Pulsonix or Easy-PC ? with possible path to PADS
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Posted by on February 28, 2005, 9:33 am
Please log in for more thread options Hi, I'm setting up some electronics capability at my new job, and wouldn't mind avoiding the hefty price tags associated with OrCad and PADS, esp as we don't look to be doing much board development. The work will be mostly low-frequency analog, and I don't anticipate ever needing an auto-router. I've read favorable comments about both Easy-PC and Pulsonix here, and am looking forward to using one of them. It would appear that Easy-PC is a bargain, and that Pulsonix is priced in between Easy-PC and OrCad+PADS. Q.1. Any recommendations about the strengths of one over the other ? One concern I have is that sometime in the future I may want to ship a schematic out for someone else to lay out, and that would probably be in PADS. Pulsonix explicitly supports a variety of netlist formats incl PADS, so that's no problem. Easy-PC has native and generic netlist formats. The generic looks easy to read, but that doesn't mean PADS will read it ! I'm not too keen on writing my own translation program, simple though it may be. Q.2. Has anyone been down this road reading Easy-PC netlist into PADS PowerPCB ? Thanks for your help, -rajeev- | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Leon Heller on February 28, 2005, 8:12 pm
Please log in for more thread options They are out of the same stable, but are intended for different markets. EasyPC is more for low-end users and Pulsonix competes with PADS, ORCAD and Protel. It's arguably better than them and cheaper. I use it all the time. Leon | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by R.Lewis on February 28, 2005, 9:55 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> Hi,
There seems to be some confusion over what you are trying to achieve here.
> > I'm setting up some electronics capability at my new job, and wouldn't > mind avoiding the hefty price tags associated with OrCad and PADS, esp > as we don't look to be doing much board development. The work will be > mostly low-frequency analog, and I don't anticipate ever needing an > auto-router. > > I've read favorable comments about both Easy-PC and Pulsonix here, and > am looking forward to using one of them. It would appear that Easy-PC > is a bargain, and that Pulsonix is priced in between Easy-PC and > OrCad+PADS. > > Q.1. Any recommendations about the strengths of one over the other ? > > One concern I have is that sometime in the future I may want to ship a > schematic out for someone else to lay out, and that would probably be > in PADS. Pulsonix explicitly supports a variety of netlist formats > incl PADS, so that's no problem. Easy-PC has native and generic > netlist formats. The generic looks easy to read, but that doesn't mean > PADS will read it ! I'm not too keen on writing my own translation > program, simple though it may be. > > Q.2. Has anyone been down this road reading Easy-PC netlist into PADS > PowerPCB ? > > Thanks for your help, > -rajeev- > If you want to layout pcb's use a pcb layout package. You suggest easy-pc so why not try that? If you want a package to draw schematics (you do not mention simulation) then look for a schematics package that suits you. Why do they have to be the same? see terry pinell's excellent web page for suitable cad http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/ECADList.html for schematics only you can probably get a freeware/shareware that will suffice. see 'SCORE' in the above list. - there are probably others. Any schematic that produces an EDIF netlist can probably be transported to just about any layout CAD. If you are not going to do much pcb layout work stick to something like easy-pc else every time you come to do something you will spend *hours and hours* re-learning how to use your package. | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by on February 28, 2005, 2:59 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Right now, I want to do schematic + pcb layout. In the future I can see wanting to use the same schematic package, but giving the netlist to a design house for them to do the layout, presumably with PADS. I don't want to have to change schematic packages at that future date. Sorry if it was confusing. (And even sorrier if it still is ;-) -rajeev- | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by R.Lewis on March 1, 2005, 1:17 am
Please log in for more thread options
> Right now, I want to do schematic + pcb layout. In the future I can
> see > wanting to use the same schematic package, but giving the netlist to a > design house > for them to do the layout, presumably with PADS. I don't want to have > to change schematic packages at that future date. Sorry if it was > confusing. (And even sorrier if it still is ;-) > > -rajeev- In which case, as I stated before, why not pick out a schematic tool that produces EDIF netlists then you can either import them into your own layout CAD or send them to someone else to import into theirs. You do not have to pay much for such tools. You can pay a lot for E-CAD tools such as PADS, Cadstar, Protel,and the like, and usefull they certainly are: but they contain huge piles of bloatware aimed at the semi technical manager who sees an impressive list of functions for the price but which are of very dubious use in practice. | |||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Pulsonix or Easy-PC ? with possible path to PADS | February 28, 2005, 9:33 am |
| Pulsonix / EasyPC features | May 29, 2005, 1:08 pm |
| EasyPC Gerber "Dimensions" File Problem | March 15, 2007, 4:03 pm |
| ANN: Pulsonix Version 3.1 available | September 8, 2004, 9:12 am |
| Pulsonix V4.0 released | October 12, 2005, 11:32 pm |
| Something wrong with Pulsonix ? | May 29, 2008, 3:29 pm |
| Pulsonix - what a waste of time | September 7, 2004, 5:15 pm |
| Pulsonix Users Group | September 26, 2005, 5:31 am |
| flood over smt pads in PADS | March 13, 2008, 2:01 pm |
| How to highlight a path in Calibre? | June 12, 2008, 5:51 am |
| OT: Copy PATH from Windows Explorer ?? | December 20, 2004, 1:17 pm |
| anybody use PADS? | March 19, 2006, 4:45 pm |
| Via pads in mid-layers | March 15, 2005, 6:14 pm |
| PADS vs OrCAD | August 16, 2006, 8:46 pm |
| PADS PCB Translator | October 31, 2006, 1:17 pm |
>
> I'm setting up some electronics capability at my new job, and wouldn't
> mind avoiding the hefty price tags associated with OrCad and PADS, esp
> as we don't look to be doing much board development. The work will be
> mostly low-frequency analog, and I don't anticipate ever needing an
> auto-router.
>
> I've read favorable comments about both Easy-PC and Pulsonix here, and
> am looking forward to using one of them. It would appear that Easy-PC
> is a bargain, and that Pulsonix is priced in between Easy-PC and
> OrCad+PADS.
>
> Q.1. Any recommendations about the strengths of one over the other ?