Have you ever need to return from DxDesigner to PADS Logic? If yes in which case?
Mentor does not have a translator to translate files from DxDesigner to PADS Logic.
Import dxdesign in altium and altium in padslogic.
We shouldn't need a Cadence tool to translate from one kind of Mentor design to another kind of Mentor design. It's not like Cadence is cheap.
I am wondering why you would want to go back to PADS Logic? I heard that DxDesigner was an upgrade to PADS Logic?
PADS Logic is a simple, easy to use tool for generating schematics, Bills of Materials, and interfacing to PADS Layout for pcb layout. Pretty much everything you need to put most designs into production. It is simple to learn, whereas DxD has a steeper learning curve.
DxD has tighter integration with the simulation tools, but the Hyperlynx support from Logic improved with PADS 9.#.
I keep wanting to switch to DxD, but I start climbing up the ramp to convert over, run out of time, decide it isn't worth the effort, and keep working with PADS Logic and getting products out the door. For this engineer, the KISS factor really applies.
Others with more DxD experience may now post with why they would never go back to Logic!
We don't use the simulation tools, we get everything we need from PADS Logic, so why complicate things with DxD? Logic is a very nice tool, intuitive and easy.
PADS Logic is the schematic design tool more pleasant and easy to use I have used.
According to my experience has only two penalties
- The design is very limited Hiearchical
- And the management of libraries is way too simple by default.
- No multi documents
If Mentor enhances this solution can compete better with CADSTAR and ORCAD cost / benefits, but do not understand why Mentor does not improve the PAD Logic!
I am currently learning to use the Dx and have found many things that can be improved, simple things that depend only on how to program the interface.
The Dx is ugly, but very powerful, especially the DxDatabook, is multi board, and the system is very powerful hiearchical.
In general do not understand why the Dx is so poorly designed in its graphical interface!
For most applications Dx is not necessary, but needs some improvements Pads Logic.
I think it is cheaper to improve Pads Logic, which make the Dx easy to use tool for this market.
Personally in a week I'm working with Dx!!
Mentor might view it that way, but not all users prefer DxDesigner over PADS Logic. DxDesigner is really a completely different tool that has both a different front end operating on a different data structure.
Cross-probing between PADS Layout and PADS Logic works very well, but other designers who work with me have said that DxDesigner to PADS Layout cross-probing is not as fully implemented.
More to the point, some organizations are mixed, with some designs existing in DxDesigner and others in PADS Logic. (My organization is one of these cases.) It's common in such a workplace to need to re-use parts of a PADS Logic design with parts of a DxDesigner design. The designer should have a choice of what design tool he wants to use in such a case and not be forced to use only DxDesigner, particularly when you need only a page of a DxDesigner schematic merged into a five-page PADS Logic design.
Retrieving data ...