yea yea yea  Acel was so damn good they went out of business. Dont get my
going slamming bit mapped crayola like Accel.

Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darryl Newberry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 3:43 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
>
>
> I heartily concur with Mr Watnoski regarding PCAD superior ease of use and
> "niceness" and "sensibility". And no, I am not a newbie, I was a longtime
> PCAD user (going back to MD 4.x, that's 1988 kids) and then PADS/DOS for a
> couple of years, then more recently ACCEL/Tango v13 for about 3 years, now
> Protel 99se for almost a year.
>
> I normally try to keep my mouth shut about how bad Protel sucks because
> people get all bent out of shape as if I'm slamming their wife or
> mother or
> something. Sure Protel is pretty eye candy, and to be fair, it tries very
> hard to be a full featured system in monolithic package, but it only gets
> credit IMO for the basics, and even a lot of that is quirky and fairly
> non-intuitive. Protel feature sets I do like are single-key CAM generation
> and print preview. The synchronizer works well most of the time. The
> schematic editor is a real toy compared to Pcad. Wire rubberbanding is the
> key to pcad ease of use I think. Protel library handling is really
> intimidating but in the end isn't all that great because of the lack of
> standardized field usage e.g. for simulation. Having user-defined
> and -named
> attributes is SOOO much better. Protel simulation is very "lite" IMO.
> Support for SPICE models is okay but I've gotten more useful
> results faster
> out of simpler cheaper programs like EWB, as in 2 hours out of the box.
> Signal integrity? Never could get it to work, it locked up my system on a
> small 100-part design. Protel automated placement and routing
> (again IMO) is
> 94.2% useless. I place schematic symbols, add wiring, do placement, and
> route--all manually.
>
> My crystal ball says that Phoenix will include those PCAD
> niceties and more
> like integrated libraries and perhaps even in-place library
> editing. I could
> be wrong.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Watnoski, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 13:54
> > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
> >
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> >     I will admit that I have had more experience with PCAD
> > than Protel.
> > I have used PCAD for about 3 years and Protel for only abut
> > six months now.
> >
> >     It is the common things that Protel fails in that drive
> > me crazy.
> > Things like having to readjust the wire after moving a
> > component.  Protel
> > will keep the wires connected unless this option is turned
> > off.  PCAD allow
> > a component to be dropped on a wire and it will split the
> > wire and connect
> > each end to the pins.  Protel will short the component, so
> > the wire must be
> > deleted first and two new wires drawn.  I also don't like
> > that Protel will
> > delete all wires drawn in the same operation rather than just
> > the selected
> > wire.  This list can continue on but I suspect part of this
> > is my preference
> > due to having learned PCAD first.  YMMV
> >
> > Michael Watnoski
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 1:03 PM
> > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
> >
> >
> > At 09:59 AM 2/8/2002 -0500, Watnoski, Michael wrote:
> >
> > >         I regularly use both systems and I prefer PCAD.  I
> > only use Protel
> > >because my day job insists that I use what they already paid
> > for.  I find
> > >PCAD far more efficient and easier to learn.  I am able to
> > turn out jobs in
> > >about a third of the time that Protel requires.  This makes
> > me far more
> > >competitive in my contract work.
> >
> > My suspicion here is that Mr. Watnoski is not as skilled at
> > the use of
> > Protel as he is at the use of PCAD; he may well be trying to
> > use Protel in
> > a PCAD manner, and, definitely, that would be slow.
> >
> > What would be useful would be to compare specifics, what is
> > fast in one and
> > slow in the other, and are there ways to improve efficiency?
> > Since Mr.
> > Watnoski is forced to use Protel, perhaps he might learn
> > something which
> > would help him in his day job, and I might learn something that would
> > encourage me to dive into my PCAD license.
> >
> >
>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to