Lpc2000

To me its very much a cost issue. Eagle seems solid and competent. When 
I trialled 3V? a few years ago it seemed at least as good as protel on 
general usage, but not so good on library issues, i would have preferred 
it to Protel, but my then client/employer/partner (he was first a 
client, then apartner, then I worked for him)  insisted on Protel as 
they had used it in house for a while. Now it seems when you compare 
$800 vs $10,000 for protel or Pulsonix, they would have to be better by 
a country mile for me to justify spending the money on them, and, 
frankly I can't see it from here. 50% more mouse clicks has got to be 
better when used productively than when trying to find a match in 
Protels useless help system. I don't know about pulsonix, having never 
used it, but the price seems far too high for comparative functionality, 
ie  Pulsonix would have to have an awful lot more than fewer mouse 
clicks, a better librarian and some novel autoroute procedures (I don't 
autoroute anyway) to justify the price difference.

And referring to another thread, I don't think, in fact I know for sure 
that, in this business, you definitely don't get what you pay for, so 
price is not really a good measure of quality.

Cheers

Al

leon_heller wrote:

>--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Onestone <onestone@b...> wrote:
>  
>
>>My old package was like that, you could initiate an action without 
>>speciifying the target, it was one of the things I liked. But what 
>>    
>>
>I 
>  
>
>>really liked was the fact that it didn't use menus mostly, instead 
>>    
>>
>of 
>  
>
>>having to go to a menu and select PLACE-TRACK for example, as per 
>>protel, if I wanted to start a track connecting to an existing pin 
>>    
>>
>I 
>  
>
>>simply moved the cursor to a point close to tha pin, or wire 
>>    
>>
>endpoint 
>  
>
>>and right clicked, to change track orientation I double clicked, to 
>>    
>>
>fix 
>  
>
>>the track I left clicked, to start a track in mid air I left 
>>    
>>
>clicked, 
>  
>
>>since what you do on schematics is place signals, and what you do 
>>    
>>
>on 
>  
>
>>PCB;s is place tracks this seems too obvious to ignore to me. To 
>>    
>>
>move a 
>  
>
>>signal or track you click on the point and drag, try that with 
>>    
>>
>protel. 
>  
>
>>protel works in different ways between Schematic and Layout, how 
>>    
>>
>dumb is 
>  
>
>>that! And this is in every aspect, even library maintenance, for 
>>    
>>
>example 
>  
>
>>in SCH I can copy a part and then edit it and rename it, in layout 
>>    
>>
>I 
>  
>
>>can't, or it requires a wholly different mechanicsm
>>    
>>
>
>That is basically how Pulsonix works. A track (PCB) or net 
>(schematic) can be started anywhere just by double clicking. 
>Schematic and PCB work the same way, in most cases. When my previous 
>employer tried to get me to use Eagle, I found that it required about 
>50% more mouse clicks than Pulsonix when doing a design. I refused to 
>use it on health and safety grounds (I have suffered from RSI) and 
>they let me use my own copy of Pulsonix, after a lot of arguing.
>
>Leon
>
>Leon
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>  
>