advice on selecting new PCB design package

[Brad Velander]

Dax,
Yes I had used ACCEL version 14, however my recollection is that V.14
had a number of weaknesses that were addressed in v.15. All I can remember
about is that I was quite pleased with the v.15 improvements and was looking
forward to future versions if they kept on path.

Your comments about it being some package, remember this was most
closely a limited/junior version of PCAD. Yes it was a pretty good package,
I am sure there are those who may disagree but that is mostly personal
preferences and what they like/are used to. If I recall correctly, creating
SCH library parts was not too intuitive, rather complicated and took a bit
of getting used to so that you could properly configure parts for gate or
pin swapping. I was sorry to hear that Altium was discontinuing it after
they bought PCAD and ACCEL, although it made sense business wise because it
could have been too much competition for their Protel tools. By that time i
had moved on to another company and wasn't using ACCEL any longer.

If you find ver. 15, it had a very neat tool for documenting your
design. You could take a snapshot of your PCB, place it within the database,
select layers, change zoom levels, mirror, flip, rotate, etc.. Then you
could do say a PCB assembly print with this snapshot window showing you a
detail view zoomed up, mirrored, flipped, rotated, to clearly show some
complicated or finely detailed area. The best thing is that if you changed
the board, the snapshot was live, it was updated to reflect the real board
changes. No need to redo the snapshot just because you editted the PCB since
creating the initial snapshot.


While I have had my differences with Leon on this group, I have to agree
with you 100%. Pulsonix is seemingly suffering from lack of exposure. They
do not seem to advertise in the industries #1 trade magazine PCD&M and as
far as I know they have never made the trip to the PCB West Design
Conference (PCB East Conference have no idea?). Both of those sources would
do marvels for their marketing if the product is even half as good as some
claim. Name any another source that is specifically marketed straight to PCB
designers. The only other one would be IPC Route magazine directed at
Designer council membership but I don't believe they take paid advertising.
If they sold enough to proffessional PCB designers then they might have
enough money to do some real significant development and grab market share
because there is a shortage of offerings in the lower - mid end of the
tools.

Now that said, if you haven't realized Pulsonix is not a hobbyist or
non-proffessional tool. Pulsonix is a low-end to medium level proffessional
tool, afterall it starts at approx. $2000 US and goes to over $10K with
additional modules and unlimited database elements (pins and layers).

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Dax" <email_demonoid@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142749109.327225.297020@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

Someone mentioned Accel EDA v14. I found a copy of this on the eDonkey
network and installed it. Splash page shows a copyright of 1998. Wow,
this was some package for 1998! I'm impressed. This copy had the help
and libraries ripped out but another download claims to be a full
install including a tightly integrated SPECCTRA. I'll download that and
give it a spin and maybe update the thread.

The only problem with Pulsonix is the owner doesn't market his product
worth a crap. This tends to happen when an engineer-type (which I am,
no offense intended) runs the show, in my experience. Whenever I've
mentioned Pulsonix to some very knowledgeable people, their eyes squint
and they say "Pulsonix?"

 

[Leon]

Joel Kolstad wrote:

[deleted]

Just curious -- what *does't* Proteus do that you'd like it to? I've never
used it, but on paper it looks pretty good. I certainly don't downgrade a
package because it also happens to cater to hobbyists (e.g., printing out
drill hole targets for manual PCB fabrication, as you mention).

Pulsonix has a drill hole option - very useful as I often make
prototype boards at home. Of course, I sometimes forget and one or two
PCB suppliers object to them: Olimex emails a cryptic "No donuts"!
PCB-Pool just ignores them.

Leon

 

[Leon]

Dax wrote:

Random Notes:

circuitmaker, pulsonix, ExpressPCB, Eagle, Kicad, or
gEDA for a 20 layer router board with 622MBps busses requiring
matched-length tracks & 2.5Gbps diff pairs to an optical transceiver.

This is a true statement but please, don't lump Pulsonix in with the
rest of the toy software. It is fully a professional-level product and
doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath.


Someone mentioned Accel EDA v14. I found a copy of this on the eDonkey
network and installed it. Splash page shows a copyright of 1998. Wow,
this was some package for 1998! I'm impressed. This copy had the help
and libraries ripped out but another download claims to be a full
install including a tightly integrated SPECCTRA. I'll download that and
give it a spin and maybe update the thread.


Cadstar is at v8 now and it looks to be a peer with PADS as far as
high-speed, SI features. There's a copy of v8 and v7 on eDonkey and
I'll have a look-see what it's all about.


Worst PCB package I've ever seen is WinBoard/WinDraft from IVEX. Bugs
galore, serious ones and annoying ones, that never got fixed or grew
worse. When I saw IVEX finally shut its doors a couple of years ago, I
thought, "good riddance!"


The only problem with Pulsonix is the owner doesn't market his product
worth a crap. This tends to happen when an engineer-type (which I am,
no offense intended) runs the show, in my experience. Whenever I've
mentioned Pulsonix to some very knowledgeable people, their eyes squint
and they say "Pulsonix?" The website looks OK but DIY. Screen shots are
fewer now that they were in v3. And default white background for the
layout tool? Give me a break. How about a selection of color presets to
remind a user of Protel or Orcad Capture? How much work would it
friggin take? Just have an intern or high school kid do it. Nice
product that continues to improve...too bad.

Pulsonix sales are handled through distributors in various countries,
who also provide support. It's a very configurable package. For
instance: the background can be any colour one wants and individual
nets can have their own colours. There is a colour setting that allows
R, G, B, hue, saturation and luminosity to be selected for various
features.

Leon

 

[kai-martin knaak]

Leon schrieb:

There is a colour setting that allows R, G, B, hue,
saturation and luminosity to be selected for various features.

This is the job of the default color selection box of the widget set
used. I'd be more impressed, if the transparency of objects could be
configured.

---<(kaimartin)>---
--
Kai-Martin Knaak
http://lilalaser.dyndns.org/blog

 

[Lukas Louw]

Dax,
Yes I had used ACCEL version 14, however my recollection is that V.14
had a number of weaknesses that were addressed in v.15. All I can remember
about is that I was quite pleased with the v.15 improvements and was
looking forward to future versions if they kept on path.

Your comments about it being some package, remember this was most
closely a limited/junior version of PCAD. Yes it was a pretty good
package, I am sure there are those who may disagree but that is mostly
personal preferences and what they like/are used to. If I recall
correctly, creating SCH library parts was not too intuitive, rather
complicated and took a bit of getting used to so that you could properly
configure parts for gate or pin swapping. I was sorry to hear that Altium
was discontinuing it after they bought PCAD and ACCEL, although it made
sense business wise because it could have been too much competition for
their Protel tools. By that time i had moved on to another company and
wasn't using ACCEL any longer.

Some snipping......

PCAD is alive and well, PCAD2004 (Version 18 in Accel speak) is the current
version, and PCAD2006 will supposedly ship later this year.

www.pcad.com

I moderate the user group at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCAD-EDA/

Lukas

 

[Gary Crowell / VCP]

Brad,
I don't know anything that transpired between '91-'98, I was never familiar with the Tango product.
I've always assumed that Tango evolved into Windows PCAD because the old PCAD was DOS. No idea
where the name ACCEL came from.

The Windows PCAD was noticably less powerful than the older DOS version, but it has gotten better.

Oh, and come to think of it, ACCEL PCAD was at V12 (not 13) when I started with it in '98.

Gary




On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:18:18 GMT, "Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote:

Gary,
Was Tango not ACCEL? I don't recall the particulars but I believe that
some called the tool Tango while others just called it ACCEL. One of those
confused identity products that I believe had somehow grown or evolved from
Tango but some people wouldn't let go of the old name.

 

[Dax]

Oh, and come to think of it, ACCEL PCAD was at V12 (not 13) when I started with it in '98.

Here's the splash from ACCEL EDA P-CAD PCB v14.00.46. I guess it's your
memory vs. this OEM bitmap.

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/6219/accelv140kp.jpg

Accel EDA v15 is just another name for the P-CAD 2000 product, is it
not?
**************************************************************************************
Accel EDA v14
P-CAD 2000 (v15)
P-CAD 2001 (v16)
P-CAD 2002 (v17)
P-CAD 2004 (v18)

 

[Brad Velander]

Never doubted it Lukas,
I was strictly speaking of ACCEL (which is what it says on the box in
big letters, actually ACCEL EDA to be absolutely complete), which was
discontinued in approx. March-May of 2000. About 4 months after Altium
bought ACCEL Technologies.
--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Lukas Louw" <louw1@att.net> wrote in message
news:qleTf.8205$bn3.7469@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

PCAD is alive and well, PCAD2004 (Version 18 in Accel speak) is the
current version, and PCAD2006 will supposedly ship later this year.

www.pcad.com

I moderate the user group at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCAD-EDA/

Lukas

 

[Brad Velander]

No Dax,
My memory is not that faulty. I was responsible for the software,
maintenance, use, standards, upgrades, internal support and library
management. Not likely I would forget that it was actually PCAD.

It was a very separate program that just shared some common code with
the real PCAD. It has nowhere near the capabilities of PCAD in terms of
layers and high end PCB design concerns. Thus I will sometimes describe it
as a PCAD Jr.. Simple test, how many PCB copper layers can your downloaded
ACCEL software handle, PCAD was greater than 20 layers (I don't recall the
precise number). I believe that ACCEL EDA is limited to no more than 8 or 10
layers and 6 seems to be ringing a bell somewhere in my head.

Jeesh, just do a web search for ACCEL EDA or ACCEL Technologies. You
will see that there was both ACCEL EDA and PCAD as separate tools.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Dax" <email_demonoid@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142787872.310391.133240@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...

Oh, and come to think of it, ACCEL PCAD was at V12 (not 13) when I
started with it in '98.

Here's the splash from ACCEL EDA P-CAD PCB v14.00.46. I guess it's your
memory vs. this OEM bitmap.

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/6219/accelv140kp.jpg

Accel EDA v15 is just another name for the P-CAD 2000 product, is it
not?
**************************************************************************************
Accel EDA v14
P-CAD 2000 (v15)
P-CAD 2001 (v16)
P-CAD 2002 (v17)
P-CAD 2004 (v18)

 

[Lukas Louw]

No Dax,
My memory is not that faulty. I was responsible for the software,
maintenance, use, standards, upgrades, internal support and library
management. Not likely I would forget that it was actually PCAD.

It was a very separate program that just shared some common code with
the real PCAD. It has nowhere near the capabilities of PCAD in terms of
layers and high end PCB design concerns. Thus I will sometimes describe it
as a PCAD Jr.. Simple test, how many PCB copper layers can your downloaded
ACCEL software handle, PCAD was greater than 20 layers (I don't recall the
precise number). I believe that ACCEL EDA is limited to no more than 8 or
10 layers and 6 seems to be ringing a bell somewhere in my head.

Jeesh, just do a web search for ACCEL EDA or ACCEL Technologies. You
will see that there was both ACCEL EDA and PCAD as separate tools.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

Hi Brad,

There is admittedly some confusion about the old Accel software naming
conventions

In the pre-Protel/Altium days, Accel Technologies had one product, but it
was known as Accel EDA, with 2 versions. The full unlimited version was
called PCAD, a Windows app, not to be confused with the old DOS Master
Designer PCAD. The limited version, with fewer signal layers, a 400
component limitation, and some other feature limitations, most notably only
one copper pour allowed, was called Tango, not to be confused with the
original DOS Tango. The 2 versions shared the same GUI, identical database
structures, etc.

After Protel, now Altium, bought out Accel Technologies, the product is now
called PCAD200X, this decade anyways, also with 2 versions, full unlimited
and a 2nd, cheaper one with layer and component limitations, no other
features compromised.

Confused yet?

Lukas

 

[Andy Peters]

Brad Velander wrote:

Never doubted it Lukas,
I was strictly speaking of ACCEL (which is what it says on the box in
big letters, actually ACCEL EDA to be absolutely complete), which was
discontinued in approx. March-May of 2000. About 4 months after Altium
bought ACCEL Technologies.

The tool currently called PCAD is really Accel with newer features. I
remember the switch from Accel to PCAD was pretty seamless.

-a

 

[Joel Kolstad]

Hi Leon,

"Leon" <leon.heller@bulldoghome.com> wrote in message
news:1142767896.127099.297210@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...

Pulsonix has a drill hole option - very useful as I often make
prototype boards at home. Of course, I sometimes forget and one or two
PCB suppliers object to them: Olimex emails a cryptic "No donuts"!
PCB-Pool just ignores them.

Advanced Circuit's "freedfm.com" site tends to generate many spurious error
messages with the drill holes drawn (i.e., donuts are drawn). Their
suggestion to avoid this is to just avoid drawing them, so they ignore them as
well (when you go to fab).

 

[Brad Velander]

Thanks Andy,
Seems like you know exactly what I am talking about if you also did the
change to PCAD. Was that back in early 2000, like I reported about my old
mates? Yes I would imagine the switch was pretty seemless since I had always
considered ACCEL EDA just a junior/limited version of PCAD.

From what you are now saying, maybe Altium was forced to reconsider the
orphaning of the ACCEL users and reversed it's decision but not until after
they had already convinced my former work mates to upgrade to the full PCAD.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Andy Peters" <Bassman59a@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142879026.440394.20600@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

The tool currently called PCAD is really Accel with newer features. I
remember the switch from Accel to PCAD was pretty seamless.

-a

 

[Brad Velander]

Hi Lukas,

See my comments interspersed.


"Lukas Louw" <louw1@att.net> wrote in message
news:ZawTf.592420$qk4.495232@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

The limited version, with fewer signal layers, a 400 component limitation,
and some other feature limitations, most notably only one copper pour
allowed, was called Tango, not to be confused with the original DOS Tango.
The 2 versions shared the same GUI, identical database structures, etc.

Yes, yes, everything you say is bang on with my memory except for the name.
Don't recall the one copper pour limit, could have been but I would think I
would have remembered that because personally I love copper pours, can't do
without them. Maybe one per layer? Hold it I have a couple of old boards,
let me look. Damn, no external pours but there is at least one internal
layer with at least pours, can't see anything else internally so maybe there
is only one pour and the othewr internals were planes.

After Protel, now Altium, bought out Accel Technologies, the product is
now called PCAD200X, this decade anyways, also with 2 versions, full
unlimited and a 2nd, cheaper one with layer and component limitations, no
other features compromised.

Confused yet?

Lukas

Well your last question is very appropriate. Yes I am confused because
my old mates told me that they were forced to update to the full unlimited
PCAD or face being orphaned. That came directly from the fellow that took
over all responsiblities for the software when I left the company. As I
mentioned in the other response to Andy, maybe Altium eventually was forced
to reconsider orphaning the ACCEL product but not until after my old mates
had already dove into the deep end and upgraded?

Except that at the time I had no confusion with all of the licensing
documentation nor technical support who all referenced ACCEL as the package
we were using. When I was using it, it may well have been what you referred
to as Tango but all my contacts and literature from ACCEL Technologies
referred to it as ACCEL EDA. So am I confused or was ACCEL Technologies
confused?

Here is what I might surmise. ACCEL Technologies may have wanted to
change the product name to ACCEL EDA but was fighting a loosing battle with
ole time Tango users that refused to completely give up on the old Tango
moniker? Just one possibility consider all that has been exchanged about it
in this thread. You will note that Dax's screenshot doesn't say Tango
anywhere on it and Andy "seems" to confirm my recollection as well. If Dax's
screenshot is from PCAD, which it could possibly be, all things considered,
then he will have 20 or more layer capability in the package.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

 

[Joel Kolstad]

"DJ Delorie" <dj@delorie.com> wrote in message
news:xnodzzh2n4.fsf@delorie.com...

Unfortunately, I couldn't find anyone who commercialized the process.
It probably would have cost too much for the equipment anyway

I suspect it probably would have done OK, since the costs seem comparable to
using an LPKF machine (not at all cheap), and they've been in business for
quite some time now. I'd guess the hard part is initially getting the product
to market and gaining market share.

 

[Stuart Brorson]

DMBPrescott@aol.com wrote:
: Right......... gimmee the names of some well known companies using gEDA
: on serious, mission critcal projects????

Don,

While browsing for something else, I happened to find this company
which lists gEDA alongside PADS as one of their preferred tools:

http://www.distantfocus.com/main/services_index.html

Page down to the "tools" section.

Looks like gEDA is gaining traction in the commercial world.

Stuart

 

I said "well known companies".................

And gEDA ain't gaining "traction" in the commercial world. OK, tell me
some points about gEDA that would attract me to use it instead of one
of the standard paid-for products..... And don't tell me it's free.
The fact that it's free is paradoxically a deterent to a serious user.

Prescott

 

[Lukas Louw]

I've looked at gEDA as well, and compared to PCAD, which I use, it is near
unusable. I'd love to get rid of annual maintenance fees like everyone else,
but switching to GEDA will definitely be a step backwards in productivity
for me.

OTOH anyone who uses one of these packages for commercial work should not
really be concerned about up front cost and maintenance fees and such, IMHO.
It's a business expense like anything else, and you amortize the initial
purchase cost over a few contracts, and maintenance should really be covered
by one medium sized job.

Even a low cost EDA package like Cadsoft's Eagle pretty much blows gEDA out
of the water. Their professional package at US$1200 seems to be a vary fair
deal. One design job takes care of that....... They don't seem to list
maintenance fees, so I can't comment on that, but even at say US$300/year,
that cost can easily be covered by one small design job per year.....

That does not mean that I'll never consider switching, but gEDA has a loong
ways to go before it'll be mature enough to be considered as a serious
contender.

I DO like the concept of course, and wish the developers all the best in
their endeavors.

Lukas

I said "well known companies".................

And gEDA ain't gaining "traction" in the commercial world. OK, tell me
some points about gEDA that would attract me to use it instead of one
of the standard paid-for products..... And don't tell me it's free.
The fact that it's free is paradoxically a deterent to a serious user.

Prescott

 

[DJ Delorie]

"Lukas Louw" <louw1@att.net> writes:

but switching to GEDA will definitely be a step backwards in productivity
for me.

Why?

 

[Lukas Louw]

but switching to GEDA will definitely be a step backwards in productivity
for me.

Why?

OK check out the specifications at www.pcad.com and if you can convince me
that gEDA will be as productive or better, I'll switch today

Lukas