******************************************************* Todays forums are sponsored by Ian Martin Limited Engineering/Technical Placement Specialists www.ianmartin.com *******************************************************
"PROTEL for PCB design cannot handle high complexity electrical designs and especially high speed designs. The route tool software applications are limited in the control a designer has, especially in fan outs on high pin count high density designs (tracks per inch)." I have found all CAD software has their strong points and their limitations, regardless of how much the cost. I have been using Protel since the Windows 3.1 days and, in my opinion, for the money there is nothing close to Protel (although the prices for Protel have been increasing as of late...). It took a while to master, but is easy to use once the "dues" are paid. I was not real fond of the "Design Explorer" concept, but have come to except it now. I have done some fairly complex and high speed designs with Protel. My experience with some other CAD software: I ran the layout dept of a company (a previous job) that did some large, extremely dense, high speed (1GHz +), motherboard type layouts. When I joined the company, they were using PADs. We had some major issues with PADs (limitations in design rule checks, gerber generation anomalies, plane/polygon creation problems, etc.) that cost us a few very expensive board runs, not to mention the schedule hits which did not go over well with the pointy haired types (Dilbert reference). The cost for the software was high. PADs is modular. Want to cut and paste, you have to buy the "design re-use" module - $5,000.00. Want test point support - $5,000.00 module, etc. In the end, the cost was 5 times what I paid for Protel and there was no schematic capture, cross probing, simulation, PLD, etc. The whole philosophy of how PADs works is bogus in my opinion. They assume you have a error free netlist when you start the layout. This is seldom if ever the case in my experience. Many times the layout and schematic are completed in parallel. You can't place a part or trace if it is not included in an error free netlist. You can't do experimental part placements for area studies or experimental routes, gate swapping, etc. The process of updating netlist changes was a nightmare. We looked to replace PADs with a "High End" System. The experience would rival any used car dealership nightmare. Slick salesmen calling daily, promising much more that they were capable of delivering, applying heavy pressure to buy NOW or the deal is off. Once the P.O. was issued, getting support was like pulling teeth. The main candidates were Cadence and Veribest (Mentor). We told the salesmen in the first meeting that we would be using OrCAD for schematic capture and we wanted to be able to import PADs layout files so we could maintain our old designs. The salesmen from both companies gave a impressive demo and translated a PADs file that we provided. They showed Return On Investment graphs showing how the software would pay for itself because of the decrease in design time and fewer errors. We ended up going with Mentor primarily because of their "interactive routing tools" and the promises of huge improvements in routing time. After about $80,000.00 we had 2 seats. The learning curve was like something I have never experienced before. There were so many bells and whistles and so many ways to do the same thing it was very confusing. The documentation sucked. There was no information on using OrCAD netlists, the PADs translator was not a "officially" supported product, didn't work and had no documentation. If PADs had all of the limitations dealing with having a pure netlist before the layout could be started, Mentor was worse. Not only did they require an error free netlist to start the layout, but they also require EVERY part to exist in the library, without errors, before the layout could be started. My layout people, seasoned professionals who in my opinion are very good, said it made them feel like idiots. They were struggling over simple stuff. It took months before we could even complete a simple layout. Now over a year later, they still haven't realized any significant improvements in layout time and this was the justification for spending the "big bucks" on a high end system. I say keep it simple and keep the designer in control. Beware of fancy features that "do it all for you" and slick sales presentations (It's like the old joke: How can you tell if a salesman is lying? ..... Its when his lips are moving.). Talk to designers who have used the product. Check out the company's bug lists, user support pages, and message boards. I also recommend getting a copy of the software for evaluation and do a simple design from start to finish. This is the only way to know for sure what you are in for.... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cliff Gerhard, P.E. Director - EE Group E-M Designs, Inc. 32122 Camino Capistrano Suite 200 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 PH 949.661.3016 x 501 FX 949.661.3017 www.GerhardEng.com www.emdesigns.com www.emmanufacturing.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
