| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Iain Wilkie |
Posted - 07 Jan 2012 : 10:19:20
Its round about this time of year I think the programmers come out of hibernation and start looking at what can be put into V16 to improve the product further.
Personally I would like to see the inclusion of tools for high speed design (now becoming the norm) .... for instance, there is aready a report sysyem that allows to you to get the lengths of specific nets to ensure they are all the same length within limits (great) .... however these nets may have to have series terminations at each end in which case there will be another two "bits" of different nets that need to be added to the whole. This needs to be done manually at the moment and is a real pain.
Also in order the get these nets the same length it would be great to have a "serpentine" tool that would negate the need to do this maually, again very tedious.
I still also think there could be a better library management system, bound libraries were introduced in V15 but it is not perfect and I am still strugging a bit with libraries.
Also the creation of BOMs seems to have inconsistencies in generating particular forms of this report, has never been the best in my opinion, s would be good if this could be re-vamped.
Anyway thats my inputs .... what about the rest of you, this is your opportunity to get your wish list to the programmers.
Iain
|
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| remi |
Posted - 26 Jul 2012 : 15:29:35
I don't know what you guys were expected especially Iain for this update... Remember last year a similar thread with very interested features was totally ignored by numbersystems. why would it be different this year? they will keep updating their useless libraries and we will keep complaining  |
| edrees |
Posted - 26 Jul 2012 : 09:59:06
Iain started this thread with,-
"Its round about this time of year I think the programmers come out of hibernation and start looking at what can be put into V16 to improve the product further".
Well it appears that they didn't look at the many useful suggestions and ideas presented to them by real users of this package. Perhaps it was too cold for them to wake up.
I wish that my Clients would do my Marketing Research for me free of charge! |
| Iain Wilkie |
Posted - 25 Jul 2012 : 18:45:23
What ????????????, are you joking !
|
| remi |
Posted - 25 Jul 2012 : 14:14:16
I think V16 answered pretty much everything you covered!
Hurrah V16 you rock! |
| toni9999 |
Posted - 16 Jul 2012 : 10:00:56
Is there a date for when V16 will be announced and for when it will be released?
Cheers,
Toni |
| toni9999 |
Posted - 05 Jul 2012 : 11:41:17
Would be nice if you could export and import a users settings including key shortcuts so they could be shared throughout the department.
T |
| jlawton |
Posted - 02 Jul 2012 : 16:12:53
quote:
Originally posted by toni9999
Would be nice if the back and forward button of a mouse allowed you to move between open sheets in your project i.e. the pages in the tab bar at the bottom of the EasyPC window.
It would be nice if the tab bar could be dockable to top/bottom/left/right of screen instead of being fixed at the bottom as at present.
John |
| toni9999 |
Posted - 02 Jul 2012 : 16:01:28
Would be nice if the back and forward button of a mouse allowed you to move between open sheets in your project i.e. the pages in the tab bar at the bottom of the EasyPC window.
T |
| toni9999 |
Posted - 02 Jul 2012 : 15:58:49
Would be nice if you could give a bus a name and wherever you use a bus and call it that name it automatically adds the nets which are defined for that bus.
We currently get lots of errors if a bus has even a single net different on different sheet the schematic DRC says that the net is only connected once to a bus.
Example
Bus on sheet 1
aaa
bbb
ccc
ddd
eee
Bus on sheet 2
aaa
bbb
ccc
ddd
eee
zzz
Even if zzz is not used all the other nets have an error from the DRC saying that they are only connected once to a bus.
Which is not true just a signal was deleted etc.
T |
| toni9999 |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 08:37:28
Looking at Eagle and possibly trying to steal some ideas from that.
The auto placement of vias whilst placing tracks looks like it could be useful. i.e. you draw a track and the package automatically places vias where you cross another track on the same layer.
Another feature that looks even better in my opinion is the DRC check which shows you images of the error instead of trying to work it out.
See the guided tour on the eagle site for these features.
http://www.cadsoftusa.com/eagle-pcb-design-software/guided-tour/?language=en
Another thing which i find extremely annoying about the DRC is component clashes. EasyPC things two components clash due to it squaring the irregular shape
___
|__|_
|____|
|__|
___
|__|
|__|
|__|
In the example above if you had a component of the shape on the top EasyPC would make the shape like on the bottom for its DRC.
This means if you try and place components in the two cut out sections you get lots of errors which i don't think are genuine.
T |
| toni9999 |
Posted - 25 Jun 2012 : 12:21:42
Would be nice if when Easy PC is opened from the start menu it didn't try to open the last project / files it had opened. Or this was a tick box option in the settings.
This is very annoying if you have multiple people working on the same PCB for different reasons (i.e checking the design) and then you try to do something else as EasyPC hangs trying to open the file the other user is currently using.
T |
| jlawton |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 15:17:29
quote:
Originally posted by DavidM
John,
If you promise to keep it secret between just you and me....
xxxxxxx
Well that's a few guaranteed sales then, many thanks.
John
John Lawton Electronics |
| DavidM |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 15:04:10
John,
If you promise to keep it secret between just you and me....
Yes, we've fixed this for V16.
David
|
| jlawton |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 14:58:22
quote:
Originally posted by DavidM
I know it breaks the rules I've just written about in another post, about not talking about what is coming in the new release, but...
Hi David,
any news on adding the option for individual pads of with/without thermal reliefs to the the copper pour. You said that were going to consider this for a feature? http://www.numberone.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=530
I'm won't tell :)
John
John Lawton Electronics |
| DavidM |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 14:23:42
I know it breaks the rules I've just written about in another post, about not talking about what is coming in the new release, but...
I can confirm that this will indeed be sorted for V16. If you enable spacing check of Board and Components, you will get an error marker at lower left corner of board for each comp that is in the bin.
David
|
| robhardy |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 13:21:32
I also have been caught out by this, it realy needs to be put right.
|
| edrees |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 13:17:15
quote:
Originally posted by edrees
Design Rule Checking.
This apparently doesn't check for components still left in the Component bin. Bit obvious I know, (until you thought the bin was empty and then you've later dropped something back in there and forgotten about it). DRC and Integrity check both miss this potential error.
Confirmed ..... this does need to be put right, its caught me out in the past, you think you have everything placed and connected an suddenly you find another component/s need to be squeezed in !!!
Iain
This has just caught me out again! Grrrrrrrrrr!
Hope this gets sorted in V16 please!
|
| toni9999 |
Posted - 22 Jun 2012 : 10:01:46
Small thing but when using dual monitors save all only saves the screen you select save all from
i.e. if you click file then save all in the SCM window it only saves the schematics.
The save is true in the PCB window.
Would be nice if save all saved both. |
| hodali |
Posted - 30 May 2012 : 20:06:35
1) It would be nice if it is possible to change the length of a track segment by filling in the properties dialog box (right click on the track and choose properties).
2) Design variants is also a useful feature
3) Backward annotation is missing. Eagle has backward annotation. Why not Easy-PC ?
4) Autoplacer
5) EMC lab
|
| Iain Wilkie |
Posted - 28 Apr 2012 : 10:25:05
You could create the block as a normal schematic/PCB layout and then simply copy and paste the schematic part and the pcb part into your new layout. However you would need to do this first as there may be net name conflicts.
Iain
|
| R.Redding |
Posted - 26 Apr 2012 : 19:09:29
I would like to add a pcb layout to a schematic block ..
I tend to use the same mcu's and it would be nice to create a schematic block for all the anciliary components and include a pcb footprint for that block aswell ..
so if I select a block to add to the schematic..the pcb layout is forwarded to the pcb in much the same way as a library component.
Having used Easy PC since 92 ...its one of the few programs that Ive used over that time that is very difficult/impossible to coerce into making sub assembly layouts...
Mainly because of the pads only subset of drawing tools..
Rob
Rob |
| jlawton |
Posted - 26 Apr 2012 : 13:40:52
Thanks David,
it looks like I will have to do a lot of component editing in the library to add these values to components.
Regards,
John
John Lawton Electronics |
| DavidM |
Posted - 26 Apr 2012 : 13:21:36
If you open any Component for editing (either from the Components tab of the Libraries dialog, or by right-clicking on one in a design and doing Edit Component In Library), you should be able to go to Properties from the View menu and find the buttons on the Values tab.
David
|
| jlawton |
Posted - 26 Apr 2012 : 13:17:19
Thanks for you assistance, I wish I had known before of the component values function!
quote:
Component value order can already be specified in the component definition itself, there are Up/Down buttons there on the Values page in the Properties dialog
Thanks, but can't find this. Should I be in schematic, Layout, Libraries or where?
John Lawton Electronics |
| DavidM |
Posted - 26 Apr 2012 : 12:43:51
Component value order can already be specified in the component definition itself, there are Up/Down buttons there on the Values page in the Properties dialog. You can't do it within the Schematic design itself on individual component instances though.
As for using CSV for component values, you can already do this from Settings, Component Values, there are Export and Import buttons on this dialog that would seem to do what you require.
David
|
| jlawton |
Posted - 26 Apr 2012 : 12:27:38
A couple of things regarding component 'values'.
Firstly the display of component values on the schematic - it would be nice to be able to change the position of items as previous poster requested, maybe with UP/DOWN order buttons, as presently depends on the order values are added/entered.
Secondly, could project components be exported AND imported as a CSV file so values could be edited in spreadsheet program. This would save a LOT of tedious work entering values in a schematic design and allow use of an in-house database of components with manufacturer and supplier codes etc. This would be most helpful. It could possibly be part of the reporting BOM function, or the Library function.
John Lawton Electronics |
| shuttlem |
Posted - 15 Mar 2012 : 14:51:55
A few things I would like to see, some of which have been touched on elsewhere in this forum...
1) I would like to be able to change a component's package without having the values change (perhaps have a 'change...' button next to 'package' on the component properties page, which would leave defined values alone, change the package and add any new values that come with the new package, or at least allow you to choose which values remain unmolested).
2) I would like to be able to display the shown values for a component in a horizontal line (space or comma separated) rather than under each other, or even be able to move them independently.
3) I would like to have a 3D model for an axial component that has been mounted vertically eg a resistor. This can be achieved to some extent using a can and offsetting it above a pad, increasing the legs so that they protude through the top of the can. If the can shape could have an option for linking the two legs (like an axial component's legs do), I could complete the illusion. If the can could also have its stripe radially rather than longitudinally (and colour coded as with axial resistors) and also have rounded ends, I would be a very happy bunny.
4) I would like text callouts to have a style to not only allow the settings that their property sheet reveals to be predetermined, but also to have a hide/show property so that you could create styles for say 'node voltages', 'Farnell/RS part numbers', 'things to do', 'calculations', 'hyperlinks/file references', 'PCB layout notes', etc, etc and then show/hide them as relevant for printouts for various purposes without them getting too busy.
5) When joining nets in PCB, when the dialogue comes up to tell you that the nets would be joined, rather than dictating what the resultant net will be called it would be good if there was a dropdown allowing you to choose which of the names of the two nets should be used.
Apologies if I've missed the obvious with any of these, I know some of them have workarounds, but usually not particularly pretty ones.
Mark |
| edrees |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 16:03:03
DaveP
'check for unplaced components' would be better.
Sorry, I disagree.
The default should be to check everything. Parts not fitted to the pcb can be signed off as "accepted errors" |
| davep |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 15:30:28
An option to 'check for unplaced components' would be better.
I often have parts which I require on the circuit for documentation purposes but are not placed on the artwork (transformers, fuse, panel pots etc). I prefer a clean DRC report. |
| Iain Wilkie |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 10:25:17
quote:
Originally posted by edrees
Design Rule Checking.
This apparently doesn't check for components still left in the Component bin. Bit obvious I know, (until you thought the bin was empty and then you've later dropped something back in there and forgotten about it). DRC and Integrity check both miss this potential error.
Confirmed ..... this does need to be put right, its caught me out in the past, you think you have everything placed and connected an suddenly you find another component/s need to be squeezed in !!!
Iain
|
