I'm with you, Tony. You couldn't pay me to go backwards into the old separated file method. Our designs use a numbering scheme which in the past meant having to look up on paper records which version of schematic matched what version of pcb. The ddb file system makes it fast and idiot proof.
-----Original Message----- From: Tony Karavidas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 4:00 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel usage I love the design explorer. When I revisit a design from a year or more ago, I can see everything I was up to at the time. Oh, I did 2 protos...Oh, here was production gerber set 2, etc... I just got a call to change some hole sizes on a board so I called up and 'old' design, globally changed some hole sizes, went to the CAM manager and pressed F9 - voila! New gerbers were ready to go. I didn't have to remember squat! I'm glad the old "scattered-on-your-harddrive" approach is gone. You can still have it that way, just don't use the integrated DDB file. Tony > -----Original Message----- > From: Brooks,Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 1:54 PM > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel usage > > > This examination of the Protel package usage is a good exercise... Protel > should pay attention to this. > > <rant mode on> > > My pet peeve with the Protel Explorer concept is that I have to open > everything, in a specific place, without any changes in the windows > environment, in order to get the design up and running to edit > it... I can't > keep my users from being confused about the stupid thing... I just want it > to go away. I want the option to disable the stupid thing and use the > program like it was in the 98 version... without all the bugs.. > At least it > made sense to everyone back then. Archiving files, Rev Control, > argh... must > be done manually anyways... with or without it. > > They have added a layer of complexity that was not wanted or needed... I > presume that it simplifies the desire to do their paranoid > licensing checks > over the network... but it provides me with nothing but trouble... no net > value to the company... > > I prefer a KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) approach... One program one > function... Windows explorer does ALL that is needed to handle > organization > of files... PCB should read PCB's. Schematic should read Schematics, PLD > should do PLD's... SIM should simulate.. this things do not need to be > hidden inside an extra layer of hierarchy.. I archive just the > .pcb and .sch > and throw away the ddb file... the backups... the superfluous > junk files... > This is in order to capture the important files for archiving... I do not > use the 1 file for all files approach to Protel, I use the Windows file > system to keep the files out where we can see them... where we don't get > confused about which file is which.. and what rev is what...etc... > > The ability to do IPC-356 Netlist out or ODB++ file output, or the GENCAM > format might be useful... If it doesn't make our lives more > complex than it > has too.. > > I dislike what the Autorouter does, It breaks the DRC rules and > creates more > cleanup for the designer... I'm sure it makes sales though... > looks awesome > in the demo... If they ever did make it do what it was advertised to do it > would be worth the extra cash.... > > I don't do sim, signal integ, pld, 3D, The print manager is sucky... and > buggy... and makes me repeat the setup steps over and over with every edit > session I set up...the 3D implementation is a... not too funny joke... A > good translator to solidworks would be way more useful... The CAM > manger is > ... well could be better... still have to set it up every time... > > And the 'Microsoft' approach to releasing software before there is good > beta testing and debug... is just poor customer relations... Protel has a > reputation of being the 'Jack of all Trades' and Master of > none... and when > do we get to put our feet up on the desk like that guy who's in > the picture > on the box? > > <Rant mode off> > > As a caveat, I still like Protel better than PADS... (which truly > sucks with > terrific force...) all things are relative...after all :) > Still wish they had not used the Explorer concept as a required > option.. it > sucks. > > - Bill Brooks (don't quote me...I use sarcasm as a tool... lol) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Elson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:34 PM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel usage > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The following is my usage of Protel > > - Schematic yes > - PCB yes > - Powerprint yes > - CAM Manager yes > - Simulator sometimes - still have great difficulty > providing models for > many components. > > - Autorouter yes - usually try it on every board, and usually > take the > best result from a few trials and finish/clean-up by hand. > I trick > myself into thinking I'm saving time this way, but I can't > say for sure. > - 3D Viewer no > - PLD tried it some, simulation works to test out > designs, but couldn't > implement any Xilinx chips with it. > - Arrange Components no > - Autoplacer no > - PCB Miter no > - Signal Integrity no > - Database Link no > > Jon > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
