Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: At 03:35 PM 2/11/2002 -0600, Jon Elson wrote: There's a lot of history, there. Accel originally sold Protel's Tango package in the US. When Protel was solw to deliver the next version, Accel went out, hired programmers, and created their own program that ran to the same specs that Protel was working with. I consider this a pretty unlikely version of the story. It is a major effort to go out and hire programmers and it takes time. It is much more likely that Accel saw a market opportunity and prefered to meet it with their own product than having to pay Protel their cut. But I was not privy to the negotiations. Tango and Protel Autotrax, as I recall, came out at approximately the same time, but it would be interesting to know which was actually first. I was in the middle of this, and was in very frequent communication with the Accel technical support people. I sent them a letter with about 50 major points that I considered to be either code bugs or deficiencies in the existing product. This was the last Tango version before the Tango series II was released. I was STUNNED when the new product(s) came out, because they had not only looked at my list, but done SOMETHING about EACH individual point. Both Protel and Accel produced a product that was essentially their programmer's concept of how to satisfy all of the points. (Now, I'm sure, some other people must have contributed their own lists of things they felt needed work, and obviously Accel (and other reps from other countries) must have been making lists of the frequently asked support questions.) But, I felt really weird about the whole experience, like I'd been the guy that wrote the spec for the software update, without ever being told that I was doing that! Anyway, someone on the inside may have had a different (and possibly more accurate) view of how this all unfolded, I inferred a lot of it from what was said publicly and what was mentioned in numerous support calls after the new Accel Tango Series II came out. What I can say, to the best of my memory, is that Accel publicly announced that the original autors of the software (anyone who cared could easily find out that was Protel Party, Ltd.) were planning a major revision of Tango, and it was expected in several months. This kept going round and round for at least a year, and Accel said there would be no maintenance releases until the new program was out. Accel did not come right out in print with the declaration that they had tired of waiting for Protel to complete the next release, but they did clearly explain to me that they were in the process of writing their own program to the same spec as the Protel product was to be written to. I had a bad feeling about this, having seen what could be cobbled together in a few midnight coding sessions with C. It looked like a program, smelled like a program, quacked like a program, but you sure couldn't do any useful work with it. And, that is what we got. It eventually became a limited, but functional program, and I made a LOT of boards with it. But, I had to do things a certain way, or messes would be made. The notorious one the never fixed was place component, copy component, move copy, and the silkscreen part of the moved component was trashed, 100% of the time. This could be demonstrated in less than 10 seconds, and it failed absolutely every time you did it! This bug remained through at least 8 or 10 revisions of Tango series II! The file formats were very similar, internal database structure very similar, etc. The new Accel product was chock full of bugs, which Accel never seemed to be able to fix. Accel eventually bought out Pads, and that must have represented too much competition to Protel, so they bought out the whole thing. But, in a sense, they bought many of their old customers back. The last sentence may be true, except that my sense, as a Tango user, is that the majority of Tango users did not stay with Accel in the long run. But, again, I don't have actual numbers, I just know many desigers who did not go up to TangoPro et seq. I bailed right at the DOS/Windows transition. I had seen enough of bugs unfixed and complaints disregarded to have 0.000% trust in Accel anymore. I remembered the original Protel Autotrax DOS program sold through Accel as a fairly weak program, but absolutely reliable - 100% it did what you expected every time you hit a key. It had almost no netlist checking capability, but it was as bug-free as any program I've ever used. That takes work and dedication to excellence, and I felt it had to mean something about the attitude of the people responsible for it. So, when Protel started to make a serious effort to reach old Accel customers, I decided to try them out. They couldn't have been worse than Accel even if the TRIED to, Accel was THAT bad, both in their software and their support! I got the Protel Schematic software first,
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
the schem wiring could be better but as a result of experience what i do is right click a lot between end points it's not too hard and often makes editing easier it helps if you can anticipate what you are going to change :) Dennis Saputelli Jon Elson wrote: Watnoski, Michael wrote: 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. This is an area where progress has been backward. The old DOS (Autotrax or Accel Tango DOS) program did a lot better in schematic manipulation than the current program. Moving a selected block of a schematic usually ends in a mess that takes a few minutes to clean up. 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. The handling of wire segments that were placed at different times as being totally different from a bunch of segments that were placed in one operation is a very annoying 'fetaure'. IE. if you select a wire that was all drawn at one time, it all selects. If you select a wire segment that was drawn just by itself, only that segment selects. If you move a segmant that was drawn together witrh others, it drages the ends of the attached segments. If you move a separately-drawn segment, you only move that segment. Jon -- ___ www.integratedcontrolsinc.comIntegrated Controls, Inc. tel: 415-647-04802851 21st Street fax: 415-647-3003San Francisco, CA 94110 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: I'd also like to hear from other experienced Protel users as to how to rewire quickly. If you left-click on the end of the wire like you said but then hit the delete key instead of placing the vertex you have over another vertex and clicking, this will delete the vertex you are dragging and attach the next vertex of the wire to the cursor. This way you can quickly nibble away at a wire back to the vertex you want and start rewiring from there. Bryn -- Name : Bryn Wolfe Title : Robotics Engineer Dept : Texas Robotics Automation Center (TRACLabs) Company: Metrica, Inc Addr : 1012 Hercules Drive Houston, TX 77058-2722 Voice : 281-461-7886 NASA : n/a FAX: 281-461-9550 Web: http://www.traclabs.com Email : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
On 03:52 PM 8/02/2002 -0500, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax said: ..snip.. Or the wire can be picked up and moved from one end, which might be faster. Yes, if you are grunting every time you want to insert a resistor into a wire, the grunting will severely slow you down! PCAD's reported behavior here is better, no question. Not $2000 better, but better. But over the long term they are the same price (or close to it) as they have the same ATS cost. Since the initial purchase price is about $2000 lower (for P99SE over PCAD) but the on going maintenance is the same then Altium must think that PCAD has more features or is better in some fashion, but P99SE is more expensive (proportionally) to maintain. I wonder what conclusions we are supposed to draw from this. Ian Wilson * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Yeah but dont forget Protel has PLD tools, 3D viewer, sim tools, signal Integrity tools, spreadsheet exporting tools and autorouting. Its also is on the path following Gates Law, Yuriy Khapochkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 02/09/2002 05:35:13 AM Please respond to Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Protel EDA Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:(bcc: Clive Broome/sdc) Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A good synchronisation of Schematic and PCB (Update board/schematic). How about swapping pins in PCB and backannote to SCH? Seamless in Accel and no way in Protel. :( Yuriy. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
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. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Abdulrahman Lomax Easthampton, Massachusetts USA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Georg Beckmann wrote: Altium is now selling to different systems. Protel and Accel. Does anybody work with both systems. ? Which is better, or are they similar. ? Whats the major difference ? Advantages of Accel EDA: Ability to swap pins and gates on PCB and backannotate this to SCH. Ability to define height for components and rooms with limited height on the PCB. User interface is more clear (at least for me :). Overall I prefer AccelEDA, though I have to use Protel now. In general I'm absolutely agree with Mr. Watnoski. Yuriy. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A good synchronisation of Schematic and PCB (Update board/schematic). How about swapping pins in PCB and backannote to SCH? Seamless in Accel and no way in Protel. :( Yuriy. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
At 01:54 PM 2/8/2002 -0500, Watnoski, Michael wrote: 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. First of all, it should be noted that PCAD is, as Altium has represented it, a program designed for what used to be called drafters. These people typically would need to be able to draw schematics and design printed circuit boards. Typically they are not engineers. Typically they are working for a larger company (except for service bureaus and the like, where the company is standing in for another company's CAD department, either completely or for overflow capacity.) 99SE includes a lot of functionality that is irrelevant to the typical CAD user. Until Protel bought Accel, a full PCAD suite was selling for about $20,000. This did include a bit more than Schematic and PCB design, but those two programs alone, in their full implementations, were way over $10,000 as I recall, at a time when Protel was selling for $6,000. So it would be *expected* that PCAD would be better in certain ways. 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. Protel Schematic has been neglected for some time, I'd say; there have been few major changes beyond the important one of the Synchronizer, which is really not a schematic functionality change but an automation of the interface between Schematic and PCB. The behavior can be predicted, if you are familiar with it. Familiarity is an important word here. I do not understand Mr. Watnoski' comment here, however. If a behavior is optional, and you don't like it, surely it would be reasonable to turn it off! In this case there is only one option of which I know: Drag Orthagonal. If Drag Orthagonal is on, Protel will keep wires at right angles when dragging a part; if it is turned off, parts will drag wires at any angle. Neither mode is fully satisfactory, but it is easy enough to delete wires. The problem is that when a wire is deleted, the *entire* wire is deleted, and Protel considers a collection of wire segments to be a single wire, thus by deleting a wire segment, we may be deleting wire that is off-screen, which is not desirable. It is usually not what we want. So, instead, to delete a wire segment, one can first give the wire the focus if it does not already have it. (When a wire has the focus, there will be handles at each vertex). Then a vertex can be picked up with a single click. Note that the click must be released; when it is, the vertex will be floating on the cursor. That vertex can then be moved back to the next vertex, thus deleting the segment. Yes, a zero-length segment disappears, but I think it is really gone, not merely invisible as in PCB. Definitely, Protel's wiring behavior could be improved, but I would not expect this, even if it were perfect, to make the huge increase in productivity that Mr. Watnoski mentioned. I'd also like to hear from other experienced Protel users as to how to rewire quickly. In the long run, an operating mode maintain connectivity, when turned on, could essentially autoroute wires when a part was moved. Properly done, this could be quite a timesaver. Not simple to do, though. Protel Schematic is not presently net-aware, one of its shortcomings. Tango Schematic, for example, would highlight all wires and net labels belonging to a net, once the schematic had been analyzed. Protel never brings that information in; but it would be even better if net analysis information could be maintained in real time. (And I have not mentioned the reasons for this.) 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. Or the wire can be picked up and moved from one end, which might be faster. Yes, if you are grunting every time you want to insert a resistor into a wire, the grunting will severely slow you down! PCAD's reported behavior here is better, no question. Not $2000 better, but better. 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 Tango Schematic had a Cleanup command that analyzed all wires and eliminated redundancies. What I'd like to see in Protel is that all wires would not only be cleaned up (Protel does not even have a command for this, and it can cause problems), but wire segments could be deleted individually. Right now, if I want to delete a segment, I can't even tell from the display if that is an isolated segment or is part of a longer wire. I'd expect that fixing
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
The collapse of the company doesn't necessarily reflect on the product. If all we had to do was design the best products then a good number of us would probably be wealthy and retired by now. The second comment would be if the product was so poor why has Protel kept it and maintained development? I think that we will see a healthy dose of the some of the best PCAD features start showing up in Protel soon. (Can't wait for unlimited user definable attributes in the parts/symbol library). Sincerely, Brad Velander. Lead PCB Designer Norsat International Inc. Microwave Products Tel (604) 292-9089 (direct line) Fax (604) 292-9010 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norsat.com See us at Booth 323 at Satellite 2002 in Washington, DC March 6-8. -Original Message- From: Watnoski, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 1:38 PM To: 'Protel EDA Forum' Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel Was Accel so bad that they went out of business, or so good that Protel was so desperate for a useable package that they offered so much to buy them that they couldn't refuse? I think the latter. Michael Watnoski -Original Message- From: Michael Reagan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:19 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel yea yea yea Acel was so damn good they went out of business. Dont get my going slamming bit mapped crayola like Accel. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Michael , Fact: Accel like PADs was close to filing for bankruptcy. Shortly before Protel purchased Accel , they laid off most of their engineering and marketing staff due to lack of sales when the rest of the CAE industry was experiencing double digit growth. Cadence help put some of the nails in their coffin when they pulled the only router from resellers like PADs Accel and Mentor. Mentor only survived because they had the resources to purchase Veribest which came with a router. Otherwise they had a 200K tool without a router. That was a laugh.I believe Veribest is now their entire PCB suite. It is pretty good.You can not sell CAE tools without a router. I used PCAD and have labeled it Bitmapped Crayola because the graphics looks like DOS quality. I too used it for MCMs and Hybrids and we couldn't even view a 4 x4 mil pad with the resolution that we could with Protel. Protel was the first Program to support sub mil pads and traces with out rounding off. Accel 14 rounded everything off to .1 mil.I could objectively list over 100 deficiencies we found with the program, but my time is short. I generated a list and presented it to the Pres of Accel at the time. He didn't feel it was necessary to fix things that didn't work in it. Protel has responded to suggestions and bugs. Most of the complaints we hear on the forum are not bugs.Sure we run into one once in a while ,but as Abdul has written, some of the bugs are so obscure that most users would never run into them. I would stack Protel against anything on the market.Sure I don't have 3d but who cares? I think the real competition, Cadence should be shaking in their boots when Protel release Phoenix, or whatever.Any company that has grown from 23M in sales to over 50 in two years should not be taken lightly. My point of view Hardcore User Mike Reagan EDSI -Original Message- From: Watnoski, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:38 PM To: 'Protel EDA Forum' Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel Was Accel so bad that they went out of business, or so good that Protel was so desperate for a useable package that they offered so much to buy them that they couldn't refuse? I think the latter. Michael Watnoski -Original Message- From: Michael Reagan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:19 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel yea yea yea Acel was so damn good they went out of business. Dont get my going slamming bit mapped crayola like Accel. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
On 04:19 PM 2/8/2002 -0500, Michael Reagan wrote: yea yea yea Acel was so damn good they went out of business. Dont get my going slamming bit mapped crayola like Accel. Well...not exactly. And obviously, the program had enough of a value that Protel purchased the company, and appears to have, since P98's obsolescence, used some, if not many of the requests for improvement in Protel made here to improve PCAD, and what's more, Protel/Altium now appears to be using PCAD (see the Phoenix news flash) as a source for improvements in the next version of Protel EDA... aj * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Altium is now selling to different systems. Protel and Accel. Does anybody work with both systems. ? Which is better, or are they similar. ? Whats the major difference ? Georg * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Accel vs. protel
Hi, in the past I worked with Accel. Since 6 months I work with Protel. From my point of view Protel is better. Protel is easier to learn. Integrated Schematic,PCB and LIB in one System. A good synchronisation of Schematic and PCB (Update board/schematic). Harald Georg Beckmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08.02.2002 08:02 Please respond to Protel EDA Forum To: 'Protel EDA Forum' [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:[PEDA] Accel vs. protel Altium is now selling to different systems. Protel and Accel. Does anybody work with both systems. ? Which is better, or are they similar. ? Whats the major difference ? Georg * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
