PADS Standard vs. PADS Professional

[Feynman]

Hi there,

for our small PCB design team (4-5 engineers plus maybe 1-2 students temporarily) we are planning to change to a new PCB tool (moving away from EAGLE 7.X).
Since some of our engineers already have had experience with it, we are having a closer look into Mentor PADS (other alternatives are Altium and Pulsonix).

I'm already in contact with our local sales representative, but I'm looking for some first hand opinions

There seem to exist two variants of PADS: One being "Classical" PADS, now called "PADS Standard (Plus)", and the other one being "PADS Professional".
According to our sales representative, classical PADS and PADS Professional are basically two different systems. PADS Professional seems to be the new tool which Mentor will focus on.

How is your general opinion on either classical PADS or PADS Professional? According to our engineers and some google research classical PADS is rather old and clunky and has some weird quirks (which PCB tool doesn't? ).
How does PADS Professional compare to classical PADS?
How difficult is the transition from classical to professional PADS? Are they really two entirely different systems?

Thank you in advance

Regards,
Feynman

[T3sl4co1l]

I never got a feel for how PADS is supposed to work.  It doesn't seem to "flow".  That was on, um, PADS 13 or so I think?  Or wait, maybe it was 8.3 or something?  I don't remember the versions anymore.  Also there were different variants back then too, I think that was PADS Logic.  Whatever that's equivalent to today, I guess.

Anyway, I was able to do things, but either I was unable to figure out the proper flow, or I blocked myself from being able to see it (or, there simply is no "flow" to it, and it really is just that bad).

I "grew up" on Altium, so the second possibility is most likely, in all fairness.

Are you concerned much with format compatibility?  I don't know if PADS can import Eagle (but, wouldn't be surprised if it does).

Tim

[Feynman]

I never got a feel for how PADS is supposed to work.  It doesn't seem to "flow".  That was on, um, PADS 13 or so I think?  Or wait, maybe it was 8.3 or something?  I don't remember the versions anymore.  Also there were different variants back then too, I think that was PADS Logic.  Whatever that's equivalent to today, I guess.

This was "classic" PADS then, I guess. I know someone who worked with "PADS Logic 9.3" and "PADS Layout 9.3" have a year ago . His experience was similar to yours

Are you concerned much with format compatibility?  I don't know if PADS can import Eagle (but, wouldn't be surprised if it does).

Fortunately there is no need for an import feature, since we have infinite EAGLE 7.x licenses that allow us to fix/modify our old boards in the future.

[Ysjoelfir]

I had the "chance" to work with all four of the mentioned tools. Eagle was quite nice but restricted at some times. Moved away from that to switch to Altium (better: Circuit....maker, studio, whatever that 500$ thing is called. I always forget.), the transition was really smooth and easy.

PADS was the tool we used at work. Awfull, I can totally support the lack of "flow" Tim mentioned. We discarded PADS for Pulsonix, which is.... ok-ish, but not nearly as good as Altium. I prefer the smooth keyboard controll instead of having to click on every command I want to perform. Also I prefer the rules- and stackup system from altium over the "technology" system from pulsonix as well as I way prefer the intuitive, easy to create libraries from altium.
At work we decided for Pulsonix over Altium because, well, basically because altium didn't bother to send a competent sales representative for only 10 seats.

[Feynman]

PADS was the tool we used at work. Awfull, I can totally support the lack of "flow" Tim mentioned.

Was this classical PADS or PADS Professional? Sounds a lot like classical from all I know so far

[Ysjoelfir]

It was just called "PADS", so... no clue.

[CadenceAE]

if your debating PADS VS Altium you might also consider OrCAD.  When it comes to the mid tier of PCB design tools those are the three most companies use. 

https://www.orcad.com/

[dzseki]

At work we have PADS 9.3 (and 3.5 too) working on legacy projects, but for new ones we use Altium 18 (earlier 9 and 13 too). I am curious what do you mean by „design flow”? For me Altium and PADS are equally usable, they are different in many ways, of course. Also there are some things in wich I like the PADS approach more and in others the Altium way.
But I don't do cutting edge designs so to say, no high density, etc.

[Jester]

I have used Pads, Orcad and Altium.  IMO, Altium is by far the best, Orcad was pretty decent, Pads was brutal.  I recall reading a review that pretty much described my Pads vs. Alitium experience..... something about Pads being about as effective as pissing the design into a snow bank.   Found it, here it is https://offlogic.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/why-does-mentor-graphics-suck-so-very-very-much/

[dzseki]

I have used Pads, Orcad and Altium.  IMO, Altium is by far the best, Orcad was pretty decent, Pads was brutal.  I recall reading a review that pretty much described my Pads vs. Alitium experience..... something about Pads being about as effective as pissing the design into a snow bank.   Found it, here it is https://offlogic.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/why-does-mentor-graphics-suck-so-very-very-much/

I have to add I've never used the DxDesigner, instead , the old fashioned PADS Logic/Layout/Router approach, that works pretty well IMHO, not like stated above.

[Feynman]

What exactly is DxDesigner? The former schematic capture of PADS Professional? I just installed a PADS Professional trial and the schematic capture is called "PADS Designer".
This PADS/Mentor stuff is really confusing...

[gasmeter]

Hi

I use pads standard and the difference is just that some features restricted.

The only thing in the differences I think that would help you from a team point of view are  the centralised libraries.

You have two schematic options with pads.
Standard pads logic or the more modern dx designer.

There are lots of videos on youtube explaining.


I think most people will agree that what matters with a cad package is the time and effort you have invested in it.
If its altium or pads both will give you a good design environment.
Once you commit to you it should be for the long term !

Peter

[Feynman]

Just to shed some light on the matter:
After evaluating the tool, "PADS Professional" has very little in common with "classical PADS" or "PADS Standard/Plus" as it is called now. It is a completely different tool.
However, PADS Professional is very similar to Mentor's high-end package "Xpedition". PADS Professional is more or less an "Xpedition light".

[chrisl]

Just to shed some light on the matter:
After evaluating the tool, "PADS Professional" has very little in common with "classical PADS" or "PADS Standard/Plus" as it is called now. It is a completely different tool.
However, PADS Professional is very similar to Mentor's high-end package "Xpedition". PADS Professional is more or less an "Xpedition light".

This is correct.  PADS Standard/Plus is the original PADS flow.  PADS Professional is the water down version of Xpedition PCB.
They are completely two different tools and cannot even open each other's design files - although both programs save their design files as *.PCB.

[ddavidebor]

Isn't PADS... Reeeeeeally old?

[gasmeter]

Apologies

I was confusing Pads standard and pads plus.

Peter

[Feynman]

Just a quick update: We opted for Pulsonix. Price/Performance is really decent and the interface is intuitively enough too find out most stuff by playing around.