Any CADStar comments/stories/users?

[James Beck]

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software and
CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
I am interested in any feedback on the product, pro or con. If it
makes any difference, I am looking at the upper end product with the HS
PCB/router extensions.

Jim

 

[JeffM]

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software
and CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
Jim (James Beck)

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=group:sci.electronics.*+Crapstar
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=group:sci.electronics.*+use-CADStar+-30-days&scoring=d

 

Dunno about the latest Cadstar as the last time I looked at it was
maybe 6 years ago and I haven't heard that's it's changed much. It
seemed a capable product but a little dated in concept, and looked as
it it had a fairly long learning curve. I now use Pulsonix (which has
Cadstar import). I find it an excellent product and it has high speed
design capabilities i.e. min/max length tracks, diff pair routing,
serpentine tracks. If you're surveying the market at the higher end
then I'd say take a look. www.pulsonix.com

Prescott

 

[Henrik [6650]]

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f314d04d31c6673989cf5@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software and
CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
I am interested in any feedback on the product, pro or con. If it
makes any difference, I am looking at the upper end product with the HS
PCB/router extensions.

Hello,

I have been using Cadstar for quite a few years. And my overall impression
is that it is worth the effort and cost. It is fairly easy to get started
and lots of great tutorial material.
The library system is in my opinion one of the best I have seen.

Setting up your defaults in the PCB and schematic templates may require a
little patience, but read the tutorials well, and the pain is endurable.

Now and then a bug slips out, as always when dealing with more complex
software packages. Zuken normally fix these quite rapidly and distribute the
updates on the Linkz website.

When Zuken released V6.0 it was scarred by some quite disturbing bugs.
However with the V7 and V8 releases, I have not seen anything.

Best regards
Henrik

 

[RHRRC]

James Beck wrote:

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software and
CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
I am interested in any feedback on the product, pro or con. If it
makes any difference, I am looking at the upper end product with the HS
PCB/router extensions.

Jim

The best pcb software is generally the one you know.

If you have used Cadstar for some time and are happy with it then
certainly stick with it and upgrade.

If you are new to Cadstar don't touch it with a bargpole - presuming
you have been using another pcb CAD package you will find it hopeless
and its structure/organisation so designed to break the flow of
engineering thought processes during 'on screen' pcb design it is
unbelievable.
(Cadstar has more bells and whistles than just about any other package
to support its marketing which is geared toward non-electronic design
managers who buy it for their electronics design departments.)

There are a lot of packages out there and it can be a minefield. Just
be sure that you need a package at this price level.
The Protels, Pulsonix, Pads etc of this world (I just mention these
because they happen to begin with P! and are in the Cadstar price
bracket) are poweful tools that can take a bit of learning.

Good luck

 

[Tod Adamson]

James,

This software is an extreme waste of money. It has so many short comings. I
wasted $10K. The productivity is very low and you will routinely lose all
your work.
Almost everyone is using OrCad for schematic capture and PADS ( PowerPCB)
for layout.

My two cents worth,

Tod


"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f314d04d31c6673989cf5@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software and
CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
I am interested in any feedback on the product, pro or con. If it
makes any difference, I am looking at the upper end product with the HS
PCB/router extensions.

Jim

 

[James Beck]

In article <3bidnT1dBcQrUk3ZnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@adelphia.com>, tadamson127
@adelphia.net says...

James,

This software is an extreme waste of money. It has so many short comings. I
wasted $10K. The productivity is very low and you will routinely lose all
your work.
Almost everyone is using OrCad for schematic capture and PADS ( PowerPCB)
for layout.

My two cents worth,

Tod


The company does not mind spending money, BUT they do frown on wasting

it. I've been pretty much orphaned by P-CAD/Altium because I can't
stand what they have done to the package since PCAD 2002 (If I had
wanted Protel I would have bought it) and they aren't actively working
on patches to fix the problems in the version I like. So, I am on the
hunt again for a new CAD package that I like and is being supported. I
would prefer to keep the schematic entry and PCB layout to be as
seamlessly integrated as possible, I don't mind shelling out to a router
but that is about it.
So, at this point I am kinda boycotting Altium and I didn't like Eagle
and I am going to have to reconsider the CADStar package. I guess I'll
keep looking.

Jim

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f314d04d31c6673989cf5@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software and
CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
I am interested in any feedback on the product, pro or con. If it
makes any difference, I am looking at the upper end product with the HS
PCB/router extensions.

Jim

 

[Tod Adamson]

If you like to have schematic capture and layout in the same package you can
look at Mentor Graphics. PowerPCB, and PowerBGA are their PC based layout
tools. PowerLogic is the schematic capture tool.
OrCAD is a good package too. The schematic capture tool is called "Capture"
and the layout tool with the basic autorouter is called "Layout Plus". I
just happen to think that OrCAD "Capture" and Mentor Graphics "PowerPCB" are
the best from each company.

Tod


"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f3abff696ad1ad3989cf8@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

In article <3bidnT1dBcQrUk3ZnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@adelphia.com>, tadamson127
@adelphia.net says...
James,

This software is an extreme waste of money. It has so many short
comings. I
wasted $10K. The productivity is very low and you will routinely lose
all
your work.
Almost everyone is using OrCad for schematic capture and PADS (
PowerPCB)
for layout.

My two cents worth,

Tod


The company does not mind spending money, BUT they do frown on wasting
it. I've been pretty much orphaned by P-CAD/Altium because I can't
stand what they have done to the package since PCAD 2002 (If I had
wanted Protel I would have bought it) and they aren't actively working
on patches to fix the problems in the version I like. So, I am on the
hunt again for a new CAD package that I like and is being supported. I
would prefer to keep the schematic entry and PCB layout to be as
seamlessly integrated as possible, I don't mind shelling out to a router
but that is about it.
So, at this point I am kinda boycotting Altium and I didn't like Eagle
and I am going to have to reconsider the CADStar package. I guess I'll
keep looking.

Jim

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f314d04d31c6673989cf5@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

We are looking (again) to change our schematic/pcb CAD software
and
CADStar was one of the packages that looked promising.
I am interested in any feedback on the product, pro or con. If
it
makes any difference, I am looking at the upper end product with the
HS
PCB/router extensions.

Jim

 

[Brad Velander]

James,
While I understand that some people still love their PADs I can't watch
somebody being sent that direction without saying something. I too used PADS
PowerPCB through the better part of the 90's and it was my system of choice
at that time. Today I shake my head and wonder what has happened besides the
constant change of ownership and rebranding of PADs. I take issue with Tod's
comment that PADs is the best from Mentor, yeah right and I am the tooth
fairy. He obviously doesn't want a real, modern, useful system or he
wouldn't have ditz'd Expedition with his comment.

First word of caution, stay away from PADs Logic, it is a piece of shit
that PADs gave away free all through the 90's as a freebie if you bought the
PCB package. Even when I used PADs as my system of choice I never once met
anybody that used PADs Logic, that should tell you something. Everybody got
it free but they would go out and spend more money to buy something else,
usually OrCAD originally, some Protel later. Today Mentor is charging $1500
for it and there has been no visible development done on it since the very
early 90's, it is archaic and crude.

For schematic capture you could use OrCAD as suggested or your could try
and get an old version of Protel just to use the schematic. It is very close
to OrCAD's schematic. Originally when I first used PADs I was using DOS
OrCAD Capture, a short while later we switched to Protel for schematic since
it was Windows based and superior to the DOS OrCAD capture at that time.

Second word of caution, I have recently heard from some people
supposedly in the know, that PADs is on the move again. This is
unsubstantiated rumor but the word is that PADs is moving to some 'entity'
called Millenium. What or who Millenium is I don't know. Is it a prospective
purchaser, a new division of Mentor or an old age home convalesence home for
a tired old CAD package who knows. Is it in N.A. or Bangalore India, I don't
know.

I can understand your comments about Altium, I am a Protel/Altium user
myself but on the other side of the CAD tools. I also periodically still use
PADs in my present employment and I fear each time I am going to have to use
it. Part of that is the loss of familiarity with the package over the last
almost 10 years (used Accel/PCAD Jr. for a few years and more recently
P99SE) but the rest of it comes from the fact that it is still a DOS engine
running under the very same ole phoney GUI developed back in the mid 90's.
The manner of dealing with rules is arduous and limited, copying and pasting
between databases is difficult and varies depending on what you are copying.
The ability to accurate copy and place fine detail is solely reliant on your
ingenuity at inventing way to reference those copied bits between databases.
Importing mechanical details in DXF format is painful and you must be very
precise in how you configure the DXF or it will simply blow up. You must
configure the DXF import as though it is a PADs export to DXF. Don't feel
too comfortable about opening multiple designs with PADS, remember it is
still a DOS engine under the hood, there are all sorts of non-windows
compliant issues especially with multiple windows running. In short, give it
a good test drive before even looking at the purchase contract.

Personally if I were looking myself, Zuken would get a real good looking
over and test drive. Don't just play with their canned demo designs. Do a
small but semi-complicated design yourself, from start to finish. Find their
user forum (Yahoo, Google or company run) and seek out actual users
comments. Would those users purchase it today if they were looking at it
fresh? Other than Zuken I would check out Mentor Expedition if my company
was willing to spend roughly double the money but get a good working tool
that can handle most anything you can throw at it technology wise today or
tomorrow.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Tod Adamson" <tadamson127@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:V6OdneJgx993zUzZnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@adelphia.com...

If you like to have schematic capture and layout in the same package you
can
look at Mentor Graphics. PowerPCB, and PowerBGA are their PC based layout
tools. PowerLogic is the schematic capture tool.
OrCAD is a good package too. The schematic capture tool is called
"Capture"
and the layout tool with the basic autorouter is called "Layout Plus". I
just happen to think that OrCAD "Capture" and Mentor Graphics "PowerPCB"
are
the best from each company.

Tod

 

[Mike Monett]

"Tod Adamson" <tadamson127@adelphia.net> wrote:

If you like to have schematic capture and layout in the same package
you can look at Mentor Graphics. PowerPCB, and PowerBGA are their PC
based layout tools. PowerLogic is the schematic capture tool.
OrCAD is a good package too. The schematic capture tool is called
"Capture" and the layout tool with the basic autorouter is called
"Layout Plus". I just happen to think that OrCAD "Capture" and Mentor
Graphics "PowerPCB" are the best from each company.

Tod

Tod, how do you back-annotate across different vendors products?

Regards,

Mike Monett

Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm
SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm
Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm

 

[Brad Velander]

Mike,
It typically isn't that difficult if the two products make any attempt
to support it. Typically (I know it is true for PADs or Protel) the PCB
packages will generate a simple WAS-IS file. Typically it is a simple text
file. A number of the schematic packages support import of the WAS-IS file.
Maybe you have to do a little massaging or formatting to make it work.
Typically it does have limitations where it won't fully support pin and gate
swapping, some may. But if needed you can do the pin and gate swapping
manually anyway and simply drive it from the schematic forward rather than
backwards.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Mike Monett" <No@email.adr> wrote in message
news:Xns981461A777132Noemailadr@208.49.80.251...

Tod, how do you back-annotate across different vendors products?

Regards,

Mike Monett

 

[Tod Adamson]

Hey Guys,

Here is what I remember about CADStar schematic.

* No Undo function
* No auto panning
* You are forced to build a PCB foot print for every schematic symbol before
you can place the symbol.
* When making a schematic symbol, the symbol does not accept the pin number
directly. You have to maintain a separate file with the pin number mapping.
* You can not cut or delete a symbol without every net connected to it being
cut or deleted as well. They have this thing called a "dangler" you are
required to connect to a net before you delete something. With the Xilinx
Virtex 4 FF1148 package you would have to place hundreds of "dandlers"
before you could delete the symbol.
* If you modify a symbol and move pins or add new ones, when you paste the
new symbol all the nets will get messed up because the tool tries to remap
them automatically..
* The support line is terrible. All they try to do is to sell you on
attending their seminars.

Granted, I have not used CadStar since 3.1, Zuken would have had to
completely redesign the foundation of their system. This POS almost ruined a
project and caused a three month delay. As such, I would never recommend
this nightmare cad tool.

I agree that the PowerLogic schematic tool is lousy, but I like OrCAD
"Capture"

I did not here any mention of Cadence OrCAD "Capture" and Layout Plus. Are
these tools satisfactory in your estimation?


"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote in message
news:LRfAg.313843$IK3.237693@pd7tw1no...

James,
While I understand that some people still love their PADs I can't
watch
somebody being sent that direction without saying something. I too used
PADS
PowerPCB through the better part of the 90's and it was my system of
choice
at that time. Today I shake my head and wonder what has happened besides
the
constant change of ownership and rebranding of PADs. I take issue with
Tod's
comment that PADs is the best from Mentor, yeah right and I am the tooth
fairy. He obviously doesn't want a real, modern, useful system or he
wouldn't have ditz'd Expedition with his comment.

First word of caution, stay away from PADs Logic, it is a piece of
shit
that PADs gave away free all through the 90's as a freebie if you bought
the
PCB package. Even when I used PADs as my system of choice I never once met
anybody that used PADs Logic, that should tell you something. Everybody
got
it free but they would go out and spend more money to buy something else,
usually OrCAD originally, some Protel later. Today Mentor is charging
$1500
for it and there has been no visible development done on it since the very
early 90's, it is archaic and crude.

For schematic capture you could use OrCAD as suggested or your could
try
and get an old version of Protel just to use the schematic. It is very
close
to OrCAD's schematic. Originally when I first used PADs I was using DOS
OrCAD Capture, a short while later we switched to Protel for schematic
since
it was Windows based and superior to the DOS OrCAD capture at that time.

Second word of caution, I have recently heard from some people
supposedly in the know, that PADs is on the move again. This is
unsubstantiated rumor but the word is that PADs is moving to some 'entity'
called Millenium. What or who Millenium is I don't know. Is it a
prospective
purchaser, a new division of Mentor or an old age home convalesence home
for
a tired old CAD package who knows. Is it in N.A. or Bangalore India, I
don't
know.

I can understand your comments about Altium, I am a Protel/Altium user
myself but on the other side of the CAD tools. I also periodically still
use
PADs in my present employment and I fear each time I am going to have to
use
it. Part of that is the loss of familiarity with the package over the last
almost 10 years (used Accel/PCAD Jr. for a few years and more recently
P99SE) but the rest of it comes from the fact that it is still a DOS
engine
running under the very same ole phoney GUI developed back in the mid 90's.
The manner of dealing with rules is arduous and limited, copying and
pasting
between databases is difficult and varies depending on what you are
copying.
The ability to accurate copy and place fine detail is solely reliant on
your
ingenuity at inventing way to reference those copied bits between
databases.
Importing mechanical details in DXF format is painful and you must be very
precise in how you configure the DXF or it will simply blow up. You must
configure the DXF import as though it is a PADs export to DXF. Don't feel
too comfortable about opening multiple designs with PADS, remember it is
still a DOS engine under the hood, there are all sorts of non-windows
compliant issues especially with multiple windows running. In short, give
it
a good test drive before even looking at the purchase contract.

Personally if I were looking myself, Zuken would get a real good
looking
over and test drive. Don't just play with their canned demo designs. Do a
small but semi-complicated design yourself, from start to finish. Find
their
user forum (Yahoo, Google or company run) and seek out actual users
comments. Would those users purchase it today if they were looking at it
fresh? Other than Zuken I would check out Mentor Expedition if my company
was willing to spend roughly double the money but get a good working tool
that can handle most anything you can throw at it technology wise today or
tomorrow.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Tod Adamson" <tadamson127@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:V6OdneJgx993zUzZnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@adelphia.com...
If you like to have schematic capture and layout in the same package you
can
look at Mentor Graphics. PowerPCB, and PowerBGA are their PC based
layout
tools. PowerLogic is the schematic capture tool.
OrCAD is a good package too. The schematic capture tool is called
"Capture"
and the layout tool with the basic autorouter is called "Layout Plus". I
just happen to think that OrCAD "Capture" and Mentor Graphics "PowerPCB"
are
the best from each company.

Tod

 

[Mike Monett]

"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote:

But if needed you can do the pin and gate swapping
manually anyway and simply drive it from the schematic forward rather
than backwards.

Manual changes are risky and highly error-prone. They are virtually
impossible for humans to check, and can generate hidden problems in
production boards that may be impossible to locate.

If manual back-annotation must be used anywhere in a process, change the
processs. The risk of disaster is too great.

Regards,

Mike Monett

Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm
SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm
Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm

 

[Brad Velander]

Mike,
I don't know about you but I can readily switch gates in a multigate
part without introducing errors, been doing it for many years including
prior to CAD, thanks. What would you ever do without CAD? Or how do you get
your gates right in the first place, if you can't manually swap them and
bring them forward into the PCB later? What is manual back-annotation, what
is manual forward annotation? Part of DESIGN! What is the alternative,
Button Pushers? Computer operators?

Maybe you could explain what differences there would be with my comments
you quote below, verses the original design and how it would be any more
risky than the original processes that got you to the initial PCB design in
the first place?

OrCAD? For me not a consideration, I hear too many negative comments and
it has been relegated to Bangalore maintenance and support.
--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Mike Monett" <No@email.adr> wrote in message
news:Xns981565CA5E58FNoemailadr@208.49.80.251...

"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote:

But if needed you can do the pin and gate swapping
manually anyway and simply drive it from the schematic forward rather
than backwards.

Manual changes are risky and highly error-prone. They are virtually
impossible for humans to check, and can generate hidden problems in
production boards that may be impossible to locate.

If manual back-annotation must be used anywhere in a process, change the
processs. The risk of disaster is too great.

Regards,

Mike Monett

 

[Mike Monett]

"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote:

Mike,
I don't know about you but I can readily switch gates in a
multigate
part without introducing errors, been doing it for many years
including prior to CAD, thanks. What would you ever do without CAD? Or
how do you get your gates right in the first place, if you can't
manually swap them and bring them forward into the PCB later? What is
manual back-annotation, what is manual forward annotation? Part of
DESIGN! What is the alternative, Button Pushers? Computer operators?

Maybe you could explain what differences there would be with my
comments
you quote below, verses the original design and how it would be any
more risky than the original processes that got you to the initial PCB
design in the first place?

Brad,

Maybe you are perfect, but the people I have to hire certainly are not.
They get distracted, bored, tired, interrupted, hungry, have to go
pee, develop tunnel vision, and all the other human traits that lead to
mistakes.

The main concern in back annotation is to swap components to eliminate
noise problems or parasitic oscillation caused by long traces or bad part
placement. The parts may be different sections of an op amp, or high-speed
ecl or cmos gates. Noise-sensitive circuits, such as oscillators or low-
level amplifiers need to be kept separate from high-speed or high-power
circuits.

You can see this easily while viewing the pcb. I mark each critical node on
the schematic, then manually route the trace on the pcb. However, a better
route can often be obtained by swapping to a different part.

Swapping means back-annotating to the schematic. If this is not done
correctly, and you do the final board route without checking carefully, the
board may have problems that only show up with certain parts or operating
conditions. This can be difficult or impossible to debug when the board is
shipped. Sure, you can claim it would be caught in a design review, but
that is not certain due to the human frailities mentioned above.

Due to the complexity of the problem, I would not accept software that
required manual back-annotation. But if you can find different vendors that
can import/export the data to different formats, and not make errors in the
conversion, that would be fine.

Regards,

Mike Monett

Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm
SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm
Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm

 

[Brad Velander]

Mike,
The main concern for Pin/Gate swapping and back-annotation is to better
route the PCB. Typical Pin and Gate swapping is not a design tool, it is a
simple manhattan length minimization. As a mahattan length minimization it
is not even always the best routed solution. I commonly do the gate or pin
swap manually anyways because the manhattan solution is not as routable as
other solutions I can readily see in the design. That is not even
considering SI or other issues, just the pin/gate swap for routing.

Seems from your details below you want much more than Pin/Gate swapping
and back-annotation, you want design specific knowledge complete with full
SI tooling and knowledge. You want a design engineer and you are describing
junoir PCB designers that screw it up on you. Can't put that burden on the
tools either unless you are buying $50K+ tools as well. Even then you have
to full understand the tools and their detailed limitations before you will
get results you could reliably bank on. Even with such tools, anything less
then a fully competent Engineer running the best tools available will not
get you what you want. So your issue is not with Pin/Gate swapping and
back-annotation but it is a design issue of the highest degree. No push
button will ever do that for you.

I certainly never said that I am perfect but it seems that you are
probably hiring junior people to do experienced required work. Typical for
the PCB design industry, that is why many years ago I decided to try and
break that cycle, moving from general circuit design to PCB design as my
specialty. Unfortunately the field is still generally colored with the same
single brush. And everyone (designers and managers) thinks that every
electronics designer/engineer can do it better themselves but they typically
never learn about the actual PCB design and fabrication end of the task. The
does and don'ts of PCB design for fabrication and assembly.


--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

P.S. Also sounds like your present designers never check their work as they
go if they experience the problems you have indicated. After back annotating
the first you do is check the integrity of that function by trying to update
your circuit again (pass the changes forward again to the PCB) and making
sure the changes went as planned. No point in waiting until the end to find
up something screwed up on the prior major change. Then again, seems that
you didn't fully check the changes that you had requested either, nor run
full checks of the design after routing. Because it is a human frailty? I
get the distinct impression you may be making up issues to refute the
legitimacy of manual or semi-manual back annotation between different tools
because you are seemingly grasping at unrelated issues or issues that would
be caught through proper checking and wouldn't be caught without other
features/checks anyway.


"Mike Monett" <No@email.adr> wrote in message
news:Xns98173A008F4CENoemailadr@208.49.80.251...

"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote:

Maybe you are perfect, but the people I have to hire certainly are not.
They get distracted, bored, tired, interrupted, hungry, have to go
pee, develop tunnel vision, and all the other human traits that lead to
mistakes.

The main concern in back annotation is to swap components to eliminate
noise problems or parasitic oscillation caused by long traces or bad part
placement. The parts may be different sections of an op amp, or high-speed
ecl or cmos gates. Noise-sensitive circuits, such as oscillators or low-
level amplifiers need to be kept separate from high-speed or high-power
circuits.

You can see this easily while viewing the pcb. I mark each critical node
on
the schematic, then manually route the trace on the pcb. However, a better
route can often be obtained by swapping to a different part.

Swapping means back-annotating to the schematic. If this is not done
correctly, and you do the final board route without checking carefully,
the
board may have problems that only show up with certain parts or operating
conditions. This can be difficult or impossible to debug when the board is
shipped. Sure, you can claim it would be caught in a design review, but
that is not certain due to the human frailities mentioned above.

Due to the complexity of the problem, I would not accept software that
required manual back-annotation. But if you can find different vendors
that
can import/export the data to different formats, and not make errors in
the
conversion, that would be fine.

Regards,

Mike Monett

 

[Mike Monett]

"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote:

Mike, The main concern for Pin/Gate swapping and back-annotation
is to better route the PCB.

Yes Brad. And the reason for back-annotation is to put that
information back into the schematic.

That is not easy to do. There are many ways to make errors.

That's why I would never consider software that requires manual
changes. A proper computer program is much faster and makes no
errors.

Of course, you are free to do whatever you wish. Good luck.

Regards,

Mike Monett

Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm
SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators:
http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm
Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm

 

[Joel Kolstad]

"Tod Adamson" <tadamson127@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:3bidnT1dBcQrUk3ZnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@adelphia.com...

Almost everyone is using OrCad for schematic capture and PADS ( PowerPCB)
for layout.

Rubbish. OrCAD and PADS are certainly both very popular tools, but there are
at least a decent-sized handful of similarly popular programs out there.

 

[Chuck Harris]

Joel Kolstad wrote:

"Tod Adamson" <tadamson127@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:3bidnT1dBcQrUk3ZnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@adelphia.com...
Almost everyone is using OrCad for schematic capture and PADS ( PowerPCB)
for layout.

Rubbish. OrCAD and PADS are certainly both very popular tools, but there are
at least a decent-sized handful of similarly popular programs out there.

Both Orcad and PADS had their day in the sun, but it ended around
1990 something with the introduction of Windows 3.0. They both dumped
their dos programs, and went with inferior windows implementations.

-Chuck