Questions about Proteus - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 09:24:28 am
content: I'm thinking of buying Proteus but I'm a bit confused about the limitation of power planes. If I'm doing a power design where it makes sense to have a number of copper pause to carry high currents or to act as heat sinks this is mean I will not be able to do them? I would have thought the limitation on the pin count is already sufficient to stop people doing designs that are too complex.I'm also wondering about how we library management system works. I use more than one computer to do my work a home PC and my laptop which lets me do work on the go. With one licence would be limited to one computer? How would 2 different computers be able to access the same library files? At the moment are you KiCAD and I put all of my libraries in my dropbox so they are accessible from both computers.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 02:26:58 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 13, 2016, 09:24:28 amI would like to know the answers to these questions as well. (I'm looking at Proteus and trying to compare to Diptrace, Eagle, KiCAD).The power plane thing seems to be a major limitation though - I think it means you can't do things like having guards around pins (except as perhaps tracks) and you can't choose to use coplanar wave guide. You wouldn't be able to reduce capacitance with cutouts beneath key components and I suspect there are other things I might want to do and suddenly find myself stuck.The pin limitation is reasonable, if you want a more complex circuit you pay a bit more to increase from 500 to 1000 but if you're on the base version at £150+VAT~£180 and find you do need cutouts then you have to fork out about four times as much (£595+VAT ~£720) for the level 2 version. This is the main thing that is currently preventing me going the Proteus route.Of course these costs are trivial for commercial use, but for someone like me - a keen amateur/hobbyist I can justify 2 or 3 £100 but when it starts to look like £1000 plus ongoing costs if you want to keep up with newer versions then it is unaffordable.The trouble is I just don't know if the power plane thing is a real problem or something that can be worked around.An example of a possible problematic layout is that of Figure 2 of the LT3081 data sheet:http://cds.linear.com/docs/en/datasheet/3081fc.pdf

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 02:30:42 pm
content: I'm not sure if there is a limit on the amount of layers you can use. I think it's one power plane per layer whereas initially I was worried they were saying only one power plane. Yes it could become a problem where you want say a digital and analogue ground plane on the same layer. My designs at the moment are not too complex and as I am looking to make money with them I don't mind paying some money but I don't want to get locked into a software that is then going to be very expensive to get to do what I want. I'm also wondering about how the libraries are organised. I think I need to give them a ring. It's also not clear what they mean by 3-D viewer availability. I have 3-D CAD I don't need a 3-D viewer but I need a 3-D model which is a different thing. Dip trace is a bit cheaper although there 3-D modelling capability is an absolute joke because it cannot cope with external models I usually just fall over.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 02:41:04 pm
content: I am more concerned with say guarding voltage references - these might be very simple circuits but you want to prevent stray current/conduction as inthe LT3081 example that I added as an edit to my earlier post after your reply (a case of crossed wires).Reading these forums and looking at the various offerings I'm in a bit of a conundrum.DipTrace users seem a little unhappy with it and the pace of progress/development.Eagle people either love it or hate it and it is going to the web in the latest low cost version which I don't want to do.KiCAD, like all opensouce stuff (and I use a lot of it) is liable to be a bit inconsistent - some bits very good and other bits neglected.Finally Proteus is a bit more expensive and has difficult to assess limitations on the "cheaper" versions.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 02:52:45 pm
content: To answer a couple questions -Licensing is pretty well done. You can install on as many PCs as you want, but only 1 can run at a time. It checks your local NW to see if another instance is active.It also "registers" you on the Internet, IF it can make a connection. IF one of the PCs can't access the Internet, you get a warning, but good to go.Not sure how long you get, but I've had a couple running for a few hrs, by accident, our NW had died. It will simply shut 1 of the sessions down, once it figures it out :-)Edit: The pin limitation is on the # used in the Netlist. There are ways to get around this, worst case, smaller sections. There is a lot of detail somewhere, I think onthese forums.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 03:18:50 pm
content: I have heard of power plane limitations on the base version, but I don't believe there is any # layer limit. Only the # netlists.I personally hate power-planes, I've seen more failures from power planes than shoddy routing. If I need guards, I run the usual guard tracks, driven or passive.That way I can optimise the type of guard for each signal type. In most cases, in my type of work, good layout / decoupling etc eliminates the need for a true powerplane. I have used them in rare cases, usually DGPS etc. There ARE definitely times you have to use them, but I see too many designs that just have them in becauseeveryone else is doing it. YMMV.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2016, 11:29:44 pm
content: Proteus has 3D view like KiCAD, it can generate .STEP, .IGES and .STL for MCAD, for 3D models, you can specify geometry within the editor, or load .STEP / .IGES files, for mechanical model, for visual model, you can import vml / 3ds etc.Libraries, you can customise the library folder, so you can add your c:\users\xxxx\dropbox folder for example and create libraries in that folder, separately and share them for example.We have a licensed version, but don't really use it much any more.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 17, 2016, 08:00:11 am
content: ok I bought the basic version. In one word useless: The power plane limitation literally means power. I can only connect a plane to GND...... so so useless for SMD work. I'm struggling to create a manual plane for heat sinking with thick traces but to be fair need to look at setings first before i rule on that.But so far looks like this is only any good if you shell out £720

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2016, 09:01:58 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 17, 2016, 08:00:11 amCan you have multi-layers and use vias? Though this would require a 4 layer board presumably. Sorry to hear that you seem to have wasted your money, though I'm glad for the warning.I really don't understand why they've chosen this drastic limitation and then made it such that you have to go 3 price levels up to get around it. I find it frustrating because I'd like to support a UK company but they seem not to want business from anyone on a budget (hobbyists/small businesses etc).I suspect they chose the power plane constraint when most boards were through hole and have just stuck with it since.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 18, 2016, 07:47:09 am
content: The software is clearly throughhole oriented in it's limitations. But it seems quite nice so far. The plane/copper pour limitation is barking mad, it's either "vcc" or "gnd" and you only get one power tag which is also mad, I have a small design with 3 supply voltages in it so having a VCC1, VCC2, VCC3 beats running lines all over the drawing. there may be other ways around it I've not discivered yet.Nice software, it's just that they are so protective of it no one will get to urchase it and appreciate it.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 21, 2016, 09:23:57 am
content: Hm, new problem, how do I make manually placed via's attach themselves to the nets of the planes I have "dumped" them in.

author: Labcenter
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 24, 2016, 10:56:38 am
content: Hi All,We received an e-mail in support on this earlier this morning and I thought it might be worth replying in general to the issues raised here.The limitation with planes/copper pour is a single flood fill per layer. It's not limited in terms of which nets you can attach. For example, you may have a +5V and a +3.3V as well as a GND. Basically, any named net will appear in the combo box for assigning to the copper pour. A net will be named either by virtue of being connected to a named terminal or via a wire label making the assignment.So, to have split planes on a single layer (e.g. AGND and DGND) you need to have advanced feature set, otherwise you are fine. Here's some more detail :In Proteus, vias are treated as transient objects so they pick up the net to which they are tracked our routed. This connectivity is re-scanned and refreshed when the netlist changes, the project re-opened etc. Stitching to a zone is therefore done with pads. Place a pad, edit and assign to net. Then, either replicate or block copy as required. The clearance will default to that specified in the edit zone dialogue but can be overriden in the pad dialogue itself.Stitching pads (and vias in general) do not contribute to a pin limitation. As discussed above, this works purely on pins in the netlist.Licensing is, as previously mentioned, user based. No problem with a single user installing on laptop and desktop for example.I hope this answers some of the questions raised.Labcenter Support.Youtube Channel (PCB Design) :https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXLOTYmVieaIzPew-5TiWkSzlnEZTBxaFYoutube Channel (Tutorials) :https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXLOTYmVieaJVVR-xXM5pHRAXIoCAgjYA

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 26, 2016, 06:37:50 pm
content: Thank you LabCentre for responding with some answers.Though from my point of view, as a potential purchaser on a budget, the key question is how restrictive is the power plane limitation? And the answer seems to be very - given any need for mixed digital and analogue circuits, of surface mount or creating island and guard planes (though there may be work-arounds) or CPW.The related question is how much do we need to pay to avoid the restriction and the answer to that is the need to go to the third level up and pay approximately £720. This is not a lot to a largish commercial concern but it essentially is too high as a cost of entry for hobbyists or even small companies that don't produce a lot of boards.It will be interesting to get further feedback from Simon regarding the level 1 constraints, but I personally think it is not good customer relations to impose constraints that are difficult for new buyers to assess. The pin count constraint makes sense and the idea of buying in at 500 pins and then paying more if more are needed seems fair and reasonable. But the power plane constraint is hard to assess until you need to use the software (when it is too late) and the cost of removing it is high (£180 to £720 is a factor of 4 times).

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 27, 2016, 08:23:52 am
content: Quote from: jpb on March 26, 2016, 06:37:50 pmIndeed all you can do with copper planes is pour over the whole board you have no other option. You can stitch planes together as described by lab centre frankly I find the not being able to assign a via to a net a bit odd but if a pad is as good as a via then fair enough. I think a lot of the perceived problems come from the fact that Proteus does things in very different ways from other software although the result we are trying to achieve and will achieve is the same. I do find it rather bizarre that you cannot just assign a copper pour to any net but instead have to put a label on that net and then choose the label. Again it's not really much of a limitation just a strange way of doing things.As I have already said to them the limitations are very through-hole orientated. These days we use copper pours for very custom traces for surface mount work. My suggestion would be that if they lowered the limitations somewhat and the demo version had the ability to save a design with maybe 50 pins it would give people the opportunity to get a better grip on what software can do as it is not possible to learn how to use it and produce a design from start to finish without being able to save the design and it leaves you thinking the software cannot do what it can do in fact.I rarely need to go beyond 500 pins in my design but I will have to spend £720 to officially buy the capability of 3000 pins or whatever it is just so that I can use copper pours for power tracks. That is very disappointing as I am in a chicken and egg situation where lots of people have shown an interest in a particular type of product but until I go through the whole process of designing and building prototypes of the product nobody will be interested. So on top of the time and cost of making the prototypes I also have to shell out quite a bit of money from my point of view as I'm not really making any money at this game yet in order to get the software which will do it and then I may still never sell the product. Ultimately I will be buying level III but there is going to be some scrimping and saving 1st and hopefully somebody else doesn't beat me to it in the development.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2016, 04:57:27 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 27, 2016, 08:23:52 amActually £720 only buys you 1000 pins at level 2 (the prices are at level 1 in round number s £180 for 500, £360 for 1000, £480 for 2000 then you go to level 2 at £720 and go back down to 1000 pins).I think that for me, as a hobbyist where I don't expect to make any money, the cost of ownership is just too high. I think it would make much more sense if they just sold the level two software and perhaps allowed 500 pins at around £350 or they just stuck at £720 being the entry level and did what you said and allowed 50 pins for a trial version.The simulation stuff makes everything even more complicated if you want to make use of it with a massive menu of different options at different prices.The complication and the half hidden nature of the power plane restriction must be bad for customer relations. For instance, in your case you spent out a not-insignificant sum only to find what you have is "useless" for your purposes. Then do you spend four times as much or do you cut your losses and use something else? Either way, you've started your relationship with the Lab Centre feeling less than happy (I suspect) and probably slightly conned.On top of this, they don't seem to advertise what it costs to maintain the software (i.e. what you have to pay if you want updates after the first six months that you get with your initial purchase).Over all the cost of ownership seems to be made deliberately hard to assess. This is not unusual but is slightly disappointing.My current position is that I can't make up my mind between KiCAD (free, but a bit of a mixed bag from what I've read), DipTrace (cheap hobbyist option and some sing its praises whilst others comment that it isn't being developed or supported as much as it might be), Eagle (which is quirky and going the cloud route which I personally don't like) or Proteus which requires you to spend £720 whereas my budget is around 1/3 to 1/2 that for what I do.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 27, 2016, 05:13:07 pm
content: Quote from: jpb on March 27, 2016, 04:57:27 pmI was aware of the one plane per layer limit when I bought it. At first this seemed limited to "power planes" as that was the description. But it emerges that you can assign any net to a plane providing you put a pin label on it. Which is a bit weird but ok and poorly described. The description of features does leave you with questions.If you do a bit of reading the cost of ownership is apparent. I think it's 25% of buying it from scratch for an upgrade.Diptrace is a waste of time, they have just brought out version 3 with little extra functionality, now if I open a file with the new trial and then open it with my original licenced 2.9 version I get messages encouraging me to update. Diptrace is a waste of time and money. It has only one main developer who apparently has a family, or at least that is their excuse for slow progress. The autorouter is a joke as if you put a couple of copper pours in it stops working and can't route.KiCAD is good, I'd still use it for doing loom drawings at work as it's so fast to edit scematics, but I am loosing faith in it as they have done this new library organization scheme that is barking mad. A good theory but in practice it does not work. I had my PC not working it properly and then set my laptop up properly, only to find a week later that the laptop stopped working and the PC could use libraries so I am not willing to be at the risk of someone tinkering with an online library. I used only libraries on my machine but still got weired messages when trying to run the package assignment program so I think I'm giving it a miss. Free is great but people just do as they please with little consideration for legacy and constant funtionality.Proteus seems quite good but with it's quirks. I think once I have learnt to use it I will be very happy and it will be a very powerful tool that is very good at automating things. for example i can just draw a schematic, move straight to routing a board and then send my assembler the gerbers and BOM that are automatically generated. It all needs setting up but when i get round to it it will be sweet.The next option is Altium at £5000 (and you have to ask to know the price) I still get emails from their UK reseller thinking i will buy it - fat chance.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2016, 07:27:14 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 27, 2016, 05:13:07 pmThanks for the summary, it is useful if a little depressing in that it confirms the conclusion I was coming to that it is expensive to get a usable and stable tool. I think I was aware that Altium is in the "if you have to ask you can't afford it" category. I was hoping that I could get something in the few hundred pounds category. It is not just the cost - it is the time needed to invest in learning each system, I want to just select one and learn it not have to learn two or three as I have very little spare time and I want to spend it on fun stuff.I guess the best thing for me is to put some effort into KiCAD and see how things pan out before spending good money on one of the others.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 27, 2016, 07:29:52 pm
content: Well in my opinion Proteus will turn out to be best but does come out more expensive than diptrace but then diptrace does not work. KiCAD is still in development and i can't wait around. If you go on the forum with a problem the standard response is "we know - we are working on it".

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2016, 09:56:36 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 27, 2016, 05:13:07 pmYou don't have to use the online libraries - just download a local copy from Github and point Kicad to that instead of using the online master (which is the default). In that way you are sure that the stuff won't break behind your back if someone changes something.The package assignment program (Cvpcb) often complains about old symbol libraries that weren't updated yet and point to the old footprint names (the new ones are in the form library name:footprint name). Just assign the footprints by hand in that case and save the parts back in the symbol library from the schematic editor.One thing that has tripped me up is that they have changed the workflow a bit - Cvpcb now stores the assigned footprints in the schematics and to get them into the PCB editor you need to re-export the netlist! The old style workflow was saving these into a separate file.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 08:02:30 am
content: Yes I was trying to use off-line libraries and yes I still got messages about old format footprints despite the fact I had pulled these footprints from the new downloaded libraries or at least I think that's where they came from. The total lack of documentation and assumption that you will work out how to use it is not acceptable. I am running a business I cannot risk that one day my designs suddenly fall apart because somebody thought they were clever and I also cannot waste time troubleshooting problems with the software all the time. Dip trace is clearly a joke they have just released another version with I think less improved functionality than the previous update that we did not have to pay for yet now they want more money. There 3-D CAD capability is an absolute joke as it relies on models which were probably pinched from Ki CAD or generated from the same source and if you try to import your own models the whole thing just falls over. This makes dip trace a disaster for me as if I'm buying 3-D model capability I expect to be able to put models of components like connectors and transducers which I have to supply the models for. Obviously I can't speak for Proteus yet on this capability as I have to spend the extra money to add up to £720 but I suspect it might be better.A lack of ability of Ki CAD to copy and paste is an absolute disaster it causes me no end of trouble at work where if I do a vehicle loom layout I then need individual drawings of the looms. I can do this by taking a copy of the master vehicle file and deleting the stuff I don't need but if I were to do it the other way around and start with the individual looms I then cannot put them into a general vehicle schematic. I can live with this but it's not something I'm going to risk in my own business any more.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 09:55:59 am
content: I have to admit, in the beginning, Proteus had a excellent sales model. They had agents everywhere, (and here in OZ), had a free / hugely discountedschools model ( I even sold a few), had flexible no-penalty upgrades (you could chose whatever modules you wanted) etc etcIt was really doing well. But for some INSANE reason, they cut it back dramatically, no idea why. They sure lost ground FAST here in OZ.Luckily, I still have 3 full licenses :-) . I rarely use the "fancy" options, so can't comment on those. I have no complaints with it otherwise.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 05:57:02 pm
content: Maybe when it was under heavy development more licences were being sold? I don't know the history of Proteus has it been a mature programme for some time? Why don't they have representatives around the world? Did they stop that or did the resellers decide they didn't want to do it any more?I don't mind ongoing cost for a program that is genuinely improving. What I resent for example is things like solid edge in the 3-D CAD world who come out with a so-called new version every 6 months and you wonder what the hell they did to it as nothing much changes but of course very conveniently as soon as you open a file in the newest version of solid edge and then save it you can no longer open it with a previous version. This is clearly not an ever illusionary software incompatibility it is a forced limitation they have put on the software to try and keep people current and paying their maintenance contracts which I heavily disagree with considering there resellers aren't actually very competent at giving help in the software and the only person with any true knowledge has left the company.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 09:02:10 pm
content: I've been to some of the UK electronic design shows over the past few years (5 or so) and Altium, Zuken and Cadence have stands and sales teams crawling all over handing out flyers and the like, not once have I seen Labcenter, I see them on the back of various electronics related magazine covers, but that's about it.Thing is, Proteus is used in places like Plymouth uni, but I struggle to see anyone use it "professionally", some ask for Cadence, some ask for Altium (the majority in fact), some for CadStar (Zuken), even Pulsonix, and I have also seen quite a few accept EAGLE, but I don't think I have ever seen 1 (in the south west) company ask for experience in Proteus.We have one version 7 license, but nobody uses it apart from simulation, which it is particularly good at wrt microcontrollers and such.I like Proteus, and I can see why people useit, it does seem a bit behind the times in comparison to newer package version features, but I think if you like it, and are willing to pay the price for it (about £4k for the "full" version?) and it fulfils your needs, then use it! It's easy to use, quite a good interface, if the were to add a bit of high speed and multi trace routing like you can do on Altium it would be back in the game for me I think.Their forums are good also, their support people are top notch!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 09:14:54 pm
content: I don't think even in the UK Altium have a real presence there are a number of companies that resell software on behalf of software owners. I know that in the UK Altium is resold by another company which probably deals in a number of software solutions. The guy keeps contacting me trying to keep me interested despite the fact I have said that £5000 is well out of my budget and agreed that my limit of £1000 is something he cannot help me with which I knew. Eagle was bought up by Farnell so they probably have plenty of money behind them and Farnell of probably already at various shows. To be honest I'm not overly fussed about not seeing a particular company at shows. This whole show thing has become a money for old rope in itself and there are lots of people trying to start more of them in order to make money charging companies thousands of pounds for stands and of course behind every stand there was not just the cost of renting the space at the show but there are other logistical costs of getting the display stands transported and set up not to mention buying and designing the materials in the 1st place.What I'm more interested in is that they are a company that will be here tomorrow and will be willing to offer support and develop further features based on user suggestions.OrCAD or cadence or whatever they are calling themselves is an absolute nightmare to use anybody requesting it probably just happens to know the name and that it was once big but quite frankly I would refuse to use it. I used its Dos version at school and later got a Windows version and it was excruciating. It is probably good software for doing extremely complex designs but for the average user it's so overcomplicated you waste even more time. And no doubt it's extremely expensive.I have to say that what I am finding with Proteus is that it's a bit quicker to get parts set up and the automatic generation of a sensible bill of materials from the parts that I set up for myself using part numbers I wish to use is going to be a godsend once I get it all working.I have come across a slight hitch in that when you create a new schematic symbol you can't choose to hide the name or the value which is something you're allowed to do on the PCB footprint related to that part. I think this would be a good feature because if the bill of materials works as it should you don't necessarily need the value name of every part because you will just reel off the bill of materials and be able to see which part is which very clearly and because it's created automatically it's no extra work.What I am finding infuriating is that you can't actually modify a part except by overwriting it. Unless I'm missing something you have to "decompose" the symbol and then rerun the make device dialogue which allows you to set it up as a new part and assign a footprint to it and give it part numbers and ordering codes. If you make one mistake in all of that the only way to fix it is to decompose the part again and rerun the dialogue if you choose the same name for the part it will ask you if you are happy to overwrite the one you already have. This is a little backward in my view.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 09:17:40 pm
content: I'm also not sure about the datasheet linking functionality. It won't work from Farnell's website and it won't work if I upload the datasheet to my own server. So although there is server in the field name maybe they just mean the disc on your local computer.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 10:02:46 pm
content: Quote from: SimonYes, going back app 20+ yrs, there was a heck of a lot of development (naturally), and a high volume soldQuote from: SimonIt's one thing I always liked, VERY FEW bugs, and the ones that did pop up, were fixed fast.Quote from: SimonNo one would tell me the truth. One day, it just changed. Maybe they couldn't keep up with the high volume of student bases.Quote from: SimonI know EXACTLY what you mean ! I use a sheetmetal program, IronCAD. and like Proteus, I prefer it by FAR compared to SolidEdge, SolidWorks and a few others I'vehad to use (customer requirements). They do the same thing (regards backward compatibility) but LUCKILY, you can skip updates for a few years and NOT HAVE to payfor all the years you missed !! That SUCKS ! Plus I can use the older versions still.As for Proteus, there were only ever 2 major file changes. One was app 15 yrs back, and they make a conversion program available free, so that was fine.The other time, was a few yrs later, where rendering totally SCREWED UP and you HAD to send the files back to them to be fixed !! It was quick and free,but why they just didn't make another "patch" program, was a stupid decision IMO. They never gave a reason. Luckily, it was ONLY files created during a short periodof time, so I guess most people put up with it. I was popping out HEAPS of designs though, so it pee'd me off a little :-)As for updates in Proteus, I only update every 3-5 years, and there is NO "missing years penalty", so that suits me perfectly. They used to offer a DAMN CHEAPcatch-up, when I got to ~ 3-4 yrs (which I'd snap up !!) Just a couple hundred $$s, but they stopped doing that now AS WELL !! Dunno why.But it works perfect for me, so there's no way I'll change now.I note your comment on "decompose / make device" annoyance ... I'm not sure why you think it's antiquated? I love it, personally, even fixing mistakes.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2016, 11:08:47 pm
content: Yeah, Altium is sold by Premier EDA here in the UK

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 07:39:11 am
content: Quote from: Wilksey on March 28, 2016, 11:08:47 pmYes the guy find an excuse to contact me now and then to see if I have 5K to spare.I am guessing that the full 4K version of proteus is mainly bulked out with the advanced simulation and micro controller simulation addon's. I'd only buy the ones I need.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 11:59:55 am
content: Yes, it is their "Platinum" edition, if you look on the website it tells you, sometimes, by the time you add the bits you want / need / require, it is cheaper to go for the platinum version.I don't think Proteus has ever crashed on me either.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 12:35:40 pm
content: I'd only use 1000-1200 punds worth of it. I don't need simulation for every processor on earth. If you look at the total amount of software available most of it is MCU emulation packages and I only need one or two. Maybe if your a large company that has multiple users using the one license or have a vast array of technology spread it makes sense. Me I'd just go for the AVR simulator.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 03:54:32 pm
content: Yes, in your case you wouldn't require a vast majority of the platinum package by the sounds of it, there are a lot of complaints regarding the simulation around the PIC and AVR on Proteus, and whilst most of this is true in terms of what it can simulate, I haven't found a better simulator than the one in Proteus.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 03:55:54 pm
content: I guess it's the balancing of reality to expectations. I think people always expect a simulation to be able to replace a real life situation.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 07:42:38 pm
content: Is the smallest resolution for the PCB side really just 0.1mm ? drawing footprints is interesting, so may part is 4.3mm across, so I want to draw it around the origin, so I need to draw a line 2.15mm from the centre but now I have to pick between 2.1mm and 2.2mm

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 07:55:45 pm
content: I think I have worked it out. Software is Imperial not metric. It will go down to one thousandth of an inch but only down to .1 of a millimetre. So you only get one course of the accuracy in metric. A little bit backwards me thinks again the software is through-hole oriented where everything is based on imperial measurements. In the surface mount world which this software was clearly never have written for we use millimetres quite often.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2016, 09:46:23 pm
content: I guess you are on 8 now?In 7, Technology -> Grids... You can change the startup mode also.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2016, 05:46:38 am
content: Yes that works. Odd that they don't start with equivalent grid settings

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2016, 06:20:56 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 29, 2016, 07:55:45 pmNowadays a resolution of 1mil or 0.1mm is no good! You need 10 times that for comfort. Every now and then I set the grid of the PCB package I use to 0.05mm to get a trace between 2 SMT pads. Could the resolution limit be tied to the maximum size of the board?

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2016, 10:00:29 pm
content: Quote from: nctnicoWho the heck do you have that can do 4 thou and 2 thou !! I've never pushed my luck below 6 thou, with my std being 8 thou. Do you get any failures at 2 thou?I've never come across a resolution limit, but I have decided to stay on v7

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 07:37:56 am
content: Quote from: digsys on March 30, 2016, 10:00:29 pmIt is not about the width of the traces or clearances but you need the extra resolution to place pads/vias/traces so you can meet clearances while making a board as dense as possible. For example: if you have 0.45mm left between 2 traces you can lay a 0.15mm trace in between but chances are this trace has to be laid using a 0.05mm grid.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 07:56:35 am
content: I don't know what the internal resolution is. You have just 4 presets for the grid but you can specify them. I was able to change my 0.1mm setting to 0.05mm, I don't know how far it can go. I suppose on the one hand it's good that you can make it what you want but 4 standard settings does not sound like much.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 07:58:18 am
content: And in setting 0.05mm I still get the 0.1mm main grid with lighter 0.05mm lines which is nice as it's easier to see where I actually am, nice touch.Overall I'm happy with the software it just seems to do things in different ways and it can be frustrating.

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 08:30:37 am
content: Sadly the proteus isis ( they really should rethink the name now) does not simulate any of the STM32 chips

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 10:56:03 am
content: Quote from: hamdi.tn on March 31, 2016, 08:30:37 amWell as we haven't even agreed what we call that other lot and Proteus had the name first I think the other lot can blooming well change their name.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 10:57:34 am
content: Quote from: SimonNot sure why you have so many issues - I work on a 2x 27" 4K screens. My highest res is a 0.1 Thou grid (the pic has been downsized 1/4), usable is 1 ThouNotes: You can set up 4x Imperial, and 4x Metric defaults, so you can have 8 grid sizes instantly. Just press the M to switch.Use the Origin O, to line up the grid for very fine precise positioning. Again, just a tap of a button.Set the Design rules - Pad-pad, Pad-Track say 1 Thou smaller than you use, and instantly you see all the "errors" with exact clearances listed !!Then NUDGE the tracks and watch errors clear or appear. MAN it is SUCH a DREAM to use !! All instant.I literally make custom IC pads, as per pic2 on the fly, within seconds. Shave pin pads, sometimes even add tracks on unused layers to show me how many tracks Ican get out the corners of a QPF / LQPF for example. I assign all my common commands to a single HOTKEY, and man, can you fly !!www.pbase.com/digsys/image/1628974571thouwww.pbase.com/digsys/image/162897458custom

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 11:01:23 am
content: Quote from: SimonOddly enough, when they first came up with that name, I was fretting a little, as I often sent HEAPS of ISIS drawings to forums / sites all over the world.With all the mail tracking going on, with trigger words, I expected that one day my front door would blow open and me lying tazered on the ground :-)

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 02:27:16 pm
content: Quote from: digsys on March 31, 2016, 10:57:34 amIt's just getting used to it. Thing is with a combined PCB and fotprint creation environment you will end up needing more than 4 presets as you want high resoliution for drawing footprints but just enough when placing parts. Agan not a deal breaker just need to bear it in mind.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2016, 05:50:13 pm
content: Orcad Layout lets me enter the grid resolution I want (ctrl-g + a number + enter). That is also pretty quick. I don't recommend shaving off bits of SMT pads. The assembler may not like it.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2016, 10:11:48 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 28, 2016, 08:02:30 amAFAIK, you can copy & paste schematics. One thing you can do is to import schematics from another project into your current one, but copy & pasting used to work too. I recall it being a bit weird/non-obvious, though (don't have Kicad at hand atm). Here are some workarounds for it:https://forum.kicad.info/t/exporting-and-importing-in-eeschema/1796But yeah, this is one of the more retarded parts of Kicad

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 20, 2016, 09:07:50 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 31, 2016, 02:27:16 pmSimon, can you give us an update on how you're getting on with Proteus?I'm still sitting on the fence, and I find your balanced feedback very useful.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 12:11:39 pm
content: Well I am still using it. It's no worse than any other program and does seem to have more potential to improve. At the moment I'm going through the tedious process of creating all of my own parts because the library functionality is quite powerful and it would be a shame not to use it. At the moment the library is full of components from dishy key which will be more expensive and incur large carriage costs for me so I am checking out parts available from Farnell or RS in the UK but I am using mfr part numbers not wholesaler part numbers to describe each component. This is a double-edged sword because where I am not sure about a component value yet I do have to pick something although I could make up a set of non-descript parts so that there is no confusion in the bill of materials. Once I have said all of these parts up and created all of the footprints to go with them it will mean that in a click I get a bill of materials with all of the mfr part numbers which I can then just upload as a CSV file and instantly order.On the PCB side I'm quite disappointed with the mechanical capability. There is no way of actually determining the position of things like there is in other programs. I can't for example double-click on a pad when I'm creating a footprint and put in coordinates. There is a slightly more round about way of doing this which is a pattern command that allows me to make a copy at a set distance from the pad I am copying. If the pads are different I can then double-click on the new copy of the pad and choose a new pad style. This is rather a roundabout way of doing it but does work my preference is to just pick the pad I want place it and then give it exact coordinates following the footprint on the components datasheet. Similar problems are to be had if you are trying to do a board edge for example you cannot position the ends of lines with coordinates. What I do is just draw the border in a mechanical CAD program export it as a DXF and reimported into Proteus which is a lot quicker than faffing about in Proteus.I have successfully completed a couple of simple layouts so I am happy that I have reasonable command of the program now. I'm starting to redraw one of my projects in Proteus and I'm trying to use the hierarchical design functionality. This does not seem to be as simple as I hoped it would be and pretty much amounts to saving a project clip and then been able to import that clip into another project so basically a way of copy and pasting by using an intermediate file but you can store in a known location rather than have to keep going back to old projects. I did find the help file on this very confusing and I emailed them and got a prompt reply suggesting I ring them so I spent 15 minutes on the phone with somebody yesterday who was very helpful. From what I gather creating a modular design requires the circuitry of the module to be separately saved or copied from another project and the actual higher level module back contains that circuit to be saved separately which is a bit confusing. The idea is that if you create a sub circuit module you can import this into other designs if you then go into that child seat for that module and copy or import a project clip it would automatically populate all of the other child sheets if they are the same top level module. I do find this a little bit confusing and again it's a halfway house to what looks like an easy to use feature. I will have to do a bit more investigation there.They say they are planning to introduce the ability to put in coordinates of items in future versions which would be most welcome. Is almost like Proteus was designed to do a lot of advanced features but some of the simpler and more basic things have been neglected in their design but are still achievable in what would seem a more roundabout way if you compare to other programs but I suppose once you have learnt to use these methods it's about the same as doing it any other way it's just a different way of doing it and I suppose you can't expect everybody to conform to the same workflow otherwise we might as well just have one program.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 12:25:07 pm
content: Thanks Simon for the update.It sounds like Proteus is ok but not a magic bullet for simple pcb layout.Are you still using the basic version or have you forked out for the upgraded version?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 12:36:28 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 21, 2016, 12:11:39 pmThe inability to input coordinates would be a show stopper for me. In my current CAD package (Orcad) I use this feature all the time to put holes, buttons, LEDs, etc in the right place and angle. Messing with grids is just tedious. For your sake I hope Proteus gets this added quickly. I didn't know there where CAD packages out there which didn't allow to input coordinates manually!

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 12:49:36 pm
content: I just use the zero key. Make one reference point and drop everything from there. If it's a complex hole pattern, I put a transparent dxf or graphic on anotherlayer and use it as a quick reference. Never really wished for anything more. We all work differently I guess.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 12:59:25 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 21, 2016, 12:11:39 pmRight click on the pad -> move to, enter coordinates you want.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 01:01:05 pm
content: Yes there is the secondary "0" so if i am drawing a rectangle for a board I can find the location of the oposite corner, make it the secondary "0" and then use it as a reference to draw a box from to the main "0". I really don't know why they came up with such a roundabout method.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 01:02:48 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on May 21, 2016, 12:59:25 pmReferenced to where ? the main centre or the current position of the randomly placed pad ? I tried that but just went round in circles, quite literally. If it's referenced to the current location I suppose you can place the pad on the "0" but it's all a bit silly, there is a corrdinate system: USE IT.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 01:05:59 pm
content: Place temporary origin on some of the pads (press "o"). Use it as reference - zero x/y coordinates. Or either use global zero coordinate.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 01:06:40 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on May 21, 2016, 01:05:59 pmYes, again everything is possible, just with more steps.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 01:09:19 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 21, 2016, 01:06:40 pmI don't see a problem, either use temporary origin, or use zero coordinate. When you are moving the part, you already can see it's current absolute position (or relative if you want).

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 01:17:35 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 21, 2016, 01:01:05 pmDon't get what you are talking about really. You always can see the rectangle size you are drawing, first corner and second corner coordinates, and current cursor coordinate on the bottom.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 02:47:02 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on March 31, 2016, 07:56:35 amBase dimension size is 0.01 mm. IIRC it is written in the help.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 08:08:28 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on May 21, 2016, 01:17:35 pmYes but... to accurately place stuff you have to zoom in and it can get awkward. Of course if you want the centre of the rectangle to be the centre of the sheet it's harder. I don't want to be funny but it's the first time I work on a grid yet can't use it directly.

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 21, 2016, 10:26:56 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 21, 2016, 01:01:05 pmyeah it's a nightmare to draw stuff in proteusbut to be fair i don't think i saw any complet CAD when it came to drawing mechanical details, even altium. most of the time when i need to do precise things i draw in AutoCad then import it to Altium.however you can still do the same with proteus, you can import the board from an existing dxf file.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 22, 2016, 07:12:35 am
content: yes I did infact import my board as a DXF. but it is madening, diptrace is easier to use when it comes to placing things, you can create complicated shapes by entering coordinates.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 22, 2016, 01:26:15 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 22, 2016, 07:12:35 amIf you already know coordinates, it's not that difficult to create complex shape using closed path mode. You can create both straight or round shapes. Just watch cursor coordinates while drawing. Press "ctrl" for arc, if something goes wrong, press backspace, last point will be removed.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 22, 2016, 01:58:38 pm
content: I was refering to pads as well. But like the man said they are working on that side of it and seem to aknowlege that it needs work.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 22, 2016, 03:06:17 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 22, 2016, 01:58:38 pmThere is no difference between drawing the pads and board outline at all. Just take any closed shape and make the pad from it.

author: electrolust
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 23, 2016, 07:44:48 am
content: I just switched from Eagle to Proteus. I am a novice and hobby user so YMMV. I have commercial licenses for both.I liked Eagle well enough until I put it down for awhile and recently tried to pick it back up. With much of the functionality in the ULPs it was just awful trying to get back to fluent usage. Managing libraries is rather a PITA due to footprints and schematic symbols being intimately tied together. (Try updating all your footprints. I guess you can do it with a ULP but ugh.) You can't even look at a board from the solder side (ie, bottom).At half the cost (for entry level perpetual license), Proteus is quite a lot nicer. Still quite quirky and even after getting used to it, well there are warts. But it is modern and quicker and easier to use than Eagle. I look forward to playing with mixed mode simulation.I also evaluated diptrace and kicad, and found both pretty challenging.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 23, 2016, 11:34:49 am
content: diptrace is developing very slowly and they just ignore all issues and pretend they don't exist and if you push them just say "sorry we are a small company with only one main developer". KiCAD needs to be finished. It's lacking in a few things and the library management is um, peculiar.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 11:14:43 am
content: Before buy proteus take a look herehttp://www.pcbweb.com/This can be a more affordable option

author: electrolust
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 09:03:02 am
content: http://www.pcbweb.com/faqQuotesorry, that's a non-starter.AFAICT from the limited docs, it's an extremely basic package. eg there's no hierarchy support. there's no way to import footprints.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 10:48:23 am
content: lots of those around. If it's cheap there is a reason, why only digikey parts ? this is a problem I have in proteus, all of the parts are digikey, I can't order parts for a sample from digikey because the shipping is so expensive, I don't use stockist numbers, I always use manufacturers numbers so that I never screw myself over. I am having to recreate every single part in proteus but at least once it is done ordering parts is a dodle from any supplier of my choosing.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 01:06:05 pm
content: It's not so hard to make a 2 column excel sheet with any name you want x digikey, also Proteus does not import or export to any other platform, The pro's of proteus is that is really very easy to use .Also take a look on this another onehttp://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:07:27 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on May 30, 2016, 01:06:05 pmIs this a joke? It's very basic PCB software. No schematic, no nothing.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:57:27 pm
content: I actually bought a sprint lisence and found it so basic i demanded a refund. they were gracious enough to give one and i promised not to use the software not that I wanted to, that was about 7 years ago so I don't nkow what it is like now. It was no better than the PCB-express software.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 06:48:27 pm
content: Hello fellow fake RussianSprint Layout isn't a joke, is a very fast cheaper and interesting program extremely well made. But everthing for you is a joke bla bla bla blaIf you really do a board, and have used Sprint Layout you see that is easy fast and perfect for hand routing , KISS

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 08:13:18 pm
content: Yes but i like autorouting too, I forget how I fell for thinking that sprint had an autorouter but basic functionality like a ratsnest were being listed as features....and who's the fake russian ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 09:58:22 pm
content: I looked at Sprint layout's website and IMHO it is a very limited program. If you have a circuit with more than a few component you will want schematics editing etc so I think Kicad would be a better choice. But for anything serieus (professional) you'll need to spend a decent chunk money.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 10:38:30 pm
content: The point there is usability, it's fast and easy, Of course for anything more complex Altium is the way

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 10:50:37 pm
content: It is limited, but somethimes the simplicity of sprint is the benefit.A small circuit board, with not more than 10 componets, is very fastpaintedwith sprint.If the circuit is really simple and you do just a handfull boards during the year (or always the same boards) and your PCB manufacturer accepts sprint files directly ... it is a winner.I know some amateur radio guys who use this program very successfully. For antenna switches or packet radio stuff.A hobbyist and amateur level tinkerer should give it a try.Not all people on this world are able to handle a programm like proteus, altium, orcad, Kicad, etc. The complexity is too high. But they are happy with software like sprint and they love their hobby.So, why not?I encourage them to use it if it fits their needs!Cheershammy

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 11:31:29 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on May 31, 2016, 10:38:30 pmFast? Unless it's a one 8 pin IC with a few other components, it will be faster in Proteus. And even then it would not be faster in Sprint, you can make very fast pcb without the circuit in Proteus either. I know this because used Sprint for a few circuits ~ 1.5 years ago, and can say it's a pain in the ass. If the design has any serious complexity, it will be very slow process to draw the board and then all will need to be verified by hand. Because of this, it's very easy to not notice some error and pass the defect into production.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 01, 2016, 11:06:49 am
content: Quote from: wraper on May 31, 2016, 11:31:29 pmNo one will deny this. But a lot of hobbyist projects are just in that size. And if you design a pcb just twice a year you don't need more, even if a complex pcb would be created faster with a full scale software.Sprint is, for sure, not a software a professional EE would choose. Something like Proteus is the better choice in that case. But hobbyists are a different target audience.Anyway, let's talk about Proteus - the topic of this thread. Sorry for the derailment.Cheershammy

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2016, 12:56:57 pm
content: Talking about ProteusProteus it's also a nice piece of software but have some problems1) Extremely week library2) Does not import export to other platforms , specially libraries3) Frequently hangs4) To expensivePositive points1) Very easy to sue2) Nice simulator for processors

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 01, 2016, 02:29:41 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on June 01, 2016, 12:56:57 pmLibrary is fine. But who remotely serious uses libraries of unknown quality anyway (unless wants the problems later). Footprints can be imported from Library expert.QuoteIf you use crappily cracked one.QuoteDepends on compared with what.

author: electrolust
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 10:59:20 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on June 01, 2016, 12:56:57 pmcompared to what? cheaper than eagle unless you need multiple polygon pours

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 03, 2016, 06:39:22 am
content: Quote from: ebclr on June 01, 2016, 12:56:57 pm1) I'm not sure depends on what you want the library for. It's a pity you can't auto make a library using the passives of a particular manufancturer. But now my requirement for a library has gone from "a" resistor symbol to a symbol for every phytsical value used so that the BOM functionality works.2) yes shame I really needed to take an eagle jpb on and modify it.3) not so far but I am legal.4) really ? yes to get fuller functionality for a hobbyist it's pricy and it's a shame they don't come ut of the through hole era and into surface mount where planes are essential. but it's much better than diptrace and is that bit more pricey as you would hope, you get what you pay for and if I ring up they are willing to help, diptrace effectively tell you to get lost and when you press them just say that they only have one main developer and that he has a family now.....On the positive1) I think you meant use, I'd dissagree, it's nothing like I have used before and the mechanics is seriously lacking. in order to do a PCB edge it is quicker and easier to use my cracked mechanical CAd package to draw a shape and import it as a DXF.2) but you just complained about costthat's an added feature you have to pay seperately for.

author: electrolust
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 07, 2016, 08:07:20 am
content: Quote from: Simon on June 03, 2016, 06:39:22 amHow would such auto-making work? You'd still need to somehow inform Proteus of the part numbering scheme. And even if condensed to a single symbol, you still have to enter the properties dialog to change the value and partno. Choosing the distinct parts from the picker window may be easier anyway, not sure.Anyway I believe you can do such auto-making using the dump and pack library commands, and some external scripting. I can't find these discussed in the help nor can I find it in the forum (their search function is not so good), but I believe I read on their forum that the dump library will export a file per device in an ASCII format. So you can write out a set of ASCII files then pack the library from that.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2016, 05:27:41 pm
content: What about circuitmaker.com ?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 07, 2016, 05:32:28 pm
content: Well I made a footprint today and yes it was fast using the replicate comand.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2016, 06:25:55 pm
content: I see Proteus 8.5 has just been released, though when you try and download the brochure the 8.4 one comes up instead.The main new feature seems to be some sort of improved system for Arduino - presumably for education use. It also talks about GerberX2 output but I thought it could already do that?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 25, 2016, 08:32:35 pm
content: It seems they have also just totally revamped their website and it's the most un-comprehensible thing I have ever seen. It looks like they are now only running 2 versions of Proteus a basic one and the professional one which puts the price up in both cases I surely hope that is just a lack of updating the website. I have just paid half a months salary to update to level II basic so that I have mechanical CAD output and custom copper pours I hope the next time I have to renew my subscription I'm not going to be told to upgrade to level 2+ at a cost of £1200. It seems the more you tell these people they are shooting themselves in the feet commercially the more they shoot themselves in the feet as disastrous as dip trace is you don't know how bad program is until you use it and it is now much cheaper unless they have raised their prices too. I can't even see how you download the demo now the website is just a total mess and hopefully that accounts for the program seeming to increase in price overnight.I have indeed upgraded to level II now and am quite happy with the mechanical exporting capabilities. I'm not sure what practical improvements have been made to the program in this new release and the only way I have so far of applying it is to download it from the program itself. It seems they are putting a lot of effort into entry level staff to get people in like the Arduino staff to try and coherse new users but if they are now charging over £300 I think they can go and whistle for their new users particularly those coming from the free arduino camp. I don't see why i should have to pay through the nose for a program I want to use for serious engineering when they are more worried about writing software that helps people continue to pazy around with the ardino. If your marking a custom arduino PCB it's really time you just program the thing.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2016, 08:35:48 pm
content: Until have people to pay for sure they will do that

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 25, 2016, 08:36:42 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on June 25, 2016, 08:35:48 pmDo what ?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 25, 2016, 08:42:32 pm
content: After playing around a bit I have found the different licence versions. You have to click if you want standard or professional and then choose how many pins you want. Personally I find the thing very unintuitive once again they are shooting themselves in the foot. The previous method of just listing side-by-side the features was much clearer and easier to understand although I suppose it was also very clear to understand by how much you were being shafted because you have to go up to levels above the basic to get any real change in features. Nobody designed circuit boards that have more than 500 pins these days unless they are doing something so large they will warrant having the higher level licence anyway but in this case I have to pay for 2000 pins when I will rarely use more than 200 just so that I can get the features I need.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2016, 09:52:18 pm
content: I agree that they don't seem to know who they want to target. They used to give good discounts to education I think (though much less so now) so perhaps they are adding features that are attractive to education (simple simulation of Arduino) in the hopes of getting engineers used to their products early. And similarly for hobbyists.But I agree with you that hobbyists aren't going to be keen to pay even the base prices (the Arduino simulation is in addition to the standard starter price I think).Whilst, as you say, people paying for the professional system won't be keen to see all the money going for developments that are not relevant to their needs.Meanwhile, people like me sit on the fence not wanting to spend any money on a crippled version (in terms of the copper fills) but not wanting to risk the entry level price for the professional version because I'm a hobbyist not a professional user and can't justify the price.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 26, 2016, 07:21:02 am
content: I have already said to them that they should release a free version that does 50 pins rather than the current demo that does absolutely nothing. I have used 3 or 4 programs in the past and Proteus seems to be quite different from all of them where as all the others were vaguely similar in the workflow. This makes it very difficult to do a trial design from start to finish and create relevant libraries and footprints to see if the program will do what you want because you can't save anything, they could at least just lock out the ability to export Gerber's so that you can do a complete design and see if you are happy before buying. I only justify the expenditure because I am running a small business and even so it was a huge investment. I had to buy the starter kits just to see if the program was suitable so that was already £180 I may have wasted given that there is nothing else available it was a reasonable risk. As far as I'm aware the program has been pirated anyway so it's not like they are protecting themselves they are just making it more attractive for people to pirate the program has wants to pay money for something that may be totally useless. Personally I'm quite happy with the program but then I had a real incentive to get a decent program and I am further encouraged by the fact that one of our suppliers at work also uses Proteus and the work he does is a fine art so that is enough of an endorsement for me.

author: electrolust
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 30, 2016, 09:03:02 am
content: Quote from: Simon on June 25, 2016, 08:42:32 pm[Emphasis mine.]Sorry to say it, but you sound like the guy that complains about the Chinese taking away all the jobs then turns around and hacks the disposable Chinese scope you just bought. I mean come on, if you don't like the program and the pricing, it's simple. Don't pay for it and don't use it.The fact is, Proteus is the best entry-mid level software out there right now and it's worth the price.You want finer grained ala carte but Labcenter needs to pay their guys also so of course they are going to bundle. Not everyone is going to need ALL the features of the next level up. The pricing strategy is obvious and intentional and I think it's smart on Labcenter's part. Does it suck? Does it suck for your employer and your customers to have to pay you for your work? I mean jesus why are they paying you for all your accumulated expertise when really they only need a smallish 10% fraction of it.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 30, 2016, 11:34:44 am
content: Quote from: electrolust on June 30, 2016, 09:03:02 amIn my case they don't!The problem I have with lab centres pricing is that the next level or two only gives you more pins not functionality. It looks like they may have revosed that slightly on the new website and the pro starts with lower pins than the entry level ends so you can choose more pins or more functions but this has only just arrived.

author: jpb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2016, 05:37:22 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on June 30, 2016, 11:34:44 amI don't think this has changed at all. It was always the case that level 1+ had more pins than level 2. The prices haven't changed at all either. It is just the presentation on the web site that has altered.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 30, 2016, 05:44:18 pm
content: Quote from: jpb on June 30, 2016, 05:37:22 pmI see well I stand corrected then. but I would have offered custom copper pours earlier on and left the 3-D model capability in the higher version as that way at least you are getting something earlier on. Ultimately anybody who is serious will need a 3-D modelling capability and so will end up with that version anyway or it could be an add-on as not everybody wants it and maybe some people will want 3-D modelling capability earlier on. It's just that when you looked at the old price list which is now gone so it's hard to make a side-by-side comparison it was very obvious how for the 1st 2 or 3 versions you got no more functionality other than more pins. As I said overall I'm quite happy with the software.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2016, 03:40:27 pm
content: Altium did the parting shot on Proteus with price reduction on circuit studio to 999 USD

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2016, 03:53:59 pm
content: I'm not sure I want to touch anything Altium I can't remember what the functions of their circuit studio are but from memory its heavily limited. I think I'm quite happy as I am now although I will have to learn the quirks of the program.

author: kaz911
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 07, 2016, 07:34:35 am
content: I wonder who they think their target is with the new Videos. Seems like they are made for children? (Check the Visual Designer "demo" Video.....)