DEX eval by free_electron

[Iliya]

to give you an idea what i am building : i am recreating a project i did a while ago. not that complicated. essentialy a galvanic USB isolator

see images below :

like i said at the beginning: the goal is to make a REAL board. everyone can make a rectangle with some parts arbitrarily placed and randomly routed without any rules.
that is not the goal. The goals is to get a manufacturable board that is testable in production.

I was initially going to do something more complex but this is going to take too much time as the libraries have almost none of the parts i want. So i will limit it to creating a few parts.
I have real work to do and a life outside of this as well. the sun is out and the beach calls ... besides my car is antsy to go for a ride too.

in this board there are rules to be set. for example the clearance between the ground planes under the opto and Dc/Dc convertor needs to be taken into account. a slit needs milling under the DC Dc as it does not have the required creepage by itself. (  i want 1.5 kilovolt flashover ). There are thermal rules for certain parts. there are via placement rules as the via's double as in-circuit testpoints.

This design relies heavily on #D mechanical interaction as the placement of parts need to fit the chosen box. Board contour, cutouts , connector placement, thru-hole part placement is all driven by the shape of the box. So this will test how good the 3D capabilities really are. Every PCB program these days has 3D but for 'eye-candy' only. they have no spatial checker nor do they allow editing of board features while in 3D. i will find out if DEX can do that.

i have high hopes for this program. Hopes created by the 'marketing material'. let's see if it meets the mark.

If you send me the schematic/pcb I will look at it. Eagle, Altium, Diptrace, Multisim or PDF are all OK.
Please note the 8 hours time gap. Often this works great for people on the west coast, if the post a report in the afternoon, they have the response when they go into work the following morning.

[Iliya]

to give you an idea what i am building : i am recreating a project i did a while ago. not that complicated. essentialy a galvanic USB isolator

see images below :

like i said at the beginning: the goal is to make a REAL board. everyone can make a rectangle with some parts arbitrarily placed and randomly routed without any rules.
that is not the goal. The goals is to get a manufacturable board that is testable in production.

I was initially going to do something more complex but this is going to take too much time as the libraries have almost none of the parts i want. So i will limit it to creating a few parts.
I have real work to do and a life outside of this as well. the sun is out and the beach calls ... besides my car is antsy to go for a ride too.

in this board there are rules to be set. for example the clearance between the ground planes under the opto and Dc/Dc convertor needs to be taken into account. a slit needs milling under the DC Dc as it does not have the required creepage by itself. (  i want 1.5 kilovolt flashover ). There are thermal rules for certain parts. there are via placement rules as the via's double as in-circuit testpoints.

This design relies heavily on #D mechanical interaction as the placement of parts need to fit the chosen box. Board contour, cutouts , connector placement, thru-hole part placement is all driven by the shape of the box. So this will test how good the 3D capabilities really are. Every PCB program these days has 3D but for 'eye-candy' only. they have no spatial checker nor do they allow editing of board features while in 3D. i will find out if DEX can do that.

i have high hopes for this program. Hopes created by the 'marketing material'. let's see if it meets the mark.

If you send me the schematic/pcb I will look at it. Eagle, Altium, Diptrace, Multisim or PDF are all OK.
Please note the 8 hours time gap. Often this works great for people on the west coast, if the post a report in the afternoon, they have the response when they go into work the following morning.

Send to eevblog@pcb.software

[Iliya]

When sending problem reports. Please keep it to one issue per report. It makes it easier for me and quicker for you. It's like ordering from Amazon, if you place an order for several things the slowest one holds up all the others.

[Iliya]

For DRC errors, if you zoom in on them you will see a dimension. Move the mouse over it and a tooltip will tell you more.
The DRC panel also shows them all. Select one and it will highlight on the PCB and auto-zoom. You can drag the DRC panel off onto another screen.

I fixed the capacitor references in the library and some other stuff. Click on Home->Account->What's New

[nctnico]

i tried watching some video's. what is the point of some of those ?
Fro example : 'Schematic, Simulation , PCB Design and Solid Modeling'

there is no sound apart from clicking . all we see is someone clicking menu's one by one , too short to read anything. no explanation.
the first 30 seconds is someone zooming in and out and panning a schematic and then a board , then a populated board  then 3d view. and then we click the menu's one by one.
what is the goal of this video ?

there is not a word about the 'simulation' in the title , there is no 'design going on' it doesn't show how to place a track/component or even move one. and modeling ? i didn't see that either ..

i just watched the 'Creating a custom potentiometer part' video  and have a couple of things that are missing in this video

we begin by placing pads. ->
- how do i define the shape , annular ring and hole of the pad ? that is not shown
- how do i set the pad number ? i may want to call a pad 'A' for example or 'T2'
- how do i change the positioning grid ?
- can i have a large crosshair cursor so i can see relational spacing to other objects as opposed to the little arrows on the rulerbars ?
- the outline is drawn as a simple rectangle . how can i change this ? i may want to add arcs and other things on there.
- is there a mechanical layer available so i can add features like keepout distances ( for example a part that has a hole for a screw. such a pad is non plated but i want to draw a circle on a mechanical layer showing where the head of the screw will be so i don;t route traces there ? )
- the white box is the silkscreen , but is there a courtyard available and can i set that ?
- can the silkscreen and courtyard be polygons (non rectangualr)? for example a vertical heatsink for a to 220 package is not a rectangle. it is a complex shape where the to220 package will later fit in. so i need a way to draw this complex shape and courtyard for it so the spatial drc ( i hope there is a spatial drc...) doesn't flag parts collision

Reading this makes me wonder: Isn't there a manual (PDF) for DEX which takes a new user through the process of creating parts and a schematic? IMHO a video isn't suitable for that purpose because video is a slow medium. I can read the same information 100 times faster with more accuracy than when someone is presenting it through a video. A list with 'click here', 'type this', 'select that' is suitable to get started and refine the process in more advanced chapters.

[nctnico]

board design is all about grids. some parts use imperial, others metric. some use very odd numbers. the grids are needed to accurately position parts so they mate with holes in enclosures , and they are needed to accurately position part features such as pins , holes, outlines, and bodies.

I have to disagree. Using a grid to position components (and pads in a footprint) is utterly clumsy. A footprint with a wisely choosen point of origin can be placed quickly & perfectly if you can type in the coordinates.

BTW The CAD package I'm using detects which increment is used when entering coordinates for pads in a footprint so creating the third pad in any direction is a matter of pressing a single key.

[IconicPCB]

Not everything is about grids.

Old thinking is grid based, some cutting edge thinking is moving away from grid based software producing amazing layouts.

Free Electron Your expectation to hop into a new cad package and be able to drive it immediately is a bit unrealistic.

Consider Eagle and Altium.. both windows based both notionally written around windows paradigm.

One prepared by ( I understand ) by a German speaking author.. the other by a native English speaker. Cultural differences are obvious.

These same differences exist within the Anglophone world; in this case American and British. Culturally the differences are significant enough to produce discord as You and Iliya  have amply demonstrated.

Please consider toning down the indignation. After all You have only just picked up the application; give Yourself a chance to learn it. Remember You too, just like me, were born ignorant.

[G0HZU]

Yes, it does take time to get used to a new CAD package.

The other thing is that some PCB packages are better suited to certain tasks depending on complexity. Also some packages will suit some users more than others depending on how intuitive they find the user interface.

I'm not sure where this DEX product falls in all this but my initial impressions are (assuming it is functional) that it is best suited for advanced hobby and small business use. But that could change as it develops and improves.

At my place of work we use Mentor for all of our product design work. We have several full time PCB designers and I suspect that if you gave them an alternative PCB design package to play with like Altium they would probably find it a bit lacking and limiting. However, I doubt that they would be disrespectful to Altium as a product and I'm sure they wouldn't be directly disrespectful (on a public forum) to the product creator.

At work, most of the RF/HW design engineers favour using EasyPC from NumberOne Systems when designing in house test jigs or dev boards and they seem quite happy with it. However, something like DEX could compete here if it proves to have a decent 3D capability. By contrast, I tend to use either Mentor or Eagleware/Agilent Genesys for designing RF boards for research work and neither is ideal (but I prefer them both to EasyPC!).

[free_electron]

The learning curve is not the issue. I know this takes time. I am probing to see if the tool is up to snuff capability wise. What functions does it have and how mich does it help the user.

[Wilksey]

Iliya,
Coming from an unbiased viewpoint here, I can see that there is a clash of personalities between yourself and free_electron.

The fact that he is taking the time to review, he isn't saying everything is bad, and that your software is a steaming pile of poo, he is saying that there are good points and some bad points, flaws perhaps if you will, means that he is essentially helping you develop / debug your software for free, and yes it is easy to compare against the likes of Altium etc, some of the advice you will not agree with as it is more specific to Altium.

However...

He raises some really good points with regards to what could be changed to improve things, like the Auto wiring for example, you could surely add an option to turn this feature on or off, give the end user a choice rather than force them into doing something which, although from your point of view might be better, from the way they are used to working, might not.

The fact you are offering your software for free implies to me that you are serious about wanting it to be a contender with the other CAD software, so irrespective of how these things are reported to you, you should really stop being so defensive when people are trying to give you some good feedback.

I think most people would agree that the main flaw of most developers is that they do not listen to the people using the software and bury their heads, don't be one of those developers, listen to the advice of someone like free_electron, surely you must agree with some of the points he makes, implement them, bring it back for further review  / feedback, that is one sure fire way to make a program that people will want to use rather than see it as another one of those fly by night CAD applications.

[tautech]

The learning curve is not the issue. I know this takes time. I am probing to see if the tool is up to snuff capability wise. What functions does it have and how mich does it help the user.

Good to see the heat lowering in the exchanges now  and some reasonable dialogue happening.

Yep, the ease of intuitive use is important but not as much as overall capability.
If it can't do stuff simply there must be a work-around to get the result required.

[free_electron]

I will file a couple of bug reports, if not today, to orrow.

One very frustrating bug is the linrary browser not being able to sort alphabetically and the filter not worki g at all. According to the documentation *diode* is the same as diode and it isn't. It yields comp,etely different results. Also searching with an, according to the documentation valid syntax does not work. Search for 74*00 and you get a maxim chip as first in the list that doesnt even have a 4 in its part number.

This makes it so that i cannot find parts in this library.

[aroby]

Good to see the heat lowering in the exchanges now  and some reasonable dialogue happening.

Seconded.  Attacking the person instead of simply describing an issue with the product is not called for.

I've only been using Dex for a few days, and that is pretty much the sum total of my PCB design experience.  I've sent in a handful of problem reports and they were all resolved very quickly, but I still have some issues with the software :

- the autowiring does have a mind of its own.  Most of the time I can tweak the result, but when it chooses to deviate from lines at right angles to each other, that can't be recovered except via Undo and try something different.  Microsoft Powerpoint seems to have solved similar problems and my expectation in the schematic editor was of similar behavior.

- grouping of symbols on a schematic clashes with autowiring.  I'd expect that once I've grouped a set of connected symbols, I ought to be able to move that around the schematic, but when I try that, the wiring inside the group starts to change and screws everything up.

- for common parts (resistors, capacitors), I'd expect to be able to drag the part on to the schematic and then, via the context menu, be able to select and change the package for that component.  The standard components all seem to have that when you select one to insert into the editor, but once you've made that selection, I can't find a way to easily be able to change the footprint.  Nor can I find a way to select a part and find out what part / footprint it actually is.   

- there are number of UI behavior issues, like the multi-select to change properties, buttons active but not operating on the tab in focus etc.

- search seems rather hit or miss.  And it's not clear whether the search is actually running or if it's stopped or what you need to do to start a search.

I will keep persevering since the software overall is much better, for me, than Eagle which drove me nuts in the few attempts I had to use that.

Anthony

[free_electron]

Good to see the heat lowering in the exchanges now  and some reasonable dialogue happening.

Seconded.  Attacking the person instead of simply describing an issue with the product is not called for.

I've only been using Dex for a few days, and that is pretty much the sum total of my PCB design experience.  I've sent in a handful of problem reports and they were all resolved very quickly, but I still have some issues with the software :

- the autowiring does have a mind of its own.  Most of the time I can tweak the result, but when it chooses to deviate from lines at right angles to each other, that can't be recovered except via Undo and try something different.  Microsoft Powerpoint seems to have solved similar problems and my expectation in the schematic editor was of similar behavior.

- grouping of symbols on a schematic clashes with autowiring.  I'd expect that once I've grouped a set of connected symbols, I ought to be able to move that around the schematic, but when I try that, the wiring inside the group starts to change and screws everything up.

- for common parts (resistors, capacitors), I'd expect to be able to drag the part on to the schematic and then, via the context menu, be able to select and change the package for that component.  The standard components all seem to have that when you select one to insert into the editor, but once you've made that selection, I can't find a way to easily be able to change the footprint.  Nor can I find a way to select a part and find out what part / footprint it actually is.   

- there are number of UI behavior issues, like the multi-select to change properties, buttons active but not operating on the tab in focus etc.

- search seems rather hit or miss.  And it's not clear whether the search is actually running or if it's stopped or what you need to do to start a search.

I will keep persevering since the software overall is much better, for me, than Eagle which drove me nuts in the few attempts I had to use that.

Anthony

Those are all on my list too.
The autowiring really needs a way to be turned off. I understand beginners may like it , but when trying to draw complex schematics and moving parts and clusters of parts the damn thing just doesnt work. In alot of cases you end up with spaghetti , or worse : diagonal lines cause the algorithm just gave up.  That is just ... For lack of a better word : crap.

I want , no NEED the ability to be able to draw my own wires and buses.
I also need the ability to have a stub of wire with a netname kn it connecting somewhere else ... With autowiring that doesnt work. You always are restricte to point to point ...

In a lot of cases i may be working in a section of schematic and put section of wire down that will be connected later. I place em so i reserve the space on the page. At alater point i will be drawing a different block and then wire it up. With this autowiring this i also not possible.

It reall needs to be able to be turned off. For beginners it may be great but it becomes a nuisance and a hindrance once you start getting into more advanced stuff.

Like i said, many cad packages have tried it and they get blasted by their user base. Turn it off . Don t want, don t need, doesnt work.

Imagine trying to draw a schematic for a relay system : that will end up being a friggin maze !
Whenever you move so ethign you need to spend five minites cleanup after the autowirer.

Right now i am trying to make some symbols and am kinda stuck drawing the symbol. Placing pins is ok. But the symbol artwork itself... I need lines, boxes, polygons, arcs so i can make a nice symbol that represents what is inside the chip.. For examp,e i i put down an analog multip,ier i may want to put in a multiplier symbol. Same for an opamp. I only find how to grab a predrawn picture and put pins on that. ?  What am i missing ?

[mswhin63]

I changed the grid size, works for me. I still use the grid, just spend a bit of time at the beginning to change my defaults. I think it is safe to assure that this evaluation is totally the wrong direction. I usually give my opinion on any new software after a period of time to learn it processes, this include Altium, Eagle and any other software I wish to evaluate.

free_electron, it appears you need a complex solution to work out of the box, so i suggest to simply evaluate $1000.00 to $10,000 products that have spent their fair share of bugs to be cleared and generate new bugs.

Thank god (if he exists) I wont buy a Tesla.

One thing that would probably fix a lot of problems noticed is to switch off the "snap to grid".

are you insane ? the whole PCB world is about grids and accurate measuring. and you are starting off throwing that out of the window.
how can you make an accurate footprint if you cant snap to the grid ?

Here is how i make a footprint : for example a TQFP style package ( four rows of pads )
grab datasheet and find 2 numbers : the pin pitch and the distance between the left and right side, set the x grid to the pin pitch and the y grid to half the column distance.  ( you need the center point ) plonk down the left and right coumns. now swap x and y grid and plonk down top and bottom rows. set the y grid to half the width of the body and draw two lines ( top and bottom) with the length of the body . one coordinate is frozen already due to the grid. you onlyt need to set the length of the body, the spacing is handled by the snap to grid. now set the y grid to half the courtyard that you want and draw another two line. select the last four lines you have drawn , copy , paste and rotate the paste line 90 degrees around the centroid.

Done. i can do this in under a minute

The same goes for routing. if you know your channel and track width you can set the grids so that everything snaps neatly spaced.
the same goes for parts placement : wanna evenly space parts ? set the grid , place parts alter the grid. there are rules for parts placement ! depemnding on the proces you may need grid spacing.
For example a doublesided board that will go reflow top and wave soldering bottom. the parts can be denser on top than on the bottom. the pick and place and reflow have no problems. the wave on the other hand is a 'blob' you need a certain space between parts so the wave can get to the pins. so you setup a placement grid for top and bottom that are different.

then there is testpoint injection that also needs to happen on a grid as it determines the type of pogo pin that will be used. that typically uses a staggered grid.

so now we require snapping to :
- pin grids
- body grids,
- top placement grid
- bottom placement grid
- routing grids
- testpoint grids.

some of these can be polar grids ( circular )

and you are going to make a tool that doesn't have grids ? that doesn't work ...
and the tool bloody well should understand the difference between all those grids and the 'electrical grid' whci is a gravitational pull emanating form the center of any electrical object.
if i have a board that uses both metric and imperial parts and am on one type of grid i could not 'snap' to the center of a pad of that part happens to be using the other type.
the electrical grid solves that as it excerts a gravitational pull and allows the track to jump form the defined grid to the center of the pad , or ending of a track.

i haven't gotten that far in DEX yet , but i hope it has such capabilities or the experiment will end prematurely. you can NOT design a board without those capabilities. you may as well fling parts to a sheet of paper and hope they stick.

i am getting scared now ... my gut feeling says it will be a no .. to all of it.  i took another look at that demo board ... i get this icy creepy feeling that this is indeed wired gridless which would explain the mess. it also leads me to believe there is no such thing as design rules for inter-object spacing and/or realtime checking against the rules.  there are some parts and tracks that are placed very 'funny' where a proper DRC would have slammed on the brakes. it could be that they just used defaults ( which were dialed in wrong)

anyway. i haven't gotten that far yet...  first things first

i will try to make a schematic symbol today ... one with proper graphics.  .. i hope there is a grid there...

currently there is only one obstacle blocking me ( the rest are 'annoyances' , apart from the bugs like DEX crashing while trying to show the properties panel , or the installer trying to run autotrax instead of dex ) and that is the schematic autowiring. That has to go. i can not use this program with autowiring running. it just makes the schematics look like shit and it is too much work to clean up every time it messes up. especially the dots not being where the are supposed to be annoy the hell out of me.

so get on your horse and tell me how to turn autowiring off. ( I hope it can be turned off ... if noet : hard stop. end of excercise... )


two blockers right now :
- autowiring
- incorrect gerber

those need urgent fixing.

[MacAttak]

I'd be thrilled to get that kind of feedback if it were my software product. That's part of being a good developer - you have to be able to suck it up and accept criticism when someone (other than you) finally gets their hands on it and starts breaking it in ways that you never even contemplated. I'm glad to see the tit-for-tat exchanges have died down and both Iliya and free_electron have been interacting more professionally towards each other. I was on the edge of totally ignoring this whole product after seeing the early exchanges - if someone with free_electron's credentials feedback is brushed aside nonchalantly, then I know my own feedback wouldn't have even registered if I ran into difficulty using it.

I've used Eagle a bit and can't say I use it because I like - I used it because it was "less bad" than the competitors. Altium is far beyond my price range, since I'm just a typical hobbyist making small one-off boards here and there. So this product definitely has my interest.

Also, I totally missed that other thread where free_electron mentioned what his new job is. That's pretty awesome... as you can tell from the profile image, I'm something of a Tesla fan 

[free_electron]

i've hit another snag ... i am trying really hard to read the docs but there is something wrong with the documentation: either the website has broken links or that documentation is a work in progress...

www.kov.com/manual

chapter :

Dex's design model    <- note that this is about pages in this chapter , not about the 'parts chapter' later in the documentation
-> Parts  -empty-
->-> Schematic symbols -empty-
->->-> Symbols with a border -empty-
->->-> Fully custom symbols -empty-
->-> Footprints and Land patterns -empty-
-> Artwork -empty-
-> Adding grpahics to sheets
->->Lines
->-> Polylines and polygons -just a figure. no explanations -
->-> Rectangles -empty-
->-> Arcs -empty-
->-> Circles and ellipses -empty-
->-> Curves -empty-
->-> Text -empty-
->-> Text boxes -empty-
->-> Pictures -empty-
->-> Dimensions -empty
-> Pimp your design -empty-
->-> Sprucing up those lines -empty-
->-> Get your fill -empty-
->-> Fancy fonts -empty-

and the icing on the cake :
->Help! -EMPTY-

can someone please write the documentation ? it's kinda hard to learn things if all the pages in the book are empty ...


Parts <- this is the parts chapter in the root of the documentation
->The Part Builder
->->Quad Parts
->->-> Quad parameters. -just a picture-
->->BGA parts
->->-> BGA PArameters -just a picture-

header parameters,  just a picture
chip parts is just a picture
axial parts ( is completely empty)
sod323 is completely empty

For almost all subfolders in the Part builder tab the Device overview and parameters are blank or only have a picture that says nothing.

There are a couple of funny ones in there like "The parameters editor is shown below. As you can see there are currently no editable parameters." 

parts ->footprints->adding graphics to a footprint.
"You can add graphics to any layer for a footprint. If the graphics are on the top, bottom or inner layers (copper layers), then they will be in copper and do have electrical significance. "

Yes, and ? what now ? can i have at least a simple example that shows me how to do this ? for example show me how to place a circle on the silkscreen. or remove the default box on the silkscreen and replace it with a polygon. this is useful for things like connectors where you want to have a drawing on the silkscreen that shows the exact outline of the connector ( for example connectors that have ejectors on em ) or flat-flex connectors that have an insertion band.

Artworks
this chapter only explains how to drax existing artwork from the library and put it on a part. how do i create artwork ?
this is a strange way of working. All other schematic tools have a dedicated library editor where you draw a part consisting of electrical objects (pins) and drawing primitives such as lines, arcs and polygonw. This drawing is done on a grid so everything lines up neatly and cleanly.

Dex apparently uses an approach where you create an 'artwork' that has no electrical properties somewhere (I haven't figured out how to do that yet. All the documentation says it 'you get it from the library, but i can't find where they explain how to create one. Does this need to be done in paint ?  coreldraw ? something else ? saved as a bitmap ? how does this work ? please help , make a video , write a tutorial, i am too stupid to figure it out)
Then you place pins and drop that artwork. There is one video where Iliya shows and grabs an existing artwork and puts pins on it (again 'by eye' ,nothing aligns properly... that is just ... shoddy and unprofessional)

This is getting to be very cumbersome.. the documentation is severely lacking and it takes a tremendous amount of time to figure out the basics. i am getting frustrated with this thing... i can generally pick up a new piece of software very quickly. Most cad tools for schematic pcb work somewhat on the same principles. This ? radically different ... and without documentation hard to figure out as i am in completely uncharted waters.

[elgonzo]

i've hit another snag ... i am trying really hard to read the docs but there is something wrong with the documentation: either the website has broken links or that documentation is a work in progress...

www.kov.com/manual

chapter : Dex's design model

[...snip...]

I just checked. I can see the content that you are missing (i tested with FF, IE and PaleMoon).
Browser problem perhaps?

[free_electron]

i use Chrome. also on the Ipad  those pages are all empty ...
lemme check internet exploder ...

[free_electron]

nope. even with IE : all empty. on the ipad, ont he Mac, on Windows in IE and in Chrome : all empty
see images below. i made sure to capture the screne exactly so you see what is selected. it is not only those folder icons that are empty, also the document icons are empty.
DO i need to download a set of files ? don't tell me i need a java machine .. hmm. no i guess i would see a java icon ..

[c4757p]

Smartphones and Android tablets not supported.

Sorry, smartphone and Android tablet browsers cannot display this page correctly. You can view the page in a desktop browser or with an Apple iPad using Mobile Safari.

Fuck that noise, let it try! 

[IconicPCB]

invisible pages display nicely on firefox/ubuntu

[free_electron]

i am using a desktop browser (IE and Chrome on win 7 )  and Safari and Chrome on Mac. does not work
Same story on the Ipad : exactly the same view

Here is an example of the problematic documentation :
Chip parts
it is just a picture without a single word of explanation.
You can set width and pitch. but how do i set the size and position of the actual pads ? change the shape of the pads ?
some ceramic caps have short electrodes and need the electrode offset on the pad so i need a way to specify not only the length and width of the pad bit also the offset.
right now i can specify the body width and the pad will land in the center .. i need to be able to offset that. i may need a differnet fillet style. it is also possible i need pads that are smaller or wider than the body width depending on the package.

from this help file i cannot figure out how to do this, nor if this is even possible.

For a resistor that has a folded electrode (plating top to edge to bottom , but no plating left and right ) the pad should be the exact width of the body to avoid pillowing of solder on the side of the resistor body. for a capacitor that has an overcap ( plating exists also on the sides of the part ) the pad needs to be wider to form a correct fillet on the sides. So how do i create such footprints. i need to be able to dual in the exact pad size, pad location and body size/location

These are real world things that are important when designing a board. The Cad tool must have support to dial in these things.

i can't figure it out.

[free_electron]

invisible pages display nicely on firefox/ubuntu

can you post a screenshot what it should look like ? make sure i see the left column what topic exactly you selected. ( see my examples : the topic is highlighted in the left column )

[elgonzo]

Strange. I also use Win7 with the current FF, and it looks fine 

The "Chip Parameters" page looks exactly like yours - just a graphic without text. A quick peek with FireBug i can tell that this page does not have any text in a hidden element, the page just contains that image...

p.s. I will edit this post and add the other pages for comparison...