Feedback requested on Target3001 CAD Program

Hi to all,

I've been looking at some low end $400 to $1000 Schematic capture and
PCB layout programs. What seems like a new kid on the block is the
TARGET3001 CAD program.

http://www.ibfriedrich.com/english/index.htm

Feedback one their website is all very positive, no surprise. I've
spent a little time playing around with it and it looks pretty solid.

What I'm looking for is feedback from other users of the program. Is
this package as good as it seams, or do I need to take off my rose
colored glasses.

Thanks in Advance,
Rich, East Coast Optical Technologies, Inc
http://www.ecotechnologies.biz

 

Hi Rich,
I've been working with Target for 1 year now.Like every other program it
has advantages and disadvantages.Before I worked with Eagle
(Cadsoft).Eagle is easier to handle.You get a good schematic and a sharp
layout on the screen from the beginning without much adaptation of default
values.In Target you can adjust almost everything ( drill, trace width,
case outlines...) in your schematic and layout without going back to the
device-library. If you know how and where to adjust these things it is
very comfortable. But just there lies the crux.The menu is confusing and
the online-help and handbook are lousy.The default colors of schematic and
layout are miserable without your intervention.It took me about 3 weeks to
get a screen image that was acceptable to me.So what? there are people who
like Target (Forum) others are more sceptical (I).I think it depends on
your experience.Target is very flexible but at least for me difficult to
get accustomed to. Eagle is easier to learn, I guess.
Rolf

 

Hello Rolf,

Some time ago, when only workstation had enough computing power I was
trained on Mentor Graphics. I was not a great fan of it, at all.
Than for different smaller projects and to be faster with development I
used Orcad. When Orcad run under DOS it was outstanding at that time.
As some people on the boards wrote several times, the newer Orcad
versions are not that great anymore and people said, that parts of the
tool still run with patches in DOS background.
Agreed, Eagle it is easy to use and straight forward, but as most
projects have something special on the board, e.g. special IC, cut out,
mechanical integration, unique routing I found, that Eagle has
limitation. For simpler projects it is good and with the evaluation
level not bad. But particularly, when you change something on the
screen and it does not come out the way you draw it this can be
frustrating. You play for a long time until you found out what it is or
you give up.

This is in my humble opinion the beauty of TARGET3001. The IBF
companies philosophy is WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). And
that is really true. Also having good CAD drawing function can be
sometimes very helpful.
You are right, there are more elements which can be modified for the
user and as with any program you need to go through the learning
process. But once you know the right mouse clicks, short cuts the tool
is enormous efficient. The thing for me is I don't want to pay xk $
for a tool and than on top support fees. Target is a good balance
between pricing and performance and they keep adding on functions. I
like the tool and with the easy gerbering function a nice round up.

Your input on the poor help menu is something you should place on the
TARGET forum
http://www.ibfriedrich.com/cgibin/forum_e.cgi
or send an email to IBF (). The company is more
than happy to get feedback and improve their product. This is important
that the tool need to improve with the hardware and software changes.
Also if you have technical problems, I found that IBF usually posts an
answer within 24 hours and I assume if you email them the same will be
true - all for free, what a deal. This kind of service running on a
big boy's tool will cost you.
Regards,
...richard

 

Thank you Rolf and Rich for the inputs. I started to get fustrated
with Target and have loaded Eagle. Many parts in Targets library and
documentation retain their German origin. One feature that I really
liked in Target was the built in simulation capability. Unfortunately,
the learning curve is substantial and the documentation is somewhat
lacking. Eagle was definately easier to learn.

 

Here is a link to a "TARGET-crash course english" pdf-file.

http://ibfriedrich.com/english/engl_download.htm

Maybe it helps.
Regards, ..richard