Darryl, I will have to differ with you with respect to your views on Protel. We have the latest PCAD here too and I have made it my best attempt to keep away from it.
I have to admit, being a former Protel 98 user, I was intimidated by the DDB interface at the first run. It did take the first two services packs and some experience for me to get content with the package. I enjoy the stability of Protel, noting Protel was written for a windows environment. Most other CAD seems an array of DOS trivia. The Protel DDB architecture makes it a global storage effort for a designer. Some will protest that this is risky, those who do regular back-ups won't complain here. I am a work alone engineer, so I have little time afforded for library management. I also don't need 999 layers or a blockage of attributes to create a pwb design. The attributes effort with PCAD has been used here to even indicate naming the suppliers. This is insanity and it is what source control drawings are about. Well, it is true that Protel is weak on attributes. I do wish there was a better design interface here. I feel this might come with Phoenix. I know, PCAD will let you do more. However, it comes at the cost of remembering a great number of short cut keys. This taxes my memory. Sometimes these short cuts seem so far buried in the Help, it hurts. As far as part creation is concerned, a fellow engineer commented about the PCAD Executive does not permit the saving of interim work. Another pox is the *requirement* for a pristine netlist import that simply halts a work effort in it's tracks. The one feather in Protel's hat even with a flawed netlist is a reasonably good error reporting mechanism. Basically, Protel is simple 'to use'. I prefer this to being fighting with the tool rather than accomplishing the work. On the simulator, it was really a freebie add on IMHO. I would not ask alot. PCAD also users the exact same tool taken from Protel's work. I have looked at the 3D thread here. In my earnest I would hope that this would be adapted with proper library field definitions and it would match up with industry standards. A would also pray for an engine to do a thermal analysis for my design efforts. We do know a better autorouter is on it's way, at least. This will also be implemented in PCAD from what I read. Speaking for myself, I do not use autorouters. What I have seen of them, I do not like. I just do my own work. Take care. Fabian Hartery Research Engineer Guigne International Limited Paradise, Newfoundland A1L1C1 tel: 709-895-3819 fax: 709-895-3822 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] website: www.guigne.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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
