ORCAD vs EAGLE

Cadsoft's recent use of DRM

and their recent Screw-You policy toward paying customers *-*-website+reuse+paying.*+*-I-will-switch+cracked-*+*.would.not.help.*+zzz+after-*-*-version-*+copied+*.*.unlock.*.designs+*-*-*-*-exchange-*-*-*-*-third-party+reused+qq+*-*-single-bit-*-*-*-*+useless+*-*-*-projects-could-no-longer-be-opened is going to cost them much more than they will recoup from this idiocy.

OrCAD has been headed downhill for a long time.

's-new-policy-of-doing-programming-in-India-has-caused-lots-of-problems-in-the-new-releases *-*-*-agree-*+*-see-what-you-like+Protel.If+OrCAD.seems+slowest.growing+Accel-Bah+in-practice+inbetween

Have you looked at the prices of KiCAD and gEDA?

Hello Karthik,

I switched to Eagle. Was a longtime OrCad user but never liked their Windows stuff much. When they jacked up the prices big time I pulled the plug. Eagle is IMHO a much better deal. Also has a nice support forum which can be accessed via a newsreader and not some crummy web interface.

The downsides I saw with Eagle: No hierarchical sheet structure and I don't have the impression they understand how important that is. No secondary part fields but they promised to fix that. Also, since OrCad is still the de-facto standard where I live I cannot easily exchange schematics with clients. Just had that happen again yesterday.

You can download a free version and try it out. Library part edits are a bit more cumbersome than in OrCad but one does get used to it over time.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Both are dated CAD systems IMO. OrCAD's dev, or what is jokingly called dev, now emanates from India after OrCAD was sucked dry by Cadence. Eagle is, and always has been, a difficult to use tool. They are both very much products of the 90's and have had their day. The only thing Eagle has going for it is the free version. Before you spend money take one look at Pulsonix 4 and you'll see what a product from this century should look.

Prescott

Yup. Pulsonix has rabid advocates here:

*-*-*-*-*-*-limitations-of-*-compatibility+zzz+opening-PCAD/Accel-*-*-*-*-*-with-*-Pulsonix-*+*-*-*-*-*-any-serious-CAD-programs-*-can-*-make-a-net-list-that-has-the-*-package-information . as well as pragmatic admirers ?q=*-real-showstopper-bugs+import.ORCAD.schematics+Pulsonix+ORCAD.is.on.life.support.these.days+India+Cadence+get-fixed-*-*-immediately+zzz+DOS.version

(who are not blind to its shortcomings)

*-*-producitivity-*+*-have-nets-connect-by-copying-pasting-*-*-*-*-*-components-*-*-*-nets-on-top-of-*-other-nets++drawing-*-line-past-*-*-*-pins-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-doesn't-connect-*-net-*-*-*+*-*-Pulsonix-EasyPC-lack+*-make-*-*-*-*-two-click-operations-*-twenty-click-operation . . [1] In case you don't follow Joel's syntax, he's talking about *Pulsonix* patches.

Hello Prescott,

I don't know what else to wish for in a CAD system, other than what I mentioned in the previous post. So, what would be modern CAD systems? And here I mean somthing that doesn't cost as much as a Rolls Royce.

Had a hunch back then that this would happen. And then it did :-(

Not really, maybe except for the library editor where I do think that OrCad's was more intuitive. Eagle is from Germany and for some reason "cut" means "copy". Like usual in Europe they use lots of icons so initially I needed a cheat sheet that showed me that clicking on the marriage counseling icon really meant "duplicate". But after a few hours of practice you get the hang of it.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Hi,

What about PCAD and EWB ... ? I came to know that EWB is also good one. But, does it have all the necessary stuffs just like ORCAD, EAGLE , PULSONIX.

Further, i am interested in KiCAD, gEDA also. But, do those have all the necessary functionalities and easy interfaces just as ORCAD, EAGLE , PULSONIX.

Share your views regarding PCAD, EWB, KiCAD and gEDA.

Really, a big set of tools with vast features to download and check all the tools before getting on with one of them.

Thx in advans, Karthik Balaguru

Hello Karthik,

Except for EWB I don't know any of these from experience. For me a CAD system is like a pair of pliers, I try it out and if it works I buy it, then it goes into the tool cabinet and is used whenever needed. I don't spend much time to keep looking for a "better set of pliers" if the current ones work.

At a client I tried EWB but was not thrilled. For simulations I like LTSpice a lot better and for schematics Eagle or the older OrCad versions. In the case of OrCad preferably the old DOS version which I still have. It was (and is) better than anything I have seen after that.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

One of the first things I remember hearing about Pulsonix was that "it comes with its own cheerleader," that of course being Leon. :-) I like Leon, even if I do think he views Pulsonix through rose-colored glasses. Plus he has a cool web site.

Leon started and has maintained a Pulsonix users group on Yahoo! groups, which has about zero spam and lots of good, solid information plus some useful files -- I'd encourage anyone considering Pulsonix to go and take a look when they have the time.

---Joel

BTW... I should mention... I first ended up with a copy of Pulsonix as an inexpensive way to get ahold of John Warner's SIMetrix SPICE simulator. Since SIMetrix started being distributed by Cantena, the price rose significantly, and while they have added a bunch of extra features, for the features *I* needed Pulsonix was still -- by far -- the least expensive option. (John sold me on SIMetrix while I was in college... the college had a site license for HSPICE, and while almost everyone else was slugging it out through hand-entered netlists, I generally was able to finish assignments in less time with SIMetirx. In that case, I came upon SIMetrix because they had a student version that understood BSIM3 models, which the student versions of, e.g., PSpice didn't. Plus John Warner was still popping up on Usenet every now and again, having debates with the likes of Kevin Aylward of SuperSpice fame. :-) ) Later on we needed to do a few simple boards, and although we do have a copy of PADS kicking around for "high end" boards, it was easiest (and *much* cheaper than buying another PADS seat -- the outright purchase price of a Pulsonix PCB is less than we pay annual in PADS maintenance) to get a pin-limited upgrade to Pulsonix to lay them out.

As far as I can tell, "Pulsonix SPICE," as it's called, is not a particularly popular configuration; I think the number of times I've seen people on the Yahoo! group discuss it could be counted on one hand. That's a shame, I think, since the combination of Pulsonix PCB and SPICE is quite powerful and inexpensive.

---Joel

"KBG" a écrit dans le message de news: snipped-for-privacy@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Proteus...

Thankyou for all of your valuable responses & tips. I will try the demo versions also before deciding on this.

Regards, Karthik Balaguru

Hello Karthik,

Very wise decision, I did that as well. Make sure you also download the manual. You'll need that, especially for library editing.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com