 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering ElectronicsKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Electronics Forum / CAD / April 2005Protel or ORcad?
What software is better, Protel or ORcad? Thanks. depends who's paying... also depends on the support group IMO.. Protels is very active and DXP has some nice features added in SP3. Simon > What software is better, Protel or ORcad? > Thanks. This question has been asked thousand times! So don't expect some good out of it... I believe it depends upon your application. OrCAD is good at simulation whereas Protel is for PCB design. Well since your question is between the two. First of all there is no ideal package. Secondly what are your needs? I know that there are bugs and issues in the current DXP2004. However it seems that Altium is genuinely trying to address those issues in a timely and professional manner right now. It hasn't always been that way, can't guarantee it is not a fleeting cycle. I hear there are also bugs and issues with OrCAD. Hearsay only as I have never used it, except for years of using OrCAD as a schematic front-end back in the DOS days. From what I have heard and experienced, DXP2004 is destined to become a much more powerful system than OrCAD. With many complex capabilities and DRC rules capabilities. The new system is a bit non-standard in it's user interface and operation, however for those that take the time to learn it properly the payoffs will come in what you are capable of doing with the package. Autorouting? The Situs (DXP2004) router still seems to be out to lunch and I wouldn't ever expect anything much out of it if you truly care about the integrity of your routing. What can you expect for that price range included in the whole package. OrCAD, not sure what OrCAD has for autorouting these days. If you truly need autorouting then spring for a proper autorouter like the latest Cooper Chyan/Cadence offering but be prepared to spend as much time learning to make it run (properly & as expected) as you would with the CAD package. Simulation? I don't use it so I can't say other than I know some have used the simulation with reasonable results in P99SE & DXP. Can't say how hard it was for them to get there. So if you are a tinkerer, parttime designer, I don't think either of these are the answer for you unless you just have too much money to spend on your hobby. But if you are a fulltime designer or in a small company looking for your long term solution I would suggest DXP2004 is my future roadmap.  SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > This question has been asked thousand times! So don't expect some > good out of it... > > I believe it depends upon your application. OrCAD is good at simulation > whereas Protel is for PCB design. > I know that there are bugs and issues in the current DXP2004. > However it seems that Altium is genuinely trying to address those > issues in a timely and professional manner right now. It hasn't > always been that way, can't guarantee it is not a fleeting cycle. For as long as I have known Protel they have a poor reputation for bugs and taking an eternity fixing them. Now we hear, yet again, that Altium are trying hard to get it right. Why is this constantly the case with Protel...? The product ain't bargain basement. It's what $8K.....! > From what I have heard and experienced, DXP2004 is destined > to become a much more powerful system than OrCAD. Well that isn't hard to figure. IMO OrCAD is a dying product. It's not been healthy since Cadence bought the company. But since OrCAD canned the US dev operation and shipped dev to India it's gone into suspended animation. The Layout product - the old Masstech suite that OrCAD bought way back when is prehistoric by modern standards. Cadence don't even sell this stuff in the US - they have a VAR, EMA doing it..... > Autorouting? The Situs (DXP2004) router still seems to be out > to lunch and I wouldn't ever expect anything much out of it if > you truly care about the integrity of your routing. Again, the Protel router has been poor for a long time now. How come they can't get it right? >.....But if you are a fulltime designer or in a small company looking for > your long term solution I would suggest DXP2004 is my future roadmap. I would not recommend either of these products. Altium have recorded consistent losses over the last few years and it's not difficult to see part of the reason why. OrCAD is on the slippery slope. No doubt about it. The Schematics and Simulation are still OK, but the layout is awful and there's little or no dev on any of it. If you want to know what I use and recommend it's Pulsonix. A much better product and lower priced than either of these. Prescott >> I know that there are bugs and issues in the current DXP2004. >> However it seems that Altium is genuinely trying to address those [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > >Prescott Cadence is trying to kill off Layout. The development team in India has taken over a year to get version 10 working. Unfortunately, they have no idea what they are programming! Presently, version 10 is pretty stable and useable. They slowed it down and broke numerous things. They have an irritating bug if you need to apply a scaling factor to a printer job. If you happen to buy Layout, insist on them giving you the latest version 9 release so you have a fully functional program when version 10 fails to work properly. Cadence is pushing new customers to buy Allegro instead of Layout. Allegro seems to be a much better program than Layout. I have sat thru a demo and it looks pretty good. I would venture to guess that learning Allegro will take some time. Orcad Capture is bundled with Allegro and looks like the two programs shared data pretty good. If you despise Capture, Allegro will import Telesis net lists. Both Layout and Allegro use the Specctra autorouter which can do good work if you sit down and plan out every net. Layout still has their old Massteck autorouter and SmartRoute. I haven't used their autorouters in years since the autorouters usually make a big mess on complicated boards. In short, avoid Layout like the plague. If you want to jump into the Cadence camp, get Allegro. Or look at some of the other fine packages out there. BTW, PSpice is a pretty good simulator. Of course, you could save a bunch of money and use LTspice which is a quality simulator and compatible with PSpice syntax. LTspice's schematic entry is a bit clunky and doesn't have a couple of the nice graphing features that PSpice has. Mark Don, And Pulsonix is what, $6995 USD (straight from their web pages) for the equal package? Wow, big difference when you are investing more in the user development than on the software. So Pulsonix isn't bargain basement either and Don should be more honest about it instead of trying to make it seem Pulsonix is incredibly cheaper at an equal product level. -- Sincerely, Brad Velander > For as long as I have known Protel they have a poor reputation for > bugs and taking an eternity fixing them. Now we hear, yet again, that > Altium are trying hard to get it right. Why is this constantly the > case with Protel...? The product ain't bargain basement. It's what > $8K.....! > Don, > And Pulsonix is what, $6995 USD (straight from their web [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > honest about it instead of trying to make it seem Pulsonix is > incredibly cheaper at an equal product level. It's not a cheap product, but bugs that do show up are fixed *very* quickly. It is much easier to use than the competition and Pulsonix is very repsonsive to suggestions from users. Overall cost of ownership (when designers' time is taken into account) will be much less than for Protel and OrCAD. Leon > Don, > And Pulsonix is what, $6995 USD (straight from their web [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > incredibly cheaper at an equal product level. > -- The model I use is 2000 Pin with Autoroute. On the Pulsonix website it's currently $4495. I've found the product to be very stable with an excellent router. Brad, my simple question is this: how can these guys at Pulsonix get it right consistently and Altium can't? All we ever hear about Protel is "yep, still buggy, but they're trying to get it right..." Prescott >> Don, >> And Pulsonix is what, $6995 USD (straight from their web [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > ever hear about Protel is "yep, still buggy, but they're trying to get > it right..." They basically got the software structured properly using C++ right from the start, making enhancements quite easy, without introducing too many new bugs. Having excellent software engineers is another factor, as well as using tools like Trolltech's QT for the GUI. They also have the benefit of me being one of their beta testers. 8-) Leon SignatureLeon Heller, G1HSM http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller As I said, compare equal product levels. Do you want to compare 100 pin limit packages as well? If Pulsonix get it right consistently, where is their user base? I have never met one person that uses it. Never heard of any professionals even considering it, just hobbyists and one man shops through the newsgroups. Actually , just you and a handful of others, some suspect of actually being Pulsonix employees. As for the router, never seen one yet that works satisfactorily for less than $10K - $20K USD ( I remember when that was $30K or greater not all too long ago). At that you also have to take a course (about $5K US) just to really learn how to operate it. But it's the same sad story with all seran wrapped routers, as I said you just can't expect much out of any of them. I never said that Altium always gets it right, I gave them an honest assessment that right now they seem to be working diligently to cleanup DXP. It hasn't always been the case as I suggested. SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > > Don, > > And Pulsonix is what, $6995 USD (straight from their web [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Prescott > As I said, compare equal product levels. Do you want to > compare 100 pin limit packages as well? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > shops through the newsgroups. Actually , just you and a handful > of others, some suspect of actually being Pulsonix employees. It's only been going for a couple of years, but they already have a substantial user base. I run the Yahoo Pulsonix users group - it has very little activity because the software just gets the job done, with very few problems: http://www.pulsonix.com All the senior Pulsonix people are ex-Zuken, with decades of PCB software experience between them. > As for the router, never seen one yet that works > satisfactorily for less than $10K - $20K USD ( I remember when [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > diligently to cleanup DXP. It hasn't always been the case as I > suggested. Pulsonix uses the Electra router, it's also available for Protel. It's very good, as routers go, and quite easy to use. I think it was written by the same chap who developed Specctra, now sold by Cadence. Leon SignatureLeon Heller, G1HSM http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller > As I said, compare equal product levels. Do you want to > compare 100 pin limit packages as well? Even if you take the unlimited pins model it's still lower priced than Protel. > If Pulsonix get it right consistently, where is their user > base? I have never met one person that uses it. Never heard of > any professionals even considering it, just hobbyists and one man > shops through the newsgroups. Actually , just you and a handful > of others, some suspect of actually being Pulsonix employees. Pulsonix is quite a new product. It was only released a few years ago, so it's not surprising you haven't encountered many users. Protel started what, 25 years ago....? Pulsonix have quite a large user-base in the US so I believe. I've spoke to several other users. Nothing like the user-base of Protel I agree. I may be wrong but I haven't heard of any hobbyists shelling $7K. They are usually use the free versions or open source stuff. > As for the router, never seen one yet that works > satisfactorily for less than $10K - $20K USD ( I remember when > that was $30K or greater not all too long ago). At that you also > have to take a course (about $5K US) just to really learn how to > operate it. But it's the same sad story with all seran wrapped > routers, as I said you just can't expect much out of any of them. You're talking past-tense here Brad. This sounds like SPECCTRA speak. The Pulsonix router might not be quite on par with SPECCTRA but it's pretty close. > I never said that Altium always gets it right, I gave them an > honest assessment that right now they seem to be working > diligently to cleanup DXP. It hasn't always been the case as I > suggested. There's no justifiable excuse why a multi million dollar operation can't release reliable software, and a usable router. Not guaranteed bug-free of course 'cos nobody can do that. As can be seen by other messages, the basic rule of thumb: "don't touch any Protel release until service pack 5".......! How can you defend that..? Prescott Don, Do you always make mindless arguments and arguments on points that coincide with peoples comments? 25 years? Yeah right, were you in diapers then Don? If you weren't then you would know that there was no CAD 25 years ago unless you had mainframes or PDPs handy. Protel started approx. 1990 after the split between Nick M. and the Accel people. So approx. 15 years, not 25 years. Yes the unlimited version is lower priced than Protel, I told you that as well. So you can save $1000 on a $8K package while you spend $10K or more in training and support and setup costs to adapt and start using the package reasonably well. You critique me for mentioning Spectra as past-tense but almost every comment you make about Protel is past tense as well. Find anyone making comments about DXP and 5 service packs? DXP had 2 SPs, DXP2004 is currently on SP2 with SP3 imminent. There has been a wide acceptance of DXP from the start, very few users went back to P99SE and that was mostly an initial GUI/familiarity protest because they altered so many basic operations in the program. Find the comments that are not just past-tense, then maybe we can talk. That is if the complaint is not just mindless cattle fodder because the user figured it should do things or should do them the same way as the package that they were used to using. Then again, if you want to discuss the subject of the thread feel free. Otherwise I don't know where Pulsonix was invited into the conversation before you rudely pushed your way in like a used car salesman with off topic comparisons and exaggerations of price savings for lesser products that very well may not have met the original request's needs. SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > > As I said, compare equal product levels. Do you want to > > compare 100 pin limit packages as well? [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Prescott > Don, > Do you always make mindless arguments and arguments on points [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > price savings for lesser products that very well may not have met > the original request's needs. "mindless cattle fodder"...."pushed your way in like a used car salesman" Tsk, Tsk, Brad! Do I detect you're getting a triffle pissed... Let's get something straight - Pulsonix is NOT a lesser product than Protel. It came in merely 'cos I said I wouldn't recommend either OrCAD or Protel and I mentioned what I use and recommend. But let's face it - you're a fully paid-up Protel groupie. I can see that. Hearing something adverse about your pet product obviously offends your sensibilites. Calm down! Prescott Don quit pissing up the rope, and look at where it is ending up. And your opinion is based upon what, hearsay and rumor? That's all you have offered in argument against either package. Now listen closely Don because you are obviously hard of hearing and failed to register it any of the other numerous times I have state the same things. I don't use DXP, I don't say Protel is the greatest, I admit that Protel has been less than attentive in the past to bugs and improvements. I have only stated that at the moment Protel seems to be mending their ways an that if those few existing issues are suitably addressed there will be no product in the price point that can touch it for power. So you can go f.ck yourself with your baseless accusations. They only exist in your own petty little mind. Got any references or experience to share touting DXP2004 not being usable until 5 SPs? If you don't then just f.ck off you little troll. SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > > Don, > > Do you always make mindless arguments and arguments on points [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Prescott > > Don, > > Do you always make mindless arguments and arguments on points [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > that. Hearing something adverse about your pet product obviously > offends your sensibilites. Calm down! Steady on children. I can only agree that if you had paid n-mega bucks for Protel you would have to be a 'protel groupie' to do so. It circulates for free just about everywhere in PRC so it is cheaper to fly there and get a copy. If you want to see reall sad groupies - what about the poor souls that have paid money for Cadstar? Now that software really is b*ll*cks. guys.. guys.. please .. lets keep it seemly in here.. There's no need to start a war over oil or CAD.. every one has their preference ... and we are all groupies... If engineers weren't "strange" and quirky.. then we couldn't be engineers.. some of the greatest minds in History have been so weird.. they put Hollywood to shame... And there's something called Brand Loyalty.. companies do it all the time.. that's why Apple have university programs.. and you can buy student software for one tenth the cost for commercial. Its not because students are poor... as Universities aren't. I've been using protel for decades.. since 2.8.. and at the time it was one of the best for the dollar... things might be different now when there are new start-ups around.. I still believe that for all the faults Protel has been around for a long time.. and likely to be around for a long time to come. so bugs will eventually be fixed and the usual theory of 1-2 years delay or 3 service packs works. Pulsonix MIGHT be a better package right now... but what is the company history? what are their upgrade plans ? I looked at Pulsonixs and it reminded me of the older tools I've left behind as the graphical interface is still a little clunky but in saying that Protel has grown slower and slower due to over doing the interface... for better or for worse. Also the price has only one year maintaince for Pulsonix.. but Protel is supported until the next release... and some times a little past. And maybe.. just Maybe .. Pulsonix is the Protel of the 22nd centaury... and Protel is going the way of Mentor Graphics. Orcad.. Pcad or Tango Also, because of the financial investment I have in Protel.. I would always prefer a competitive upgrade price rather than an outright purchase. Simon > > "Brad Velander" <SpamThis@nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:<8a4ae.1103698$8l.84305@pd7tw1no>... [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > paid money for Cadstar? > Now that software really is b*ll*cks. > guys.. guys.. please .. lets keep it seemly in here.. > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > times > a little past. I've always thought the Pulsonix interface was very slick. In what way is it clunky? I've tried Protel, OrCAD and PADS and don't like any of them much, compared to Pulsonix. Leon SignatureLeon Heller, G1HSM http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller It depends on what you are used too.. PCAD was all rectangles with square ends.. so you didn't get a feeling of what was there.. Protel is wisiwig... probably too much so now. Pusonix reminded me of autotrax.. or at least my initial look did.. unfortunately I had to remove it as DXP's beta loaded a whole new copy.. and each new beta gradually filled up my windows partition. Simon > > guys.. guys.. please .. lets keep it seemly in here.. > > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Leon > It depends on what you are used too.. PCAD was all rectangles with square > ends.. so you didn't get a feeling of what was there.. > Protel is wisiwig... probably too much so now. Pusonix reminded me of > autotrax.. or at least my initial look did.. unfortunately I had to remove > it as DXP's beta loaded a whole new copy.. and each new beta gradually > filled up my windows partition. Pulsonix always has been true WYSIWIG. Leon > I hear there are also bugs and issues with OrCAD. Hearsay > only as I have never used it, except for years of using OrCAD as > a schematic front-end back in the DOS days. OrCAD has some bugs, and the Titanic took on some water. Layout has always crashed at least once per half hour, Capture has taken to crashing once per half hour, and 90% of the way through my last project, Capture decided to crash catastrophically and take out my schematic with it, leaving me to finish the project from a layout only and then manually recreate the connection diagram from the netlist. > Autorouting? The Situs (DXP2004) router still seems to be out > to lunch and I wouldn't ever expect anything much out of it if > you truly care about the integrity of your routing. What can you > expect for that price range included in the whole package. OrCAD, > not sure what OrCAD has for autorouting these days. The same aforementioned project was finishable from Layout only because it was really just a glorified adapter. Through-hole connectors on one side, through-hole connectors on the other, traces between. I sat there massaging the connections in Capture until finally, when all was said and done, the rat's nest showed no crossovers. Every pin on side A could be routed directly to a pin on side B and never have to cross a neighbor to get there. And so I let SmartRoute have a go at it. At which point it very generously via'd every line, some up to three times, and tied my entire board into a knot. I eventually had to route the thing manually, which did in fact prove that it could be easily done with no crossing. > So if you are a tinkerer, parttime designer, I don't think > either of these are the answer for you unless you just have too > much money to spend on your hobby. But if you are a fulltime > designer or in a small company looking for your long term > solution I would suggest DXP2004 is my future roadmap. While I can't speak to Protel at all, I would personally never recommend OrCAD to anyone. Oh Brad how could you.... the 'f' word! You have been a very bad boy! Have you been missing your anger management classes.....? From Simon peacock on about Protel DXP: "I am also on the DXP beta list.. There is about a service pack a month there." .."And yes DXP is buggy.." "I don't see my current company upgrading to DXP until there are a few more service packs." So Brad old pal, how many service packs would you want before you would start using DXP...? Maybe 4 is about the right number.... Seemingly "5" sends to into a fit.... Now calm down Brad, it's only a number.... breath deeply..... I've never been called a little troll before...... What is a troll..? Prescott Geeeee Don, You are so smart, not! Why didn't you quote my comments that initiated Simon's response? Maybe that would have refuted your disparaging comments towards me? However, even your quotes from Simon are very selective and incomplete. Why did you not quote Simon's comment fully? "And yes DXP is buggy.. but less so then earlier releases of DXP." One would reasonably assume that the first DXP was actually intended to be DXP2004 otherwise the comment doesn't really make a lot of sense. Now Don, how did you selectively miss Simon's comment from just the other day? "Some of the bugs are even documentation issues... on that side they have fallen well short of 2.8 & 98. But for all its faults.. it is quite usable." Don, so what are you saying with your quotes from Simon? DXP Beta releases are buggy? DXP Beta service packs come out too often, not often enough? Simon's company won't upgrade for what reason? Simon doesn't actually use or suggest that DXP is usable? What is it Don? Troll(n) - look in the mirror! Maybe you should check the dictionary for "spin doctor" as well, since you are so adept at using quotes or partial quotes out of context. SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > Oh Brad how could you.... the 'f' word! You have been a very bad boy! > Have you been missing your anger management classes.....? > > From Simon peacock on about Protel DXP: "I am also on the DXP beta > list.. There is about a service pack a month there."..."And yes DXP is > buggy.." "I don't see my current company upgrading to DXP until there > are a few more service packs." [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Prescott So, I'm adept at using quotes or partial quotes out of context am I.....Mmmmm Well lets's look at what you just said: > Now Don, how did you selectively miss Simon's comment from > just the other day? "Some of the bugs are even documentation > issues... on that side they have fallen well > short of 2.8 & 98. But for all its faults.. it is quite usable." "But for all it's faults it's quite usable......."! note,completely in context I had a look at the latest price for Protel....$9995 So Brad, you recommend that folks shell $9995 for a product that's only "quite useable" do you. Can we take this to mean: "yep it's buggy and the router is pretty useless, but heck it's only ten thousand dollars...."!!!! I spent a whole lot less than that and I have a product that's totally useable.... And Brad, notice how I defeat your arguments, in context, without resorting to personal insults... Prescott Don, Now you are using Simon's quotes to put words into my mouth. And you call that in context do you? So far you haven't defeated any argument, misquoting is not winning any argument. If that is winning an argument then you are feebler than you misquotes. You have a product that is limited, mind you at fully unlimited it is still cheaper but that is only an argument that you have chosen to fight with yourself because I pointed out the difference in my first reply to you. So considering your comments and lack of knowledgeable retorts you must be the real groupie. Nothing else gets consideration and everyone is only as good as the least common denominator amongst the gripe class. This is so over, your just a f.cking little wienie who uses others original thoughts and issues when they are advantageous to you. Do you even think for yourself Don, or does somebody tell you how to do that as well? SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > So, I'm adept at using quotes or partial quotes out of context am > I.....Mmmmm [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Prescott > This is so over, your just a f.cking little wienie.... Oh Brad, first I was a "troll" now I'm a "f**ing little weanie". Brad have you be overdosing on viagra yet again...? I'd answer your comments but I'm seriously worried about your blood pressure. Prescott As if you really give a damn. If you did then you would stop playing your games with the quotes and suggesting other's quotes are my words or feelings. Funny, you seem to think you can put other's words into my mouth but yet you won't even quote my own words, shows precisely how lame your comments and your whole argument is. SignatureSincerely, Brad Velander > > This is so over, your just a f.cking little wienie.... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Prescott |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.