ANN: new Pulsonix version 3 PCB software released

L

Leon Heller

Guest
I've been helping to beta test version 3 of Pulsonix for the last few
months. It has now been released and is available for download from:

http://www.pulsonix.com.

Without a license it's a full working demo (up to 100 pins for schematic
entry and PCB design) and Pulsonix will provide a 30 day license for a
fuller evaluation on request.

Pulsonix support is excellent and bugs get fixed very quickly, unlike some
other products I could name. Support is also available via the Pulsonix
Users Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

which doesn't get a lot of use as the software is very intuitive and easy to
use.

It comes with comprehensive new libraries including lots of Xilinx and
Altera parts. There are numerous additions and enhancements including an
optional Chip Packaging Toolkit.

Leon
 
Leon Heller wrote:
I've been helping to beta test version 3 of Pulsonix for the last few
months. It has now been released and is available for download from:

http://www.pulsonix.com.

Without a license it's a full working demo (up to 100 pins for schematic
entry and PCB design) and Pulsonix will provide a 30 day license for a
fuller evaluation on request.

Pulsonix support is excellent and bugs get fixed very quickly, unlike some
other products I could name. Support is also available via the Pulsonix
Users Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

which doesn't get a lot of use as the software is very intuitive and easy to
use.

It comes with comprehensive new libraries including lots of Xilinx and
Altera parts. There are numerous additions and enhancements including an
optional Chip Packaging Toolkit.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that the demo version be upped to 500 pins. Heck, most
of the chips I use have more than 100 pins.

I find that a lot of vendors are so afraid that someone will actually
use their product without paying for that they make it hard to eval the
product. I can't speak for others, but I don't even bother to eval
products unless I can work it into my work schedule as useful work. Why
would I bother to spend a couple of days to play with a new tool when I
should be working? It's not like there aren't plenty of PCB packages
out there that are easy to use.

--

Rick "rickman" Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com
Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design URL http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 301-682-7666 FAX
 
Leon Heller wrote:

I've been helping to beta test version 3 of Pulsonix for the last few
months. It has now been released and is available for download from:

http://www.pulsonix.com.

Without a license it's a full working demo (up to 100 pins for schematic
entry and PCB design) and Pulsonix will provide a 30 day license for a
fuller evaluation on request.
Click to expand...
When advertising commercial software it's a good idea to state which
platform(s) and/or operating system(s) it is available for. While this
product is no doubt excellent, it appears to be be available only for
Windows.

Paul
 
"rickman" <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:405214D6.9711C1A3@yahoo.com...
Leon Heller wrote:

I've been helping to beta test version 3 of Pulsonix for the last few
months. It has now been released and is available for download from:

http://www.pulsonix.com.

Without a license it's a full working demo (up to 100 pins for schematic
entry and PCB design) and Pulsonix will provide a 30 day license for a
fuller evaluation on request.

Pulsonix support is excellent and bugs get fixed very quickly, unlike
some
other products I could name. Support is also available via the Pulsonix
Users Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

which doesn't get a lot of use as the software is very intuitive and
easy to
use.

It comes with comprehensive new libraries including lots of Xilinx and
Altera parts. There are numerous additions and enhancements including an
optional Chip Packaging Toolkit.

I would suggest that the demo version be upped to 500 pins. Heck, most
of the chips I use have more than 100 pins.

I find that a lot of vendors are so afraid that someone will actually
use their product without paying for that they make it hard to eval the
product. I can't speak for others, but I don't even bother to eval
products unless I can work it into my work schedule as useful work. Why
would I bother to spend a couple of days to play with a new tool when I
should be working? It's not like there aren't plenty of PCB packages
out there that are easy to use.
Click to expand...
Pulsonix will provide a full 30 day license on request.

Leon
 
Leon Heller wrote:
"rickman" <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:405214D6.9711C1A3@yahoo.com...
Leon Heller wrote:

I've been helping to beta test version 3 of Pulsonix for the last few
months. It has now been released and is available for download from:

http://www.pulsonix.com.

Without a license it's a full working demo (up to 100 pins for schematic
entry and PCB design) and Pulsonix will provide a 30 day license for a
fuller evaluation on request.

Pulsonix support is excellent and bugs get fixed very quickly, unlike
some
other products I could name. Support is also available via the Pulsonix
Users Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PulsonixUG/

which doesn't get a lot of use as the software is very intuitive and
easy to
use.

It comes with comprehensive new libraries including lots of Xilinx and
Altera parts. There are numerous additions and enhancements including an
optional Chip Packaging Toolkit.

I would suggest that the demo version be upped to 500 pins. Heck, most
of the chips I use have more than 100 pins.

I find that a lot of vendors are so afraid that someone will actually
use their product without paying for that they make it hard to eval the
product. I can't speak for others, but I don't even bother to eval
products unless I can work it into my work schedule as useful work. Why
would I bother to spend a couple of days to play with a new tool when I
should be working? It's not like there aren't plenty of PCB packages
out there that are easy to use.

Pulsonix will provide a full 30 day license on request.
Click to expand...
I read that. But unless a tool allows me to do *useful* work, I don't
have the time to eval it. Giving me 30 days puts me in a position where
I *have* to buy it if I want to maintain a design.

I recently used Eagle to design a small board. I don't think it is the
best tool around, but it is good enough for many designs. I will be
able to maintain this design indefinitely without having to purchase the
SW. If I decide that this tool is good enough for the rest of my work,
I *will* buy it. But unless I could have done a useful design
initially, I would not even have considered it.

My point is that for me, the price of my time for evaluating a product
is to provide a tool that I can do *useful* work with as part of the
eval. This precludes 100 pins or 30 day limits. This is just my
opinion. I am sure you will find lots of users who are willing to spend
their time and money to eval a tool.

--

Rick "rickman" Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com
Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design URL http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 301-682-7666 FAX
 
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:47:17 -0000, "Leon Heller"
<leon_heller@hotmail.com> wrote:

Pulsonix will provide a full 30 day license on request.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be any good for me, at least. I've had stacks of 30 day
evaluation copies of all sorts of software over the years but the
continual problem I face is in not being able to spare enough time in
one month between first trying to use the program and its expiry to be
able to produce anything useful or even form any constructive
opinions.
It would be far better IMV if the developer provided say a 72 hour
limit on actual use (tallying up several seperate periods of such use)
rather than a plain 30 days to expiry where during most of that time,
we've more pressing matters to attend to and the clock's ticking away
with the program laying idle on hard disk.
--

The BBC: Licensed at public expense to spread lies.
 
My point is that for me, the price of my time for evaluating a product
is to provide a tool that I can do *useful* work with as part of the
eval. This precludes 100 pins or 30 day limits. This is just my
opinion. I am sure you will find lots of users who are willing to spend
their time and money to eval a tool.
Click to expand...

I've looked at many Layout products over the years. I believe I can
assess if a product has possibilities within a couple of hours - many
times far less for the horror products. For those passing the 2 hour
tests I can assess upto 90% of the capability within 8 hours. For the
other 10%, yes maybe you have to layout a decent size board and that
might take a week using a full evaluation... I would say the Pulsonix
demo and evaluation period is more than adequate to assess the
capabilities.

Still, I guess I'm biased as I use Pulsonix. IMO it's about the best
product around and beats OrCAD, PADS and Protel hands-down. I tried
Eagle again this week and what a shock! It looks prehistoric by
comparison...

Don Prescott
 
"Don Prescott" <DMBPrescott@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7fb54666.0403130005.a5c8430@posting.google.com...
My point is that for me, the price of my time for evaluating a product
is to provide a tool that I can do *useful* work with as part of the
eval. This precludes 100 pins or 30 day limits. This is just my
opinion. I am sure you will find lots of users who are willing to spend
their time and money to eval a tool.



I've looked at many Layout products over the years. I believe I can
assess if a product has possibilities within a couple of hours - many
times far less for the horror products. For those passing the 2 hour
tests I can assess upto 90% of the capability within 8 hours. For the
other 10%, yes maybe you have to layout a decent size board and that
might take a week using a full evaluation... I would say the Pulsonix
demo and evaluation period is more than adequate to assess the
capabilities.

Still, I guess I'm biased as I use Pulsonix. IMO it's about the best
product around and beats OrCAD, PADS and Protel hands-down. I tried
Eagle again this week and what a shock! It looks prehistoric by
comparison...
Click to expand...
If you want another shock look at this abortion:

http://www.otl.co.uk/

The developer seems to have a very high opinion of it, but it doesn't even
have rubber-banding on the connections!

Leon
 
i have downloaded at link for 3.0 ..

but that is always the 2.1 version !!

Pierre


"Paul Burridge" <pb@osiris1.notthisbit.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de
news:usk45010mu8mtvfqs26b238t6a0k8o5d00@4ax.com...
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:47:17 -0000, "Leon Heller"
leon_heller@hotmail.com> wrote:

Pulsonix will provide a full 30 day license on request.

Wouldn't be any good for me, at least. I've had stacks of 30 day
evaluation copies of all sorts of software over the years but the
continual problem I face is in not being able to spare enough time in
one month between first trying to use the program and its expiry to be
able to produce anything useful or even form any constructive
opinions.
It would be far better IMV if the developer provided say a 72 hour
limit on actual use (tallying up several seperate periods of such use)
rather than a plain 30 days to expiry where during most of that time,
we've more pressing matters to attend to and the clock's ticking away
with the program laying idle on hard disk.
--

The BBC: Licensed at public expense to spread lies.
Click to expand...
 
"ABCDEF" <F5BJR@10online.fr> wrote in message
news:c2vb13$au7$1@apollon.grec.isp.9tel.net...
i have downloaded at link for 3.0 ..

but that is always the 2.1 version !!
Click to expand...

This has been raised on the Pulsonix User Group forum. I've checked and the
download is really Version 3.0 Build 1563. They updated the web page in a
hurry and got the version number wrong when they rebuilt the software. I've
told them about it and they should be rectifying it on Monday.

Leon
 
hum ??

Current download version is Revision 3.0 :: Build 2150 :: 10-Mar-2004

not found 36 mo and not 51 mo ??

Pierre


"Leon Heller" <leon_heller@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:405335cf$0$28269$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com...
"ABCDEF" <F5BJR@10online.fr> wrote in message
news:c2vb13$au7$1@apollon.grec.isp.9tel.net...
i have downloaded at link for 3.0 ..

but that is always the 2.1 version !!


This has been raised on the Pulsonix User Group forum. I've checked and
the
download is really Version 3.0 Build 1563. They updated the web page in a
hurry and got the version number wrong when they rebuilt the software.
I've
told them about it and they should be rectifying it on Monday.

Leon
Click to expand...
 
"ABCDEF" <F5BJR@10online.fr> wrote in message
news:c2vgnh$lpu$1@aphrodite.grec.isp.9tel.net...
hum ??

Current download version is Revision 3.0 :: Build 2150 :: 10-Mar-2004

not found 36 mo and not 51 mo ??
Click to expand...
I downloaded the demo, it acts as a full version with the license file. It
is definitely identified as version 2.1 Build 1563.

Leon

Leon
 
Leon Heller posted in sci.electronics.cad , in article
<4052d7a8$0$10149$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, at Sat, 13 Mar 2004 09:43:04 -
0000:


If you want another shock look at this abortion:

http://www.otl.co.uk/

The developer seems to have a very high opinion of it, but it doesn't even
have rubber-banding on the connections!
Click to expand...
And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me after this).

For other shock i'd look at VUTRAX, that has a GUI which I would call a CUI
(Confusing User Interface), IMHO. Their help system is a pain on the a**.

--
Chaos MasterŽ - Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
irc.brasnet.org - #xlinuxnews and #poa
marreka.no-ip.com (ainda năo pronto)
LRU #327480
"quotes with no meaning, are meaningless" - Kevin Aylward
 
"Chaos Master" <wizard_of_yendorIHATESPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c30b4j$22gb0t$3@ID-88878.news.uni-berlin.de...
Leon Heller posted in sci.electronics.cad , in article
4052d7a8$0$10149$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, at Sat, 13 Mar 2004
09:43:04 -
0000:


If you want another shock look at this abortion:

http://www.otl.co.uk/

The developer seems to have a very high opinion of it, but it doesn't
even
have rubber-banding on the connections!

And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me after
this).

For other shock i'd look at VUTRAX, that has a GUI which I would call a
CUI
(Confusing User Interface), IMHO. Their help system is a pain on the a**.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine has used the original DOS version of Vutrax for about 25
years. It's probably because he comes from Yorkshire. :cool:

I find it very strange that several PCB packages don't conform to the usual
intuitive way of selecting objects - just put the pointer on them and click
the mouse button. That's the way most other applications work these days.

Leon
 
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 02:44:23 -0000, the renowned "Leon Heller"
<leon_heller@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Chaos Master" <wizard_of_yendorIHATESPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c30b4j$22gb0t$3@ID-88878.news.uni-berlin.de...
Leon Heller posted in sci.electronics.cad , in article
4052d7a8$0$10149$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, at Sat, 13 Mar 2004
09:43:04 -
0000:


If you want another shock look at this abortion:

http://www.otl.co.uk/

The developer seems to have a very high opinion of it, but it doesn't
even
have rubber-banding on the connections!

And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me after
this).

For other shock i'd look at VUTRAX, that has a GUI which I would call a
CUI
(Confusing User Interface), IMHO. Their help system is a pain on the a**.

A friend of mine has used the original DOS version of Vutrax for about 25
years. It's probably because he comes from Yorkshire. :cool:

I find it very strange that several PCB packages don't conform to the usual
intuitive way of selecting objects - just put the pointer on them and click
the mouse button. That's the way most other applications work these days.

Leon
Click to expand...
Backward compatibility has its downside.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
 
Leon Heller <leon_heller@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4053c705$0$28271$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com...
[clip]
A friend of mine has used the original DOS version of Vutrax for about 25
years. It's probably because he comes from Yorkshire. :cool:
[clip].

Leon

It's tight fisted sods like him that gives the rest of us poor buggers a bad
Click to expand...
name :)

regards
john (born and bred in gods own)
 
"Chaos Master" <wizard_of_yendorIHATESPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c30b4j$22gb0t$3@ID-88878.news.uni-berlin.de...
And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me after
this).
Click to expand...

What is it with those guys that stick religiously to Windows 98? It is,
along with ME, one of the crappiest versions of windows. I have run on 95
for years which was challenging some times, but it worked. Then I switched
to NT4, which was a big improvement After NT4 I went to 2000, which was
about the best thing (apart from using Linux) I have ever done, rock solid,
stable and fast. On two other machines I sometimes use, is 98 and ME. And it
always strikes me how unstable and sloooow these machines are compared to
windows 2000. The memory management of 98 and ME is so bad that working with
large files results in many swapping actions which slow the computer down
tremendously. The same operations on an 2000 machine with a slower processor
and the same amount of memory perform much faster. And then I haven't
mentioned the times 98 and ME crash, for no apparent reason. Sticking to 98
and ME is the worst thing you can do. Do yourself a favour and take that
time to start fresh with 2000. You'll love it.

Meindert
 
Chaos Master wrote:
Leon Heller posted in sci.electronics.cad , in article
4052d7a8$0$10149$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, at Sat, 13 Mar 2004
09:43:04 - 0000:


If you want another shock look at this abortion:

http://www.otl.co.uk/

The developer seems to have a very high opinion of it, but it
doesn't even have rubber-banding on the connections!

And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me
after this).
Click to expand...
Why?:)


I will note that I have not yet "upgraded" my MS VC++ to the latest with
..net. This is because it wants to eliminated support for 95/ME etc. Too
many are still using the older systems for me to restrict SS in that way
just yet. .net, is of course, just another attempt for MS to flog,
essentially, useless new product.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

http://www.anasoft.co.uk/NewBeginning.mp3

"quotes with no meaning, are meaningless" - Kevin Aylward.
 
Meindert Sprang wrote:

"Chaos Master" <wizard_of_yendorIHATESPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c30b4j$22gb0t$3@ID-88878.news.uni-berlin.de...

And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me after

this).

What is it with those guys that stick religiously to Windows 98? It is,
along with ME, one of the crappiest versions of windows. I have run on 95
for years which was challenging some times, but it worked. Then I switched
to NT4, which was a big improvement After NT4 I went to 2000, which was
about the best thing (apart from using Linux) I have ever done, rock solid,
stable and fast. On two other machines I sometimes use, is 98 and ME. And it
always strikes me how unstable and sloooow these machines are compared to
windows 2000. The memory management of 98 and ME is so bad that working with
large files results in many swapping actions which slow the computer down
tremendously. The same operations on an 2000 machine with a slower processor
and the same amount of memory perform much faster. And then I haven't
mentioned the times 98 and ME crash, for no apparent reason. Sticking to 98
and ME is the worst thing you can do. Do yourself a favour and take that
time to start fresh with 2000. You'll love it.

Meindert
Click to expand...
Windows 95 and 98 let you control the serial and parallel ports without
hassle. Many programs that do physical I/O won't run on NT derivatives.

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
 
"Meindert Sprang" <mhsprang@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote in message
news:40540fb0$1@news.nb.nu...
"Chaos Master" <wizard_of_yendorIHATESPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c30b4j$22gb0t$3@ID-88878.news.uni-berlin.de...
And it does not run on Windows 98 (yeah, I know Kevin will flame me
after
this).

What is it with those guys that stick religiously to Windows 98? It is,
along with ME, one of the crappiest versions of windows. I have run on 95
for years which was challenging some times, but it worked. Then I switched
to NT4, which was a big improvement After NT4 I went to 2000, which was
about the best thing (apart from using Linux) I have ever done, rock
solid,
stable and fast. On two other machines I sometimes use, is 98 and ME. And
it
always strikes me how unstable and sloooow these machines are compared to
windows 2000. The memory management of 98 and ME is so bad that working
with
large files results in many swapping actions which slow the computer down
tremendously. The same operations on an 2000 machine with a slower
processor
and the same amount of memory perform much faster. And then I haven't
mentioned the times 98 and ME crash, for no apparent reason. Sticking to
98
and ME is the worst thing you can do. Do yourself a favour and take that
time to start fresh with 2000. You'll love it.
Click to expand...
I installed XP a few days ago after using 98 and ME for several years and
have been pleasantly surprised. It's much faster than ME, hasn't crashed
since I installed all the updates (it was very flaky at first) and runs all
the software I use without any problems.

Leon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top