Uh..."Danirel" or whatever Cad Connections guy on behalf of Jim Mc Grath

Please qualify your "advise". After all, you're casually suggesting that
the PEDA subscribers go out and spend about $8K (US) simply to "skip
99SE and go for AD6".

Dan Pierce,

Check the PEDA archive (see the messsage footer) and you should be able
to answer all of your questions. And beware that while AD6 is
significantly more powerful than 99SE or 98, it is also significantly
more complicated and very expensive. Clearly Mr McGraft's sales
assistant didn't feel it necessary to give more than a curt bow and an
ovation for you to hand over a large chunk of change without even
knowing what your needs are...

>From my own experience, P99SE is a little more complicated to use than
98, but it's more stable and has a larger feature base than the original
flavor. Not significantly larger than P98, since it is nothing more than
P98 w/sp12, if you know what I mean. They are in essense the same
package, just that P99SE (with the service packs installed) is what P98
was originally advertised to be...IMO, P99SE is better. Why, can't
remember the list of improvements, but it's across the board.

I wasn't a fan of the Database model when it first came out, but I've
grown more fond of it with time, and IFF the service packs are all
installed, I'm pretty confident in the stability of the data contained
in a DDB wrapper...Having said that, using the Windows file system is
like what you would do in 98 or 2.5 or 3.3...all management of files is
up to the user...

Libraries (either) can be imported to any project. That is, you can
reference a specific library from within a DDB and can also make DDB
specific libraries (exclusive to that DDB). Haven't worked with them in
a bit so can't speak to specifics. 

Printing/gerbers/etc different...yes.

I think you'll have to settle yourself for the fact that at least some
reading of manuals is going to be in your future. And don't forget to
check the PEDA archive

Best of luck.

regards,

aj

"Snake oil cannot be confused for anything else than what it is, any
more than snake-oil salesmen"
-anon

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim McGrath
>Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:38 AM
>To: 'Protel EDA Discussion List'
>Subject: Re: [PEDA] P99SE File System & Library Strategy
>
>Dan,
>
>If there is anyway possible skip 99SE all together and go for AD6. 
>
>Danirel
>CAD Connections, Inc.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pearce, Daniel
>Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:33 AM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [PEDA] P99SE File System & Library Strategy
>
>I've owned a 99SE license for several years, but I'm still 
>using my old copy of Protel 98.  It's looking like I'd better 
>get up to speed on 99 (Still being used at several of our 
>contractors in China).  I have several areas where I'm in need 
>of some strategy advice.  You know, the kind of decisions you 
>don't want to make by digging through the help system when 
>it's too late.
> 
>1. I'm a bit apprehensive about the "DDB vs. Windows File System"
>decision.  In the past, I've been content with having to 
>manually generate & load Netlists and back-annotation.  I 
>often use the PCB editor to create sketches, etc that are 
>never related to a schematic, so just having a .PCB file was 
>fine.  It looks like keeping every part of a design within a 
>single DDB can simplify things, but it forces a working style 
>that packages *everything* at a 1-DDB-per-project level.  What 
>if there is a logical system/schematic heirarchy, but 
>different contractors working on different PCB designs? Also, 
>libraries concern me - see next
>2 items.
> 
>2. I want to maintain a central PCB Footprint library that 
>contains all of the component types we use.  So far, that's 
>only ~400 parts and ~4Megs (I draw relatively fancy silkscreen 
>outlines).  Can I reference one copy of one library for 
>multiple projects?
> 
>3. A similar question applies to Schematic Libraries - Just 
>one central library suits me well.  When I need to create a 
>new symbol, usually I either copy and modify an existing part, 
>or I import from one of the existing Mfr's libraries. There is 
>always some editing involved - I use different fill & outline 
>colors based an part types, and I *never* use hidden power pins.
> 
>4. Something tells me I'll have to re-learn everything about printing &
>Gerber generation - any advice/good links for some Quick-Start 
>info.?   
> 
>So, which file system, and what do I need to watch out for? 
>Hopefully, I can start out by importing my P98 Libraries & designs.
> 
>Thanks for any advice -
> 
>Dan Pearce
>Sr. Design Engineer
>Bose Corporation
>Professional Systems Division
>
>
> 
>____________________________________________________________
>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]
>
>


This e-mail transmission and its attachments may contain information from 
Avtron Manufacturing, Inc. that is proprietary, privileged and/or confidential 
and is intended exclusively for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. Any use, 
copying, retention or disclosure by any person other than the intended 
recipient or the intended recipient's designees is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by 
return e-mail and delete all copies.

 
____________________________________________________________
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