Re: [PEDA] BOM sorter version 10

[Dennis Saputelli]

Linden
try it, it is great!
i haven't had a chance to get up to version 10, but it is/was working
well at earlier versions

ds


Linden Doyle wrote:
> 
> David,
> 
> Just a short word of thanks and encouragement.
> 
> While I have not had occasion to use your BOM Sorter (maybe soon though) , I
> (and I think many others) appreciate the effort you are putting in to
> develop and distribute it.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Linden Doyle
> Product Development Engineer
> Zener Electric Pty Ltd.

-- 
Dennis Saputelli

  = send only plain text please! - no HTML ==
___
Integrated Controls, Inc.   www.integratedcontrolsinc.com  
2851 21st Streettel: 415-647-0480
San Francisco, CA 94110 fax: 415-647-3003


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

Re: [PEDA] PADS ?

[Robert M. Wolfe]

John,
Yup I have not seen PADS in action although Mentor
now owns both, but I agree Expedition is the best at this type
of track manipulation (Auto-Interactive) ,
I really have not seen anything out ther better at it
but it does cost a bit more that this. I would also agree that track
editing is very stick-like almost etch-a-sketch level in Protel
compared to Expedition. But again Expedition does cost more.
It takes many many more steps to edit many tracks that need to be moved
in Protel even with group moves etc.

Bob Wolfe



- Original Message - 
From: "John Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] PADS ?


> I don't know about PADS but Mentor Expedition does this very effectively.
>
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Dennis Saputelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] PADS ?
>
>
> >
> > we are about to embark on a large project for an outside customer
> > (second spin, one year in rev, 16 layers, yada yada)
> >
> > we will be using 99SE and probably spectra
> >
> > in talking with the manager (a very smart fellow BTW)
> > at our customer's place he said:
> > 'I HATE Protel!' quite vigorously
> > i said "Oh?" (pretty diplomatic i thought)
> >
> > he said he watches his people tediously draw track segments and
> > then when they have to move something, rip it up and re-draw everything
> > segment by segment
> > 'very primitive' as he put it
> >
> > he then went on to say that he used to do this stuff and he used PADs
> >
> > he said with PADS he could pick up a fully routed and fanned out QFP and
> > plop it somewhere else
> > all the traces would remain attached and reroute themselves around
> > obstacles
> > very fast and easy he claimed, like a mini-manual-autorouter
> >
> > anybody know about this or have experience with newer versions of PADS ?
> > my last look at it was probably in the 70's :)
> >
> > As DXP does not seem to offer any productivity gains which i can see we
> > may be looking for another package
> >
>
>
>
>




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

Re: [PEDA] Printer Driver

[Simon Bridger]

I would think the best solution is to print to postscript, and use
ghostscript to rip this to your printer. There are lots of printer drivers
in GS, as well as using windows native drivers. It's also easier to make a
new GS printer driver than a native windows one.

There are tools to redirect a printer port so you just get a postscript
printer in the windows dialog (that happens to be a physical XX printer). 
You can also easily set up a linux printserver that appears as postscript
printers to the windows network pc's, and does the ripping and printing
transparently, for everyone.




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

Re: [PEDA] BOM sorter version 10

[Linden Doyle]

David,

Just a short word of thanks and encouragement.

While I have not had occasion to use your BOM Sorter (maybe soon though) , I
(and I think many others) appreciate the effort you are putting in to
develop and distribute it.


Best Regards,

Linden Doyle
Product Development Engineer
Zener Electric Pty Ltd.

Ph: +61 2 9795 3600
Fax: +61 2 9795 3611
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 10 July 2003 11:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEDA] BOM sorter version 10
>
>
> Hi again,
> Minor bug found - version 10 available at:
>
> http://www.proteluser.com/download
>
> Regards
>
> David Watling
>
>
>
>
>




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

Re: [PEDA] PADS ?

[Mark Iams-McGuire]

I've used Pads since the late 1980's and pefer it most of the time over 
Protel which I have used since the mid 1990's.  Both programs have their 
plus and minus.  Protel is better for smaller analog boards where I find 
Pads much much faster for designing larger digital pcb's.

I am using Pads v4.01 which is last years release.  I have not moved  a 
section as mentioned but I think it is possible.  Some things that speed 
the design process in Pads is the ability to manually autoroute 
traces.  Its hard to describe in words, but basically you can guide where 
you want the route to go and Pads will route the trace per set design rules 
following your path  Buss routes are much faster as well.  Fan out signals 
then use the buss route feature and route one trace and the others you have 
selected will route along side.

There is more.  Pads does a better job handling planes.  It will redraw and 
error check planes much faster.  There is more that I won't go into but one 
thing is that Pads cost more.  I don't have the full options and it cost me 
about $16K.  I think the full package is $19K.

The new release v 5.0 with Blaze route seems even faster though I haven't 
used it for any jobs yet.

I recently did a large 12 layer analog and digital mixed design in Protel 
99SE,  I swear I could have done the job in less than half the time.

Mark

At 08:52 AM 7/10/2003, you wrote:

we are about to embark on a large project for an outside customer
(second spin, one year in rev, 16 layers, yada yada)
we will be using 99SE and probably spectra

in talking with the manager (a very smart fellow BTW)
at our customer's place he said:
'I HATE Protel!' quite vigorously
i said "Oh?" (pretty diplomatic i thought)
he said he watches his people tediously draw track segments and
then when they have to move something, rip it up and re-draw everything
segment by segment
'very primitive' as he put it
he then went on to say that he used to do this stuff and he used PADs

he said with PADS he could pick up a fully routed and fanned out QFP and
plop it somewhere else
all the traces would remain attached and reroute themselves around
obstacles
very fast and easy he claimed, like a mini-manual-autorouter
anybody know about this or have experience with newer versions of PADS ?
my last look at it was probably in the 70's :)
As DXP does not seem to offer any productivity gains which i can see we
may be looking for another package
Dennis Saputelli

  = send only plain text please! - no HTML ==
___
Integrated Controls, Inc.   www.integratedcontrolsinc.com
2851 21st Streettel: 415-647-0480
San Francisco, CA 94110 fax: 415-647-3003

Mark Iams-McGuire
Master CAD Designs
13222 Hidden Valley Road
Grass Valley, CA  95949
phone: 530-271-7078
fax: 530-271-7088


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

Re: [PEDA] PADS ?

[Arthur K Dewyer]

YES, PADS does do all that's been mentioned below. I layout out boards using
PADS POWER PCB 4.01, PROTEL DXP, and ORCAD Layout. I think that PROTEL
has come along way with their latest release of DXP, but I still prefer
to layout boards in PADS. I used to refer to PROTEL as "PROHELL", but like I
said before I can see allot of effort has been put into this new DXP
release.
 I also use Specctra 10.0, ORCAD CIS, and SolidWorks 2003.

Sincerely,

Arthur K Dewyer
Sr. PWB Designer
Cygnus Technologies
8240 East Gelding Drive
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
480.905.1500 x237
www.cygnus-technologies.com




-Original Message-
From: Brad Velander [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:07 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] PADS ?


Dennis,
I last used PADs in about 1998 (Power PCB early versions, 3.X I think). At
that time it didn't have anything that would support the level of
intelligence that you described. Just like with Protel, you would have had
to select the part & fanout, then move it, then reroute traces. I suspect
that the operation is not as simple even today as this person told you,
especially not without running an autorouter. PADs did rubber band traces
but it typically did so with no intelligence and left a mess that I
typically found worse to clean up than deleting the traces and re-routing
from scratch in that effected area.
I would have to ask, does Spectra have this capability? If Spectra doesn't
then I suspect that nobody does, at least not as simply as it was described.

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

CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail and any attached files may contain information
that is confidential and may be privileged.
If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient,  please
notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to another
person, use it for any purpose or store or copy
the information in any medium.  Thank you.



> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:52 AM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] PADS ?
>
>
>
> we are about to embark on a large project for an outside customer
> (second spin, one year in rev, 16 layers, yada yada)
>
> we will be using 99SE and probably spectra
>
> in talking with the manager (a very smart fellow BTW)
> at our customer's place he said:
> 'I HATE Protel!' quite vigorously
> i said "Oh?" (pretty diplomatic i thought)
>
> he said he watches his people tediously draw track segments and
> then when they have to move something, rip it up and re-draw
> everything
> segment by segment
> 'very primitive' as he put it
>
> he then went on to say that he used to do this stuff and he used PADs
>
> he said with PADS he could pick up a fully routed and fanned
> out QFP and
> plop it somewhere else
> all the traces would remain attached and reroute themselves around
> obstacles
> very fast and easy he claimed, like a mini-manual-autorouter
>
> anybody know about this or have experience with newer
> versions of PADS ?
> my last look at it was probably in the 70's :)
>
> As DXP does not seem to offer any productivity gains which i
> can see we
> may be looking for another package
>
>
> Dennis Saputelli




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

Re: [PEDA] PADS ?

[John Williams]

I don't know about PADS but Mentor Expedition does this very effectively.



- Original Message - 
From: "Dennis Saputelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] PADS ?


> 
> we are about to embark on a large project for an outside customer
> (second spin, one year in rev, 16 layers, yada yada)
> 
> we will be using 99SE and probably spectra
> 
> in talking with the manager (a very smart fellow BTW) 
> at our customer's place he said: 
> 'I HATE Protel!' quite vigorously
> i said "Oh?" (pretty diplomatic i thought)
> 
> he said he watches his people tediously draw track segments and 
> then when they have to move something, rip it up and re-draw everything
> segment by segment
> 'very primitive' as he put it
> 
> he then went on to say that he used to do this stuff and he used PADs
> 
> he said with PADS he could pick up a fully routed and fanned out QFP and
> plop it somewhere else
> all the traces would remain attached and reroute themselves around
> obstacles
> very fast and easy he claimed, like a mini-manual-autorouter
> 
> anybody know about this or have experience with newer versions of PADS ?
> my last look at it was probably in the 70's :)
> 
> As DXP does not seem to offer any productivity gains which i can see we
> may be looking for another package
> 




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

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme nt D XP

[Bagotronix Tech Support]

> I have no patience with people
> who spout off unsubstatiated, illogical, and incorrect garbage, reagrdless
> of whether it offends the ears or eyes of the current priveledged class.

Are you referring to Hippies, Liberals, or the Green Party?  ;-)

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com


- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme nt D
XP





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

Re: [PEDA] PADS ?

[Brad Velander]

Dennis,
I last used PADs in about 1998 (Power PCB early versions, 3.X I think). At 
that time it didn't have anything that would support the level of intelligence that 
you described. Just like with Protel, you would have had to select the part & fanout, 
then move it, then reroute traces. I suspect that the operation is not as simple even 
today as this person told you, especially not without running an autorouter. PADs did 
rubber band traces but it typically did so with no intelligence and left a mess that I 
typically found worse to clean up than deleting the traces and re-routing from scratch 
in that effected area.
I would have to ask, does Spectra have this capability? If Spectra doesn't 
then I suspect that nobody does, at least not as simply as it was described.

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

CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail and any attached files may contain information that is 
confidential and may be privileged.
If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the 
message to the intended recipient,  please
notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, use 
it for any purpose or store or copy
the information in any medium.  Thank you.



> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:52 AM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] PADS ?
> 
> 
> 
> we are about to embark on a large project for an outside customer
> (second spin, one year in rev, 16 layers, yada yada)
> 
> we will be using 99SE and probably spectra
> 
> in talking with the manager (a very smart fellow BTW) 
> at our customer's place he said: 
> 'I HATE Protel!' quite vigorously
> i said "Oh?" (pretty diplomatic i thought)
> 
> he said he watches his people tediously draw track segments and 
> then when they have to move something, rip it up and re-draw 
> everything
> segment by segment
> 'very primitive' as he put it
> 
> he then went on to say that he used to do this stuff and he used PADs
> 
> he said with PADS he could pick up a fully routed and fanned 
> out QFP and
> plop it somewhere else
> all the traces would remain attached and reroute themselves around
> obstacles
> very fast and easy he claimed, like a mini-manual-autorouter
> 
> anybody know about this or have experience with newer 
> versions of PADS ?
> my last look at it was probably in the 70's :)
> 
> As DXP does not seem to offer any productivity gains which i 
> can see we
> may be looking for another package
> 
> 
> Dennis Saputelli


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

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... TIME OUT, GUYS

[Bagotronix Tech Support]

> What's your point? That people should be diplomatic no matter what? Yeah,
> right. Diplomacy is a two way street buddy. I have no patience with people
> who spout off unsubstatiated, illogical, and incorrect garbage, reagrdless
> of whether it offends the ears or eyes of the current priveledged class.

aj, how can you stand living in this world?  ;-)

My thoughts:

1) The world is full of people like you described.
2) Some of these people are "full-time propagators" of their own brand of
BS.
3) Usually BS is said to advance the cause of a priveledged class, not in
opposition to it.
4) Most of us have been at least a "part-time propagator" of our own brand
of BS at some point in our lives  ;-)
5) The priveledged class always consists of "other people", not oneself  ;-)

I enjoy fictional stories about people who always see things through their
own preconceived notions.  The movie "Being There" and the novel "A
Confederacy of Dunces" are 2 of my favorite illustrations of this.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com


- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme nt D
XP


> What's your point? That people should be diplomatic no matter what? Yeah,
> right. Diplomacy is a two way street buddy. I have no patience with people
> who spout off unsubstatiated, illogical, and incorrect garbage, reagrdless
> of whether it offends the ears or eyes of the current priveledged class. I
> find it darkly humorous that most of you people who instinctively rally
for
> blind diplomacy are those who
> a) are generally overpaid,
> b) are secretly worried that the rest of society around them will discover
> how much of a gravy train they're riding
> c) will generally overlook any deceptive remarks made by others if it
suits
> their purposes
> d) always have subtle "diplomatic" methods of imbuing the world with their
> own forms of poison.
>
> Finally, I'll note that your own "contribution" to the thread consisted of
> little more than an attack on me, with no mention of the fact that Peter
> Morgan was wrong in his authoritative statement about the purpose of this
> group.
> (See items "c" and "d" above)
>
> Pot.Kettle.Black
>
> aj
>
> Clearly we do not share the same vision of what constitutes open, honest
> communication. If that means I am not part of your community, then thank
> God.
>




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

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placement D XP

[Richard Sumner]

Enough!

Can we please end this thread?

At 09:52 AM 7/10/2003, you wrote:
I do not believe you for a moment. Your statement could not be read any way
other than the way you intended it to be read.
And I quote

   "Firstly you posted to the
wrong list, this list is
for Protel 99se, and not
DXP"
That statement cannot be read any other way than to authoritatively indicate
to readers and writers alike that they should not be posting any DXP related
topics to this group, thereby doing the work of Altium's executive board is
isolating the independent user's group from be able to openly scrutinize the
corporate mismanagement of this expensive EDA package.
I'll respect the Neo-Eurocratic (or should I say Plutocratic) nature of this
group and so leave, as I have realized that it is now thoroughly corrupted
by the same old-world scheming values that have caused so much strife there,
here, and elsewhere in the world.
Your remarks were offensive to the truth, but it is also clear from the
response that you are in like company here. As with all things, one must
either embrace or avoid company of a particular sort. And in this case, I
will no longer attempt diplomacy to embrace this group, as its premise that
diplomacy trumps truth is disgusting.
aj

> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:58 AM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent
> component placement
> D XP
>
>
> I apologise to the administrator for implying that this list
> is not for
> discussing DXP, of course
> such topics are not banned and I did not mean it to read like
> that. I only
> wished to indicate that
> this list is no longer necessarily the best place for discussing DXP
> operational issues.
>
> I still think that the response from one of this lists
> members was uncalled
> for and extremely unprofessional. If this guy is like this
> with people he
> actually
> meets I would not be surprised if he has trouble keeping jobs
> for long.
>
> You have the logs, so you can tell better than me, but I
> don't think I've
> ever
> noticed a Protel ne Altium employee taking part in discussions
> on this list using their 'Protel' identity.
>
> On the other hand, the DXP forum seems to have much more
> feedback direct
> from engineers at Altium.
>
> Jason.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Forum Administrator [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 09 July 2003 17:49
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme
> nt D XP
>
>
> For the record, this forum is dedicated to discussion of ALL
> versions of
> Protel software as well as EDA design issues and EDA software
> from other
> vendors.
>
> As for drawing the attention of Altium's engineers, this
> forum enjoys a
> large following by members at Protel/Altium. The membership
> of this forum
> currently includes 21 protel.com.au subscribers and those
> span employees
> from the highest corporate level down through engineering and support.
>
> If you are looking for a direct reply from Protel, their own
> DXP forum is
> probably the best place but you might find it advantageous to
> post to both
> forums as some already do.
>
> Regards,
>
> Forum Administrator
> Association of Protel EDA Users
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers
>
>
> At 08:15 AM 7/9/2003, you wrote:
> >Andrew,
> >
> >Seems somebody got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning
> >
> >After reading my post again, in-case I did make a mistake
> (it has been
> known
> >on several occasions)
> >I stand by my response, it was correct in every way and written by an
> >experienced,
> >user long term member of both lists.
> >
> >I was in no way rude or abusive to the original author, nor
> did I cast
> >aspersions
> >on the validity of PEDA, indeed, they are providing better
> support for
> >Protel 99se and below
> >in a way Protel, pre-Altium never managed (my experience in
> the UK anyway).
> >
> >I just pointed out you may get a response from people who
> know more about
> >DXP on a
> >list maintained for DXP users.  Posting on the official DXP
> list will also
> >draw potential
> >problems to the attention of Altium's engineers who own and
> monitor the DXP
> >list.
> >
> >We all know that DXP is (on the surface at least) very
> different to 99se,
> >and these questions
> >on "how do I." come up all the time.  It is very
> important that Altium
> >are aware of
> >such discussions so that they can put effort into improving the
> >documentation.
> >
> >I think other, (less aggressive) long term users of both
> lists will agree.
> >
> >Jason.
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: 09 July 2003 13:57
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Protel EDA Forum... was RE: [PEDA] adjacent
> component placement
> >D XP
> >
> >
> >
> >Mr Morgan,
> >
> >S

Re: [PEDA] Reposted-Orcad Library Importing

[Dennis Saputelli]

i see DECOMP posted on

http://www.proteluser.com/download/orcad_utils/

Dennis Saputelli


John Ross wrote:
> 
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Terry Creer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 3:32 AM
> >To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> >Subject: [PEDA] Orcad Library Importing
> >
> >
> >
> >Hi all,
> >   Just got a few schematics and a library in Orcad format
> >from the Atmel website. The schematics load ok (minus the parts in the .lib
> >file), but when I try to load the lib file, Protel (99SE) tells me
> >DECOMP.EXE must be in the path when trying to imort Orcad libraries. Any
> >ideas where I can aquire this DECOMP.EXE?
> 
> Terry
> 
> Please visit
> 
> http://www.protel.com/resources/kb/kb_item.asp?ID=2980
> 
> The files you are after are at
> 
> http://www.ivex.com/techsupport/appnotes/converting_orcad_to_windraft.shtml
> 
> Although aimed at windraft the zip file contains decomp.exe, 16to32.exe and
> comp.exe so all you need to add is the SDT.cfg file and your off.
> 
> The note also gives a little insight into the Orcad format.
> 
> I will also upload the files to http://www.proteluser.com/download
> 
> If you have any more problems let me know the URL to pick up the libraries
> from Atmel and I can open them in Capture and save as V9 for you (can open
> in Protel?).
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> John A. Ross
> 
> RSD Communications Ltd
> 8 BorrowMeadow Road
> Springkerse Industrial Estate
> Stirling, Scotland FK7 7UW
> 
> Tel +44 [0]1786 450572 Ext 225 (Office)
> Tel +44 [0]1786 450572 Ext 248 (Lab)
> Fax +44 [0]1786 474653
> GSM +44 [0]7831 373727
> 
> Email   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> WWW http://www.rsd.tv
> ==
> 
> _
> Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends
> http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger

-- 
Dennis Saputelli

  = send only plain text please! - no HTML ==
___
Integrated Controls, Inc.   www.integratedcontrolsinc.com  
2851 21st Streettel: 415-647-0480
San Francisco, CA 94110 fax: 415-647-3003


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

Re: [PEDA] BOM sorter version 10

[Dennis Saputelli]

THANKS David for your continuing work on this
it is much appreciated

Dennis Saputelli


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> Hi again,
> Minor bug found - version 10 available at:
> 
> http://www.proteluser.com/download
> 
> Regards
> 
> David Watling

-- 
Dennis Saputelli

  = send only plain text please! - no HTML ==
___
Integrated Controls, Inc.   www.integratedcontrolsinc.com  
2851 21st Streettel: 415-647-0480
San Francisco, CA 94110 fax: 415-647-3003


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

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placement D XP

[Brad Velander]

Jason,
as for your earlier comments, when I read them they seemed a little heavy 
handed and almost as though you were chastising the Dr.. But let's let that rest.
As for Altium/Protel employees monitoring this group, I have witnessed or 
heard tell of any number of occasions where Protel employees respond to issues raised 
on this list. They commonly do not do it on the list but through email. I have 
received a number of emails from Tech Support on issues that were raised or being 
discussed on this list. So yes, I can vouch for the system admin's comments that 
Protel/Altium staff monitor this list.

Hi Lorena!  8^>

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



> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 1:58 AM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent 
> component placement
> D XP
> 
> 
> You have the logs, so you can tell better than me, but I 
> don't think I've
> ever
> noticed a Protel ne Altium employee taking part in discussions
> on this list using their 'Protel' identity.
> 
> On the other hand, the DXP forum seems to have much more 
> feedback direct
> from engineers at Altium.
> 
> Jason.


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

Re: [PEDA] Simulation component

[Mike Ingle]

Dave,

If you place the library siov.lib in the \lib\sim\ecos  (you must
create the ecos directory) then you will be able to use the siov component
wih the part name specified as "S20K275" (as on sch)  or whichever component
you want.  The gotcha here is that I tried to make the simulation work, but
there are differences in PSICE, and SPICE3 or whatever PROTEL SPICE engine
is used.  At least this will get the spice simulation code into PROTEL for
you.  You will have to keep modifying siov.lib until it works.

FYI: the steps involved are:
1 create the sch symbol
2 update the readonly/library lines in the description
line 1: type  subckt(x)   **everything I have done so far is a subckt
line 2: model   this is the name of the part in your library.
There must be a corresponding:  .SUBCKT  xxx   in your library
file.
line 3: file lists the library file name.
line 4:  maps the pins on the sch symbol to the .subckt line in the sim file
example:  opamp using pins 2,3,4,6,7  as in- in+ v- out v+ correspondingly
might be pins=1:[3,2,7,4,6]   and the sim file would have the .subckt line
in the order: in+ in- v+ v- out
line 5: takes line 4 and sends it to the sim file with the number of pins
wanted by the sim file
as far as I can tell, the %1 references the first pin in line4 ...

I always use a boilerplate from a working sym symbol.

If you are able to make the conversion work, please send me the working
version as I want to learn more about how to convert libraries.  This is the
first one I haven't been able to make work.

Best of luck,
Mike
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 11:15 PM
Subject: Simulation component


> Mike,
>
> Thanks for your kind offer... the attached zip file contains the PSpice
> files downloaded from the EPCOS web site.
>
> (See attached file: var_psp.zip)
>
> Cheers
>
> Dave
>
>
> :.
> CONFIDENTIALITY : This  e-mail  and  any attachments are confidential and
> may be privileged. If  you are not a named recipient, please notify the
> sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, use
> it for any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium.
>
>


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

Re: [PEDA] Printer Driver (was - Protel EDA Forum... was adjacentcomponent placement D XP)

[Bagotronix Tech Support]

Yeah, I have tried several Epson LQ models with negative results so far.  An
IBM Proprinter emulation worked, but gave ugly results.  The Toshiba P351 is
a 24-pin dot matrix, and IIRC the IBM Proprinter was 9-pin.  When using
Proprinter emulation, the Toshiba gives the same ugly results as a real
Proprinter!

Does anyone know how a Windows printer driver is written?  I sure would like
to print my schematics on this Toshiba wide carriage printer.  If I can find
instructions on how to write a printer driver, I might do it if it's not too
tough.  Alternatively, does anyone know how to put a Win95 printer driver on
a W2K box?

Yes, I know I could just buy a wide carriage inkjet, but where's the fun in
that?

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com


- Original Message -
From: "Harry Selfridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 6:11 PM
Subject: [PEDA] Printer Driver (was - Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent
component placement D XP)


> Ivan -
>
> I never tried with a Toshiba, but I had good luck using Epson drivers for
> other old dot matrix printers.  Looking at the Toshiba P351 description,
it
> appears that an Epson LQ series driver might work (they were/are also 24
> pin).  Epson was the dot matrix market leader for so long that many other
> vendors adopted compatible printer command sets (kind of like Hayes modem
> commands becoming the standard for other modems).
>
> If I were you, I would experiment by installing a Win2K Epson LQ driver.
> Your Protel99SE file will probably print just fine pretending the Toshiba
> is an Epson.
>
> Regards - Harry




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

Re: [PEDA] PADS ?

[Dennis Saputelli]

we are about to embark on a large project for an outside customer
(second spin, one year in rev, 16 layers, yada yada)

we will be using 99SE and probably spectra

in talking with the manager (a very smart fellow BTW) 
at our customer's place he said: 
'I HATE Protel!' quite vigorously
i said "Oh?" (pretty diplomatic i thought)

he said he watches his people tediously draw track segments and 
then when they have to move something, rip it up and re-draw everything
segment by segment
'very primitive' as he put it

he then went on to say that he used to do this stuff and he used PADs

he said with PADS he could pick up a fully routed and fanned out QFP and
plop it somewhere else
all the traces would remain attached and reroute themselves around
obstacles
very fast and easy he claimed, like a mini-manual-autorouter

anybody know about this or have experience with newer versions of PADS ?
my last look at it was probably in the 70's :)

As DXP does not seem to offer any productivity gains which i can see we
may be looking for another package


Dennis Saputelli

  = send only plain text please! - no HTML ==
___
Integrated Controls, Inc.   www.integratedcontrolsinc.com  
2851 21st Streettel: 415-647-0480
San Francisco, CA 94110 fax: 415-647-3003



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

[PEDA] SMD Wavesolder

[Tim Fifield]

Can anybody point me to the correct IPC document or other documents that
specify which SMD packages can be wave soldered and the correct rotation to
prevent solder bridges, etc...
Tim Fifield, CET



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

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placement D XP

[ajenkins]

I do not believe you for a moment. Your statement could not be read any way
other than the way you intended it to be read. 

And I quote

   "Firstly you posted to the 
wrong list, this list is 
for Protel 99se, and not
DXP"

That statement cannot be read any other way than to authoritatively indicate
to readers and writers alike that they should not be posting any DXP related
topics to this group, thereby doing the work of Altium's executive board is
isolating the independent user's group from be able to openly scrutinize the
corporate mismanagement of this expensive EDA package.

I'll respect the Neo-Eurocratic (or should I say Plutocratic) nature of this
group and so leave, as I have realized that it is now thoroughly corrupted
by the same old-world scheming values that have caused so much strife there,
here, and elsewhere in the world. 

Your remarks were offensive to the truth, but it is also clear from the
response that you are in like company here. As with all things, one must
either embrace or avoid company of a particular sort. And in this case, I
will no longer attempt diplomacy to embrace this group, as its premise that
diplomacy trumps truth is disgusting.

aj


> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:58 AM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent 
> component placement
> D XP
> 
> 
> I apologise to the administrator for implying that this list 
> is not for
> discussing DXP, of course
> such topics are not banned and I did not mean it to read like 
> that. I only
> wished to indicate that
> this list is no longer necessarily the best place for discussing DXP
> operational issues.
> 
> I still think that the response from one of this lists 
> members was uncalled
> for and extremely unprofessional. If this guy is like this 
> with people he
> actually
> meets I would not be surprised if he has trouble keeping jobs 
> for long.
> 
> You have the logs, so you can tell better than me, but I 
> don't think I've
> ever
> noticed a Protel ne Altium employee taking part in discussions
> on this list using their 'Protel' identity.
> 
> On the other hand, the DXP forum seems to have much more 
> feedback direct
> from engineers at Altium.
> 
> Jason.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Forum Administrator [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 09 July 2003 17:49
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme
> nt D XP
> 
> 
> For the record, this forum is dedicated to discussion of ALL 
> versions of 
> Protel software as well as EDA design issues and EDA software 
> from other 
> vendors.
> 
> As for drawing the attention of Altium's engineers, this 
> forum enjoys a 
> large following by members at Protel/Altium. The membership 
> of this forum 
> currently includes 21 protel.com.au subscribers and those 
> span employees 
> from the highest corporate level down through engineering and support.
> 
> If you are looking for a direct reply from Protel, their own 
> DXP forum is 
> probably the best place but you might find it advantageous to 
> post to both 
> forums as some already do.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Forum Administrator
> Association of Protel EDA Users
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers
> 
> 
> At 08:15 AM 7/9/2003, you wrote:
> >Andrew,
> >
> >Seems somebody got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning
> >
> >After reading my post again, in-case I did make a mistake 
> (it has been
> known
> >on several occasions)
> >I stand by my response, it was correct in every way and written by an
> >experienced,
> >user long term member of both lists.
> >
> >I was in no way rude or abusive to the original author, nor 
> did I cast
> >aspersions
> >on the validity of PEDA, indeed, they are providing better 
> support for
> >Protel 99se and below
> >in a way Protel, pre-Altium never managed (my experience in 
> the UK anyway).
> >
> >I just pointed out you may get a response from people who 
> know more about
> >DXP on a
> >list maintained for DXP users.  Posting on the official DXP 
> list will also
> >draw potential
> >problems to the attention of Altium's engineers who own and 
> monitor the DXP
> >list.
> >
> >We all know that DXP is (on the surface at least) very 
> different to 99se,
> >and these questions
> >on "how do I." come up all the time.  It is very 
> important that Altium
> >are aware of
> >such discussions so that they can put effort into improving the
> >documentation.
> >
> >I think other, (less aggressive) long term users of both 
> lists will agree.
> >
> >Jason.
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: 09 July 2003 13:57
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Protel EDA Forum... was RE: [PEDA] adjacent 
> component placement
> >D XP
> >
> >
> >
> >Mr Morgan,
> >
> >Since when is this

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme nt D XP

[ajenkins]

What's your point? That people should be diplomatic no matter what? Yeah,
right. Diplomacy is a two way street buddy. I have no patience with people
who spout off unsubstatiated, illogical, and incorrect garbage, reagrdless
of whether it offends the ears or eyes of the current priveledged class. I
find it darkly humorous that most of you people who instinctively rally for
blind diplomacy are those who
a) are generally overpaid,
b) are secretly worried that the rest of society around them will discover
how much of a gravy train they're riding
c) will generally overlook any deceptive remarks made by others if it suits
their purposes
d) always have subtle "diplomatic" methods of imbuing the world with their
own forms of poison.

Finally, I'll note that your own "contribution" to the thread consisted of
little more than an attack on me, with no mention of the fact that Peter
Morgan was wrong in his authoritative statement about the purpose of this
group.
(See items "c" and "d" above)

Pot.Kettle.Black

aj

Clearly we do not share the same vision of what constitutes open, honest
communication. If that means I am not part of your community, then thank
God. 

> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Moreton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:14 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme
> nt D XP
> 
> 
> My point? - that you can make *your* point better by not using
> inflamatory language, and perhaps by being a little more 
> helpful to the
> orginal poster. Why publicly insult someone you have never met (and
> therefore cannot truly know), with words like "ignorant" and phrases
> like "spouting off erroneous garbage like the bull sheisa..." ???.
> Whether you are right or wrong about a particular point, and no matter
> how strongly you feel about that point, there is always a 
> diplomatic way
> to get your point over.
> 
> The Forum Administrator did re-state your premise, but he/she did so
> without resorting to insults.
> 
> Peter Moreton
> 
> 
>  -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: 09 July 2003 19:27
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent 
> > component placeme nt D XP
> > 
> > 
> > It is also instructive to note that the Forum administrator 
> > has stated my
> > own premise. 
> > 
> > By the way, making a typing error, unlike cognitive 
> > disfunction, is not
> > indicitive of stupidity.
> > 
> > Your point?
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Peter Moreton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:32 PM
> > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent 
> > component placeme
> > > nt D XP
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Jason, 
> > > 
> > > It is instructive to note that in your post, you took the time to
> > > actually answer Dr Roberts question, very fully. Mr Jenkins 
> > > replied only
> > > to be offensive by inferring that you were " ignornat " 
> > (sic), and he
> > > did not contribute anything to the original question.
> > > 
> > > Peter Moreton 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Jason Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: 09 July 2003 16:15
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent 
> > component placeme
> > > nt D XP
> > > 
> > > Andrew, 
> > > 
> > > Seems somebody got out of the wrong side of the bed this 
> morning
> > > 
> > > After reading my post again, in-case I did make a mistake 
> > (it has been
> > > known
> > > on several occasions)
> > > I stand by my response, it was correct in every way and 
> > written by an
> > > experienced,
> > > user long term member of both lists.
> > > 
> > > I was in no way rude or abusive to the original author, nor 
> > did I cast
> > > aspersions
> > > on the validity of PEDA, indeed, they are providing better 
> > support for
> > > Protel 99se and below
> > > in a way Protel, pre-Altium never managed (my experience in the UK
> > > anyway).
> > > 
> > > I just pointed out you may get a response from people who 
> know more
> > > about
> > > DXP on a
> > > list maintained for DXP users.  Posting on the official DXP 
> > list will
> > > also
> > > draw potential
> > > problems to the attention of Altium's engineers who own and 
> > > monitor the
> > > DXP
> > > list.
> > > 
> > > We all know that DXP is (on the surface at least) very 
> different to
> > > 99se,
> > > and these questions
> > > on "how do I." come up all the time.  It is very 
> important that
> > > Altium
> > > are aware of
> > > such discussions so that they can put effort into improving the
> > > documentation.
> > > 
> > > I think other, (less aggressive) long term users of both 
> lists will
> > > agree.
> > > 
> > > Jason.
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 09 July 2003 13:57
> > > T

[PEDA] BOM sorter version 10

[Dave . Watling]

Hi again,
Minor bug found - version 10 available at:

http://www.proteluser.com/download

Regards

David Watling




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

[PEDA] Attn: Gwyn Roberts - ON-TOPIC: adjacent component placement DXP

[Jason Morgan]

Gwyn,

I bet you were a little taken aback that innocuous query caused such a
flurry of emails. In a way, that is the problem with PEDA these days. On 
a number of occasions it has gone extremely off topic (less so until
recently), causing some long term and well respected members to leave and
others in the recent past to generate requests for the list to be moderated.


So, anyway, back on-topic, did you try my suggestion? Any luck?

It seems from Ian's post that there are problems with this method and I'd
like to know if you have had any success.


Jason.


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

Re: [PEDA] adjacent component placement DXP

[Jason Morgan]

Ian,

I can state that it works for me - honest. The area of the PCB in question
is over 2 years old - obviously inherited from 99se.

In this case, the components in question are an array of LEDs with a light
pipe over them, all tightly
packed together.

I've not experimented with the actual parameters in DXP, but I know 'full
checking' MUST be on and I recall
having to play with the negative clearance in 99se, ending up at -127mm.

IIRC The online DRC always fails - annoyingly - but a full DRC passes with
this rule in place.

If I find time I'll take a look at it and see if I can work out *WHY* it
works.

It seems that this method perhaps does not work in all cases, at least
without some messing and plain luck.

I agree on the generalised clearance rule. Hm, perhaps this conversation
should be on DXP as it seems a little product enhancement is in order ;)

J.


-Original Message-
From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 July 2003 12:59
To: Protel EDA Forum
Cc: DXP Technical Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] adjacent component placement DXP


On 06:45 PM 9/07/2003, Jason Morgan said:
>Firstly you posted to the wrong list, this list is for Protel 99se, and not
>DXP,
>there is a separate list for DXP issues, see
>http://forums.altium.com/cgi-bin/msgbylist.asp?list=dxp

PEDA is not just for P99SE but is certainly mainly used for that - the 
Altium DXP list certainly has a much higher SNR both generally and for DXP 
related stuff.


>To answer your question, its the same as in 99se, you create a
>component-component clearance rule
>that uses the same component type for each side of the rule.
>
>I use this exact method for a mechanical part that sits over some LEDs.
>
>e.g.
>Create a rule in Placement: Component Clearance: New Rule
>HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') vs HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') you need to
>specify "Full Check"
>and a large negative clearance, e.g. -999mm

My experience is that this doesn't work.  DXP does not support negative 
clearance checking (overlaps).  It has been something I and others have 
been asking for for a while now.  I just tried a test case and couldn't get 
it to pass a batch DRC if I had any overlap at all - a negative clearance 
acted like a zero clearance.

Are you sure this has worked for you, Jason.  Can you give a little more 
detail? I would love to know why it doesn't work for me.

The only way I have been able to solve this sort of problem is by excluding 
the affected footprint from testing by making the general (All-All) rule 
into a:
NOT HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') vs NOT HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1')

This excludes 'FOOTPRINT_1', in this case, from any clearance checking - 
but this then means that *no* component is checked against any component 
with footprint 'FOOTPRINT_1'.  I thought I had solved this issue to exclude 
just 'FOOTPRINT_1' from being checked against any other 'FOOTPRINT_1' but 
all other components being checked against each other and 'FOOTPRINT_1' but 
I can't recall and it is late.  I think there should be something in the 
DXP forum archive on this.

This solution is pretty poor as it doesn't scale well.  A number of users 
have been requesting generalised clearance rules (not just component and 
electrical) with negative clearance (overlap) capability.  Hopefully it 
will appear in a DXP SP soon.

Ian




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

Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placement D XP

[Jason Morgan]

I apologise to the administrator for implying that this list is not for
discussing DXP, of course
such topics are not banned and I did not mean it to read like that. I only
wished to indicate that
this list is no longer necessarily the best place for discussing DXP
operational issues.

I still think that the response from one of this lists members was uncalled
for and extremely unprofessional. If this guy is like this with people he
actually
meets I would not be surprised if he has trouble keeping jobs for long.

You have the logs, so you can tell better than me, but I don't think I've
ever
noticed a Protel ne Altium employee taking part in discussions
on this list using their 'Protel' identity.

On the other hand, the DXP forum seems to have much more feedback direct
from engineers at Altium.

Jason.



-Original Message-
From: Forum Administrator [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 July 2003 17:49
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel EDA Forum... was adjacent component placeme
nt D XP


For the record, this forum is dedicated to discussion of ALL versions of 
Protel software as well as EDA design issues and EDA software from other 
vendors.

As for drawing the attention of Altium's engineers, this forum enjoys a 
large following by members at Protel/Altium. The membership of this forum 
currently includes 21 protel.com.au subscribers and those span employees 
from the highest corporate level down through engineering and support.

If you are looking for a direct reply from Protel, their own DXP forum is 
probably the best place but you might find it advantageous to post to both 
forums as some already do.

Regards,

Forum Administrator
Association of Protel EDA Users
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers


At 08:15 AM 7/9/2003, you wrote:
>Andrew,
>
>Seems somebody got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning
>
>After reading my post again, in-case I did make a mistake (it has been
known
>on several occasions)
>I stand by my response, it was correct in every way and written by an
>experienced,
>user long term member of both lists.
>
>I was in no way rude or abusive to the original author, nor did I cast
>aspersions
>on the validity of PEDA, indeed, they are providing better support for
>Protel 99se and below
>in a way Protel, pre-Altium never managed (my experience in the UK anyway).
>
>I just pointed out you may get a response from people who know more about
>DXP on a
>list maintained for DXP users.  Posting on the official DXP list will also
>draw potential
>problems to the attention of Altium's engineers who own and monitor the DXP
>list.
>
>We all know that DXP is (on the surface at least) very different to 99se,
>and these questions
>on "how do I." come up all the time.  It is very important that Altium
>are aware of
>such discussions so that they can put effort into improving the
>documentation.
>
>I think other, (less aggressive) long term users of both lists will agree.
>
>Jason.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: 09 July 2003 13:57
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Protel EDA Forum... was RE: [PEDA] adjacent component placement
>D XP
>
>
>
>Mr Morgan,
>
>Since when is this the "Protel 99SE" list?
>
>For your future information, this is the Protel EDA Forum, as clearly and
>explicity stated in the footer appended to each and every list message, and
>kindly maintained by Techserv, Inc for the quasi-public dissemination of
>issues related to any and all versions of Protel EDA software, including,
>but not limited to P99SE...AND DXP.
>
>I think I speak for a portion of this list (though clearly not all) when I
>say that I would appreciate it if you would attempt to remember this before
>spouting off erroneous garbage like the bull sheisa you post below. In any
>case, I speak for myself.
>
>Finally, I want to be clear to Dr Roberts that this is not the exclusive
>territory of P99SE users, and Dr Roberts is welcome to post queries or
>otherwise participate in this forum as she likes.
>
>As Jason indicated, there is another forum, sponsored by Altium, which is
>dedicated to DXP, but I feel the need to attempt to un-obfuscate the
>distinction between these forums. Altium's is one which is a quarantined,
>corporate sponsored list, with all of the implications that go with that
>status. Techserv's is an open user's forum for ANY and ALL Protel EDA
>products, regardless of any ignornat comments made by it's novice or jaded
>participants.
>
>thank you,
>
>Andrew Jenkins
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jason Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:46 AM
> > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> >
> > Firstly you posted to the wrong list, this list is for Protel
> > 99se, and not
> > DXP,
> > there is a separate list for DXP issues, see
> > http://forums.altium.com/cgi-bin/msgbylist.asp?list=dxp
> >
> > To answer your question, its the same 

Re: [PEDA] adjacent component placement DXP

[Ian Wilson]

On 06:45 PM 9/07/2003, Jason Morgan said:
Firstly you posted to the wrong list, this list is for Protel 99se, and not
DXP,
there is a separate list for DXP issues, see
http://forums.altium.com/cgi-bin/msgbylist.asp?list=dxp
PEDA is not just for P99SE but is certainly mainly used for that - the 
Altium DXP list certainly has a much higher SNR both generally and for DXP 
related stuff.


To answer your question, its the same as in 99se, you create a
component-component clearance rule
that uses the same component type for each side of the rule.
I use this exact method for a mechanical part that sits over some LEDs.

e.g.
Create a rule in Placement: Component Clearance: New Rule
HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') vs HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') you need to
specify "Full Check"
and a large negative clearance, e.g. -999mm
My experience is that this doesn't work.  DXP does not support negative 
clearance checking (overlaps).  It has been something I and others have 
been asking for for a while now.  I just tried a test case and couldn't get 
it to pass a batch DRC if I had any overlap at all - a negative clearance 
acted like a zero clearance.

Are you sure this has worked for you, Jason.  Can you give a little more 
detail? I would love to know why it doesn't work for me.

The only way I have been able to solve this sort of problem is by excluding 
the affected footprint from testing by making the general (All-All) rule 
into a:
NOT HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') vs NOT HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1')

This excludes 'FOOTPRINT_1', in this case, from any clearance checking - 
but this then means that *no* component is checked against any component 
with footprint 'FOOTPRINT_1'.  I thought I had solved this issue to exclude 
just 'FOOTPRINT_1' from being checked against any other 'FOOTPRINT_1' but 
all other components being checked against each other and 'FOOTPRINT_1' but 
I can't recall and it is late.  I think there should be something in the 
DXP forum archive on this.

This solution is pretty poor as it doesn't scale well.  A number of users 
have been requesting generalised clearance rules (not just component and 
electrical) with negative clearance (overlap) capability.  Hopefully it 
will appear in a DXP SP soon.

Ian



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