At 05:40 AM 6/20/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Strange this, I am going in exactly the opposite direction. I used Orcad
for 8 yrs until my present job introduced me to Protel.


Is it surprising that Mr. Gillatt hated Protel? He expected it to work like OrCAD. It doesn't. For someone coming from elsewhere, the Protel interface is probably, by a long shot, more intuitive and easier to learn. That was my experience, and I did learn OrCAD -- a bit -- before touching Protel. But once you have been brainwashed, once you have been drilled in all the counterintuitive ways to get things done in OrCAD, Protel will seem strange indeed. In another post, Mr. Gillatt showed that he was unaware of Protel's spreadsheet functionality. That's because Protel's spreadsheet is an option, not a requirement as in OrCAD Layout. You can design boards for a long time without even knowing about the spreadsheet access to the database. You could not get through day 1 in OrCAD Layout, as I recall.


Mr. Gillatt reported seriously buggy behavior for Protel. Suffice it to say that many heavy Protel users (of 99SE or, I assume, DXP) see very, very few serious bugs. A serious bug causes a crash and/or loss of data or harmfully defective output. A minor bug is an annoyance only, Protel is not free of those, but, then again, neither is any CAD program, certainly not OrCAD.

When users have taken the trouble to track down serious bugs, they have mostly involved hardware issues. Yes, even if everything else seems to be working fine, a problem with Protel can still be a hardware issue, often involving graphics boards, ATI being notorious.



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to