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?
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).
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.
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.
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... 8-)
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 Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave
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!
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.
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! 8-)
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!
Yes, this is a common strategy for larger companies.
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.
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?
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave
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... 8-) ) 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... ;-)
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.
Yeah, understood. Thanks for the information Charlie; I appreciate your efforts to help out the numerous OrCAD users out here!
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.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.