PSpice Demo in Windows Vista

[Bob Penoyer]

I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?

 

[JeffM]

Bob Penoyer wrote:

I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

You don't indicate just how invested you are in that app.

If it isn't required by an employer or for a course,
there are others which aren't as restrictive (or not restrictive at
all).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.cad/browse_frm/thread/2705f2d33ed1cbef/75d21f82bb147dfd?q=alternatives+*.*.*.*.*.*.crippleware+free

 

[Bob Penoyer]

On 31 Mar 2007 12:05:01 -0700, "JeffM" <jeffm_@email.com> wrote:

Bob Penoyer wrote:
I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

You don't indicate just how invested you are in that app.
If it isn't required by an employer or for a course,
there are others which aren't as restrictive (or not restrictive at
all).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.cad/browse_frm/thread/2705f2d33ed1cbef/75d21f82bb147dfd?q=alternatives+*.*.*.*.*.*.crippleware+free

Thanks, but I use it at work and I'm very comfortable with it. I
sometimes use the Demo version at home for little tasks or to check
ideas. I DO want to have the PSpice Demo working on the Vista machine.

 

[Robert]

"Bob Penoyer" <bob@NOSPAMbobpenoyer.com> wrote in message
news:5glr0353j5o5j47c929tlkjhu04hufjg3e@4ax.com...

I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?

Any chance you just installed Capture CIS and not PSpice as well? They are
separate Programs and (IIRC) separate choices in the Install Routine.

Robert

 

[Bob Penoyer]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 04:31:22 GMT, "Robert" <Robert@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Bob Penoyer" <bob@NOSPAMbobpenoyer.com> wrote in message
news:5glr0353j5o5j47c929tlkjhu04hufjg3e@4ax.com...
I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?

Any chance you just installed Capture CIS and not PSpice as well? They are
separate Programs and (IIRC) separate choices in the Install Routine.

No. The whole OrCAD 10.0 Demo group is installed.

 

[Robert]

"Bob Penoyer" <bob@NOSPAMbobpenoyer.com> wrote in message
news:01uv03to0vsag7ah8en3iu0inm6l4imf1u@4ax.com...

On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 04:31:22 GMT, "Robert" <Robert@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Bob Penoyer" <bob@NOSPAMbobpenoyer.com> wrote in message
news:5glr0353j5o5j47c929tlkjhu04hufjg3e@4ax.com...
I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?

Any chance you just installed Capture CIS and not PSpice as well? They are
separate Programs and (IIRC) separate choices in the Install Routine.

No. The whole OrCAD 10.0 Demo group is installed.

Well, one problem I've heard of is any Installed Program that tries to write
to the Windows Directory or others that Vista considers "System" is
intercepted and made to write to one of the sub-directory off the Logged-On
User's Profile Directory.

It could be after the Program came up (or during install) it tried to write
configuration information to one of those Protected Directories (perhaps to
update an *.ini file) and Vista rerouted it to somewhere else. Now there's
not a complete *.ini file.

Try looking for where the old *.ini file is stored and look on the new
machine to see if it's set up the same way.

But watch out, apparently Vista does the same thing to you if you try and
"fix/edit" a file in one of those protective spots. The only way around it
I've heard is to copy the file from the protected spot to an unprotected
area, make the changes, and copy it back.

Robert

 

[Charlie Edmondson]

Bob Penoyer wrote:

I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?
Two things. First, take a look at the Project view, and see what is at

the top. It should have Analog/Mixed Signal there. If it has PCB, then
you won't have any PSpice tools available. Start a new project, making
sure you choose Analog/Mixed Signal. If you do it in the same directory
with the same name as the DSN file, it will inherit the DSN file.

Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not
been tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0
version. Folks always insist on taking old software and trying to run
it in new OS, and then complain when they don't work...

Charlie

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 07:58:57 -0700, Charlie Edmondson
<edmondson@ieee.org> wrote:

Bob Penoyer wrote:
I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?
Two things. First, take a look at the Project view, and see what is at
the top. It should have Analog/Mixed Signal there. If it has PCB, then
you won't have any PSpice tools available. Start a new project, making
sure you choose Analog/Mixed Signal. If you do it in the same directory
with the same name as the DSN file, it will inherit the DSN file.

Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not
been tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0
version. Folks always insist on taking old software and trying to run
it in new OS, and then complain when they don't work...

Charlie

I purchased full pro versions of both Win2K and WinXP. When I need to
replace a PC again, I'll just roll my own. I'm tired of Micro$hit
dominating my life with crap.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

 

[Chuck Harris]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 07:58:57 -0700, Charlie Edmondson
edmondson@ieee.org> wrote:

Bob Penoyer wrote:
I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
can't run a simulation without those.

Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
doesn't appear?
Two things. First, take a look at the Project view, and see what is at
the top. It should have Analog/Mixed Signal there. If it has PCB, then
you won't have any PSpice tools available. Start a new project, making
sure you choose Analog/Mixed Signal. If you do it in the same directory
with the same name as the DSN file, it will inherit the DSN file.

Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not
been tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0
version. Folks always insist on taking old software and trying to run
it in new OS, and then complain when they don't work...

Charlie

I purchased full pro versions of both Win2K and WinXP. When I need to
replace a PC again, I'll just roll my own. I'm tired of Micro$hit
dominating my life with crap.

...Jim Thompson

What's that I hear? Can it be? I think there's a new linux user a-coming!

For a giggle, take a look at:

http://reverendted.wordpress.com/2007/03/19/mac-vs-pc-how-would-linux-fit/

-Chuck

 

[Joel Kolstad]

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461cf7b1$1@news.cadence.com...

Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not been
tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0 version. Folks
always insist on taking old software and trying to run it in new OS, and
then complain when they don't work...

I don't really want to be the one defending Microsoft here, but *most*
problems that older software has with Vista has to do with "doing things" they
shouldn't have been doing for many *years* now anyway, such as writing to
non-user-specific parts of the registry, adding or changing system files, etc.

ORCAD 10.0 is perhaps old enough that it isn't reasonable to expect it to work
on Vista, but you can't seriously call yourself a professional software
development house if you haven't even begun testing your product on an OS that
was first released for beta testing well over a year ago!

 

[Chuck Harris]

Joel Kolstad wrote:

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461cf7b1$1@news.cadence.com...
Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not been
tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0 version. Folks
always insist on taking old software and trying to run it in new OS, and
then complain when they don't work...

I don't really want to be the one defending Microsoft here, but *most*
problems that older software has with Vista has to do with "doing things" they
shouldn't have been doing for many *years* now anyway, such as writing to
non-user-specific parts of the registry, adding or changing system files, etc.

Well, some of the problems with programs in Vista could be relative to the very
aggressive DRM protection junk MS added. For instance Vista scans every device
and part of the machine at a 30ms rate to make sure that nothing has been tampered
with. They software encrypt anything they think might be DRM'd that comes out
of a CD, or DVD drive before it hits the disk.

All of this DRM paranoia makes your machine run much better, I'm sure.

-Chuck

 

[JeffM]

Bob Penoyer wrote:

I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

Charlie Edmondson wrote:
Even the latest versions have not been tested
or even supported under Vista,
much less the old 10.0 version.

Jim Thompson wrote:
I purchased full pro versions of both Win2K and WinXP.
^^^^^^^^^
When I need to replace a PC again, I'll just roll my own.
I'm tired of Micro$hit dominating my life with crap.

....yet you are still paying the Microsoft Tax(tm).

Chuck Harris wrote:

What's that I hear? Can it be? I think there's a new linux user a-coming!

That was the 1st thing that crossed my mind:

WINE (www.winehq.com)--well, besides *whine*.
It couldn't do any worse a job for the OP than Vista did.

Has anybody run a CAD using the Windoze API replacement?

A Virtual Machine seems like another great notion.
I would call being able to kill -9 a process
a much better paradigm than rebooting the box.

 

[Chuck Harris]

JeffM wrote:

Bob Penoyer wrote:
I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

Charlie Edmondson wrote:
Even the latest versions have not been tested
or even supported under Vista,
much less the old 10.0 version.

Jim Thompson wrote:
I purchased full pro versions of both Win2K and WinXP.
^^^^^^^^^
When I need to replace a PC again, I'll just roll my own.
I'm tired of Micro$hit dominating my life with crap.
...yet you are still paying the Microsoft Tax(tm).

Chuck Harris wrote:
What's that I hear? Can it be? I think there's a new linux user a-coming!

That was the 1st thing that crossed my mind:
WINE (www.winehq.com)--well, besides *whine*.
It couldn't do any worse a job for the OP than Vista did.

Has anybody run a CAD using the Windoze API replacement?

The old dos orcad tools run just fine under dosemu,
LTSpice runs great under wine, and so does DesignCAD.

-Chuck

 

[Charlie Edmondson]

Joel Kolstad wrote:

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461cf7b1$1@news.cadence.com...

Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not been
tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0 version. Folks
always insist on taking old software and trying to run it in new OS, and
then complain when they don't work...


I don't really want to be the one defending Microsoft here, but *most*
problems that older software has with Vista has to do with "doing things" they
shouldn't have been doing for many *years* now anyway, such as writing to
non-user-specific parts of the registry, adding or changing system files, etc.

ORCAD 10.0 is perhaps old enough that it isn't reasonable to expect it to work
on Vista, but you can't seriously call yourself a professional software
development house if you haven't even begun testing your product on an OS that
was first released for beta testing well over a year ago!


Ummmm... No, I don't think so!

In corporate software environments, especially in the CAD world, they
have gotten bitten WAY too many times by the "Just develop for the BETA"
trap, only to find that the actual release software has gotchas out the
ying-yang for those stupid (and foolish) enough to work with the beta.
So, big companies wait until the actual, released software (actually,
until at least the first service pack comes out that fixes the worst
bugs) before trying to adapt to the new OS. THEN, they see what gets
broken by the new OS and work from there.

Of course, that still doesn't stop MS from then breaking the software
AGAIN with a new service pack. I mean, after all, if all your MSF
routines automatically register themselves, and then the OS starts
blocking the registry, how could that be MS's fault!

Charlie

 

[Joel Kolstad]

Hi Charlie,

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461d5a1d$1@news.cadence.com...

In corporate software environments, especially in the CAD world, they have
gotten bitten WAY too many times by the "Just develop for the BETA" trap,
only to find that the actual release software has gotchas out the ying-yang
for those stupid (and foolish) enough to work with the beta.

Sure, I agree, if you develop for a beta version of the OS, inevitably
something will change and some of your development efforts will have been
wasted. Still, this is no worse for Cadence than it is for Adobe or Corel or
any other software company now, is it? So, you spend, I dunno, 120% of the
effort required to get ORCAD working if you wait until Vista is officially
released by instead developing with the betas, but the upside is that you
impress current and potential new customers with your responsiveness. To many
customers, that's worth something. To me it's indicative ofa copmany that's
serious about their software development, rather than just thinking that
software development is a necessary evil required to sell a product to make
money.

Note that getting software to work in Vista really does tend to improve the
software's overall quality, since it forces programmers not to take as many
"shortcuts" as they've been allowed to do (but discouraged from doing so) for
some time now.

Given that ORCAD has had some absurdly stupid bugs in it for many years now --
e.g., the line widths shown in the symbol editor are, except for the skinniest
one, not the same line widths that are shown when you place a symbol on a
capture schematic -- I would suggest that Cadence should do everything it can
to promote an image of being serious about quality software development.

For that matter, just what are the ORCAD programmers sitting around and doing
these days if now working on Vista compatibility and bug fixes? There were
minimal changes between 10.5 and 15.7, after all!

So, big companies wait until the actual, released software (actually, until
at least the first service pack comes out that fixes the worst bugs) before
trying to adapt to the new OS.

Yes, this is a common strategy for larger companies.

THEN, they see what gets broken by the new OS and work from there.

Umm... but don't you think there's plenty of corporate goodwill to be garnered
if *your* package is *not* on the list of, "Things that break with Vista" by
that point? From what you're saying, I'm guessing that Vista will probably
have been out at least a year before ORCAD begins to work on it?

It's one thing if you're just a garage shop or some individual with a software
package that you sell for peanuts and the software can be considered, "as is"
with no expectations of upgrades or bug fixes or future OS compatibility
changes over time. But for what Cadence charges for ORCAD, they're clearly
not in this same league, and it's reasonable for people to expect a lot more.

Of course, that still doesn't stop MS from then breaking the software AGAIN
with a new service pack. I mean, after all, if all your MSF routines
automatically register themselves, and then the OS starts blocking the
registry, how could that be MS's fault!

By MSF do you mean... Microsoft Framework? Or something else?

---Joel

P.S. -- Another thing that makes ORCAD 15.7 look like something from a garage
shop software company is the NEARLY 100!!! exceptions that it sticks in the
Windows Firewall "exceptions" list. Sheesh! You can't tell me that's REALLY
needed and not just some ultra-lazy programmer's implementation of a
"workaround," can you?

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:24:39 -0700, "Joel Kolstad"
<JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi Charlie,

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461d5a1d$1@news.cadence.com...
In corporate software environments, especially in the CAD world, they have
gotten bitten WAY too many times by the "Just develop for the BETA" trap,
only to find that the actual release software has gotchas out the ying-yang
for those stupid (and foolish) enough to work with the beta.

Sure, I agree, if you develop for a beta version of the OS, inevitably
something will change and some of your development efforts will have been
wasted. Still, this is no worse for Cadence than it is for Adobe or Corel or
any other software company now, is it? So, you spend, I dunno, 120% of the
effort required to get ORCAD working if you wait until Vista is officially
released by instead developing with the betas, but the upside is that you
impress current and potential new customers with your responsiveness. To many
customers, that's worth something. To me it's indicative ofa copmany that's
serious about their software development, rather than just thinking that
software development is a necessary evil required to sell a product to make
money.

Note that getting software to work in Vista really does tend to improve the
software's overall quality, since it forces programmers not to take as many
"shortcuts" as they've been allowed to do (but discouraged from doing so) for
some time now.

Given that ORCAD has had some absurdly stupid bugs in it for many years now --
e.g., the line widths shown in the symbol editor are, except for the skinniest
one, not the same line widths that are shown when you place a symbol on a
capture schematic -- I would suggest that Cadence should do everything it can
to promote an image of being serious about quality software development.

For that matter, just what are the ORCAD programmers sitting around and doing
these days if now working on Vista compatibility and bug fixes? There were
minimal changes between 10.5 and 15.7, after all!

So, big companies wait until the actual, released software (actually, until
at least the first service pack comes out that fixes the worst bugs) before
trying to adapt to the new OS.

Yes, this is a common strategy for larger companies.

THEN, they see what gets broken by the new OS and work from there.

Umm... but don't you think there's plenty of corporate goodwill to be garnered
if *your* package is *not* on the list of, "Things that break with Vista" by
that point? From what you're saying, I'm guessing that Vista will probably
have been out at least a year before ORCAD begins to work on it?

It's one thing if you're just a garage shop or some individual with a software
package that you sell for peanuts and the software can be considered, "as is"
with no expectations of upgrades or bug fixes or future OS compatibility
changes over time. But for what Cadence charges for ORCAD, they're clearly
not in this same league, and it's reasonable for people to expect a lot more.

Of course, that still doesn't stop MS from then breaking the software AGAIN
with a new service pack. I mean, after all, if all your MSF routines
automatically register themselves, and then the OS starts blocking the
registry, how could that be MS's fault!

By MSF do you mean... Microsoft Framework? Or something else?

---Joel

P.S. -- Another thing that makes ORCAD 15.7 look like something from a garage
shop software company is the NEARLY 100!!! exceptions that it sticks in the
Windows Firewall "exceptions" list. Sheesh! You can't tell me that's REALLY
needed and not just some ultra-lazy programmer's implementation of a
"workaround," can you?

Vista hasn't been translated to Hindu yet ?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

 

[Charlie Edmondson]

Joel Kolstad wrote:

Hi Charlie,

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461d5a1d$1@news.cadence.com...

In corporate software environments, especially in the CAD world, they have
gotten bitten WAY too many times by the "Just develop for the BETA" trap,
only to find that the actual release software has gotchas out the ying-yang
for those stupid (and foolish) enough to work with the beta.


Sure, I agree, if you develop for a beta version of the OS, inevitably
something will change and some of your development efforts will have been
wasted. Still, this is no worse for Cadence than it is for Adobe or Corel or
any other software company now, is it? So, you spend, I dunno, 120% of the
effort required to get ORCAD working if you wait until Vista is officially
released by instead developing with the betas, but the upside is that you
impress current and potential new customers with your responsiveness. To many
customers, that's worth something. To me it's indicative ofa copmany that's
serious about their software development, rather than just thinking that
software development is a necessary evil required to sell a product to make
money.

Note that getting software to work in Vista really does tend to improve the
software's overall quality, since it forces programmers not to take as many
"shortcuts" as they've been allowed to do (but discouraged from doing so) for
some time now.

Given that ORCAD has had some absurdly stupid bugs in it for many years now --
e.g., the line widths shown in the symbol editor are, except for the skinniest
one, not the same line widths that are shown when you place a symbol on a
capture schematic -- I would suggest that Cadence should do everything it can
to promote an image of being serious about quality software development.

For that matter, just what are the ORCAD programmers sitting around and doing
these days if now working on Vista compatibility and bug fixes? There were
minimal changes between 10.5 and 15.7, after all!


So, big companies wait until the actual, released software (actually, until
at least the first service pack comes out that fixes the worst bugs) before
trying to adapt to the new OS.


Yes, this is a common strategy for larger companies.


THEN, they see what gets broken by the new OS and work from there.


Umm... but don't you think there's plenty of corporate goodwill to be garnered
if *your* package is *not* on the list of, "Things that break with Vista" by
that point? From what you're saying, I'm guessing that Vista will probably
have been out at least a year before ORCAD begins to work on it?

It's one thing if you're just a garage shop or some individual with a software
package that you sell for peanuts and the software can be considered, "as is"
with no expectations of upgrades or bug fixes or future OS compatibility
changes over time. But for what Cadence charges for ORCAD, they're clearly
not in this same league, and it's reasonable for people to expect a lot more.


Of course, that still doesn't stop MS from then breaking the software AGAIN
with a new service pack. I mean, after all, if all your MSF routines
automatically register themselves, and then the OS starts blocking the
registry, how could that be MS's fault!


By MSF do you mean... Microsoft Framework? Or something else?

---Joel

P.S. -- Another thing that makes ORCAD 15.7 look like something from a garage
shop software company is the NEARLY 100!!! exceptions that it sticks in the
Windows Firewall "exceptions" list. Sheesh! You can't tell me that's REALLY
needed and not just some ultra-lazy programmer's implementation of a
"workaround," can you?


Hi Joel,

Don't want to go into a flame war, but I speak with way too much
experience on this. Yes, I am talking Microsoft Framework, the tools
developed by Microsoft for development in the Windows environment. They
got everyone to use COM to communicate between processes, and then shut
down the communications channels, which is why Orcad and I am sure a
bunch of other vendors, had to patch in huge lists of exceptions for the
Windows firewall. You don't know the structure of the Orcad
executables, and neither do I (though I probably have a better grasp of
it... ) but I know that all of those exceptions were needed to make
SURE that the software would run, at least on most machines.

And, you must know that there are very few developers on the Orcad
product line at this time, and they must also share their time on other
products as well. I can't say more... ;-)

Charlie

 

[Joel Kolstad]

Hi Charlie,

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461d7490$1@news.cadence.com...

They got everyone to use COM to communicate between processes, and then
shut down the communications channels, which is why Orcad and I am sure a
bunch of other vendors, had to patch in huge lists of exceptions for the
Windows firewall.

I don't know of any "non-network" application (e.g., other CAD programs, MS
Office, etc.) that have to do this. I've done very little COM programming,
but what I have done used GUIDs and not IP addresses, so I'm not certain how
the Windows firewall would ever get a wiff of what's going on anyway;
perhaps they're using DCOM? (Although I couldn't guess why. The one COM
control I wrote a couple years ago still works, though, under WinXP SP2!)
So while I admittedly don't have knowledge of the structure of the OrCAD
executables, this "nearly 100 rules added to the firewall" strikes me as --
at best -- a patch while the programmers go and figure out how what they're
"supposed" to be doing.

And, you must know that there are very few developers on the Orcad product
line at this time, and they must also share their time on other products
as well. I can't say more... ;-)

Yeah, understood. Thanks for the information Charlie; I appreciate your
efforts to help out the numerous OrCAD users out here!

---Joel

 

[Chuck Harris]

Joel Kolstad wrote:

Hi Charlie,

"Charlie Edmondson" <edmondson@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:461d7490$1@news.cadence.com...
They got everyone to use COM to communicate between processes, and then
shut down the communications channels, which is why Orcad and I am sure a
bunch of other vendors, had to patch in huge lists of exceptions for the
Windows firewall.

I don't know of any "non-network" application (e.g., other CAD programs, MS
Office, etc.) that have to do this. I've done very little COM programming,
but what I have done used GUIDs and not IP addresses, so I'm not certain how
the Windows firewall would ever get a wiff of what's going on anyway;
perhaps they're using DCOM? (Although I couldn't guess why. The one COM
control I wrote a couple years ago still works, though, under WinXP SP2!)
So while I admittedly don't have knowledge of the structure of the OrCAD
executables, this "nearly 100 rules added to the firewall" strikes me as --
at best -- a patch while the programmers go and figure out how what they're
"supposed" to be doing.

Could it be that 'doze XP does something similar to what X does in unix land?

X was designed to run on remote workstation terminals, and as such
it expects to receive all of its commands over the network interface. In the
typical unix system, X uses the network "loopback" interface to make that
connection. So, the firewall would know about everything that goes between the
X client and the X server.

-Chuck