Orcad is a total piece of dog crap!

On Aug 25, 2:51 pm, Joerg
wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> > On Aug 24, 10:43 am, Alan Nishioka wrote:
> >> On Aug 24, 12:09 am, rickman wrote:
>
> >>> Once again, I found a way to lock up Orcad and lose all my changes.
> >> I disagree (with the subject line).
>
> >> I have been using Orcad 386 schematic capture for 15 years. It is
> >> powerful, fast and never crashes. But perhaps you are talking about
> >> layout?
>
> > So you are using a 15 year old program? I don't have that program. I
> > have a windows version 10.3. ...
>
> That appears to be the problem right there. I was never happy with any
> of the Windows versions of OrCad when I used one at a client. SDT-III
> under DOS was the way to go, best schematic capture since sliced bread.
> Then it was ported to Windows and IMHO downhill from there, so I
> switched away.
>
> > ... It has numerous features that cause
> > crashes. I wouldn't say they are frequent, but it is often enough
> > that I hate using it. Part of that is the closed format for the files
> > and such. So there is no way to pull information out of the schematic
> > except for the limited means provided by Cadence.
>
> > I tried learning Orcad layout once, but like most layout programs it
> > is very convoluted with roots in the dark days of DOS. I gave up on
> > that and now I use FreePCB. I haven't switched to an open source
> > schematic program. But once I complete my current work, that will be
> > near the top of my list of things that will help me get rid of Orcad!
>
> Please let us know what you picked and how it fares. I am currently
> using Eagle but about ready to switch (again!) because it doesn't offer
> a hierarchical sheet structure and the manufacturer does not seem to
> understand the importance of that. However, I want the next switch to
> stick since all your old schematics and libraries become essentially
> worthless thanks to the fact that EDIF was a mere flash in the pan.

I am pretty happy with FreePCB. I have used it to design two boards,
one a production board and another a test fixture for that board.
Both came out ok with only a small error on the test fixture because
when you do a copper pour and it is sliced by a trace, the software
has no way to inform you that the portions are not connected or that
an IC pin is now isolated. It still reports the IC pin as being
connected to the net if it is connected to the isolated region of the
copper pour.

I am now working on an update to the production board and I am finding
it to be difficult to import changes to the net list without FreePCB
ripping up the existing traces that are changed. Some of the changes
can be made in a stepwise fashion allowing me to incorporate them
without having to do a lot of rerouting. But other changes are more
difficult. I am trying to edit the layout file manually, but the
format is not fully documented and although it is text, it is not
immediately clear. On the plus side, the support forum is excellent
and I expect to have all the info I need in a few hours or at most a
day.

I would say that the only real down side to this tool is that for the
most part it is a one-man project and changes happen slowly. Also,
you may not be able to convince Allan that your request is useful
enough to make it into the code base. I'm not up on Windows coding
enough to tweek the code myself or I would make a few changes. It is
only available for Windows, but reports are that it runs fine under
the various tools for running Windows programs under Linux.

Rick

rickman wrote:
> On Aug 25, 2:51 pm, Joerg
> wrote:
>> rickman wrote:
>>> On Aug 24, 10:43 am, Alan Nishioka wrote:
>>>> On Aug 24, 12:09 am, rickman wrote:
>>>>> Once again, I found a way to lock up Orcad and lose all my changes.
>>>> I disagree (with the subject line).
>>>> I have been using Orcad 386 schematic capture for 15 years. It is
>>>> powerful, fast and never crashes. But perhaps you are talking about
>>>> layout?
>>> So you are using a 15 year old program? I don't have that program. I
>>> have a windows version 10.3. ...
>> That appears to be the problem right there. I was never happy with any
>> of the Windows versions of OrCad when I used one at a client. SDT-III
>> under DOS was the way to go, best schematic capture since sliced bread.
>> Then it was ported to Windows and IMHO downhill from there, so I
>> switched away.
>>
>>> ... It has numerous features that cause
>>> crashes. I wouldn't say they are frequent, but it is often enough
>>> that I hate using it. Part of that is the closed format for the files
>>> and such. So there is no way to pull information out of the schematic
>>> except for the limited means provided by Cadence.
>>> I tried learning Orcad layout once, but like most layout programs it
>>> is very convoluted with roots in the dark days of DOS. I gave up on
>>> that and now I use FreePCB. I haven't switched to an open source
>>> schematic program. But once I complete my current work, that will be
>>> near the top of my list of things that will help me get rid of Orcad!
>> Please let us know what you picked and how it fares. I am currently
>> using Eagle but about ready to switch (again!) because it doesn't offer
>> a hierarchical sheet structure and the manufacturer does not seem to
>> understand the importance of that. However, I want the next switch to
>> stick since all your old schematics and libraries become essentially
>> worthless thanks to the fact that EDIF was a mere flash in the pan.
>
> I am pretty happy with FreePCB. I have used it to design two boards,
> one a production board and another a test fixture for that board.
> Both came out ok with only a small error on the test fixture because
> when you do a copper pour and it is sliced by a trace, the software
> has no way to inform you that the portions are not connected or that
> an IC pin is now isolated. It still reports the IC pin as being
> connected to the net if it is connected to the isolated region of the
> copper pour.
>
> I am now working on an update to the production board and I am finding
> it to be difficult to import changes to the net list without FreePCB
> ripping up the existing traces that are changed. Some of the changes
> can be made in a stepwise fashion allowing me to incorporate them
> without having to do a lot of rerouting. But other changes are more
> difficult. I am trying to edit the layout file manually, but the
> format is not fully documented and although it is text, it is not
> immediately clear. On the plus side, the support forum is excellent
> and I expect to have all the info I need in a few hours or at most a
> day.
>
> I would say that the only real down side to this tool is that for the
> most part it is a one-man project and changes happen slowly. Also,
> you may not be able to convince Allan that your request is useful
> enough to make it into the code base. I'm not up on Windows coding
> enough to tweek the code myself or I would make a few changes. It is
> only available for Windows, but reports are that it runs fine under
> the various tools for running Windows programs under Linux.
>

Thanks, Rick, very interesting. I wish Allan would team up with other
guys who can and want to program. He seems not to be a young lad anymore
and having bought an interest in an airplane means he's going to be busy
in other hobbies.

gEDA would be great but they've made some staunch statements in the
direction of Windows users along the lines of "Either they hang up and
move to Linux or forget it". Without realizing that much of what us guys
must use plain does not work on Linux. So it'll remain a niche product.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg writes:
> gEDA would be great but they've made some staunch statements in the
> direction of Windows users along the lines of "Either they hang up
> and move to Linux or forget it". Without realizing that much of what
> us guys must use plain does not work on Linux. So it'll remain a
> niche product.

I don't recall saying this. I've personally tried to be open and
honest about our Windows support - it runs, but not as well as on
Linux/Mac, and we're working on improving it, but we don't use Windows
ourselves so progress is slow.

I recently convinced a windows-centric friend of mine to help with the
task, maybe we'll see improvement in the near future.

DJ Delorie wrote:
> Joerg writes:
>> gEDA would be great but they've made some staunch statements in the
>> direction of Windows users along the lines of "Either they hang up
>> and move to Linux or forget it". Without realizing that much of what
>> us guys must use plain does not work on Linux. So it'll remain a
>> niche product.
>
> I don't recall saying this. I've personally tried to be open and
> honest about our Windows support - it runs, but not as well as on
> Linux/Mac, and we're working on improving it, but we don't use Windows
> ourselves so progress is slow.
>

It was Stuart:
http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist.../msg00089.html

Quote "Also, patches which I -- and others -- have made to gschem & some
other programs have probably broken its ability to compile under
Windows. Therefore, you are currently SOL."

At the end he kind of sums it up pretty harshly:

Quote "In summary: Engineers too lazy or ignorant to move off
Windows should continue to pay $$$$ for lousy commercial software --
it's their punishment for laziness and ignorance!"


> I recently convinced a windows-centric friend of mine to help with the
> task, maybe we'll see improvement in the near future.


The main reason we are windows-centric is that a lot of stuff we have to
use isn't available any other way. VMs aren't always the answer and they
are extremely resource-hungry. Then there is hardware. I recently
pointed out a dead-simple and dirt cheap USB device (basically a switch)
that would have fixed a German poster's problem in milliseconds.
However, he used Linux, could not use it and now had to take a weekend
to design his own. In corporate life we can't do that.

gEDA could become really popular just like OpenOffice did. But without a
Windows executable it will not. There are too many folks like me who
know a lot about electronic circuits but next to nothing about
programming. Ok, I can program a uC to some extent but that's about it.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg writes:
> http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist.../msg00089.html

Note that that message is 3.5 years old. It also says that PCB is
unix-only and requires X11, neither of which is currently true.

> The main reason we are windows-centric is that a lot of stuff we
> have to use isn't available any other way.

I understand - I have lab equipment that only works under XP.

DJ Delorie wrote:
> Joerg writes:
>> http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist.../msg00089.html
>
> Note that that message is 3.5 years old. It also says that PCB is
> unix-only and requires X11, neither of which is currently true.
>

Maybe there is hope then. It's just that rash statements like that do
not exactly instill confidence.


>> The main reason we are windows-centric is that a lot of stuff we
>> have to use isn't available any other way.
>
> I understand - I have lab equipment that only works under XP.


And you probably have the liberty to switch that. I am a consultant and
have to connect to stuff at numerous clients, no liberty to switch here.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

"rickman" wrote in message
news:4bce247e-5dab-4ce1-99b1-8e5b789f201e-at-w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 24, 10:43 am, Alan Nishioka wrote:
> > On Aug 24, 12:09 am, rickman wrote:
> >
> > > Once again, I found a way to lock up Orcad and lose all my changes.
> >
> > I disagree (with the subject line).
> >
> > I have been using Orcad 386 schematic capture for 15 years. It is
> > powerful, fast and never crashes. But perhaps you are talking about
> > layout?
>
> So you are using a 15 year old program? I don't have that program. I
> have a windows version 10.3. It has numerous features that cause
> crashes. I wouldn't say they are frequent, but it is often enough
> that I hate using it. Part of that is the closed format for the files
> and such. So there is no way to pull information out of the schematic
> except for the limited means provided by Cadence.
>

Try upgrading to 10.5, as it fixes most if not all of the crashing problems
in 10.3.

Mike

Mike Anton wrote:
> "rickman" wrote in message
> news:4bce247e-5dab-4ce1-99b1-8e5b789f201e-at-w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 24, 10:43 am, Alan Nishioka wrote:
>>> On Aug 24, 12:09 am, rickman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Once again, I found a way to lock up Orcad and lose all my changes.
>>> I disagree (with the subject line).
>>>
>>> I have been using Orcad 386 schematic capture for 15 years. It is
>>> powerful, fast and never crashes. But perhaps you are talking about
>>> layout?
>> So you are using a 15 year old program? I don't have that program. I
>> have a windows version 10.3. It has numerous features that cause
>> crashes. I wouldn't say they are frequent, but it is often enough
>> that I hate using it. Part of that is the closed format for the files
>> and such. So there is no way to pull information out of the schematic
>> except for the limited means provided by Cadence.
>>
>
> Try upgrading to 10.5, as it fixes most if not all of the crashing problems
> in 10.3.
>

Which brings up a question: Is there a (reputable) dealer that sells
older versions? All I can find is the new version at Ema-Eda for
USD1729, they don't give a version number. Seems you are forced to buy
maintenance whether you want it or not. Great, huh? Considering that I
paid USD495 for my old OrCad license I find that rather outrageous for a
schematic capture software.

I have moved away from OrCad long ago but want to be able to read and
revise things in client's schematics. Of course I assume Cadence will
make sure that the millisecond a new version comes out I'll be toast but
my clients are mostly rather savvy about upgrades. IOW they don't do it
just because a new version came out.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

"Joerg" wrote in message
news:Nm1tk.8646$cn7.1277-at-flpi145.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Mike Anton wrote:
> > "rickman" wrote in message
> > news:4bce247e-5dab-4ce1-99b1-8e5b789f201e-at-w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Aug 24, 10:43 am, Alan Nishioka wrote:
> >>> On Aug 24, 12:09 am, rickman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Once again, I found a way to lock up Orcad and lose all my changes.
> >>> I disagree (with the subject line).
> >>>
> >>> I have been using Orcad 386 schematic capture for 15 years. It is
> >>> powerful, fast and never crashes. But perhaps you are talking about
> >>> layout?
> >> So you are using a 15 year old program? I don't have that program. I
> >> have a windows version 10.3. It has numerous features that cause
> >> crashes. I wouldn't say they are frequent, but it is often enough
> >> that I hate using it. Part of that is the closed format for the files
> >> and such. So there is no way to pull information out of the schematic
> >> except for the limited means provided by Cadence.
> >>
> >
> > Try upgrading to 10.5, as it fixes most if not all of the crashing
problems
> > in 10.3.
> >
>
> Which brings up a question: Is there a (reputable) dealer that sells
> older versions? All I can find is the new version at Ema-Eda for
> USD1729, they don't give a version number. Seems you are forced to buy
> maintenance whether you want it or not. Great, huh? Considering that I
> paid USD495 for my old OrCad license I find that rather outrageous for a
> schematic capture software.
>
> I have moved away from OrCad long ago but want to be able to read and
> revise things in client's schematics. Of course I assume Cadence will
> make sure that the millisecond a new version comes out I'll be toast but
> my clients are mostly rather savvy about upgrades. IOW they don't do it
> just because a new version came out.
>
> --
> Regards, Joerg
>
Well, we have always maintained maintenance on our packages. Many
CADD companies price upgrades to be the same price as if you had
paid maintenance since your last upgrade, so there is not much of a
savings to be had.

We currently don't plan to upgrade further than 10.5 as we also have
Altium Designer, which is supposed to read OrCad schematics. Our
plan is to dump OrCad as well, in favour of only paying maintenance on
one package, instead of two.

Mike

On Aug 27, 7:08 pm, "Mike Anton"
wrote:
> "Joerg" wrote in message
>
> news:Nm1tk.8646$cn7.1277-at-flpi145.ffdc.sbc.com...
>
> > Mike Anton wrote:
> > > "rickman" wrote in message
> > >news:4bce247e-5dab-4ce1-99b1-8e5b789f201e-at-w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > >> On Aug 24, 10:43 am, Alan Nishioka wrote:
> > >>> On Aug 24, 12:09 am, rickman wrote:
>
> > >>>> Once again, I found a way to lock up Orcad and lose all my changes.
> > >>> I disagree (with the subject line).
>
> > >>> I have been using Orcad 386 schematic capture for 15 years. It is
> > >>> powerful, fast and never crashes. But perhaps you are talking about
> > >>> layout?
> > >> So you are using a 15 year old program? I don't have that program. I
> > >> have a windows version 10.3. It has numerous features that cause
> > >> crashes. I wouldn't say they are frequent, but it is often enough
> > >> that I hate using it. Part of that is the closed format for the files
> > >> and such. So there is no way to pull information out of the schematic
> > >> except for the limited means provided by Cadence.
>
> > > Try upgrading to 10.5, as it fixes most if not all of the crashing
> problems
> > > in 10.3.
>
> > Which brings up a question: Is there a (reputable) dealer that sells
> > older versions? All I can find is the new version at Ema-Eda for
> > USD1729, they don't give a version number. Seems you are forced to buy
> > maintenance whether you want it or not. Great, huh? Considering that I
> > paid USD495 for my old OrCad license I find that rather outrageous for a
> > schematic capture software.
>
> > I have moved away from OrCad long ago but want to be able to read and
> > revise things in client's schematics. Of course I assume Cadence will
> > make sure that the millisecond a new version comes out I'll be toast but
> > my clients are mostly rather savvy about upgrades. IOW they don't do it
> > just because a new version came out.
>
> > --
> > Regards, Joerg
>
> Well, we have always maintained maintenance on our packages. Many
> CADD companies price upgrades to be the same price as if you had
> paid maintenance since your last upgrade, so there is not much of a
> savings to be had.
>
> We currently don't plan to upgrade further than 10.5 as we also have
> Altium Designer, which is supposed to read OrCad schematics. Our
> plan is to dump OrCad as well, in favour of only paying maintenance on
> one package, instead of two.

Have you considered any of the open source tools? I have not yet
switched schematic capture, but I am using FreePCB and I find the
support is much better in the user forum than I have gotten with *any*
commercial product.

When I my current project is complete, I plan to evaluate several of
the more popular open source schematic tools.

Rick