jpexg@wheaties.ai.mit.edu (John Purbrick) (07/06/90)
The company I work at is interested in getting a new schematic capture and PC board layout setup to run on a PC-AT class computer. We aren't anxious to spend a heap of money, but we want something that we won't curse every time we use. We've had recommendations re Pads and Tango; Hiwire is cheaper and seems OK, but nobody we know has it. Anyone have comments? John Purbrick jpexg@ai.mit.edu
tindle@ms.uky.edu (Ken Tindle) (07/06/90)
In article <9353@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu> jpexg@.MIT.EDU () writes: >The company I work at is interested in getting a new schematic capture and >PC board layout setup to run on a PC-AT class computer. > >We've had recommendations re Pads and Tango; Hiwire is cheaper and seems OK, >but nobody we know has it. Anyone have comments? Yes, try Protel (Easytrax or other) and DC-Cad (Design Computation). The Protel shines in ease of learning, the DC-Cad in its power and end-to-end capability (schematic cap, layout, ar) for $500 complete. The DC autorouter is maybe the best price/performance ratio package around. Hope your AT has a co-processor; NOT a requirement, if you like taking naps during your computing sessions. --------------------------\ /----------------------------------------------- INTERNET:tindle@ms.uky.edu | "Could you please continue the petty bickering? BITNET: tindle@ukma.bitnet | I find it most intriguing." --- Data, Ken Tindle - Lexington, KY | Star Trek, The Next Generation, "Haven" --------------------------/ \-----------------------------------------------
meric@portia.Stanford.EDU (meric ozcan) (07/06/90)
In article <9353@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu> you write: ........ >We've had recommendations re Pads and Tango; Hiwire is cheaper and seems OK, >but nobody we know has it. Anyone have comments? > >John Purbrick >jpexg@ai.mit.edu Well I have used Hiwire sometime ago so I can say a few words about it. It could not be done any worse. First of all they have a tiny manual which is useless. The English is pretty bad, maybe I should say wording is bad. The program itself is horrible too! For example, When you scroll the screen, it is updated in steps; causes eye strain. They say so and so many libraries of devices bla bla.. in their ads, well I saw those libraries, it could not be done any worse. You can find for example all kinds of TTL gates, LS, S, ALS.. The very same chip but with different labels. This is confusing, what I mean is They list 7400, 74ALS00, 74S00, 74LS00, .... and so on separately. There is no need to do that, since schematic of the chip does not change just one 7400 for the above example would be enough, and I can change the label if I want to. So Their libraries are very limited. The access to the libraries is horrible, When you load a library say CMOS library, you see the first page and device names are listed and you have two options either to continue to see other pages or return to your drawing. This is incredible, I lost half of my hair!! In order to find something in the last page of a library you have to go through every single page of that library and you can not go backwards !!! If you miss something you have to make another trip(s) through the library. I did not like the menu and the access to different functions..... Well I can go on and on. These are my personal opinions, someone may like Hiwire but I certainly would not recommend it to anyone. Only good thing about this program is that you can get back your money in 30 days. Meric Ozcan meric@portia.stanford.edu
jmn@cancun.berkeley.edu (Jan Mark Noworolski) (07/07/90)
I have used Pads-PCB, and Smartwork. Which type of system you decide to use depends on how big the circuits you make are. For larger boards PCB-pads is probably best (although the user interface is about as counter-intuitive as you can get). But getting the auto- routing option is a must. When I used it we had the Superrouter (a rip-up and retry router) which managed to route to 100% an analog crossover! Smartwork is useful because it can autoroute from point to point. So you can take a wire and give it starting and ending points and it will route it. This cotrasts to Pads-pcb where you have to lead each wire by the nose to lay it down. Another option would be ORCAD. I have used their Schematic Capture extensively, and their user interface is INCREDIBLE! They now have a PCB layout program out which hopefully is just as good. Anybody used it? -- "We'd love to stay and chat but we have to go to the lobby and wait for the limo." Quotes from "Spinal Tap" jmn@united.berkeley.edu, or jmn@power.berkeley.edu
larry@rsiatl.UUCP (Larry Kahhan) (07/07/90)
In article <9353@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu> jpexg@.MIT.EDU () writes: >The company I work at is interested in getting a new schematic capture and >PC board layout setup to run on a PC-AT class computer. We aren't anxious to >spend a heap of money, but we want something that we won't curse every time we >use. > >We've had recommendations re Pads and Tango; Hiwire is cheaper and seems OK, >but nobody we know has it. Anyone have comments? > >John Purbrick >jpexg@ai.mit.edu We've had real good success where I work with Orcad schematic capture and Orcad PCB. The schematic capture package runs about $500, and the PCB package runs about $1000. We normally use company proprietary stuff on mainframes or workstations, but when we need something quick and dirty, it's Orcad. They also have some other packages that integrate with their schamatic capture package, such as logig simulation and PLD design. We're also using it to design some logic that integrates with a XILINX programmable gate-array. All in all, I like Orcad compared to other packages, and best of all, it's not copy protected, and doesn't require the use of a hardware locking device, such as Omation's SCHEMA. The other packages out there are OK, but you'll probably end up paying a lot more, and with some of the protection devices that they encumber the legitimate user with, I don't feel they're worth the hassle. Larry Kahhan - NRA, NRA-ILA, CSG, GSSA , & GOA
markz@ssc.UUCP (Mark Zenier) (07/08/90)
In article <25981@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, jmn@cancun.berkeley.edu (Jan Mark Noworolski) writes: > > Another option would be ORCAD. I have used their Schematic Capture extensively, > and their user interface is INCREDIBLE! They now have a PCB layout program out > which hopefully is just as good. Anybody used it? There is a demo disk version. You need a VGA or EGA. markz@ssc.uucp
rainer@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Rainer Malzbender) (07/09/90)
I have and use both OrCAD SDT ($495) and PCB ($1495). Some of the comments I've seen here and in magazine reviews might lead one to think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, so let me add a note of reason. These are both fine products which may in fact be the best available for PC's (haven't used other stuff), but they are definitely less than perfect. I would probably encourage someone to buy these products, but OrCAD could use a few programmers from Microsoft (flames > /dev/null) to enhance their user interface, and just in general add functionality. I've found SDT to be the better of the two and think that the price for PCB is outrageous, even with an autorouter. I keep running into weird artificial limits in both programs (e.g., drill size < 256 mils, what if I want to do a design at 4X ???). Note that if you're using SMD chips with pad spacings at weird intervals, like an 80 pin gull wing HV77 LCD driver with pads every 31.5 mils, the autorouter won't work. Zoom is not continuously variable, grid sizes are fixed (5 mil minimum), and you can't add little guide lines except by using the 'place edge' feature. And why do I get a two-inch thick manual for $495 and only a little half-inch thick one for $1495 ??? On the other hand, if your project is building boards for a PC using mostly TTL, OrCAD's products will do the job very nicely. By the way, I would prefer this note be construed as constructive criticism for OrCAD rather than advising against purchasing their products. I just couldn't let that comment about "INCREDIBLE" user interfaces go unnoticed. -- Rainer M. Malzbender Technology recapitulates biology. Dept. of Physics (303)492-6829 rainer@hibachi.colorado.edu U. of Colorado, Boulder, USA malzbender%opus@vaxf.colorado.edu