EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Electronics => PCB/EDA/CAD => DIPtrace => Topic started by: PedroDaGr8 on June 09, 2015, 07:33:10 pm
-
Alex just posted that the next beta is expected in 1-2 months:
New beta version will be released in 1-2 month. It will have major new features: diff pair support, ODB++ export, Gerber X2 support and (if we have time) customizable hot keys. In any case, cutomizable hot keys will be in stable release.
-
I'm looking forward to the customisable hot keys the most so that I can replicate the Altium shortcuts.
We especially need a single shortcut key (note a single key - no pushing ALT or CONTROL or SHIFT keys please Alex) to:
1/ Change grids from imperial to metric (the single shortcut key should "toggle" between the two);
2/ Set up different keys for different track widths so we don't have to right click, then manually enter the width we want;
3/ A single key for "measurements".
Just to name 3 that I think are important.
What other shortcuts would people like to see?
-
I'd like to see a github library integration or some other type of cloud/collaboration library. Diptrace is known for its ease of making libraries, but it would still be nice to have a clean way to share libraries on an on-going basis.
-
all I want is customisable one-key keybindings. I weep for that. as said above, no alt/ctrl etc. single ascii keys
-
all I want is customisable keybindings. I weep for that.
Alex has announced that this will be available in the final release of this next version :)
He also says that it might not be completed by the time the first Beta is released in 6 to 8 weeks time.
The final release of the next version is expected to be around October 2015.
-
Here is the latest post from the DIPTrace News Page dated June 24, 2015
We are testing probably the most anticipated feature – differential pair routing tools, which allow for dealing with high-speed signals on the board.
The new release will also feature an ODB++ and Gerber X2 manufacturing export capabilities, customizable hot keys, as well as expanded 3D and component libraries.
Looks solid. The Differential Pair and the Customizable Hot Keys are the two features that are in heavy demand. The expanded 3D and Component Libraries will also be welcome additions.
The ODB++ Feature is curious. It would appear this move is designed to shave off Market Share from its competitors.
In the long term I would think it better that they support IPC2581 Standard. But better to wait until the dust settles on that one. :popcorn:
Once the Differential Pair feature is debugged it would make sense that their next priority would be to expand the capability of the native Autorouter.
-
Here is the latest post from the DIPTrace News Page dated June 24, 2015
We are testing probably the most anticipated feature – differential pair routing tools, which allow for dealing with high-speed signals on the board.
The new release will also feature an ODB++ and Gerber X2 manufacturing export capabilities, customizable hot keys, as well as expanded 3D and component libraries.
Looks solid. The Differential Pair and the Customizable Hot Keys are the two features that are in heavy demand. The expanded 3D and Component Libraries will also be welcome additions.
The ODB++ Feature is curious. It would appear this move is designed to shave off Market Share from its competitors.
In the long term I would think it better that they support IPC2581 Standard. But better to wait until the dust settles on that one. :popcorn:
Once the Differential Pair feature is debugged it would make sense that their next priority would be to expand the capability of the native Autorouter.
I think the integrated routing functions are next on their list as well, so things like push-shove and the like.
-
all I want is customisable keybindings. I weep for that.
Alex has announced that this will be available in the final release of this next version :)
He also says that it might not be completed by the time the first Beta is released in 6 to 8 weeks time.
The final release of the next version is expected to be around October 2015.
I noticed the planned Version Number of the release is 2.9. Seeing as the current released version is 2.4 does that mean there will be 5 releases in the coming months or will all the upgrades be bundled into one release ? Any word yet on how this will go down ?
-
my guess is, if the beta is 2.9 the final will be a 3.0 and mark a new revision, and if it is a major version upgrade I wonder if we will need to do a paid upgrade for major version release...
-
my guess is, if the beta is 2.9 the final will be a 3.0 and mark a new revision, and if it is a major version upgrade I wonder if we will need to do a paid upgrade for major version release...
betas and releases keep the same verison number. With some of the reports of some of the major changes in the pipeline 3.0 will be a big upgrade and yes it requires paying for the upgrade but it is at a reduced cost. Going from 1.x to 2.x was 25% of full price (not off, of)
-
thanks for the info, thats nice to know.
-
my guess is, if the beta is 2.9 the final will be a 3.0 and mark a new revision, and if it is a major version upgrade I wonder if we will need to do a paid upgrade for major version release...
betas and releases keep the same verison number. With some of the reports of some of the major changes in the pipeline 3.0 will be a big upgrade and yes it requires paying for the upgrade but it is at a reduced cost. Going from 1.x to 2.x was 25% of full price (not off, of)
Don't they usually charge the difference between the New Version and the Old Version ?
-
I'm happy to pay for upgrades, but there's no way I'm paying just for differential pairs. I'll bet that the vast majority of their customers don't give a hoot about that. Look at their forums. We keep asking for basic interface fixes and enhancements. It hard to find anyone excited about differential pairs.
-
yep, the only thing I want is marked as the least important (customisable keys). I dont care about diff pairs, odb++, gerber x2 etc. if I needed differential pair support I'd be on a different higher tier product
-
Alex posted on the Dip Trace Forum this morning (27 July) that the Beta Version is in test and they anticipate release in 2 weeks.
-
yep, the only thing I want is marked as the least important (customisable keys). I dont care about diff pairs, odb++, gerber x2 etc. if I needed differential pair support I'd be on a different higher tier product
Maybe you don't care about Gerber X2, ODB++ or Diff. Pairs but those are features that are in demand by Commercial Houses that do work on High Speed Circuits and send their work out to large scale PCB Manufacturers. Cactus let me appraise you on a sales reality. Features sell things, Customer Support does not. Customizable Hot Keys will come in the next release or two. I would hope that Dip Trace would devote some effort to expanding the Default Component and Pattern Libraries with each release. They will find that large Production Houses are more likely to adopt their Software if the Component Symbols and Patterns are standardized. Even if it means having to break them up into separate libraries.
-
my guess is, if the beta is 2.9 the final will be a 3.0 and mark a new revision, and if it is a major version upgrade I wonder if we will need to do a paid upgrade for major version release...
betas and releases keep the same verison number. With some of the reports of some of the major changes in the pipeline 3.0 will be a big upgrade and yes it requires paying for the upgrade but it is at a reduced cost. Going from 1.x to 2.x was 25% of full price (not off, of)
Don't they usually charge the difference between the New Version and the Old Version ?
That is within different levels (ie Lite, Standard, Full, etc.). This is between version numbers which is 25% of the cost (so a 75% discount).
-
Maybe you don't care about Gerber X2, ODB++ or Diff. Pairs but those are features that are in demand by Commercial Houses that do work on High Speed Circuits and send their work out to large scale PCB Manufacturers.
people that want this stuff, need it yesterday, not tomorrow. if your work requires differential pairs, your already using altium, orcad, zuken. people who need it are not messing around waiting for diptrace who might get around to getting it right one day.
Its great to have more options (especially in hobbyist level pricing!) but if were talking 'Commercial Houses' not hobbyists. If where I worked needed differential pair work for our next control system for the new EPR nuclear reactor + power station going in in China, were not waiting for DipTrace to get it right in a release or two.
Features sell things, Customer Support does not.
diptrace adding odb++, x2, diffpair does not make it prettier to where I work. things that are pretty to where I work are 24x7 support, getting support on site on a sunday if needed, proper server license support like flexnet/flexlm, etc
Customer support sells HEAPS. IBM will drop ship a tech to replace a HD when the big iron phones home. if something goes down in our bigass simulation cluster, HP shows up on a Sunday. If our engineers have an issue with Catia or Solidworks? bam, instant support 24x7. you go into all hands crisis mode on a sunday at 3am and you want dedicated support.
customer support is like the highest thing on the list
-
It's a new trend that programmers adding features instead of fixing what they messed up before. I am wondering how many people will ever use differential pair routing together with diptrace. Their forum is full of bug requests for quite obvious stuff. Some of them repeat for years. It is a shame, it could be a really nice piece of SW.
-
It's a new trend that programmers adding features instead of fixing what they messed up before.
I do think that is a general rule of developers without strong management.
Fixing bugs is boring. Dreaming up new stuff is sexy. Ergo - bugs do not get corrected in any product unless it either annoys the developer OR a manager kicks them in the b*lls or what ever part will hurt.
In my old company we did a "once a year" 2-3 months 100% focus on fixing all non-sexy stuff to combat that exact issue type. Solid bonus round for all if all issues got fixed. And all the MOST boring one's got highest priority. Developers had a lot of normal "free range" but during that time - no other focus was allowed.
-
It's a new trend that programmers adding features instead of fixing what they messed up before.
In my old company we did a "once a year" 2-3 months 100% focus on fixing all non-sexy stuff to combat that exact issue type. Solid bonus round for all if all issues got fixed. And all the MOST boring one's got highest priority. Developers had a lot of normal "free range" but during that time - no other focus was allowed.
I love it ! :-+
-
Stanislav Ruev posted in the Dip Trace Forum News and Events Thread that DIP Trace 2.9 was released this morning (12-Aug). The features are pretty much what we have been told over the last month.
The Differential Pairs Feature is not completely implemented. Here is a quote from the announcement But you can not do some things like phase tuning or free net routing yet - we plan to complete this feature together with adding "meanders" and "trace length match" till release of 3.0.
No additional information on the time frame for release of 3.0 was given. Previous communications have hinted the time frame is on the order of several months
A Freeware Version and a 90 Day Trial Version can be obtained on the Dip Trace Download Page.
-
I have not run any of the beta's but I noticed in some updates they listed;
2. Configurable hotkeys (see Tools / Hotkey Settings). Now all hotkeys can be changed and you can assign hotkey to almost any tool of the program. If you can not assign hotkey to any tool/command you need, please let us know
whooo! anyone tried it? does it let you have hotkey like 'n' for net, or is everything CTRL something or ALT something? does it let you just have single key hotkeys?
-
BloodyCactus,
Yes it lets you assign single keys.
-
Now that DipTrace Beta 2.9 has been out for 6 weeks, what are other users opinions on this?
-
Now that DipTrace Beta 2.9 has been out for 6 weeks, what are other users opinions on this?
I use a program to make small panels of PCBs so I can use up all the space in the 10cmX10cm option from DirtyPCBs, the files that DipTrace outputs have always given me problems. This beta is the first version of DipTrace where I never have a problem with the files it outputs.
I love the hotkey settings.
The font is prettier.
That is all I have right now.
-
Been using it for several weeks. Although there has been some change in the library management over 2.4, it is still very clumsy to use. Developing a library of considerable size of not-popular components (think large through hole components used in vacuum tube amps) can be and still is extremely time consuming and frustrating. It is time consuming and redundant building patterns then components then updating schematics then pcb, there is no real easy way for forward propagation of changed components. Out of all of the complaints, the library and component development / management is the biggest of mine.
-
Been using it for several weeks. Although there has been some change in the library management over 2.4, it is still very clumsy to use. Developing a library of considerable size of not-popular components (think large through hole components used in vacuum tube amps) can be and still is extremely time consuming and frustrating. It is time consuming and redundant building patterns then components then updating schematics then pcb, there is no real easy way for forward propagation of changed components. Out of all of the complaints, the library and component development / management is the biggest of mine.
Mine too. It's amateurish, at best. That's why it's so laughable that they're putting all of this time into more advanced features. For who? For what it is, it's not bad, and if they fix some of the basic functionality I'll surely upgrade because I think they're interface is possibly the best out there...SO easy to do everything...but they need to stop screwing around, grow up, and fix all of the boring stuff that real engineers need.
-
Been using it for several weeks. Although there has been some change in the library management over 2.4, it is still very clumsy to use.
How would you improve it? I think the rules they have are correct personally...
Component and Pattern should be and is separate, that's just sensible, multiple components use the same pattern.
The pattern of a component, should be and is tied to the version of the pattern it was when it was assigned to the component unless you specifically update it, otherwise you might have unintended changes creep in to older designs when you edit a patten in the future.
The component in the schematic should and is similarly be tied to the version of the component when it was inserted into the schematic unless you specifically update it, otherwise unintended changes creep in.
Updating the PCB from the Schematic should and does update the components with patterns as currently attached into the schematic only when you update from the schematic, again, no unintended changes into older work.
Think of it as your components/patterns in the schematic/pcb being a specific version of the component/pattern in your library, not as just whatever the latest one is.
Yes it can make for some annoying grunt work if you need to change a pattern, but there is the option to update all of that type of component etc, so it's not too bad.
And it also means that your schematic and pcb files are portable without needing the libraries.
-
It's a management nightmare. When you look at a PCB, how on earth are you supposed to know just exactly what components where used to create it? If I make an update to a library, and then start adding components to a PCB, I can easily end up with components, from the same library, that are different. It's complete insanity.
There are a lot of us that have been asking, numerous times, for some specific features that will help us manage our libraries in some sort of sensible way. "Sorry, we're working 100% on differential pairs."
-
It's a management nightmare. When you look at a PCB, how on earth are you supposed to know just exactly what components where used to create it? If I make an update to a library, and then start adding components to a PCB, I can easily end up with components, from the same library, that are different. It's complete insanity.
But imagine the alternative, that you or a colleague comes along and edits a component/pattern in the library which you used in a design 12 months ago, come the day you open up your design and don't notice that your component/pattern has changed on your previously fine design. Whoops!
Perhaps some sort of indicator is needed to alert you that there are "Updated Components/Patterns In Libraries" and give you the option to pull them in.
But doing it automatically... bad bad idea IMHO.
-
It's a management nightmare. When you look at a PCB, how on earth are you supposed to know just exactly what components where used to create it? If I make an update to a library, and then start adding components to a PCB, I can easily end up with components, from the same library, that are different. It's complete insanity.
But imagine the alternative, that you or a colleague comes along and edits a component/pattern in the library which you used in a design 12 months ago, come the day you open up your design and don't notice that your component/pattern has changed on your previously fine design. Whoops!
Perhaps some sort of indicator is needed to alert you that there are "Updated Components/Patterns In Libraries" and give you the option to pull them in.
But doing it automatically... bad bad idea IMHO.
The right solution is that the components/patterns/whatever are linked via relative path names. Now, when I download a project (or start a new project, or whatever), I am linked to the version of the library that I want to use, and those links are strong. When I change something, it propagates, or at least CAN easily propagate. It needs to be insensitive to the name of the library file....the library name is defined IN the library file, so I can switch to a different file (but the same library) if I want to. All of this is completely missing from Diptrace. Information is duplicated everywhere, and there's not even anyway of checking if what you have matches what's actually in the library. Not a warning...not a method of checking...nothing. It really is pretty crazy.
-
There's also no method to attach multiple patterns to the same component. Often times, I just want to drop a transistor on my schematic, and I'll figure out exactly which one later. Oh, careful careful...when you select the actual transistor you want, if the pins are numbered differently, it will screw up your schematic, and you CAN'T number the component pins the same if the patterns are different. Why? Because the component pin number IS the pattern pin connection whether you like it or not. Why can't I just drop a stinking transistor on my schematic, and then choose from a number of specific patterns sometime later? Again, it's crazy. I shouldn't have to completely rewire dozens of components (very error prone) just because I want to switch from one JFet to another.
They'll eventually work this stuff out and I'll eventually upgrade, but they need to fix this stuff before they get another dime.
Don't even get me started on their grid/precision issues. They also have major issues importing board outlines. It comes in at some random point and can't be moved/realigned to a precise location. Their only solution is to change the board origin to match a point on the board I just sucked in. What about all the components/traces/pours etc that I spent days laying out and routing. I have to make a small change to the board outline, I suck it back in from my CAD program, and what? I just have to lay everything out again?
What about transparency between layers? Just try and do a 4 layer board. It's a royal PITA.
There's no reason for it other than stuff like this is probably kind of boring and not very interesting, and they'd rather spend time working on fun stuff, but all this boring stuff is very important if you want to be taken seriously. That said, I'll continue to use it because it's relatively cheap and it works very well for what I need right now (and probably for most hobbyists too), but I'm constantly on the lookout for new software packages.
-
Using the new keyboard shortcuts, has anyone been able to set a single key to swap between imperial & metric units (& vice versa)?
I did ask for this early on in the DipTrace Forums ............... but it appears that it might have been missed.
At least I can now activate the "measure" tool with just one key press.
-
But imagine the alternative, that you or a colleague comes along and edits a component/pattern in the library which you used in a design 12 months ago, come the day you open up your design and don't notice that your component/pattern has changed on your previously fine design. Whoops!
A much more realistic scenario is this: you have 10 or 15 pcbs in various stages of development. You order a proto pcb of one of the 10 or 15 designs and realize that the pattern / component of part "A" is wrong. This part is used in numerous pcb designs and in numerous locations, but you don't have a quick way to determine exactly which boards. Therefore, it is absolutely ridiculous to NOT be able to update the part in your "master" library and have it automatically update any pcb when it is opened. There is no provision for forward propagation on a fundamental issue such as this. The result is that it is a manual operation, not autonomous, which will lead to the chance of many more errors.
IF the part has changed (added a pin or other) simply have it highlighted on the pcb / schematic / where ever if that is your concern.
Other missing simple features beyond the library debacle that are a pain in the ass, board outlines, copper pour outlines, floating board origins, why can't you just draw a circle? Why is it always an ellipse that you have four data points to define? Why no "silk screen eraser" on the PCB? Sometimes the patterns come in funny and need to be "cleaned" up - or there is silk over a pad that needs to be removed? Where is the component "align" on the pcb? Hey, I have OCD and like things in order if possible. Why do we need to continually enter the same file names and hints for patterns and components - redundancy is a time killer... Why is there no font size for pattern text (you have to drag to resize).... and on and on. I agree, they need to finish the core program before they add too much more lipstick to a pig.
In all it could be a great program, it just needs refinement - it is not ready for daily driving yet and as I said before at times it is just "clumsy". I started driving it back at 2.3, honestly besides some GUI work for the libraries there has not been a lot to show for 2 years of subsequent development.
-
Using the new keyboard shortcuts, has anyone been able to set a single key to swap between imperial & metric units (& vice versa)?
I did ask for this early on in the DipTrace Forums ............... but it appears that it might have been missed.
I seem to remember that they have it on the roadmap, but it wasn't done yet because they want to do it as a complete solution whereby you can switch units using the hotkey while looking in any dialog/window and have that interface refresh with the new units on the fly (currently as you know if you are in a dialog and want to change units, close dialog, change units, open dialog...)
-
It is irrelevant to this thread, but I will complain. I have updated my layout from schematics and exported to Geber. The net classes were lost! Too late for me, when I received the physical boards from PCB house.
What is wrong with custom trace widths outside set net classes to be lost on "save" ? I have real trouble now with my PCBs batch.
-
It is irrelevant to this thread, but I will complain. I have updated my layout from schematics and exported to Geber. The net classes were lost!
Did you change the net classes in the the pcb without back-annotating? If in the PCB, then unless you back-annotated them to the schematic, the update from the schematic to the PCB would over-write them I expect - same as adding a component in the PCB which isn't in the schematic and then updating from the schematic, component goes away.
-
There's also no method to attach multiple patterns to the same component. Often times, I just want to drop a transistor on my schematic, and I'll figure out exactly which one later. Oh, careful careful...when you select the actual transistor you want, if the pins are numbered differently, it will screw up your schematic, and you CAN'T number the component pins the same if the patterns are different. Why? Because the component pin number IS the pattern pin connection whether you like it or not. Why can't I just drop a stinking transistor on my schematic, and then choose from a number of specific patterns sometime later? Again, it's crazy. I shouldn't have to completely rewire dozens of components (very error prone) just because I want to switch from one JFet to another.
They'll eventually work this stuff out and I'll eventually upgrade, but they need to fix this stuff before they get another dime.
Don't even get me started on their grid/precision issues. They also have major issues importing board outlines. It comes in at some random point and can't be moved/realigned to a precise location. Their only solution is to change the board origin to match a point on the board I just sucked in. What about all the components/traces/pours etc that I spent days laying out and routing. I have to make a small change to the board outline, I suck it back in from my CAD program, and what? I just have to lay everything out again?
What about transparency between layers? Just try and do a 4 layer board. It's a royal PITA.
There's no reason for it other than stuff like this is probably kind of boring and not very interesting, and they'd rather spend time working on fun stuff, but all this boring stuff is very important if you want to be taken seriously. That said, I'll continue to use it because it's relatively cheap and it works very well for what I need right now (and probably for most hobbyists too), but I'm constantly on the lookout for new software packages.
DIPTrace has become known as DIPShit around my office for these reasons and more. I've become sorry that I recommended it...
-
it would be nice, if you open a schematic it did a check on the parent part and said 'hey, component X has changed' and give you a list of parts on your board you can update. Ive had instances where updating a part and choosing to update all the same part on the schematic did not actually change them all, just a percentage of them. but luckily its not often I've had to do it but when you do and its more than 1 part on a single schematic its a royal pain in the ass.
still, light years beyond eagle for part creation/management.
-
still, light years beyond eagle for part creation/management.
Absolutely. The reason I keep using it and recommending it is that the overall situation doesn't really seem to improve until you get to something like Altium, and that's just so unaffordable that I can't even consider it. Diptrace is very very good for the price, but now it's being held back because they're completely deaf to what pros need.
-
still, light years beyond eagle for part creation/management.
Absolutely. The reason I keep using it and recommending it is that the overall situation doesn't really seem to improve until you get to something like Altium, and that's just so unaffordable that I can't even consider it. Diptrace is very very good for the price, but now it's being held back because they're completely deaf to what pros need.
Pros don't need Differential Pairs ?
-
Before basic features that are timebombs ready to go off in a production environment? No way.
-
kinda surprised how long this beta is running. is there that many bugs they are working on fixing or is the software REALLY not readdy for v3.0..
odd.
-
One has to wonder IF they are resource limited and have possibly become "distracted" on another project? I have been using 2.9 beta since it was released without issue - that being said have not had use for the differential pair routing etc.
I would get more benefit by them updating the snapping / alignment /adding a simple graphics editor / library management etc.... more than anything. Not being critical, it just seems that they have lost the drive to be competitive and release updates in a timely manner. Is it foretelling or a reason to be concerned?
-
poking around the diptrace form it seems there is going to be released sometime soon? (in november it was said 1-2 months for version 3 release... so thats about 'now'). so only alex really knows.
-
It is taking a while, there are responses to feature request such as "we are aware it needs implementing / changing", some are possibly quite simple to tweak / add configuration for.
EAGLE and KiCad has been updated more than DT at present.
I keep track of the 3 "more popular" packages.
I was wondering if they had resource issues or were working on a "sideline" project, I am quite intrigued to see if they will slip any goodies in V3, hopefully they will, which is why they are taking their time! :-//
-
I am quite intrigued to see if they will slip any goodies in V3, hopefully they will, which is why they are taking their time! :-//
I wouldn't hold my breath. In fact, after I finish the boards that I have in process, I need to take a very hard look IF I want to continue with DT. The delay in solving or adding even the most elementary features is concerning - as much as I would hate to change, it may be time to look at another software package before my time invested is a wasted effort.
-
I don't use DT "actively", I've done a few things with it when looking at alternatives to EAGLE, I now use KiCAD, but I was hoping that they would have released a stable release by now.
-
One has to wonder IF they are resource limited and have possibly become "distracted" on another project?
Alex & his team have been busy on several other specialist projects (that help pay the bills), however we should now see DipTrace Ver 3.0 released in March/April 2016.
There have been a few niggling problems that have "slipped through" various version upgrades over the years & these are being worked on now.
Also, there has been further testing with Windows 10, particularly relating to screen drivers/accelerators.
-
Version 3.0 Beta has been released.
From the Diptrace News page :
DipTrace 3.0 Beta available now
Feb 17, 2016
Differential pairs | ODB++ | Gerber X2 | Custom Hotkeys | Updated component and 3D libraries
Since 2.9 Beta release we have significantly improved the overall performance of DipTrace.
We added differential pair single-trace routing and editing modes that allow for easy handling of differential pairs on high-density circuit boards.
Design Rule Check in 3.0 Beta verifies differential pairs for possible phase shift issues in real-time, based on the net class paramaters.
DRC fully describes the nature of an error and provides certain rule details for changing routing constraints.
Phase Tune tool allows the user to fix phase shifts on differential pairs with semi-automatic meander placement tool.
ODB++ and Gerber X2 manufacturing outputs improve the reliability of CAD-CAM data transfering, ensuring maximum understanding between you and a PCB house.
Switching to DipTrace has never been easier with customizable shortcuts and vast importing capabilities.
-
Here is the list of new features for Version 3.0 from the DipTrace Webpage
Version 3.0 Beta (February 17, 2016)
- Differential pairs:
Define differential pair and its rules;
Automatic or manual defining of paired pads;
Paired routing and editing of differential pair;
Single-track differential pair routing and editing;
Phase tune tool (place custom / regular size meanders);
Real-time control of phase and length tolerance;
Differential pair manager;
Support of differential pairs for external autorouters, recognition of paired traces.
- Custom user-defined keyboard shortcuts for tools and dialogs.
- ODB++ (version 7.0) manufacturing output.
- Gerber X2 manufacturing output.
- DRC rule details (easy editing of routing constraints).
- Tree view of 3D models in All Models list, sorted by categories (folders).
- Overall speed and memory optimization for large designs.
- Optimized UI fonts.
- 8143 new components.
- 5694 new STEP models for 3D.
-
Do you know if users of the "free-for-noncommercial" 500-pin version are able to upgrade? The download page seems to suggest no?
-
*Sighs* Still no native OS X version. But hey, at least they optimized the UI Fonts... (http://img.timb.us/emoticon/ughh.gif)
-
I wonder what the percentage of users are that require the high speed diff pair routing is compared to the number that use the daily fundamentals features that are lacking in some of the most basic areas?
It seems that diff pair implementation was a "Hail Mary" attempt....
-
Some of the forum users have been complaining about the speed of 3.0 over 2.4, apparently they have introduced new protection which is slowing it down, not used V3, can anyone comment on the speed?