SuperSpice is now Free - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: mstevens
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2020, 06:07:33 pm
content: SuperSpiceby Kevin Aylward is now Freeware, per his sitehttp://www.anasoft.co.uk/. This is a very capable SPICE simulator with the emphasis on "engineering." From my discussions with Kevin years ago, he emphasized that SuperSpice is for the Engineer. I must say after using it he really did design it for an engineer, someone looking to get answers, not play with circuits. Thus if one took the time to sit and learn to use the software, with IMO does not take long then you can get answers quickly.My only gripe has been that the interface sometimes ghosts...Kevin is an Analog Engineer or at least he was when I last corresponded with him; this is why the package is not filled with fluff. He used it to do real work.It may work for your needs; so it may be worth investigating for some.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2020, 07:20:45 pm
content: Are all the circuit simulators going to be free nowadays? This seems to be the second package which is now for free. Did LTSpice kill the market?

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2020, 07:52:34 pm
content: If they will be free but not supported, they will become obsolete in no time and disappear.

author: mstevens
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2020, 07:56:51 pm
content: I doubt it.www.tina.com(I own a copy of this), Proteus, PSpice (I own a copy of this) and others show no signs of going free. Micro-Cap, and SuperSpice were/are one man products; and it seems rather than sell them as they retire, the owners decided to give them to the public.

author: mstevens
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2020, 08:00:19 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on January 04, 2020, 07:52:34 pmHmmm I don't know, just as they were made free, I suspect the owners will eventually realize that and then open the source. At which point, I am 100% sure both products will begin to be developed again, just MHO.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2020, 11:41:29 pm
content: Quote from: mstevens on January 04, 2020, 08:00:19 pmWould be nice.But I'm not entirely sure... I don't think we need to look at the source code to figure out that those apps (MicroCap, SuperSpice) are Windows-only, and given their looks and when they started appearing, it's pretty likely they used something like MFC, which is barely supported anymore by MS these days... Switching to a completely different framework would likely take a huge time...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2020, 01:19:56 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 04, 2020, 11:41:29 pmFrom the looks of it SuperSpice might be written using C# for the user interface.

author: Warhawk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2020, 11:45:12 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on January 04, 2020, 07:20:45 pmI work for a one of the semi manufacturers and visit customers all around the world. I have seen practically only pSpice and LTspice in use. Nothing else.As far as I remember, TINA TI is a one man show with the developer going to retirement soon, if not already. I personally find the biggest problem in spice models compatibility. Engineers want to download a spice model, import it in their simulation engine and use it. This is however seldom happening. SPICE comes in many flavors and it is quite normal spending half a day finding what is wrong in the model, starting from syntax and ending with unsupported directives. pSpice and LTspice became industry standards and offer most consistent results and user experience.My 0.02 USD.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2020, 01:44:22 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 04, 2020, 11:41:29 pmThis discussion actually boils down to today large adoption of open-sourcecode and mainly - complete open-source systemsThe "real-world" (outside the board desire of income) falls into simplerules but actually quite complex issues:- Software is written to one specific tool chain (compiler, libc, OS specifics canvas...)- Tool chains are getting incredibly obsolete quite fast- So does the underlying OS- Making money from license of (average JOE) OS and tool chains are more complex- Open Source code employs millions of eyes every day whole year- A single company with some hundred or thousand workers can not compete with this- it is becoming impractical due to complexity keeping source closed- not to mention specific security issues and several others things.Bottom line is that having source:- DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO COMPILE IT WITH OTHER TOOL CHAIN- Truth is you will need significant time and effort to keep software "compilable"- Not even mentioning that "engineering" requires precision and correctness- far different from what some minds define as "mainstream" (aka fast - average simple joe)Complex problem to maintain today software with paceand due to rising costs - questionable as wellPaul

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2020, 06:26:11 pm
content: Writing software for very long term maintainability is an art in itself and obviously requires making compromises (or you could say, not making as many!)And yes, in most commercial settings, compromises have to be made between development time and long term maintainablity... We have a few examples of software that has survived long term so far, such as the Linux kernel (30 odd years is not too bad). The way to get there unfortunately won't please many managers, and is often not compatible with what's done in a for-profit company.Also, it's notoriously much harder when GUIs are involved, are these are even more likely to use some kind of libraries/frameworks which long-term existence is often unknown (but usually limited.)

author: mcovington
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2020, 12:00:31 am
content: Slightly off topic perhaps, but how much does Tina add to Tina-TI? I've used the latter a good bit and like it. It may be sufficient -- I use a simulator for small circuits (to answer design questions), not entire pieces of equipment.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2020, 10:17:29 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 05, 2020, 06:26:11 pmTRUE.But i DISAGREE with above comment that sticking with some "UI" kitwould mitigate the problemsIt is just a question of how much time it resists from today rapid obsolete changes.Private corps. need frenetic cash money income...Most companies still follow the model which relies on "making new" paradigmand not "keep compatible".Proof of pudim ?Try to compile some MIX of latest GCC with new STL required interfacewith some 2, 3 old generations UI (like Wx or Qt)Soon you will find how bad things can goIn deep discussion things like INLINE ASM code just go wild w/new GCCThings like OpenGL code WITH THE PROPRIETARY CODE from vendorsjust don't fit.Unless you stick with some OS version and the proper tool chain...your chances of keeping things "running" diminish dramaticallyAnd OS vendors just follow the "deprecate" model.Chances are in 2, 3 "release" your base code is doomedStrictly a serious problem in GAMING and HIGH END Workstation softwarePaul

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2020, 11:33:09 am
content: Quote from: PKTKS on January 06, 2020, 10:17:29 amIn gaming not so much, given that 90% of games are developed for working during about the 6 months period while they are being sold. If they don't work properly afterwards, the company doesn't care anymore because they got 90% of the sales profits they would ever get from it already. Not every game is World of Warcraft or something similar that the company is able to milk (and thus needs to keep running) for 10+ years.Actually things like OpenGL are the least of your problems there:a) OpenGL backwards compatibility is pretty good, unlike the various D3D revisions (e.g. your OpenGL 1.x code from 1990s will very likely still work today without any changes).b) most games don't use it anyway (D3D is the prevalent API for gaming thanks to Microsoft, not OpenGL).c) most games don't use these APIs directly but use engines such as Unreal or Unity these days, which pretty much completely insulate you from the vagaries of changing APIs. (You get changing engine version and e.g. Unity is notorious for every version breaking something).A much bigger issue is e.g. server availability - how many even major games are essentially unplayable today because the servers for the game and/or its DRM have been shut down already.Workstation software is a very different kettle of fish with different needs (e.g. needing to make work a 20+ years old codebase and OpenGL direct mode drawing code with modern drivers and GPUs ...). But then someone like Autodesk has teams of people and decades of time to update the codebase as required.It was thanks to companies like this why we are still stuck with the compatibility profile in OpenGL - i.e. OpenGL 1.x and similar, so that they don't have to fix their ancient code (ever wondered why CAD is so notoriously slow when it comes to redrawing even small scenes, despite requiring huge amounts of horsepower?).The same for UI toolkits - yes, changing an UI toolkit is a very expensive and laborious thing to do but then you have plenty of notice when something is going to be deprecated. And toolkits like Qt are around literally for decades now, plus you can always maintain your own in-house version if required. The same about updating code for newer compilers (fixing deprecated/broken stuff, not necessarily rewriting to use the latest features) etc.I am not talking about gratuitous changes for change's sake but e.g. OpenGL 3.x spec has been released in 2008 - more than 10 years ago. And how many big name applications are still relying on the old, deprecated fixed pipeline stuff from OpenGL 1 and 2, even though it easily means 50% or more worse performance on the same workload?If the vendors had to keep compatibility at all costs, then no progress would be ever possible. Maintaining software doesn't mean you build it once and then hope that nothing ever changes, so that you don't need to update it (and when it does you blame the vendor instead!).The real problem is that this rarely gets the resources required, often things are fixed only to quench the worst fires with the least amount of effort possible because it is an old product that isn't making much money. Then the technical debt grows until there is such a mountain of it, that it becomes insurmountable.I wonder how you could work within the web development, where it is considered normal that your new framework gets deprecated withinweeksof its release and completely broken within a few months, that the paradigm that was the recommended way how to implement things is hopelessly obsolete and outdated few months down the road and the package and dependency churn make reliable and safe (with known security holes patched) production builds an impossible challenge ...(No, I don't consider the web ecosystem as something normal or conducive to good quality software, but whining about having to update software because of OpenGL changes of all things is completely ridiculous ...)

author: dzseki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2020, 11:34:02 am
content: Quote from: mcovington on January 06, 2020, 12:00:31 amFunctioinality, not much. The most obvious was for me, that right in the editor window you can switch on AC or DC mode so all your probes instantly become alive. Apart from that it has a wider selection of components, obviously Tina-TI is concentrated around TI products, a full version Tina has a wider selection of component types, like transmission lines and such. Also Tina TI is rather weak in digital circuits, full version contains a full featured digital circuit simulator as well, but perhaps this is less important these days.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2020, 12:34:30 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on January 06, 2020, 11:33:09 amIf you watch game servers today .. 90's games are still playable.Mostly thanks to the new APIs that includes *NIX as wellQuote from: janoc on January 06, 2020, 11:33:09 amIt holds true only for a subset - very recent high GPU demanding onesThanks to OpenGL Mesa and Gallium - together they can do a damn pretty job on X serversAND THANKS TO X.org being a damn bullet proof stable and rock solid APINo matter what some folks say as being "old" - in fact is really goodUnfortunately recently APIs like the "Vulkan" are not that kind with older hardwareAnd that will increase the "stronghold" of D3D ..Nevertheless WINE is an awesome and marvelous workaround for that D3D stronghold shortcoming..Making a wide range of games (and Workstation canvas) available in X(I mean X = Mesa + Gallium - not Wayland)Quote from: janoc on January 06, 2020, 11:33:09 amA *LOT* - and it is getting worse ..The "monetization" model of these APIs and "releases" are nottending to change to open specsSEEhttps://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/ea-bungie-banning-linux-gamers-in-battlefield-v-destiny-2.262622/https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/looks-like-ea-might-be-banning-linux-gamers-using-wine-to-play-battlefield-v.15706https://itsfoss.com/ea-banning-linux-gamers/Unless you use the OS they requireTHE VERSION THEY REQUIRE..You risk being discriminated and/or bannedQuote from: janoc on January 06, 2020, 11:33:09 amActually I see that "compatible" standard as goodIt allowed me to use some "vintage" GPUs in *NIX stations across last 2 decadeseven though "mainstream" market folks have done the impossibleto deprecate that hardware.It is not so easy now with Vulkan API being highly firmware dependableand vendors are not willing to put those firmwares public.You now need that bins loaded aside (or alongside) all the software problemsBest example I can remember is 90s Quake (very popular and still playable game)to Vulkan (dropping OpenGL)https://github.com/Novum/vkQuakeThis trend IMHO will soon hit other engines (UNINGINE alike)making that OpenGL compat. not so easy anymore...I see that as a bad thing - your hardware will be deprecated.Paul

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2020, 05:41:21 pm
content: Umm, sorry dude, I am a Linux user myself, but when someone speaks about problems with software maintenance and OpenGL in gaming software, then Linux gaming (which is a tiny niche inside of a tiny niche that are desktop Linux users) is reallynotsomething people understand as gaming issues ...

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 10:40:18 am
content: Quote from: janoc on January 06, 2020, 05:41:21 pmAgreed.It is small if compared to the user base of MS - reason being is quite simple:- driver performance.And that is still to be understandable:- Why in hell companies like NV and AMD are still using the closed source only model?While it may be niche the same logic can be carbon copy to CAD/EDAYou need the hardware drivers - and open source so they can be compiledwith the proper tool chain.. with increasing level of complexityRecent GPUs and vector instruction set requires proper CLANG/LVMwith GCC/libc match - not a trivial task..They just publish some closed "packaged" drivers suited to "some" distros.Obviously no private company today can fulfill "closed" packs for almosta thousand distros out there... not viable - just open source isWho in hell would pay U$3K or U$5K on a workstations WITHOUT theF*** video drivers? or the CPU/GPU microcode?While such model persists... things will be oddEnters the "compatible" level of APIs. (like OpenGL)Have you looked how DAMN GOOD RECENT GAMES ARE PLAYING IN WINE?Please do so.. you will be amazed with WINE magic thing upon D3DI bet people out there is not liking much that thing..they will put that dissatisfaction somewherePaul

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 11:14:46 am
content: P.S.Interesting addendum isVulkan-based translation layer for Direct3D 9/10/11which allows running 3D applications on Linux using Wine.Anyone trying to run CAD/EDA/3D intense GPU on *NIX shouldbe aware of that progresshttps://github.com/doitsujin/dxvkPaul

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 01:31:37 pm
content: I think that this is completely off-topic and there is little point to discuss/rant about things like GPU vendor business models here. There are plenty of other, Linux-specific, forums for doing that.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 01:37:53 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on January 07, 2020, 01:31:37 pmNah.the whole point is the complexity of "keeping the source code.."It is pointed the increasing complexity today of such task.I started pointing that this problem boils down to wide adoption of open-sourceSeveral tools today to develop Workstation software (canvas 3D acceleration)are **REQUIRED** (CLANG LVM compilers and proper API)If a company or developer today can not afford this pace...bottom line of making software free (as in topic)Increasing number of people just can not keep that pacereasons vary from tech to financialmaking it "free" available is ONE (increasing) alternativePaul

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 02:03:55 pm
content: Another interesting addendum to this "FREEWARE" problem..orHow can a company or individual(s) keep a project alivein such fast changing environment ( CPUs GPUs APIs etc)is Blenderhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)Blender started private, went "shareware" - died and resurrected asan open-source organization.It is today one very good example of 3D HIGH-END Workstation software successBoth as a Multi-platform software and as a business modelWorth addition to this "went free" reasonsPaul

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 02:06:59 pm
content: I thought we are discussing specifically superspice here ? Not bragging these common linux stuffs ?

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 02:09:53 pm
content: Blender is not linux specific-is now free - is not linux specific ...

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 04:30:30 pm
content: Quote from: BravoV on January 07, 2020, 02:06:59 pmFor the record direct to the point...This software can go to the list of "flawless" runners on WINE.Absolutely fast and fine ...The open source code would be a BONUS allowing long life andimprovements from other folks eyes...Paul

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 04:37:02 pm
content: AddingIncludes a nice usable working SPICE HELP as well..with large WINE fonts for wide screensPaul

author: Warhawk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2020, 08:37:29 pm
content: Quote from: PKTKS on January 07, 2020, 04:37:02 pmThank you for testing this. I will give it a try in WINE.Jiri

author: mstevens
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2020, 02:52:25 am
content: Quote from: PKTKS on January 07, 2020, 04:37:02 pmSecond on the thanks for testing Paul.

author: mstevens
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 02:18:56 pm
content: The source for SS is available, seehttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/eda/superspice-source-code//