Connect with us

PSpice Demo in Windows Vista

Discussion in 'CAD' started by Bob Penoyer, Mar 31, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Bob Penoyer

    Bob Penoyer Guest

    I'm having problems with PSpice Demo 10.0 under Vista.

    When I tried to install PSpice into Vista, it didn't want to install
    because it recognized that I wasn't using NT, 2000, or XP. So I used
    the Compatibility Wizard and installed it as Windows XP.

    But when I run Capture CIS and create a new project, Capture is
    missing a toolbar. The missing toolbar is the one that contains the
    Simulation Settings, the Run button, and the V, I, and W buttons. I
    can't run a simulation without those.

    Have I missed setting an option? Is Vista the reason the toolbar
    doesn't appear?
  2. JeffM

    JeffM Guest

  3. Bob Penoyer

    Bob Penoyer Guest

    Thanks, but I use it at work and I'm very comfortable with it. I
    sometimes use the Demo version at home for little tasks or to check
    ideas. I DO want to have the PSpice Demo working on the Vista machine.
  4. Robert

    Robert Guest

    Any chance you just installed Capture CIS and not PSpice as well? They are
    separate Programs and (IIRC) separate choices in the Install Routine.

  5. Bob Penoyer

    Bob Penoyer Guest

    No. The whole OrCAD 10.0 Demo group is installed.
  6. Robert

    Robert Guest

    Well, one problem I've heard of is any Installed Program that tries to write
    to the Windows Directory or others that Vista considers "System" is
    intercepted and made to write to one of the sub-directory off the Logged-On
    User's Profile Directory.

    It could be after the Program came up (or during install) it tried to write
    configuration information to one of those Protected Directories (perhaps to
    update an *.ini file) and Vista rerouted it to somewhere else. Now there's
    not a complete *.ini file.

    Try looking for where the old *.ini file is stored and look on the new
    machine to see if it's set up the same way.

    But watch out, apparently Vista does the same thing to you if you try and
    "fix/edit" a file in one of those protective spots. The only way around it
    I've heard is to copy the file from the protected spot to an unprotected
    area, make the changes, and copy it back.

  7. Two things. First, take a look at the Project view, and see what is at
    the top. It should have Analog/Mixed Signal there. If it has PCB, then
    you won't have any PSpice tools available. Start a new project, making
    sure you choose Analog/Mixed Signal. If you do it in the same directory
    with the same name as the DSN file, it will inherit the DSN file.

    Second, you are in Terra Incognita. Even the latest versions have not
    been tested or even supported under Vista, much less the old 10.0
    version. Folks always insist on taking old software and trying to run
    it in new OS, and then complain when they don't work... :cool:

  8. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    I purchased full pro versions of both Win2K and WinXP. When I need to
    replace a PC again, I'll just roll my own. I'm tired of Micro$hit
    dominating my life with crap.

    ...Jim Thompson
  9. Chuck Harris

    Chuck Harris Guest

    What's that I hear? Can it be? I think there's a new linux user a-coming!

    For a giggle, take a look at:

  10. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    I don't really want to be the one defending Microsoft here, but *most*
    problems that older software has with Vista has to do with "doing things" they
    shouldn't have been doing for many *years* now anyway, such as writing to
    non-user-specific parts of the registry, adding or changing system files, etc.

    ORCAD 10.0 is perhaps old enough that it isn't reasonable to expect it to work
    on Vista, but you can't seriously call yourself a professional software
    development house if you haven't even begun testing your product on an OS that
    was first released for beta testing well over a year ago!
  11. Chuck Harris

    Chuck Harris Guest

    Well, some of the problems with programs in Vista could be relative to the very
    aggressive DRM protection junk MS added. For instance Vista scans every device
    and part of the machine at a 30ms rate to make sure that nothing has been tampered
    with. They software encrypt anything they think might be DRM'd that comes out
    of a CD, or DVD drive before it hits the disk.

    All of this DRM paranoia makes your machine run much better, I'm sure.

  12. JeffM

    JeffM Guest

    ....yet you are still paying the Microsoft Tax(tm).

    That was the 1st thing that crossed my mind:
    WINE (, besides *whine*. :cool:
    It couldn't do any worse a job for the OP than Vista did.

    Has anybody run a CAD using the Windoze API replacement?

    A Virtual Machine seems like another great notion.
    I would call being able to kill -9 a process
    a much better paradigm than rebooting the box.
  13. Chuck Harris

    Chuck Harris Guest

    The old dos orcad tools run just fine under dosemu,
    LTSpice runs great under wine, and so does DesignCAD.

  14. Ummmm... No, I don't think so!

    In corporate software environments, especially in the CAD world, they
    have gotten bitten WAY too many times by the "Just develop for the BETA"
    trap, only to find that the actual release software has gotchas out the
    ying-yang for those stupid (and foolish) enough to work with the beta.
    So, big companies wait until the actual, released software (actually,
    until at least the first service pack comes out that fixes the worst
    bugs) before trying to adapt to the new OS. THEN, they see what gets
    broken by the new OS and work from there.

    Of course, that still doesn't stop MS from then breaking the software
    AGAIN with a new service pack. I mean, after all, if all your MSF
    routines automatically register themselves, and then the OS starts
    blocking the registry, how could that be MS's fault! :cool:

  15. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    Hi Charlie,

    Sure, I agree, if you develop for a beta version of the OS, inevitably
    something will change and some of your development efforts will have been
    wasted. Still, this is no worse for Cadence than it is for Adobe or Corel or
    any other software company now, is it? So, you spend, I dunno, 120% of the
    effort required to get ORCAD working if you wait until Vista is officially
    released by instead developing with the betas, but the upside is that you
    impress current and potential new customers with your responsiveness. To many
    customers, that's worth something. To me it's indicative ofa copmany that's
    serious about their software development, rather than just thinking that
    software development is a necessary evil required to sell a product to make

    Note that getting software to work in Vista really does tend to improve the
    software's overall quality, since it forces programmers not to take as many
    "shortcuts" as they've been allowed to do (but discouraged from doing so) for
    some time now.

    Given that ORCAD has had some absurdly stupid bugs in it for many years now --
    e.g., the line widths shown in the symbol editor are, except for the skinniest
    one, not the same line widths that are shown when you place a symbol on a
    capture schematic -- I would suggest that Cadence should do everything it can
    to promote an image of being serious about quality software development.

    For that matter, just what are the ORCAD programmers sitting around and doing
    these days if now working on Vista compatibility and bug fixes? There were
    minimal changes between 10.5 and 15.7, after all!
    Yes, this is a common strategy for larger companies.
    Umm... but don't you think there's plenty of corporate goodwill to be garnered
    if *your* package is *not* on the list of, "Things that break with Vista" by
    that point? From what you're saying, I'm guessing that Vista will probably
    have been out at least a year before ORCAD begins to work on it?

    It's one thing if you're just a garage shop or some individual with a software
    package that you sell for peanuts and the software can be considered, "as is"
    with no expectations of upgrades or bug fixes or future OS compatibility
    changes over time. But for what Cadence charges for ORCAD, they're clearly
    not in this same league, and it's reasonable for people to expect a lot more.
    By MSF do you mean... Microsoft Framework? Or something else?


    P.S. -- Another thing that makes ORCAD 15.7 look like something from a garage
    shop software company is the NEARLY 100!!! exceptions that it sticks in the
    Windows Firewall "exceptions" list. Sheesh! You can't tell me that's REALLY
    needed and not just some ultra-lazy programmer's implementation of a
    "workaround," can you?
  16. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    Vista hasn't been translated to Hindu yet ?:)

    ...Jim Thompson
  17. Hi Joel,
    Don't want to go into a flame war, but I speak with way too much
    experience on this. Yes, I am talking Microsoft Framework, the tools
    developed by Microsoft for development in the Windows environment. They
    got everyone to use COM to communicate between processes, and then shut
    down the communications channels, which is why Orcad and I am sure a
    bunch of other vendors, had to patch in huge lists of exceptions for the
    Windows firewall. You don't know the structure of the Orcad
    executables, and neither do I (though I probably have a better grasp of
    it... :cool: ) but I know that all of those exceptions were needed to make
    SURE that the software would run, at least on most machines.

    And, you must know that there are very few developers on the Orcad
    product line at this time, and they must also share their time on other
    products as well. I can't say more... ;-)

  18. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    Hi Charlie,

    I don't know of any "non-network" application (e.g., other CAD programs, MS
    Office, etc.) that have to do this. I've done very little COM programming,
    but what I have done used GUIDs and not IP addresses, so I'm not certain how
    the Windows firewall would ever get a wiff of what's going on anyway;
    perhaps they're using DCOM? (Although I couldn't guess why. The one COM
    control I wrote a couple years ago still works, though, under WinXP SP2!)
    So while I admittedly don't have knowledge of the structure of the OrCAD
    executables, this "nearly 100 rules added to the firewall" strikes me as --
    at best -- a patch while the programmers go and figure out how what they're
    "supposed" to be doing.
    Yeah, understood. Thanks for the information Charlie; I appreciate your
    efforts to help out the numerous OrCAD users out here!

  19. Chuck Harris

    Chuck Harris Guest

    Could it be that 'doze XP does something similar to what X does in unix land?

    X was designed to run on remote workstation terminals, and as such
    it expects to receive all of its commands over the network interface. In the
    typical unix system, X uses the network "loopback" interface to make that
    connection. So, the firewall would know about everything that goes between the
    X client and the X server.

Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day