What he says. Do you need to gut a pig, or perform surgery? The former
requires only a sharp knife, while the latter requires a scalpel.

I'm curious. Are you doing micromachining, by any chance? 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Samuel C. Cox Jr.
>Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 2:14 PM
>To: Protel EDA Discussion List
>Subject: RE: [PEDA] Protel vs Expedition
>
>Your observations of Mentor's Expedition, is quite correct. 
>Protel is known for it's editors and interfaces or  ease of use.
>Expedition is the only other CAD system product that comes 
>close in terms of ease of use.  Visula, Allegro, Pads, Pcad 
>all are cumbersome, confusing and painful to use compared to 
>Protel's 99se or DXP or Altium's Designer and Expedition.
>
>You are also correct when it comes to differential pair 
>routing with respect to Expedition Vs. Protel, and the 
>misunderstanding about Protel's level of accuracy.
>00.00001 should be accurate enough, and will send most every 
>Fabrication house into a tale spin If they had to make a 
>substrate or PC board that accurate.
>
>Protel's Designer package has by far the mosts features per 
>dollar, over any other cad system, including Expedition.
>The prices vary but in general I understand Allegro is 50-72K, 
>Zuken's products 36-45K, Expedition is 50-52k per seat, Pcad 
>10-12 , Pads 12-16k and Protel is 8-10k..
>
>With Protel's product performing some 85-90% of all the 
>required or truly needed functions of even the most expensive 
>Cad product, that make it a clear winner from A price 
>performance perspective.
>
>I guess it becomes a question as to how important gate and pin 
>swapping and diff. Pair routing is for you as a user vs. what 
>your management is willing to pay.
>
>Is it worth the additional 40K to 62K difference?  That is a 
>hard call..
>how many boards, how many differential pairs per hour etc.. 
>one method vs.
>another..
>
>Money is usually the great tie breaker.
>
>Best Wishes,
>
>Samuel Coulbourne Cox Jr.
>PCB Design and Consulting Services
>(408) 268-9779
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Behalf Of Brooks,Bill
>Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 9:52 AM
>To: 'Protel EDA Discussion List'
>Subject: RE: [PEDA] Protel vs Expedition
>
>I have used Mentor Expedition, it does have some desirable 
>features, but like Abd says, the rare design might need the 
>features of Mentor, but the common design can be handled by 
>Protel admirably.
>
>Things that Protel can't do... automatic pin swapping and gate 
>swapping is probably the most glaring. It will do this in a 
>limited sense for folks who are doing embedded systems and 
>design the CPLD using Protel's software, but otherwise, the 
>hooks for doing true pin and gate swapping have been broken 
>since Protel 2.8 and still aren't fixed. But we are always 
>hopeful that Altium will do the development necessary to offer 
>that feature.
>
>The ability to interactively route lines in pairs and have the 
>router obey the design rules is another thing that Mentor does 
>well that Protel does not. Differential pairs has been a 
>needed improvement for some time as well.
>
>
>Auto Routing is something Mentor bought... Veribest (used to 
>be Cadnetix) had the best router around and Mentor bought them 
>and incorporated their product into Mentor's product line and 
>it gave Mentor an edge where they were failing miserably 
>before... The price model they are using though is limiting 
>the customer base that they have to only large corporations 
>that do their own design in house and can afford the high 
>maintenance fees required to engineer the products that only 
>Mentor and Cadence can address at this time.
>
>Still I fear for their future in this tight market and like 
>Intergraph, Applicon, Calay, Telesys, and others, they may be 
>heading for the dinosaur status if they don't change their 
>business model.
>But that's good for Altium, because there are more and more 
>folks looking for a more cost effective design system.
>
>Best regards,
>
>
>Bill Brooks - KG6VVP
>PCB Design Engineer, C.I.D.+, C.I.I.
>Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510 Datron World 
>Communications, Inc.
>_______________________________________
>San Diego Chapter of the IPC Designers Council Communications 
>Officer, Web Manager http://dcchapters.ipc.org/SanDiego/
>http://pcbwizards.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:10 AM
>To: Protel EDA Discussion List
>Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel vs Expedition
>
>At 11:47 PM 9/25/2005, yijie wrote:
>>Hi
>>
>>I am a current user of Expedition, but is considering 
>purchasing Protel
>too.
>>But I am not sure if Protel can support me in the same manner as 
>>Expedition does.
>>
>>For example:
>>
>>1) Mentor can go up to 120 layers; Protel only 32 layers.
>
>That's not quite correct. Protel supports at least 70 layers. 
>32 layers is the positive copper limitation, you can also have 
>16 internal planes, 16 mechanical layers, plus the appropriate 
>top and bottom layers: solder mask, component legend, paste mask.
>
>I have *once* seen a design where the number of layers in 
>Protel was possibly a limitation, a 50-layer multilayer 
>ceramic module. However, using the full 50 layers was not 
>necessary, or was it desirable, the design was accomplished within 32.
>
>Unless what you are doing is very unusual, layer count will 
>not be a practical limitation.
>
>>2) Mentor can go down to micron units; Protel can only design in mils
>units.
>
>This is not correct. The database unit in Protel is the 
>microinch, I think. Sometimes people read the specification 
>incorrectly, for it says 0.001 to 99999 mils. That was not a 
>slip, it is indeed 0.001 mil, or one-thousandth of a mil, one 
>millionth of an inch, 0.025 micron. The Protel resolution is 
>forty times higher than the reported resolution of Mentor 
>(unless Mentor can handle fractions of a micron, I don't know).
>
>>There maybe other Protel limitations, but I am only now aware 
>of these 
>>2. If anyone out there can tell me more about what Protel can do or 
>>can't do, this will help me in considering purchasing Protel 
>for my PCB 
>>design.
>>
>>I would appreciate if someone can offer me advantages of Protel that 
>>Expedition does not have.
>
>Protel is probably simpler and easier to use. This can 
>translate into faster design. Expedition is a more powerful 
>system, at least in some ways. It ought to be, it is far more 
>expensive.
>
>If you really want a comparison, do put some effort into 
>finding someone who is an expert user for both systems. 
>Someone who is an expert user with one system and who tries 
>another and finds it hard to use may just be experiencing the 
>difficulty of switching systems, for they will be organized 
>differently.
>
>Ultimately, you may want to try Protel; and when you do, 
>especially if you are familiar with another system, you will 
>almost certainly find yourself frustrated at times. While it 
>can be helpful to read the manual, engineers are often averse 
>to doing this, and sometimes the manual can itself be 
>frustrating, it is probably not organized to help you 
>translate Expedition procedures into Protel procedures. So in 
>addition to whatever you can find in the manual, if something 
>seems difficult or not well-implemented to you, ask here or on 
>the official Protel DXP forum (or whatever it is called now). 
>One question can save you hours of difficulty.
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum
>
>To Post messages:
>mailto:[email protected]
>
>Unsubscribe and Other Options:
>http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com
>
>Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004):
>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
>Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current):
>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum
>
>To Post messages:
>mailto:[email protected]
>
>Unsubscribe and Other Options:
>http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com
>
>Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004):
>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
>Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current):
>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
>
>
> 
>____________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum
>
>To Post messages:
>mailto:[email protected]
>
>Unsubscribe and Other Options:
>http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com
>
>Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004):
>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
> 
>Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current):
>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
>


____________________________________________________________
You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum

To Post messages:
mailto:[email protected]

Unsubscribe and Other Options:
http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com

Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004):
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current):
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

Reply via email to