Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 86 subscribers
  • Views 669 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

PCBDoc V6 Import

tbmph

Hi

 

is there any public timeline on the integration of the PCBDoc V6 import in CircuitStudio?

  • Hi,

    There is no published timeline on this feature. Is there anything in particular you are trying to import into CircuitStudio that cannot work with V5 binary format?

  • in reply to e14softwareuk

    Hi

     

    we are experiencing issues with e.g. polygon poring, vias when converting Altium Designer to CS PCBDoc V5 format.

    Also for exchanging data with AD it would be alot easier, if the v6 format would be supported - just as the importer states ;-)

    Our main development partner uses AD, we for reviews and minor changes ( e.g. moving/changing connectors or drill holes ) use CS.

    So before data exchange he has to export the PCB to V5, and so on...this makes it a hard to e.g. work on the same repository

     

    Regards

     

    Martin

  • in reply to tbmph

    I'm not a developer for Altium so don't take the following as absolute truth but my understanding is that CS is based on AD in many ways but there are some differences between the current versions in terms of algorithms currently implemented and polygons are one of those cases. Regardless of V5 or V6 format the way polygons are repoured is different between CS and AD and can potentially lead to minor differences in copper patterns in more complex or edge cases. In general there is great compatibility between CS and AD, having V6 format would probably not make any practical difference in terms of quality of data interchange.

  • in reply to e14softwareuk

    Would be nice to hear the whole story about this.

     

    CS uses a poorly obfuscated version of PCBDOC V6 as its native file format, so I really don't get what the big deal is about.  My only conclusion is Altium don't want too much compatibility between AD and CS as to make it a simple bi-directional move, might reduce sales of AD.

  • in reply to harvie256

    Don't forget that there are some major feature differences between CS and AD so there cannot be full bi-directional compatibility, CS simply would not know about some of the high end features of AD so I would not expect seamless interchange in all cases is possible.

  • in reply to e14softwareuk

    Hi

    thanks for all answers and sorry for the late reply...

     

    I don't expect full compatibility and all features at the reduced price level CS is sold at, but I would expect version compatibility on file format level.

    If some features are not supported, a dialog box with a hint and the import report would be sufficient from my point of view.

    To me simple data exchange, simple changes in component placement and reviews are absolutely sufficient at that price and target market. At least this was the reason we bought CS...

     

    The main show stopper is having to export in a legacy format from AD - which absolutely makes no sense for a new product. Especially not with the information, CS uses an obfuscated, truncated V6 internally...

    In my opinion this is wasted implementation effort, which could be spent on bug fixing or such...

     

    Otherwise the CS works great and is an absolutely great product for SMEs having external professionals designing devices. It's absolutely sufficient for reviews and minor changes like component replacements.