EAGLE Netlist conversion

[qrk]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:43:47 -0400, Robert Hoffman
<bob@_I_Get_too_much_spam.com> wrote:

I've been looking hard. I need a decent schematic and PCB package under
$1000. Don't need autorouter or a zillion layers. Do want back
annotation and ease of use. I've downloaded a dozen demo packages. The
software all seems to be written by people with exceptional eyesight, no
fingers, a poor grasp of the English language, little understanding of
Windows conventions, and have never actually designed a PC board. They
mostly have 300 little tiny unreadable icons and no clue that clicking
the left mouse button should select something and the right button
should offer a list of things to do with it. A good few do not use the
mouse buttons at all. Pretty much without exception the software is
expensive and very poorly written. I can draw schematics and boards
faster and easier in Autocad, which is what I do now.

Is there ANYTHING out there that: actually correctly uses the mouse, has
working popup help on the buttons, is written in American English (no
"colours" please), is readable by somebody without super-human eyesight
and does 95% of everything with only the mouse buttons like it should.
Double-click to change properties, right-click to rotate, mirror, swap,
delete, add, cut, etc. I don't want something I have to fight with.
Under $1,000.

If you want really stable software, use Orcad's DOS stuff.
SDT386+ for schematics
PCB386+ for pcbs
It's easy and efficient to use if you use macros. It's about 10 years
old. New VESA video drivers have been written for modern high
resolution monitors. The biggest problem is finding a video board that
will handle VESA mode under Windoze.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dos-orcad/ is an active group that
deals with DOS Orcad programs including new drivers for video,
printers, modifications to the Orcad executables, and general help.

---
Mark

 

[Jamie]

Robert Hoffman wrote:

Just because I'm not a great typast or speler or attentive to my
apostrophe's does not alter the basic issue. The customer is always
right. You don't design software to suit your own convenience, you
design it to satisfy the customer. Several companies are not going to
get the thousand bucks or so which I have budgeted for this software.
It's probably not a triviality to them. (When I deliver something, I
have someone who is better at grammar and spelling check it for me. I
design things; I don't write dictionaries.)

Terry Pinnell wrote:

A'men!

 

[Jamie]

qrk wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:43:47 -0400, Robert Hoffman
bob@_I_Get_too_much_spam.com> wrote:


I've been looking hard. I need a decent schematic and PCB package under
$1000. Don't need autorouter or a zillion layers. Do want back
annotation and ease of use. I've downloaded a dozen demo packages. The
software all seems to be written by people with exceptional eyesight, no
fingers, a poor grasp of the English language, little understanding of
Windows conventions, and have never actually designed a PC board. They
mostly have 300 little tiny unreadable icons and no clue that clicking
the left mouse button should select something and the right button
should offer a list of things to do with it. A good few do not use the
mouse buttons at all. Pretty much without exception the software is
expensive and very poorly written. I can draw schematics and boards
faster and easier in Autocad, which is what I do now.

Is there ANYTHING out there that: actually correctly uses the mouse, has
working popup help on the buttons, is written in American English (no
"colours" please), is readable by somebody without super-human eyesight
and does 95% of everything with only the mouse buttons like it should.
Double-click to change properties, right-click to rotate, mirror, swap,
delete, add, cut, etc. I don't want something I have to fight with.
Under $1,000.


If you want really stable software, use Orcad's DOS stuff.
SDT386+ for schematics
PCB386+ for pcbs
It's easy and efficient to use if you use macros. It's about 10 years
old. New VESA video drivers have been written for modern high
resolution monitors. The biggest problem is finding a video board that
will handle VESA mode under Windoze.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dos-orcad/ is an active group that
deals with DOS Orcad programs including new drivers for video,
printers, modifications to the Orcad executables, and general help.

What they matter with you? have no faith in winders ?
)))


> Mark

 

[Markus Baertschi]

GrantM. wrote:

I think if they had a free version comparable to what Eagle has, they
would hold the lion's share of the hobbyist market.

I think you are right on the (sore) spot. As a hobbyist (without a $1000
budget just for drawing my schematics / PCB's) I'm using Eagle as there
is nothing else out there for the same price. For a product I actually
like and was able to _use_ (not too crippled) the free version for a
while I'd shell out $100 or so.

The functionality of Eagle is fine, even the free version allows you to
get a small project done. Unfortunately the interface sucks. On the
other hand the provided newsgroups are great and an excellent source of
support.

Once every two years I go out and download a couple of demos to see if
this has changed. Unfortunately in the last ten years this was not the case.

Markus

 

[qrk]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:01:02 -0700, Jamie
<jamie_5_not_valid_after_5_Please@charter.net> wrote:

qrk wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:43:47 -0400, Robert Hoffman
bob@_I_Get_too_much_spam.com> wrote:


I've been looking hard. I need a decent schematic and PCB package under
$1000. Don't need autorouter or a zillion layers. Do want back
annotation and ease of use. I've downloaded a dozen demo packages. The
software all seems to be written by people with exceptional eyesight, no
fingers, a poor grasp of the English language, little understanding of
Windows conventions, and have never actually designed a PC board. They
mostly have 300 little tiny unreadable icons and no clue that clicking
the left mouse button should select something and the right button
should offer a list of things to do with it. A good few do not use the
mouse buttons at all. Pretty much without exception the software is
expensive and very poorly written. I can draw schematics and boards
faster and easier in Autocad, which is what I do now.

Is there ANYTHING out there that: actually correctly uses the mouse, has
working popup help on the buttons, is written in American English (no
"colours" please), is readable by somebody without super-human eyesight
and does 95% of everything with only the mouse buttons like it should.
Double-click to change properties, right-click to rotate, mirror, swap,
delete, add, cut, etc. I don't want something I have to fight with.
Under $1,000.


If you want really stable software, use Orcad's DOS stuff.
SDT386+ for schematics
PCB386+ for pcbs
It's easy and efficient to use if you use macros. It's about 10 years
old. New VESA video drivers have been written for modern high
resolution monitors. The biggest problem is finding a video board that
will handle VESA mode under Windoze.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dos-orcad/ is an active group that
deals with DOS Orcad programs including new drivers for video,
printers, modifications to the Orcad executables, and general help.

What they matter with you? have no faith in winders ?
)))

No faith in modern programmers and companies that don't fully
alpha/beta test their crap. Layout version 10 is a good example of a
crippled release. It still isn't working right. Windoze programs can
be made to work reliably.

 

[Leon Heller]

"lurker" <ldg@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:ql5dn05dbg938k5pllbee1i2anfkk0uqfm@4ax.com...

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:47:14 +0100, "Leon Heller"
leon_heller@hotmail.com> wrote:



For simulation, I liked SIMetrix, their support was helpful with a few
questions I had about the demo.

The SPICE supplied with EasyPC is SIMetrix. It has a good reputation.

Leon


I've also looked into SIMetrix at various times, but haven't bought it
yet. The demo seemed to work great.

I'm re-evaluating my schematic capture software at the moment since it
was just sold - again. I've used ECS/Synario/Cohesion for over 10
years and it's always been reasonably priced. The new company wants
~$20k for it now: http://www.sicanvas.com/ They call it Laker AMS.

The schematic software that comes with SIMetrix will apparently read
ASCII files created by cohesion, allowing complete schematics to be
imported.

Those in the newsgroup who use ltspice will know about these ASCII
files since the ltspice format is basically cohesion, modified so they
don't quite transfer.

I don't know what the schematic capture costs by itself, but the
SIMetrix simulator plus the schematic software is still ~$5k:

Easy-PC with the SIMetrix SPICE is a lot less than that, and the Easy-PC
schematic capture is a lot nicer than that supplied with SIMetrix.

Leon

 

[Roy Battell]

In article <4a59d41a.0410201351.5de9914d@posting.google.com>, John Sosa
<john.sosa@seagate.com> writes

Hello,

This question is to all those that prototype using wire wrapping.
Currently, I have a large design that I want to wire wrap, and have
done the all the CAD drawings in Orcad. (I generally do everything in
Orcad) The problem with this is that I don't really want to wire wrap
directly from the schematic. Also, I have heard from friends that
there used to be some software that converted netlists to a list of
wirewrap connections. Also, this software was intelligent enought to
not give more than three wraps per post, etc. Apperantly the software
gave a listing of the order and between what chips the wraps needed to
go. I have searched on Google using different search criteria, but
nothing.

So, any help locating an application that does this would be great.

Regards,
John

When Vutrax started out Wire-wrap was the norm and it still produces
this sort of output if you want it - a wiring order list of wrapping
points with wire length included, never using a pin for more than
two wraps. Experience showed the most error freed method was to ignore
IC pin numbers etc. and work by coordinates. You can choose your own
column/row naming or numbering conventions. You can also output a
check-list for 'buzzing' out the wiring in an efficient order.

You may be able to export a simple pin to pin net list
for your design and import this and use the wire-wrap output.
For new projects you can use the whole Schematic > routing >
Finished board. The wire-wrap output is available after schematic
analysis and placement and part of the rats-nest suite.

Vutrax can be downloaded from one of
http://www.vutrax.co.uk (Main UK site)
http://www.protonique.com/vutrax (Central Europe Mirror)
Free for evaluation and DIY size projects up to 256 pin with
no time limits, no required internet access, or other tricks.
Available for Windows 95 through XP, and Linux.
--
Roy Battell.
To use this address remove the digits included to remove Spam ...
Mail: news@vutrax666.co.uk

 

[Paul Burke]

Jamie wrote:

What they matter with you? have no faith in winders ?

Not since Markham Colliery (1973).

 

[Phil Munro]

PSpice has a NOPAGE option you can set. Spice used to have a # lines
per page that could be set to zero (for infinite). Something like
one of these was standard; look at such possible options. --Phil

Michael Bails wrote:

Hello Group,

Could someone please advise me on creating a spice3 output file
(through the unix format) which prints a given output with no spaces
or page breaks. For example, I'm trying to determine the real and
imaginary parts of the admittance in a circuit and output it to a
file, so I use the following command:

print i(v1)/v(1) > ../home/result.dat

When I view the result.dat file, it looks good, however, there is a
np> after the 54th entry. I'm trying to get a printout that has no
page break. I'm trying to take this file and manipulate it but the
new page problem keeps arising creating errors in my code that is
trying to read this data. If I use less then 54 data points, I don't
get the <np>, however, some of my analyses require many more then 54
data results.

Regards,

Michael Bails
Department of Electrical Engineering
University of Pittsburgh

--
Phil Munro Dept of Electrical & Computer Engin
mailtocMunro@cc.ysu.edu Youngstown State University
Youngstown, Ohio 44555

 

[Charles DH Williams]

In article <98bf1ac8.0410201357.5eaf47f4@posting.google.com>,
bailsybro@gmail.com (Michael Bails) wrote:

Hello Group,

Could someone please advise me on creating a spice3 output file
(through the unix format) which prints a given output with no spaces
or page breaks.

Try the command:

set nopage

before your print statement.

Charles

 

[Pooh Bear]

Robert Hoffman wrote:

In Microsoft Word, I can generate a
document faster than I could with pencil and paper.

You're still using version 2.0c ? ;-)

Personally, I find Word to be an excellent example of an anti-productivity
application. Just today I used write in preference to generate a report in rtf
format ( that doesn't need Word to read - and screw up - the file ).


Graham

 

[Pooh Bear]

Clarence wrote:

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4171E55B.3C551560@hotmail.com...

Robert Hoffman wrote:
Is there ANYTHING out there that:....... is written in American English
Anything wrong with English English ?

Other than hard to decipher?

Please elaborate ?


Graham

 

[Pooh Bear]

Clarence wrote:

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41785CC7.5E6454A0@hotmail.com...
Clarence wrote:

< snip >

I would think it obvious, it is often sprinkled with many slang, or
colloquial
words which are not used universally.

Not used universally in the USA you mean ?

Also not used in INDIA, China, Belize, Australia, etc.

You'll find that India and Australia have their own slang and colloquialities that
you wouldn't likely be familiar with either.

Dunno about Belize. When I've been in China, they speak English more like us than
the US way.

We find some US English somewhat hard to understand.

Also understandable, for the same reasons.

I can't see how there would be much confusion in CAD software though.

I have software written in Australia. The help files are worthless!

I wouldn't base an opinion on that alone.

Is the USA claiming to own the English language in preference to its origin
in
England ?

I have no idea what your talking about. America is a country of diverse
opines.

" Bah, who needs to learn English, I'm never going to England " ...... Homer
Simpson.

Yet you have seen his shows, and understood them?

Yes - and yeah - I think so. Rather humourous when you get the picture. Took a
while though.


Graham

 

[Chuck Harris]

Pooh Bear wrote:

Is the USA claiming to own the English language in preference to its origin in
England ?

The Linguist Dr. Deborah Tannen wrote that the language spoken in the US today
more closely resembles the English spoken in England 200 years ago, than does the
language spoken in England today.

The reason is the vast size of the US compared to England. The language used in
a small community can evolve through creative new words, meanings and phrases,
without causing confusion, much more quickly than the language used in a large
geographically expansive country. Think of how the language changes within clicks
of teenagers. It drifts so quickly that one generation cannot readily understand
another.

That being so, it can be argued that what you speak in England is the aberration.

-Chuck Harris

 

[Paul Burke]

Chuck Harris wrote:

the language spoken in the US
today
more closely resembles the English spoken in England 200 years ago, than
does the
language spoken in England today.

The reason is the vast size of the US compared to England. The language
used in
a small community can evolve through creative new words, meanings and
phrases,
without causing confusion, much more quickly than the language used in a
large
geographically expansive country.

That's why Northern English dialects (the most intensively
industrialised parts of the UK, with large immigrant populations-
Flemish, Huguenot, Irish, Cornish- over hundreds of years) retain
Anglo-Saxon and Norse features not found in Standard English, and why in
the US the Deep South dialects so much resemble those of New England, I
suppose.

Paul Burke

 

[Paul Burke]

Clarence wrote:

Been to India, they have a British accent, but there are a lot if differences.
The Telephone service people are sent to school to learn to speak so someone on
a phone can understand them.

Have you ever HEARD a "British accent"? One of the newest things the
Devil has invented to plague us with is the outsourced Indian cold sales
call. It must do wonders for race relations in the UK when you KNOW that
an Asian accent means that they aren't trying to sell you anything, no,
they just want you to take part in a survey.

Paul Burke

 

[Clarence]

"Don Prescott" <DMBPrescott@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7fb54666.0410220441.5e744d22@posting.google.com...

The reason is the vast size of the US compared to England. The
language used in a small community can evolve through creative new
words, meanings and phrases, without causing confusion, much more
quickly than the language used in a large geographically expansive
country. Think of how the language changes within clicks of
teenagers. It drifts so quickly that one generation cannot readily
understand another.


Surely, the communication gaps between generations, and ethnic groups,
is more about the use of fashionable words and phrases than a true
change in the language....

Many of the words used by Americans that are not part of modern
"British" English, like: trash, garbage, sidewalk, attorney, fall
(Autumn in Britain)and the American English spellings like color, date
from the English at the time of the pilgrim fathers. There is so much
communication between the US and other English speaking countries by
way of tv shows, movies, the internet, that since about the early part
of the 20th century separate evolution paths for English have been
quite limited worldwide.

I would contend that the "American English" in product manuals and
help files is more to do with American style that the actual
language...

Prescott

Well, style is also dictated. "Strunk and White" come to mind.

 

[Chuck Harris]

Clarence wrote:

"Paul Burke" <paul@scazon.com> wrote in message
news:2trr9hF23gie6U1@uni-berlin.de...

Chuck Harris wrote:


the language spoken in the US
today
more closely resembles the English spoken in England 200 years ago, than
does the
language spoken in England today.

The reason is the vast size of the US compared to England. The language
used in
a small community can evolve through creative new words, meanings and
phrases,
without causing confusion, much more quickly than the language used in a
large
geographically expansive country.

That's why Northern English dialects (the most intensively
industrialised parts of the UK, with large immigrant populations-
Flemish, Huguenot, Irish, Cornish- over hundreds of years) retain
Anglo-Saxon and Norse features not found in Standard English, and why in
the US the Deep South dialects so much resemble those of New England, I
suppose.

Paul Burke


I thought that Television had something to do with providing some sense of
"standardizing" the manner of speech in the US. Perhaps the source of that
(TV) was bragging?

Television is having a dramatic affect on the English language.
It is standardizing the US on the Midwestern dialect of US
English.... and it has done so within my lifetime. When I was
a kid, we used to travel throughout the US and Canada quite a lot,
and I used to marvel at the way people in different parts of the
country talked, but now, they all sound mostly the same.

-Chuck

 

[Paul Burke]

Chuck Harris wrote:

Regions with a large number of dialects are a brewing pot for language
change.

That's not true at all. The dialects are stable over many years- in fact
it's believed that the "ordinary" US pronunciation derived largely from
the still- current Cornish dialect. Dialects are NOT slang, and they can
be VERY stable indeed- Norse and Anglo-Saxon elements dating back over a
thousand years are still current. And Welsh (not an English dialect by
the way) has changed only slightly in that thousand years- there are few
smaller countries than Wales. And it's obvious if you think about it-
tightly knitted communities are likely to share speech patterns and
value them as a defence against external encroachment.

It's mass communications (starting with railroads) that prevented the
fragmentation of US English. I'm sure that had the Southern US dialects
had another half century of separation from the Northern, they would
have become so mutually unintelligible to have constituted different
languages.

Paul Burke

 

[Chuck Harris]

Bob Stephens wrote:

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:00:53 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote:

Well, I have been in Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia, Michigan, Ohio,
Ontario, Wisconsin, Maryland and Virginia so far this year. My mother is
from Minnesota. And I have traveled in the South quite extensively over
the last couple of years. And some would say that I live in the south.

-Chuck


Just picking communities from three of those areas that I am familiar with.
Don't you think it would be pretty easy to distinguish between natives of
Brooklyn, Minneapolis and Memphis blindfolded?


Bob

Certainly, but unlike 40 years ago, you will understand virtually everything
that they are saying.

I believe the reason is we all share a common source of language and pronunciation
that comes from the radio, and the boob tube.

-Chuck