> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 9:44 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] OrCad to Protel > > > > Just slightly embittered after barttling with bugs on > vanishing timelines.
Robert Been there, done that, got stressed, gave up, went to pub, end of problem till Monday at least. Humorously translating a design I got from some guys in Caldicot which was in Allegro funnily enough :-) but the translation time took less time than getting to a reasonable competency level in Allegro! Best Regards John A. Ross RSD Communications ltd Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW http://www.rsd.tv ================================== > > > > > > "John A. Ross > > [Design]" To: > "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: > > Subject: Re: > [PEDA] OrCad to Protel > 21-Jun-2003 03:37 > > PM > > Please respond to > > "Protel EDA > > Forum" > > > > > > > > > > Robert > > I think you are being a bit hard here and overly critical of > Protel tools, if the tools were so bad why has Zarlink > (Mitel, GPS) used them for so long. > > Some of your statements below show a certain unfamiliarity > with the tools which would be pre-requisite knowledge for a > fair and honest comparison against another vendors tools. > > To be fair I think a little resistance to change on your part > :-) would be more a reason for your comments than the tools > themselves considering Protels history at Zarlink. > > Zarlink (Mitel, GPS) has had good use out of Protel tool for > a long time, in fact I remember being asked by some of your > colleagues for a recommendation for changing from V2.8 to > P98, I had the same conversation again with them on 99SE. In > fact the designs for your first QPSK de-mod was given to me > in Protel (still have SCH here, pre 1997 and marked GEC Plessey). > > P98 was the first copy of Protel I liked (2.8 was not for > me), but at that time I regularly used Orcad since SDT III, > Ulticap & PowerLogic but over the years most of my SCH or > captured entry is in Protel with layout split across either > PowerPCB or Protel. > > Bug wise all three have there own set of nasties, dos and don'ts. > > If I did not have a variety of tools at my disposal I could > not work efficiently and not all tools, are all things to all people. > > I agree the SI tools are pretty poor. > > But great improvements have been made in DXP and even > although I am very critical and very out spoken of some of > the features & changes within DXP, these criticisms of mine > are purely productivity related (proven by internal trials > here), it does not mean it is a bad product or have great > potential, in fact I do believe with the Protel ease of use, > bi-directional compatibility with Orcad, that nVisage > (capture tool within DXP, also available as stand alone > product) could well have the possibility to knock both Orcad > Capture and PowerLogic off the pedestals they has been > sitting on for so long. > > All just my opinions of course. > > Best Regards > > John A. Ross > > RSD Communications ltd > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > WWW http://www.rsd.tv > ================================== > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:41 AM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] OrCad to Protel > > > > > > > > Strange this, I am going in exactly the opposite direction. I used > > Orcad for 8 yrs until my present job introduced me to Protel. I am > > crowing with delight now that the firm has cut a deal with Cadence. > > Protel has got the "look and feel" right and Orcad is undeniably > > clunky but I still can't believe that any professional app > could be as > > unreliable as Protel. Crashes frequently and thoroughly, can't do > > hierarchy properly, can't screen single pin nets ( very > embarrasing ), > > leaves routes hanging unconnected without warning, cannot > > reconnect a netlist to routes competently. The SI tools are > > very fragile and do strange things without warning, there is > > no documentation to properly describe the workings of the SI > > tools... (ie the calculation engine(s)). I have no idea > > without doing experimental work as to how much of the SI > > output is true ( again, embarrasing ). It was as though the > > authors got so far and then gave up. They did all the up > > front look and feel stuff but forgot the really important > > hard edges. No way has my experience with Protel given me the > > slightest desire to try DXP. I am on my last Protel project > > now and it is Orcad and Specctra from now on... yippee!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Website Visitor > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: > > proteledaforum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > ervinc.com> cc: > > > > > > Subject: [PEDA] > > OrCad to Protel > > > > 19-Jun-2003 03:17 PM > > > > > > Please respond to > > > > > > "Protel EDA Forum" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, I used to use Protel 99SE about 3 years ago. Then > with a new > > job, the company has Orcad. I've been using Orcad now for > the 3 years > > and I am absolutely disgusted with it. I'm trying to convince > > management to go to Protel. All I wanted to know is how > everyone feels > > about the new Protel DXP. I really want to switch back to > Protel and > > any info would be great! Thanks for the replies > > > > Evi > > > > Posted from Association web site by: Evi Tomaskovic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *