hierarchical designs and has for some time. My
only complaint is about the way that they name nets for the different
instantiations of a given block.

IT doesn't push the net name down into the lower hierarchy, screws the
page cross-references, and is otherwise unusable. Other than that it
crashes ten times a day and is just peachy. I had to spend a couple
of days backing out the hierarchy just to get the work done. No,
Crapture is fatally broken.

 

[Nico Coesel]

[snip]

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

Capture certainly does do hierarchical designs and has for some time. My
only complaint is about the way that they name nets for the different
instantiations of a given block.

IT doesn't push the net name down into the lower hierarchy, screws the
page cross-references, and is otherwise unusable. Other than that it
crashes ten times a day and is just peachy. I had to spend a couple
of days backing out the hierarchy just to get the work done. No,
Crapture is fatally broken.

Which version? Years ago I have been using version 9.0 for FPGA
development (not my idea). There are some issues which can cause
trouble. IIRC this has to do with the numbering of the parts (Capture
makes a difference between instances and occurences). The only version
I've had crashes with is version 10.

 

[krw]

[snip]

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.


Capture certainly does do hierarchical designs and has for some time. My
only complaint is about the way that they name nets for the different
instantiations of a given block.

IT doesn't push the net name down into the lower hierarchy, screws the
page cross-references, and is otherwise unusable. Other than that it
crashes ten times a day and is just peachy. I had to spend a couple
of days backing out the hierarchy just to get the work done. No,
Crapture is fatally broken.

Which version?

Doesn't matter. I'm using 15.7, but 16.x is still equally flawed.
Support confirmed it. The fix is to ignore sheet references, which
means trusting that it's doing the right thing and giving up on
readable documentation (no way to tell which sheet goes where);
unacceptable. Of course if one doesn't use complex hierarchies this
problem doesn't occur; hardly useful. No, Crapture is permanently
broken.

Years ago I have been using version 9.0 for FPGA
development (not my idea). There are some issues which can cause
trouble. IIRC this has to do with the numbering of the parts (Capture
makes a difference between instances and occurences). The only version
I've had crashes with is version 10.

Interestingly, I don't remember crashes with 10.0. Yes,
instances/occurrences is another pile of steaming excrement, but one
we've lived with.

 

[krw]

It works very well in Pulsonix.

Looks interesting. Can Allegro still be used as the layout tool? How
much does this thing go for? I don't see a viewer. Your experiences
with it would be appreciated.

 

[Jim Thompson]

Looks interesting. Can Allegro still be used as the layout tool? How
much does this thing go for? I don't see a viewer. Your experiences
with it would be appreciated.

If Cadence/OrCAD had any brains, they'd undo the PCB links they cut
out of PSpice Schematics, relabel it, and replace Capture with it.
However they have no brains, and their "talent" is in India, so I'd
recommend everyone abandon OrCAD completely.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Democrats are like cats...
They'll take a dump behind your couch and then feign ignorance

 

[krw]

If Cadence/OrCAD had any brains, they'd undo the PCB links they cut
out of PSpice Schematics, relabel it, and replace Capture with it.
However they have no brains, and their "talent" is in India, so I'd
recommend everyone abandon OrCAD completely.

Up until very recently I wasn't too interested in rocking the boat.
Pushing it a little I now see what a stinking pile OrCad is. I only
want Allegro compatibility because we have a lot invested in it and I
have no say in what layout software gets used. We still support
products using OrCAD Layout.

 

[krw]

It starts at about $3,000. It can't export to Allegro, but they might
add that if requested. The demo acts as a viewer. It is very good but
I'm one of their beta-testers, so I'm biased.

I've read a bunch of their site and have downloaded the demo to take a
closer look. It appears that it's more of a layout tool with a
capture front end, rather than a standalone capture tool. I'll look
more, but I don't think that's going to cut it. Too many licenses
would be required, for functions we don't use. As I said earlier,
changing entry tools is possible, layout will involve a lot more
people in the decision.

 

[Joerg]

How do you mean "messes up"? Randomizes? Destroys what's already in
concrete? "Messed up" reference designators must be fun when doing
ECOs.

If you place a part with power on U17A, then U17B, C, and D must remain
in the same chip for noise and decoupling reasons annotate blows that
all apart. Doesn't leave them together. IMHO quite useless that way, at
least for sensitive analog stuff.

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

OrCad-SDT did hierarchies perfectly, never crashed on me, not once. Then
the company was bought :-(

Good thing my main job will be inside FPGAs, soon. ...

That would totally bore me, I'd need tons of coffee

... It's looking like
all this stuff sucks worse than Crapture. Maybe that's why Cadence
keeps the cow around.

They have a huge customer base because of the great foundation OrCad
laid back in the early 90's. But that can erode quickly, the millisecond
a better CAD comes around that dooesn't cost an arm and a leg.

 

[Joerg]

[snip]

I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

Capture certainly does do hierarchical designs and has for some time. My
only complaint is about the way that they name nets for the different
instantiations of a given block.

IT doesn't push the net name down into the lower hierarchy, screws the
page cross-references, and is otherwise unusable. Other than that it
crashes ten times a day and is just peachy. I had to spend a couple
of days backing out the hierarchy just to get the work done. No,
Crapture is fatally broken.

CAD is often like wine, where older versions are better.

 

[krw]

[snip]
I'm beginning to believe that no one does hierarchy. Crapture says it
does, but after a couple of weeks trying it's become obvious that they
lie.

Capture certainly does do hierarchical designs and has for some time. My
only complaint is about the way that they name nets for the different
instantiations of a given block.

IT doesn't push the net name down into the lower hierarchy, screws the
page cross-references, and is otherwise unusable. Other than that it
crashes ten times a day and is just peachy. I had to spend a couple
of days backing out the hierarchy just to get the work done. No,
Crapture is fatally broken.

CAD is often like wine, where older versions are better.

It was sorta interesting when we called support. They didn't even ask
which version we were using, just yep it's broke. I wasn't there when
they called back with the useless work around, though.

 

[krw]

If you place a part with power on U17A, then U17B, C, and D must remain
in the same chip for noise and decoupling reasons annotate blows that
all apart. Doesn't leave them together. IMHO quite useless that way, at
least for sensitive analog stuff.

There is no "update" option on annotation? It throws out anything
currently assigned? Ugly.

OrCad-SDT did hierarchies perfectly, never crashed on me, not once. Then
the company was bought :-(

Not familiar with SDT. IIRC, I started using OrCad around the time
Cadence bought them. Befire that I used proprietary schematic capture
tools.

That would totally bore me, I'd need tons of coffee

I like it a lot better than fiddling with schematics. The tools work,
too. ;-)

They have a huge customer base because of the great foundation OrCad
laid back in the early 90's. But that can erode quickly, the millisecond
a better CAD comes around that dooesn't cost an arm and a leg.

Apparently there isn't anything better, that doesn't cost an arm and a
leg. :-(

 

[Joerg]

There is no "update" option on annotation? It throws out anything
currently assigned? Ugly.

Not familiar with SDT. IIRC, I started using OrCad around the time
Cadence bought them. Befire that I used proprietary schematic capture
tools.

I grew up on FutureNet Dash-2 and Dash-4. Those never crashed either.

I like it a lot better than fiddling with schematics. The tools work,
too. ;-)

But it's so boring ...

Apparently there isn't anything better, that doesn't cost an arm and a
leg. :-(

Yep, looks like it. Since changing a CAD is a major pain in the neck
because of all the models you have to do over I am going to take a very,
very long time before I ever switch again. Eagle doesn't have a
hierarchy which makes it a less than top notch contender but in the many
years I've had it Eagle has never crashed on me. With modern software
these days that's already a pretty good thing.

 

[Nico Coesel]

They have a huge customer base because of the great foundation OrCad
laid back in the early 90's. But that can erode quickly, the millisecond
a better CAD comes around that dooesn't cost an arm and a leg.

Afaik Altium is taking over quickly. For around $8000 you have
schematics, PCB and FPGA design. Still, I don't like working with
Altium. Way too complicated. I actually needed the manual to get going
(which is a really bad sign).