Schematic Entry Tools? (from: Silly Resistor Values)

[Jim Thompson]

[snip]

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

Delightful! Consider the phrase stolen ;-)

...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]

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



But it's so boring ...

Processor and ASIC development is boring. FPGAs are far more fun.

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.

Our layout guy is just starting to redo our entire library, so this
would be a good time to switch.

 

[nospam]

Afaik Altium is taking over quickly. For around $8000 you have
schematics, PCB and FPGA design.

Altium is currently priced at $4000 for the full package and $1000 for the
'front end' package with everything but PCB capability. Beware of probable
relatively expensive 'software assurance' (annual maintenance from anyone
else), but, it isn't mandatory.

Interesting blog here
http://www.edn.com/blog/1700000170/post/1020046502.html?nid=3082
which gives some insight into what is going on with Altium recently.
--

 

[krw]

'A stinking pile of Orcad'? ;-)

Stinkin' pile of Crapture.

 

[Joerg]

[...]

But it's so boring ...

Processor and ASIC development is boring. FPGAs are far more fun.

ASICs can be fun if there is some high voltage stuff on there or if you
have to play triage with electromigration. But the most fun is analog,
RF or really high speed digital.

Ok, I am a bit biased here

Our layout guy is just starting to redo our entire library, so this
would be a good time to switch.

Ok, as long as you guys factor this cost into the game. It's pretty
steep, lots of hours.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

[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.

Yes. Finding an old copy of CADKEY is difficult, but worth it.

It is no longer being made, but was a pretty good package for a lot of
things.

 

[Joerg]

Hardly a show stopper when it is GPL'd and almost no cost ?

This problem can be fixed manually if you have the time. And as time
equals money, you will have the time, because gEDA is Free.

We had a discusion on the gEDA group about this and fixing this problem
appears to be not at all trivial. That opinion came from hardcore gEDA
developers, competent folks who most certainly know what they are
talking about.

I'd suggest he does, because your one anti gEDA reason is hardly
compelling to me.

Well, everyone should try for himself. I did, even loaded a VM and
Ubuntu onto the machine just to do that

So you're saying that the gEDA folks, whilst capable of building a
stable, reliable, Orcad like schematic capture application, that's GPL'd
and Free, 'fly of the handle for no reason' ?

Sometimes I have that impression. All I was doing is give feedback about
how analog engineers in the industry work. About that I know a thing or
two after doing this for 20+ years. Without feedback you can't design
good software no matter how clever you are. After this "flying off the
handle" some of the regulars on that group have sent me PMs, saying to
please not stop and that such feedback is vital. To which I have to agree.

Your post, lack credibility to me as it reads like a personal attack. I
know the gEDA designers, and a friendlier, more approachable bunch, I
doubt you'll ever meet.

It isn't a personal attack. If it came over like one I apologize.

Really?
The same Eagle that's DRM'd ?

Yes. Only people who use cracked versions generate DRM problems.

Have you checked your schematics lately, anything missing ?

How about tomorrow ?

I've used Eagle for many years. Number of problems: Zero. Not just WRT
to so-called DRM issues but in general.

Yet gEDA which has a very capable hierarchy, you won't recommend ?

Yep. Because a program that can't handle multipart refdeses properly is
not useful for a serious analog or RF designer. No matter how good it is
in other aspects (and gEDA does have its advantages).

It's a commercial application, you get what you pay for in that area.

They really missed the boat on that one. Even old OrCad SDT had it and
that wasn't a lot more expensive. I would have stayed with it but the
number of times that "new and improved" Windows versions have crashed on
me was the turn-off.

I have to disagree. I find gEDA as smooth as silk, with unlimited
configuration capability, and the non DRM features mean I'll be able to
exchange my parts and schematics forever.

I don't like KiCad, sure it's pretty, but I find it unweildy. This is
just a personal opinion, because I prefer gSchem, but I have used both a
lot.

The multi-part refdes handling in KiCad as well as the lib editor in
general are better IMHO. But like yours, this is only my personal
opinion. Plus KiCad is multi-platform which is really nice. So is Eagle
BTW (comes in a Linux edition).

 

[krw]

There's a fair impression, certainly: There's no means whatsoever to import a
"was-is" or any other form of back-annotation file between a 3rd party PCB
layout tool and Pulsonix schematic capture. (It can, of course, synchronize
between a Pulsonix PCB and a Pulsonix schematic just fine.)

That's a show-stopper because of FPGA pin-swapping. BTW, Allegro
doesn't back-annotate into Crapture very well either (it does do
pin-swapping though).

I'm in a somewhat similar situation in that we use PADS layout, and that's not
likely to change (nor does PADS seem all that bad, either -- a bit weird,
perhaps, but powerful and stable). However, back-annotation from PADS to
Capture involves running some dorky little command line program "by hand," so
if Pulsonix would only provide a means to import was-is files or even just a
scripting interface, I'm confident a process as easy or easier than the
current PADS-Capture back-annotation could be readily developed.

Back annotating placement data from Allegro to Crapture requires some
"dorky little command line program" too. We didn't bother for ages,
which left *bad* placement data in the schematics. :-(

 

[krw]

krw wrote:
krw wrote:

[...]

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. ...
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. ;-)

But it's so boring ...

Processor and ASIC development is boring. FPGAs are far more fun.

ASICs can be fun if there is some high voltage stuff on there or if you
have to play triage with electromigration. But the most fun is analog,
RF or really high speed digital.

Ok, I am a bit biased here

Our layout guy is just starting to redo our entire library, so this
would be a good time to switch.

Ok, as long as you guys factor this cost into the game. It's pretty
steep, lots of hours.

He's doing it in his "down" time. We don't do a tremendous number of
boards so he fills in with other things. Straightening out our
library (it's a mess) is one of them.

 

[krw]

How so?

No way to push net names down into the hierarchy. No way to follow a
net through the hierarchy. Sheet references get lost (and
inconsistent) across hierarchy. All sorts of similar problems.

I've used hierarchy in both Pulsonix and Capture, and while Pulsonix has a
slightly more powerful implementation, Capture's is a bit easier to use.

Crapture's *is* broken. You can get it to do simple hierarchies, but
they're hardly interesting. Complex hierarchies do *not* work
(Crapture support agrees).

 

[krw]

Hardly a show stopper when it is GPL'd and almost no cost ?

You have *GOT* to be kidding.

This problem can be fixed manually if you have the time. And as time
equals money, you will have the time, because gEDA is Free.

You have *got* to be kidding.

I'd suggest he does, because your one anti gEDA reason is hardly
compelling to me.

Not a chance. In addition to the problems mentioned (enough to not
even try it), our IT does not support Linux. That just isn't going to
fly.

So you're saying that the gEDA folks, whilst capable of building a
stable, reliable, Orcad like schematic capture application, that's GPL'd
and Free, 'fly of the handle for no reason' ?

Yeah, so "free" it's unaffordable.

Your post, lack credibility to me as it reads like a personal attack. I
know the gEDA designers, and a friendlier, more approachable bunch, I
doubt you'll ever meet.


Really?
The same Eagle that's DRM'd ?

Have you checked your schematics lately, anything missing ?

How about tomorrow ?

Oh, good grief. Spoken like a true hacker. Some of us have real work
to do. Playing with tools ain't it.

 

[krw]

Hi Keith,



I'm not sure what you mean here? If I hook up a net named "Foo" to a
hierarchical block named "Bar," inside of bar the net is called Bar/Foo?

No. Its name inside the block is whatever the port is named.

By using "select entire net?" Yeah, that would be nice.

Yes, but it would even be nicer to go to one end of the net and tell
where the other end is. Can't be done in a complex hierarchy (the
netlist appears correct but the schematic is FUBAR).

I do remember being quite annoyed when trying to turn on the "schematic path"
attribute of a hierarchical block that:

1) When you first turn it on, it gets displayed at some random location near
the title block (certainly not where you want it)
2) If you then move it to where you want it, it turns blank! WTF!?
3) If you go and toggle it off and then back on, it will retain its position
and finally work.

Haven't seen that bug. No thanks, though. I've seen enough.

Apparently the display of title block attributes was meant to be
quasi-static -- not something you'd enable/disable/move on a block by block
basis. Seems like an arbitrary limitation though.

Yes, try a schematic page with two title blocks. What fun. I have
one now where there is a non-schematic hierarchical block attached
somewhere. It won't say what it is or where, but bitches about it
being there.

The infamous "Display properties cannot be edited if Property Editor is
invoked from Project Manager. Please do it from schematic editor." is quite
annoying as well -- after all, if you could edit the display properties of a
given attribute for all your schematics enmasse, that would be useful,
wouldn't it? Having to do them a schematic at a time takes much longer if you
have a bunch of hierarchical blocks, allowing one to charge extra time to a
project.

That works, at least in 15.7. I do it all the time, to add
differential pair information on the flat netlists tab. It's a *lot*
easier than tools=>add differential pairs. It's also the solution we
came up with to force the "value" (displayed) property of no-pop'd
components to "***", or some such. Sort the "options" property,
highlight the "value" property of all parts with the desired "options"
value, right-click-edit, ***, done.

 

[Charlie E.]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 04:18:55 -0500, Terry Porter

..

Remember, Joerg said 'price is an issue', and whilst he didn't say that
he didn't have upwards of $10k to spend, I assumed he was implying that
he did not.

Apologies to Joerg is he does in fact have upwards of $10k to spend on a
schematic capture/PCB layout package.

Terry,
When he said 'price is an issue' he wasn't just talking about the cost
of the software purchase, he is talking about the much larger cost of
time take to learn the new software, to port years of part, symbol,
model and footprint libraries to the new format, and to get vendors
and customers to be able to use the formats of the new software. These
costs dwarf the costs of the software itself!

Charlie

 

[Joerg]

Even if it wasn't trivial, you did say cost was important, so I assumed
after spending the time sorting out past or current projects, one would
just create new projects using gEDA and work around the current gotchas?

Not really. "Working around" a bug like that would be like never driving
a car over a pothole or any speed bumps because the chassis would fall
out from underneath it. Without solidly assigned refdeses for U17A,
U17B, U17C and U17D most noise-sensitive analog designs or well-balanced
RF mixers such as in Doppler receivers are impossible. You can't
properly perform the project with such a CAD system. Except if you
always hand-annotate but that is tedious and error-prone for larger
projects.

Cost is important, with everything. I will not spend several k$ for
standalone schematic capture but it does not have to be free. However,
the suggestion as made on the gEDA board to throw a few hundred bucks
into the hat and then hope that someone fixes the bug (where the
powers-in-place have already hinted that fixing it doesn't interest them
much), ahm, no. Looks like their summer-of-code projects are more geared
towards upgrading the PCB Designer part (layout). I am not a layouter
but AFAICT that part of gEDA already works quite nicely. It's gschem
that doesn't (yet).

Moving from one application to another is sometimes very painful, I do
appreciate that.

True. That's why I want this CAD switch to really stick, and ideally be
my last one. So I'll take my time. If Cadsoft fixes the missing
hierarchy and it works I'll just send them a check and upgrade. That
would of course be the easiest fix because I can keep all libraries. If
other options show up (should try Altium now) that'll be fine as well
but I'll test the heck out of them just like I did with gEDA.

They are great, I run XP under Virtualbox on this Linux workstation
when I need to update my TomTom GPS maps or firmware, but don't XP
otherwise.

You guys make me feel so old at times. I don't even have a GPS.

I'm very surprised to hear it, usually it's Windows users I find who are
unreasonable.

They sometimes are, wanting everything "TV dinner style". With software
like gEDA one has to accept that it'll probably never be ported to
Windows. People have tried to compile, with rather mixed success. That
alone will keep gEDA a boutique software but if that's the wish of the
community one has to respect it.

These days, we are all in this category (unfortunately). The gEda
developers aren't young people anymore.

True, but most seem to never have done hardcore analog or RF design,
meaning very large projects with tons of specially filtered or switched
supply nodes in there.

Free Software developers get a *lot* of feedback as their target audience
is anyone who wants the software, versus anyone who has $5000+ to spend.

In 1998 I bought Pads (dos) for $5000 AUD, later I worked for a firm that
had purchased Protel (Windows) for $10,000 AUD. Protel was a total dog.

gEDA is the cost of a download, and it has always just clicked with me.

If you do mainly digital stuff I can see it work nicely. Probably quite
good for FPGA and ASIC designs because the hierarchy in gschem does seem
to work well.

I agree that accurate feedback is important.


I'm cool, and you were not attacking me. I jumped in the thread because
I do know the gEDA developers and have the highest respect for them.

They have patiently responded to my inquiries over the years, and have
always been contactable, sometimes issuing a patch within hours after my
feedback.

I've never experienced this kind of personal attention with proprietary
software, ever.

I have, with OrCad back when it was the "real" OrCad. The generic
printer driver or something had a bug. So I called them (from Europe).
Somehow I had forgotten that it was 9 time zones and not six. Whoops.
Someone picked up anyhow. "No, the engineers are all gone, I am just
cleaning here but will tell them". The next day I had a CompuServe
message saying that indeed there was a bug in the driver and I'd receive
an updated driver shortly. I wrote back that it would save them costs if
they just did a file transfer via CompuServe. But no, the next Monday a
big yellow van stopped in front of our house and there was a disk in it
from Oregon.

Absolutely.

However it's too bad if you have reused some part of a schematic that was
created on a non legal version. How are you to know ?

I never, ever, download schematics or models from any unknown source and
integrate that into my schematics. So I don't need to know

Some of my clients use Eagle and we never had any issues sending
schematics back and forth. Of course, like mine they all have it
properly licensed. But even the occasional student who got stuck and
sent me his freeware-created file had no problems.

Times are changing, the DRM is new, and you may be affected, the
*possibility* is now there.

I just can't see it as a good thing for the user, because they will
control your data.

They won't. If they'd do that the goons would be all over them. This SW
has never "called home" because I have such "features" turned off on my PC.

If Eagle are so worried about piracy, let them supply a hardware dongle
like PADS once did, because the *software* is their IP, and I'm 100% cool
with that, but the user data sure isn't Eagles to control in my opinion.

They cannot control my data without a clandestine feedback channel which
the electronic sheriff in my router would nab. Dongles? I absolutely
will not buy any SW with dongles, never have. That spells compatibility
troubles galore, seen it with others. And a

Au contraire, Cadsoft trusts me and other users that we do not
clandestinely distribute our product activation keys. What's more, they
formally allow me to install a 2nd copy on the laptop. Which other CAD
company does that?

I won't argue with that, but gEDA isn't static, the annotator could
easily fall under the gaze of someone qualified and motivated to fix it,
and then it would cease to be a problem.

Unfortunately it ain't that easy anymore, there are some things embedded
in the code that prevent a simple annotator fix. At least that what some
of the gEDA architects said :-(

Just like there seem to be some hooks in there preventing a Windows
port. This can lead to two scenarios, both probably unwelcome by the
gEDA community. Either gEDA remains a boutique app under Linux and never
makes it into mainstream or a "fork" develops and a Windows port pretty
much permanently loses compatibility with the Linux distros. At least
that's how I understood discussions between people who have tried such
ports and the coders.

The source is available, all it needs is to be modified.

Sure, but that can lead to forking. Also, most users (like myself)
aren't versed enough in coding to do that.

By comparison,Cadsofts hierarchical sheet structure problem won't get
fixed until *Cadsoft* fix it.

Lo and behold after years of bring it up (for their own sake) they
recently said that it's under consideration. That would make this a
wonderful software, pretty close to being perfect.

Yes, I agree. I loved Orcad in the DOS days, so fast and so easy to use.


It's a complex area, I guess if it was easy, they would all be perfect

Sure, but OrCad, Eagle and the others have mastered that part perfectly.
I've never seen either blow my refdeses.

You debate very fairly, it's a pleasure to discuss the subject with you.

Thanks, same kudos to you

Isn't everything 'multi-platform' when using Virtualbox ? ;-)

True. But there are some intricacies with Linux due to its file system.
It is quite restrictive and for some writes you must log in as root. Not
really my cuppa tea for security reasons even though Linux is (so far)
fairly safe in that domain because hackers don't see enough "market".
For the same reason thieves won't likely steal my car because it can't
be profitably parted out

I imagine that quite a few Windows only apps will come in a Linux version
in the not too distant future as it continues to gain market share.

In the end, it's all about what the customers want, no ?

Yes, it is. Although I've yet to see any corporate user employing Linux,
other than for file servers. I think Eagle did it because they are still
very much eyeing the hobbyist market, as evidenced by the lack of a
hierarchy.

 

[Joerg]

"Terry Porter" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:RN-

[...]

The reason people pay upwards of $10k for schematic capture/PCB layout
tools is because it would take them far more than $10k worth of time to
go and fix up gEDA to be competitive with the offerings from the big
guys.

Remember, Joerg said 'price is an issue', and whilst he didn't say that
he didn't have upwards of $10k to spend, I assumed he was implying that
he did not.

Apologies to Joerg is he does in fact have upwards of $10k to spend on a
schematic capture/PCB layout package.

$10k? No, not that much, I do not need a Rolls-Royce. Just for a
schematic capture that is too much money. In 1989 OrCad SDT cost me $495
and it was almost perfect. Now inflation has been pretty bad but not
this bad. I believe $1k for a near perfect capture software would IMHO
be appropriate and I'd be willing to pay that.

Indeed, and for many reasons.
1) Price

You can be better off with an older copy of MS-Office, can be had for
$100-$200. Legit licenses, for example for overstock liquidators, that's
how I also bought my mechnical CAD almost for a song. Much less bloat
than OO, much faster. On the big machine I also use OO because there
speed doesn't matter, it's nearly always open.

2) Open data formats

With OpenOffice that doesn't mean much because industry has not accepted
the OD standard, it's all MS-Word format. Without exception for all of
my clients.

3) No DRM, you own your data.

You always own your data. I have no software here where that wasn't the
case. It's the user's choice. For example when you use one of the free
layout programs of PCB houses they own the Gerber output but they
clearly state that in the license agreement. Then after you buy the
first set of fabbed boards from them they usually transfer the Gerbers
into your ownership. Almost like renting the SW, a pretty fair deal IMHO.


[...]

I agree. I'm 55 and finding I embrace change less and less these days.

Hmm, looks like we are all in the same boat.

But life is about change.

Yes.


XP users will need to come to terms with Vista7 at some point, and I
bet, lots of them will not like that.
Will your expensive windows schematic capture/PCB layout tools run under
Vista7 ?
This will be a great time for your vendor to force you to upgrade, I can
hear the cash register in their upgrade department going 'kerching'
already.

Why switch? I successfully sat out Vista and it seems about 75% of
industry did the same. If Windows 7 isn't backward compatible enough it
will flunk just like Vista. MS should have learned this lesson by now.
But maybe they didn't, then it'll be XP for me.

[...]

 

[Jim Thompson]

[snip]

$10k? No, not that much, I do not need a Rolls-Royce. Just for a
schematic capture that is too much money. In 1989 OrCad SDT cost me $495
and it was almost perfect. Now inflation has been pretty bad but not
this bad. I believe $1k for a near perfect capture software would IMHO
be appropriate and I'd be willing to pay that.

[snip]

1989 $495 => 2009 $851.08

Maybe double that for "perfection" ?

...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

 

[qrk]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:59:29 -0500, Terry Porter

[lots of snippage]

Yes, I agree. I loved Orcad in the DOS days, so fast and so easy to use.

Ahh, the old DOS Orcad SDT386 has new life these days. Some folks have
written a Windows display driver for it which works with Win2k up to
Vista.

 

[Joerg]

[snip]

$10k? No, not that much, I do not need a Rolls-Royce. Just for a
schematic capture that is too much money. In 1989 OrCad SDT cost me $495
and it was almost perfect. Now inflation has been pretty bad but not
this bad. I believe $1k for a near perfect capture software would IMHO
be appropriate and I'd be willing to pay that.

[snip]

1989 $495 => 2009 $851.08

Maybe double that for "perfection" ?

Well, Orcad back then was already poifect. So no doubling of the $851.08 ...

 

[krw]

The answer to your problem seems to be a smarter IT - or perhaps a
smarter employer.

Seeing how you're too stupid to be employed, your opinion is worth
exactly what it always is; zero.

 

[Charlie E.]

Usually people are just talking about the cost of the software, and I
agree that's the *first* installment, but the rest can be paid off over
time ;-)


I assume he's an engineer, he has a brain, and the ability to learn. Fast.
What's more, a good engineer will enjoy the challenge and be able to
taste the future benefits.


No. Old parts may be obsolete, or just not available. New part creation
can be done on the new system. If the old system locked you in with a
DRM'd, binary parts library, and you can't write something to port the
parts, you're on a runnaway train to a washed out bridge, and have only
yourself to blame for taking the wrong train.

You may be stuck with two systems for a while, it may be harder, so what,
get over it because nothing worth doing is usually easy.


Whoa, you left out "getting the POPE to bless the new software" 1

Someone looking for decent low cost software on S.E.D. won't be Lockheed
Martin, or IBM. It will be someone at home or self employed who wants to
draw schematics and create pcbs as part of a project design.

How did this thread suddenly encompass the lofty goals you're espousing ?

I mention Free Software, and you jump in with requirements that most
Windows software costing 10 thousand dollars won't meet.


Incorrect. These costs *may* dwarf the costs of the software itself,
especially if you don't want to learn, can't learn, or are just too lazy
to learn.

The world is changing Charlie, these days you learn at home and come to
work with the drive and skills to go, or you find yourself out of a job.

Terry,
Oh, the world may be changing, but not that much.

You see, I am all too well aware of the trials and tribulations in
converting over to Orcad or other software. Lets just say I had a
'professional' interest in it!

But, if you are just starting out, or are just a hobbyist, then of
course, you don't have much to loose going over to new software. But,
if you are a professional (and, many of us here ARE professionals!)
then that transition is full of wasted time 'reinventing' the wheel as
you realize that it will take 'x' amount of time re-drawing that basic
filter block into the new software, or having to confirm that the
simulations in the new software match the results of the old software.
A professional doesn't have time to manage two separate design flows,
unless the payoff is much higher than maintaining the old system, i.e.
and order of magnitude or more!

And, if you are a company, and not just a single professional, the
cost/benefit has to be even HIGHER to warrant a change.

Charlie