Hi,
I'm about to ditch a HP IIIP laser printer which has a 4MB after-market memory card (fits the 'II' as well I believe) and the lower paper cassette option. If anyone wants the memory board and/or the cassette for FREE, please email me. As I'm in the UK, I'll obviously only send the memory board overseas. No catches, just that some member of the CAD community might be able to make use of them. Cheers - Joe
Hi,
Are There Any FPGA Families With Free Design Software? I have an older copy of Xilinx ISE that I think was free but the current version lists for $2500. Lattice doesn't list a price on its site.
I am a hobbyist (former engineer) so money is an object.
Thanks, Gary
If you are a PSpice Schematics User you need to be aware that Cadence and EMA-EDA will discontinue support of PSpice Schematics at the 10.05 Release.
You will then be forced to use (gag me with a spoon) OrCAD Capture.
I urge you to contact Cadence and/or EMA-EDA to voice your concerns.
(If you wish to E-mail me, please go to my website to obtain the current white-listed address.)
...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 | |
You could use LTSpice instead.
Since it outputs a netlist I've been thinking about making a script to convert its netlist output to PADS-2K format. This is mostly just for the fun of it.
I still use the Orcad DOS-386 schematic capture. It does everything I want done in creating schematics for making boards from.
I tried using the Windows Capture program on one project. It refused to let me add another sheet to the design until I exited the program and restarted it. Later on, it cleverly rewired my circuit putting a wire between every posible node pair. It is real junk software.
BTW: I also tried to layout a board with the Orcad PCB-386 once. What a nightmare that program was. I ended up sending the job out and abandoning the work I'd done.
Ever since Cadence bought Orcad, their decline has become a power dive.
Rant ... Rant ... Rant
-- -- kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge
Why?
Resistance is futile.
It makes no real business sense for a company to continue to support two products like this. they aint goanna change their mind on this one
Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk
My fall-back position is a PSpice look-alike that will soon be to the market. But everything, no matter look-alike, has a learning curve.
LTSpice is not general enough nor robust enough for my needs... I earn my living with PSpice.
[snip]OrCAD was crap long before Cadence got involved. I used OrCAD under DOS. When they tried to make their own windows-like version it went straight downhill, and **never** recovered.
You'd think, since they bought MicroSim, that they would learn what a user-friendly schematic tool really looks like, and incorporate those features into Capture... not a chance... that company must have the highest degree of NIH known to man :-(
...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 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Ah Paul, it isn't the similator that's the problem, it is the front end. Jim has a copy of LTSpice, but he REALLY, REALLY, REALLY LIKES the PSpice Schematics front end. He can continue to use his existing Schematics for a while, but if he upgrades to a later version of the simulator, he is going to have to manually run the simulations instead of running them from Schematics. He, reasonably, would prefer not to go through this pain. I fully understand, and sympathize... :-(
-- Charlie -- Edmondson Engineering Unique Solutions to Unusual Problems
I've been using Protel 99SE for a few years and it's become a good tool for me. It was the first PCB layout package I've ever used and the learning curve was a lot of effort and not something I would relish undertaking again.
I got a notice from Protel (now Altium ) that there was an upgrade path to Protel 2004. Their sales rep told me the user interface was different and would take some time to learn (how convienient).
My questions:
1) Does anyone on the net use Protel 2004? How does it compare to the Pads and Orcads of the world? 2) How much trouble to learn Protel 2004 already somewhat versed in 99SE? 3) Is it worth the effort to go from 99SE to 2004?Thanks in advance for any information.
Regards,
Fred
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Can you suggest an alternative simulation package for the serious electronic designer, Kev? LT springs to mind, but do you know of any others worthy of recommendation?
-- "What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.
Big question, very few people know more than one CAD package well enough to make an informed and unbiased comparison.
Much more than you would expect.
Ought to be a no-brainer but the answer far from simple.
Go to
I've been using Protel since 98, then 99, then 99SE, then DXP and recently
2004, mainly because I've just got in the habit of upgrading. The learning curve from 99SE to DXP/2004 is fairly significant. Lots of 'look and feel' differences and conceptual differences as well. My 2 cents would be, if 99SE is doing a good job for you - as it probably is - stick with it and save yourself the heartache and $.Bob
-- "Just machines that make big decisions programmed by fellas with compassion and vision." -D. Fagen (remove yomama)
Hi Jim,
It is pretty doubtful that even dozens of complaints will make them revoke that kind of biz decision. I don't remember any case where that was the case, except maybe automotive where customers were able to cajole manufacturers to continue a line for a few more years. But it almost has to involve the press, so in this case you'd have to get it into EEDesign.
Other than that it's back to things like DOS OrCAD. That was the most reliable CAD tool I ever used and I might dust mine off and start again. Another option may be Eagle but that's Windows based and the parts editor is not so easy to use in my view. But that program allows you to generate scripts that can do all kinds of stuff, even spit out a netlists modified to whatever Spice wants. Sometimes others write these scripts and then post them on the Cadsoft server. Pretty nice.
Regards, Joerg
Aaaaaarrrrggghh... this eliminates OrCAD/PSpice as the EDA program I would buy.
(I've used Capture. I've liked it, just I can't get used to it! :/)
[]s-- © Chaos Master. |"These wounds won't seem to heal Posting from Brazil. | This pain is just too real http://marreka.no-ip.com | There's just too much that time can't erase" (most often offline... ) | -- Evanescence, "My Immortal"
Fred, Besides reading the posts to the Protel EDA forum, join the forum and receive posts directly to your Email. The members of that listserver include many Protel professionals from around the world. If anybody can answer you questions or give opinions, they can. it is without doubt the best technical support system for a CAD package and the cost is "zero". If you gain from the forum I would suggest that you also take the time to participate and post advice for others when you can, nobody likes someone who is always just taking. The forum is essentially a user run forum so good solid participation is what keeps it alive.
In short, the biggest difference from P99SE is the Query system. It replaces the older global edits and ties into rules and other aspects of utilizing the package efficiently. You can download tutorials and white papers on using the query system from Altium/Protel's website. I would strongly suggest getting those materials and downloading the demo product. Then play with the demo product and run through all the tutorials. Check the website for all the tutorial and how-to materials as well. Then you will be in some sort of a position to make your the best decision for you based upon your own experience and the assistance/comments from users on the Protel EDA Forum.
-- Sincerely, Brad Velander "nospam" wrote in message news:g1dte0pb5k5krj5h2895q24fbhef353g4n@4ax.com... > Fred wrote: > > >1) Does anyone on the net use Protel 2004? How does it compare to the > >Pads and Orcads of the world? > > Big question, very few people know more than one CAD package well enough to > make an informed and unbiased comparison. > > >2) How much trouble to learn Protel 2004 already somewhat versed in 99SE? > > Much more than you would expect. > > >3) Is it worth the effort to go from 99SE to 2004? > > Ought to be a no-brainer but the answer far from simple. > > Go to http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com/ and read > some of the discussions.
I am not Kev, but I suggest SIMetrix. I have been testing the Intro version, it seems quite good.
PS: I have NO, ZERO, NOPE, 0, 0e+0, 0d0, NINGUNA, NENHUMA, NULL, 0.00000000 relation to Catena Software.
[]s-- © Chaos Master. |"These wounds won't seem to heal Posting from Brazil. | This pain is just too real http://marreka.no-ip.com | There's just too much that time can't erase" (most often offline... ) | -- Evanescence, "My Immortal"
In article , Jim Thompson wrote: [...]
The non-386 version of Draft did everything needed and was fairly easy to learn. The only really weird thing was that the quit menu was where you saved your file etc.
The 386 version of draft could and did use more memory. Other than that it was the same.
I'd always pictured it as a death spiral.
I think their idea for the macros in the Windows version is really cute. You can hook in any visual basic program you care to write so long as it interfaces to their stuff just right. If I wanted to write my own program, I'd write my own. Give me back the simple key press recording please.
-- -- kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge
Hi folks, I was using HSPICE today and did a .OP analysis, which gives a bunch of small-signal parameters. Are there cases where this small-signal parameters aren't going to make sense? I'm basically looking for parameters such as un, Cox, Vt, and lambda, to use for rough hand analysis. I have a modern short-channel device, and the parameters .OP gives don't seem usable for hand analysis.
The goal here is to take the parameters given by .OP, and use them for hand analysis.
Here is an example from the web of what kind of thing I should get:
subckt element 0:m1 model 0:nch id 252.5184u ibs 0. ibd -24.7482f vgs 1.4400 vds 2.4748 vbs 0. vth 700.0000m vdsat 740.0000m beta 922.2733u gam eff 500.0000m gm 682.4823u gds 2.4642u gmb 220.2702u cdtot 5.0000f cgtot 23.9418f cstot 18.5418f cbtot 4.000e-16 cgs 18.5418f cgd 5.0000f
For this web example, I can fill in the classic sat eqn. ids=k*W/(2*L)*(Vgs-Vt)^2 and get a close result for ids. Now in my case, with the short channel device, the parameters are not giving anything close for ids to what HSPICE gave.
Above Vdsat=Vgs-Vt=1.44-0.7=0.740. My MOSFET results don't even make sense...Vgs=0.9, Vth=0.6, but the tool is giving a Vdsat much lower than
0.3! I don't understand. :(One book I have suggests extracting these from I-V curves, which I can do... I just want to understand why the small signal parameters HSPICE is giving don't work with the hand-analysis equations.
I'd be happy to explain this in more detail, but if you've done a .OP analysis to get small signal MOSFET parameters I think this should be a good start.
Thank you!
P.S. I took BETA to be un*Cox*W/L which seemed to work in the above example. Is this right?
I still use Word 7.0. In 20 years time, why would I want to upgrade?
Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk
As you are probably about the furthest away from being a "serious electronic designer" in these NGs, what springs to your mind on this matter is about as valid as John Travolter's on the correctness of Scientology.
Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk
You spelled it wrng agan Kevin.
But with a quick glance, I didn't see any links to the scientology.
Maybe you know in general about the scientology, though? How does it compare with atheism?
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.