R
Robert Baer
Guest
David Brown wrote:
D
David Brown
Guest
Robert Baer wrote:
given that they have explicit support for Opera, Netscape and Firefox in
the program. The website is pretty skimpy on details of the program -
it certainly doesn't make FDM look like a must-have utility. However,
I've tried a few download managers over the years, and FDM is the best
I've used. It does everything I need, integrates well with my browser,
and although it is not open-source, it is free to use (i.e., not
shareware or adware).
You're right - they do say that on the web page. It seems a bit odd,
given that they have explicit support for Opera, Netscape and Firefox in
the program. The website is pretty skimpy on details of the program -
it certainly doesn't make FDM look like a must-have utility. However,
I've tried a few download managers over the years, and FDM is the best
I've used. It does everything I need, integrates well with my browser,
and although it is not open-source, it is free to use (i.e., not
shareware or adware).
C
Chuck Harris
Guest
David Brown wrote:
I discarded it in favor of Netscape.
IE ;-)
Firefox MOFO split up the Mozilla suite into Firefox, and Thunderbird, (and a couple other elements that
have completely vanished) in order to make it appear to be resource equivalent to IE/OE. They
reasoned that the unwashed Microsloth masses were used to having the browser and email/news
client be a smaller separate package, so they felt that they could gain more "market share"
with a split product.
- I have recently been
to carry on the development of the Suite. It is independent of MOFO, though it is
lead by several of the original development crew.
total download footprint exceeds Seamonkey/Mozilla Suite.
Only if you don't like to keep your email client open while you browse.
I keep my email client active at all times... though it may be in the background.
It is essential that the client be active if you want to be informed when
new email arrives.
About 50% of the code in Firefox and Thunderbird is common to both applications.
When you have both Firefox and Thunderbird active at the same time, there are
duplicate copies of this code running on your computer. Mozilla Suite and SeaMonkey
take advantage of this fact, and only keep one copy of that common code in memory.
This produces a significantly smaller footprint.
base. They decided to direct themselves from "scratching their own itch" to
cowtowing to the unwashed masses that use Microsloth OE and IE.
The Seamonkey project was created to restore the choice that MOFO removed.
-Chuck
I can't speak to Opera, as the last time I tried it was many years ago, and
I discarded it in favor of Netscape.
Firefox is much better than IE... the text based browser lynx is much better than
IE ;-)
Firefox MOFO split up the Mozilla suite into Firefox, and Thunderbird, (and a couple other elements that
have completely vanished) in order to make it appear to be resource equivalent to IE/OE. They
reasoned that the unwashed Microsloth masses were used to having the browser and email/news
client be a smaller separate package, so they felt that they could gain more "market share"
with a split product.
- I have recently been
MOFO, abandoned Mozilla Suite completely. So, the SeaMonkey project was created
to carry on the development of the Suite. It is independent of MOFO, though it is
lead by several of the original development crew.
You only have to download it once. With Firefox, and Thunderbird, the
total download footprint exceeds Seamonkey/Mozilla Suite.
Only if you don't like to keep your email client open while you browse.
I keep my email client active at all times... though it may be in the background.
It is essential that the client be active if you want to be informed when
new email arrives.
About 50% of the code in Firefox and Thunderbird is common to both applications.
When you have both Firefox and Thunderbird active at the same time, there are
duplicate copies of this code running on your computer. Mozilla Suite and SeaMonkey
take advantage of this fact, and only keep one copy of that common code in memory.
This produces a significantly smaller footprint.
Except that the idiots at MOFO decided to remove that choice from their user
base. They decided to direct themselves from "scratching their own itch" to
cowtowing to the unwashed masses that use Microsloth OE and IE.
The Seamonkey project was created to restore the choice that MOFO removed.
-Chuck
D
David Brown
Guest
Chuck Harris wrote:
separate applications for email and for browsing. I invariably have
both open at the same time, but whether or not they share a code base is
basically irrelevant to me. At work, I use OE for email - mainly due to
the effort involved in changing, rather than because I think it is
particularly good. With appropriate safeguards, it's done a serviceable
job. I use thunderbird for news, and firefox for most of my browsing.
On linux, I've used a couple of different email clients and a couple of
different browsers. I really don't see why my choice of browser should
in any way influence my choice of email client - saving 10 or 20 MB of
run-time memory footprint is not a good reason.
It seems strange to me that you think the only reason anyone would
prefer firefox and thunderbird is because they are in some way
brainwashed from over-use of Microsoft software, or that this is the
only reason firefox was created in the first place. If anything, it is
far more in keeping with *nix philosophy to have separate applications
for separate purposes, with choices for each job, and far more in
keeping with windows philosophy to have a single monolithic application
doing several partly-related jobs. And just because Microsoft makes a
particular design decision, does not necessarily make that design bad,
nor does it mean that anyone making a similar design is copying them.
Firefox was originally created by people who felt that the development
of Mozilla suite was too slow, the code too large and monolithic, and
the gui system too complicated. They decided to take the rendering
back-end and make a lighter, simpler dedicated browser around it. It
turned out to be so popular that people prefer it to the original.
The people at MOFO were not "idiots", and they did not "remove the
choice from their user base". They looked at what people wanted, and
what people used, and what their developers wanted to work on - and thus
concentrated on Firefox and Thunderbird. These are all open source
applications - no one can remove your choices. As long as there are
people interested in using and developing Seamonkey, then it's
development continues, and everyone has the choice.
<snip>
This apparently seems a strange idea to you, but I *choose* to have
separate applications for email and for browsing. I invariably have
both open at the same time, but whether or not they share a code base is
basically irrelevant to me. At work, I use OE for email - mainly due to
the effort involved in changing, rather than because I think it is
particularly good. With appropriate safeguards, it's done a serviceable
job. I use thunderbird for news, and firefox for most of my browsing.
On linux, I've used a couple of different email clients and a couple of
different browsers. I really don't see why my choice of browser should
in any way influence my choice of email client - saving 10 or 20 MB of
run-time memory footprint is not a good reason.
It seems strange to me that you think the only reason anyone would
prefer firefox and thunderbird is because they are in some way
brainwashed from over-use of Microsoft software, or that this is the
only reason firefox was created in the first place. If anything, it is
far more in keeping with *nix philosophy to have separate applications
for separate purposes, with choices for each job, and far more in
keeping with windows philosophy to have a single monolithic application
doing several partly-related jobs. And just because Microsoft makes a
particular design decision, does not necessarily make that design bad,
nor does it mean that anyone making a similar design is copying them.
Firefox was originally created by people who felt that the development
of Mozilla suite was too slow, the code too large and monolithic, and
the gui system too complicated. They decided to take the rendering
back-end and make a lighter, simpler dedicated browser around it. It
turned out to be so popular that people prefer it to the original.
The people at MOFO were not "idiots", and they did not "remove the
choice from their user base". They looked at what people wanted, and
what people used, and what their developers wanted to work on - and thus
concentrated on Firefox and Thunderbird. These are all open source
applications - no one can remove your choices. As long as there are
people interested in using and developing Seamonkey, then it's
development continues, and everyone has the choice.
A
Anton Erasmus
Guest
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 20:21:57 +0000, Ian Bell <ruffrecords@yahoo.com>
wrote:
the price went up dramatically, and the quality of their support shot
down. It is extremely clear that the current programmers on Protel,
have never used the program to do a real design. They have added
all sorts of fluff that slows everything down, and they keep trying to
forcefeed their idea of how one should organise one's design files.
Regards
Anton Erasmus
wrote:
When Protel first came out it was very cheap. Once it became popular
the price went up dramatically, and the quality of their support shot
down. It is extremely clear that the current programmers on Protel,
have never used the program to do a real design. They have added
all sorts of fluff that slows everything down, and they keep trying to
forcefeed their idea of how one should organise one's design files.
Regards
Anton Erasmus
A
Andrzej XTC
Guest
I'm impressed - really...
Doesn't PCB module have limitation to let's say 12 or 16 layers???
I'm trying to find some usefull software since I switched to linux...
At work I use p99SE&DXP so it's a bit hard for me to "step back" at home
I've tried gEDA - what dissapoints me most is the tone of posts on
forums - where all problems are ended with "the bigger pro is the fact
that this software exists".
When I've read that updating from sch do pcb is so hard because there
are mismatches with footprint names - my eyes started to open widely 8-|
My first problem was "so how can I know what list of footprint is
avaliable?" - I've discovered that many people add elements to PCB
manually so in fact it isn't so important to have correct footprints
definitions at schematic level.
But - I didn't give up yet.
I tried Eagle also - looks very easy to use but somehow different from
flexibility of protel series - I didn't try to define my own elements
so probably I haven't seen many problems yet.
I'll try kicad and vutrax since there are linux ports.
XTC
I
Ian Bell
Guest
Andrzej XTC wrote:
here:
http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
Ian
Have you tried Kicad? Open source and runs on Windows or linux. Find it
here:
http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
Ian
A
Andrzej XTC
Guest
In fact - I've heard about kicad today - when I've come to an idea to
look for some newsgroup about gEDA.
I've read this topic and I've downloaded both kicad and vutrax.
I'll try them tommorow.
XTC
D
DJ Delorie
Guest
Andrzej XTC <xtcnow@interia.pl> writes:
#define MAX_LAYER 8
to this:
#define MAX_LAYER 24
and recompile, and it just works. There are a few gotchas, like there
are no defined layer colors above 8 at the moment and one binary can't
support both 8 and 24 layer boards (i.e. you just need two binaries,
pcb and pcb24), but I tested it with a 56 layer board. The GUI was
messy but it worked.
If >8 layer boards become more popular with PCB users, we'll make it
easier to do. Until then, it's not at the top of the priority list.
at the moment, especially with the new footprint standards coming out.
There are a couple of developers working on figuring out what to do
about it.
The old libraries made this difficult, as they were parametric - one
file for all DIP footprints, one file for all SMT footprints, etc.
The new library is one file per footprint, so a simple file listing
tells you what's available.
There are also a few websites with footprint catalogs and generators
so you can add to the "base" library.
there are multiple ways of making a "correct" footprint). It's less
important to have *all* the footprints, because we realize that we
can't please everyone anyway, so I think we're shooting for the 90%
solution.
constructive criticism. It only helps us too.
PCB is provided in source form. Change globalconst.c from this:
#define MAX_LAYER 8
to this:
#define MAX_LAYER 24
and recompile, and it just works. There are a few gotchas, like there
are no defined layer colors above 8 at the moment and one binary can't
support both 8 and 24 layer boards (i.e. you just need two binaries,
pcb and pcb24), but I tested it with a 56 layer board. The GUI was
messy but it worked.
If >8 layer boards become more popular with PCB users, we'll make it
easier to do. Until then, it's not at the top of the priority list.
I think most of us create our own footprints anyway. It's a big topic
at the moment, especially with the new footprint standards coming out.
There are a couple of developers working on figuring out what to do
about it.
Well, this should be easy - open the library window in PCB
The old libraries made this difficult, as they were parametric - one
file for all DIP footprints, one file for all SMT footprints, etc.
The new library is one file per footprint, so a simple file listing
tells you what's available.
There are also a few websites with footprint catalogs and generators
so you can add to the "base" library.
Well, it's important to have *correct* footprints (although even then
there are multiple ways of making a "correct" footprint). It's less
important to have *all* the footprints, because we realize that we
can't please everyone anyway, so I think we're shooting for the 90%
solution.
That's the spirit! Plus, the gEDA/PCB developers are very open to
constructive criticism. It only helps us too.
S
Stuart Brorson
Guest
Andrzej XTC <xtcnow@interia.pl> wrote:
: >Have you tried Kicad? Open source and runs on Windows or linux. Find it
:> here:
:>
:> http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
: In fact - I've heard about kicad today - when I've come to an idea to
: look for some newsgroup about gEDA.
GEDA info is readily available at:
http://geda.seul.org/
Documentation at:
http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/index.html
FAQs and answers to selected questions at:
http://geda.seul.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=geda
A wonderful step-by-step tutorial for gschem -> PCB is available at:
http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/tutorials/gsch2pcb/tutorial.html
Stuart
: >Have you tried Kicad? Open source and runs on Windows or linux. Find it
:> here:
:>
:> http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/index.html
: In fact - I've heard about kicad today - when I've come to an idea to
: look for some newsgroup about gEDA.
GEDA info is readily available at:
http://geda.seul.org/
Documentation at:
http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/index.html
FAQs and answers to selected questions at:
http://geda.seul.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=geda
A wonderful step-by-step tutorial for gschem -> PCB is available at:
http://geda.seul.org/docs/current/tutorials/gsch2pcb/tutorial.html
Stuart
X
xtc
Guest
My first steps with geda were with this tutorial.
I've encountered some problems - for example footprints definitions.
To be clear - I'm not a fan of "give me all footprints" - no ... for me
1206 0805 and few dips would be
enough since other I'd prefer to define by myself.
Step /gaf/myproject1$ gsch2pcb project didn't work for me...
It looks that I'm not able to convert whole project to PCB.
adding "verbose" attribute - shows that gsch2pcb knows that my project
include those two demo schematics - but - no effect.
I had to convert every schematic and then "load to buffer" and "load
netlist".
Simply when I converted:
gsch2pcb one.sch
and I tried to open the result using:
pcb name.pcb
there was always an error processing such simple file.
I don't know if it's a problem with more complicated elements or
anything else.
I plan to start with simpler structures - for example resistors only -
to see what's going on.
XTC
D
Dave Boland
Guest
Andrzej,
Would you keep us posted on the results of your comparison?
Most of my work is embedded software, but sometimes I need
early hardware to write the code. Which means I have to
design some circuits and a PCB. I have used Eagle (free
version that came with a book on card design) for a simple
card, but It won't work for the next one because it is too
large and needs 2 signal layers plus 2 power layers. So I
will need to do something soon and could use your input.
I just read Stuart's article on gEDA in Linux Journal, and
it is a very good over-view, but no details. Hope Stuart
will follow-up in LJ or Circuit Cellar with a detailed
example of a card with an ADC (they typically require a
ground plane under them) and some digital components for a
2S2P design and throw in some analog and digital simulation.
I will also look at the gEDA site for documentation and a
tutorial.
One other comment about the LJ article. Stuart uses the
software design process to describe analogies to the card
design process. I agree with Stuart on most of it, but one
point I don't agree on is the use of separate tools. I have
found that a good IDE can be very productive - more so than
separate tools all with different interfaces. So I hope at
some point the gEDA group will consider doing something like
an IDE for gEDA (like Eagle or LT Switcher from Linear) for
those of us not into card design professionally.
Dave,
Andrzej XTC wrote:
Would you keep us posted on the results of your comparison?
Most of my work is embedded software, but sometimes I need
early hardware to write the code. Which means I have to
design some circuits and a PCB. I have used Eagle (free
version that came with a book on card design) for a simple
card, but It won't work for the next one because it is too
large and needs 2 signal layers plus 2 power layers. So I
will need to do something soon and could use your input.
I just read Stuart's article on gEDA in Linux Journal, and
it is a very good over-view, but no details. Hope Stuart
will follow-up in LJ or Circuit Cellar with a detailed
example of a card with an ADC (they typically require a
ground plane under them) and some digital components for a
2S2P design and throw in some analog and digital simulation.
I will also look at the gEDA site for documentation and a
tutorial.
One other comment about the LJ article. Stuart uses the
software design process to describe analogies to the card
design process. I agree with Stuart on most of it, but one
point I don't agree on is the use of separate tools. I have
found that a good IDE can be very productive - more so than
separate tools all with different interfaces. So I hope at
some point the gEDA group will consider doing something like
an IDE for gEDA (like Eagle or LT Switcher from Linear) for
those of us not into card design professionally.
Dave,
Andrzej XTC wrote:
A
Andrzej XTC
Guest
I'm right after let's say 1hr of KiCAD session.
First of all - I'm really impressed by the interface.
Looks very good from the first sight.
I didn't install whole package since I didn't read
install documents - I know - my fault.
I've downloaded binaries only (linux ver).
I've created my own R & C schematic symbols and connected them.
Maybe it's quite obvious novadays - but I haven't seen it in eagle
- simple but efficient autojunction feature.
Today I've downloaded whole package - it comes with some standard
libraries so I hope I'll be able to test it more.
The best test will be - to try develop any real world small project
(you know - every program is simple if you do something step by step
in some creator mode or ready made elements - It's always harder
when you try to achieve exact effect).
Anyway - it's quite simple - other aspects I'll probably post them here.
XTC
First of all - I'm really impressed by the interface.
Looks very good from the first sight.
I didn't install whole package since I didn't read
install documents - I know - my fault.
I've downloaded binaries only (linux ver).
I've created my own R & C schematic symbols and connected them.
Maybe it's quite obvious novadays - but I haven't seen it in eagle
- simple but efficient autojunction feature.
Today I've downloaded whole package - it comes with some standard
libraries so I hope I'll be able to test it more.
The best test will be - to try develop any real world small project
(you know - every program is simple if you do something step by step
in some creator mode or ready made elements - It's always harder
when you try to achieve exact effect).
Anyway - it's quite simple - other aspects I'll probably post them here.
XTC
I
Ian Bell
Guest
Andrzej XTC wrote:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kicad-users/
Ian
If you need support there is now a yahoo group for Kicad users. Find it at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kicad-users/
Ian
X
xtc
Guest
Useless unfortunately... because of Yahoo.
XTC
X
xtc
Guest
Today I've tried to use copper-pour's in KiCAD.
It's a little bit tricky - since at start - when you want
to define "zone" area - you should right-click track - only then
You can define netname for zone.
Everything else is ok... maybe - it looks that there is no
possibility to move or reedit zone shape (or maybe I haven't found it yet).
But in my opinion board with 2S2G is very easy to make
(using those zones as planes - there is no "carve" mode for them /I
don't remember
how it's called in Protel/ so propably you'll have to draw shape with
gaps manually).
I'm still impressed with this software.
Automatic loop removal - online DRC (in fact clearnance only), via dragging.
Probably there is no track editing - since they are not treated as in
protel - you can
delete, split in desired place - but I haven't found a possibility to
drag a part of it (but
as I mentioned - when I drag via - tracks are still connected to it).
XTC
It's a little bit tricky - since at start - when you want
to define "zone" area - you should right-click track - only then
You can define netname for zone.
Everything else is ok... maybe - it looks that there is no
possibility to move or reedit zone shape (or maybe I haven't found it yet).
But in my opinion board with 2S2G is very easy to make
(using those zones as planes - there is no "carve" mode for them /I
don't remember
how it's called in Protel/ so propably you'll have to draw shape with
gaps manually).
I'm still impressed with this software.
Automatic loop removal - online DRC (in fact clearnance only), via dragging.
Probably there is no track editing - since they are not treated as in
protel - you can
delete, split in desired place - but I haven't found a possibility to
drag a part of it (but
as I mentioned - when I drag via - tracks are still connected to it).
XTC
X
xtc
Guest
There IS a possibility to edit and drag nodes of any track - after
unlocking selected track.
One more thing that is specific (In my opinion).
With online drc - when track is in prohibited area - you just can't set
point for track there
- I mean there is no highlight of tracks - you just cant put it
(probably just a thing
to get used to - but my first impression was "damn my mouse button
doesn't work"
XTC
unlocking selected track.
One more thing that is specific (In my opinion).
With online drc - when track is in prohibited area - you just can't set
point for track there
- I mean there is no highlight of tracks - you just cant put it
(probably just a thing
to get used to - but my first impression was "damn my mouse button
doesn't work"
XTC
I
Ian Bell
Guest
xtc wrote:
Ian
What are you talking about?
Ian
A
Andrzej XTC
Guest
Mayba I said it in wrong way - it's "read only" for me
since I don't have yaho id and I don't want to have one
giving im my visa details to some "parental control" or else.
Unfortunately I accept only standard newsgroups like this one
and few bboards & forums.
XTC
P
Paul Burke
Guest
xtc wrote:
PCB satisfactorily, so I gave up. It seems rather counter- intuitive
compared with most CAD systems I have tried.
And the Yahoo group as a means of communicatiuon is just rubbish. I
signed up, translated a page or two of the manual for them, sent it
back, then Yahoo wouldn't let me back in any more after that. Maybe
Yahoo thought I put naughty words in the translation.
The KiCad thing looks a good idea, but having to think through the mind
of the guys who created it is difficult.
Paul Burke
I tried KiCad briefly, but never found out how to alter a track on the
PCB satisfactorily, so I gave up. It seems rather counter- intuitive
compared with most CAD systems I have tried.
And the Yahoo group as a means of communicatiuon is just rubbish. I
signed up, translated a page or two of the manual for them, sent it
back, then Yahoo wouldn't let me back in any more after that. Maybe
Yahoo thought I put naughty words in the translation.
The KiCad thing looks a good idea, but having to think through the mind
of the guys who created it is difficult.
Paul Burke