LTspice, a great program, but that UI!

"John Larkin"  wrote in message 
news:65bdcctmdjne57af6j70j2hihcgvhhrsss@4ax.com...

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:33:47 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
<kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:

>wrote in message news:4t2ccc969i3l4h4o36f52hsaa1saj63du7@4ax.com...
>
>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:58:33 -0700, John Larkin
><jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:46:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:20:41 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 20:15:18 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:42:31 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
>>>>><kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"John Larkin"  wrote in message
>>>>>>news:pi2bcc1mmrc1027fui30jm0p0rr39n4nh8@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:46:53 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
>>>>>><kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"M Philbrook"  wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:MPG.332f37eeea23385398a015@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article <o9veuf$50c$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Every time I want to do something with LTspice I have to fight the
>>>>>>>> UI
>>>>>>>> something wicked.  Doing anything relating to commands is pure
>>>>>>>> torture.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I eventually figured out how to do what I wanted, but it is 
>>>>>>>>> amazing
>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>> poor not only the UI is, but the documentation.  I have learned
>>>>>>>>> programming languages by reading the manuals.  But I can't 
>>>>>>>>> decipher
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> .MEAS statement in LTspice along with many other features.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please be advised, LTspice and those like it are real programs
>>>>>>>> designed
>>>>>>>>for serious users in mind looking for real productivity tools for
>>>>>>>>those
>>>>>>>>that are PRODUCTIVE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Pardon?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I suspect that part of the motivation and value of the Analog Devices
>>>>>>>purchase of LTC was LT Spice; a couple of billion dollars worth 
>>>>>>>maybe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have to say, no way josa, and ROTFLMAO. :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>John. Not a chance in a billion that LTSpice has a business worth even
>>>>>>remotely near that value. Its a freebe, so it would be simply
>>>>>>impossible to
>>>>>>justify it as shareholder value as anything more than dubious
>>>>>>"goodwill".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>*The* fundamental reason companies buy other companies, is to take
>>>>>>their
>>>>>>*existing customers*, via the *products* that they *sell*. Its because
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>other company is eating into their markets or markets they want to
>>>>>>enter.
>>>>>>Its that simple. It has to be hard profit and loss quantifiable
>>>>>>motives,
>>>>>>that convince investors and shareholders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I propose that  LTSpice played no part whatsoever in Analog Devices
>>>>>>decision. Lets see if Mike pops up to contradict me.
>>>>>
>>>>>I would suggest that LTSpice gets LT repsonisble for a huge share of
>>>>>its high margin business.  It's the way they support smaller companies
>>>>>(where the margins are higher).  There is no other way to justify
>>>>>their prices.
>>>>
>>>>We had a team of LTC folks visit us last Wednesday, partly to tell us
>>>>about the expected effects of the ADI acquisition. They agreed with me
>>>>that LT Spice is going to be important to ADI, and that LT Spice has
>>>>probably sold gigabucks of parts so far.
>>>>
>>>>Some of their parts are good deals. Not gumdrop opamps or regulators,
>>>>but things like fast ADCs and multi-channel serial DACs.
>>>>
>>>>We've used thousands of their LTM micro-brick switchers. Nice quiet
>>>>little things.
>>>
>>>Way too expensive.  When we can buy SMPS regulator chips for well less
>>>than $.50 (and add another $.20 for passives), these sorts of things
>>>don't hold the interest much.
>>
>>"Expensive" depends on the context. They are small, convenient, and as
>>I noted, very quiet. Two inches away from a 250 MHz, 12 bit ADC, I
>>don't want a lot of switching spikes in my ground plane.
>
>>You've just stated my point about LTSpice, and LT in general.  Great
>>stuff, if you're making tens or hundreds a month.  Not so great if
>>you're making thousands or hundreds of thousands.  TI doesn't give
>>much support for people making tens or hundreds but...
>
>>It's a matter of market.  LTSpice allows LT to go after the high
>>margin business, where they want to play.
>
>This claim makes no sense. LTSpice is *only* a *simulation* program.  A
>simulation program can't "allow" them to sell parts.
>
>LTSpice is, essentially, an advertising tool. It simply puts the name LT on
>the desktop. Sure, this has value, but purchasing departments don't buy
>parts based on simulating LT chips on a computer, its, does the part meet
>the performance required, at a cost I am willing to be, with an acceptable
>lead time .
>
>
>

>Purchasing departments buy what engineers put on the BOM. If the part
>is sole-source, they have no choice.

>In most cases, an engineer can even declare an LM317 to be
>sole-source. Much less an LTC2242.

>My purchasing dept is not allowed to overrule an engineering decision
>and buy whatever they want. Heaven help companies where they are.

>I know lots of engineers who pull a part off the LT Spice parts menu,
>sim their circuit, and design in the LTC part.

Let me clarify,

For engineers, its, does the part meet the performance required, at a cost 
the company is willing to pay, with an acceptable lead time.

If an engineer does not design in parts based on that basis, he is not an 
engineer.

>LTC just sold to ADI for $12 billion, about 10x annual sales. That's
>pretty good.


That is pretty good for LT. For product designers, its bad news.

Kevin Aylward
kevin@kevinaylward.co.uk
www.kevinaylward.co.uk 

"John Larkin"  wrote in message 
news:80bdcclpctdk8lageprr2rpsf4rduih7sf@4ax.com...


>>>
>>>Pardon?
>>
>>>I suspect that part of the motivation and value of the Analog Devices
>>>purchase of LTC was LT Spice; a couple of billion dollars worth maybe.
>>
>>I have to say, no way josa, and ROTFLMAO. :-)
>>
>>John. Not a chance in a billion that LTSpice has a business worth even
>>remotely near that value. Its a freebe, so it would be simply impossible 
>>to
>>justify it as shareholder value as anything more than dubious "goodwill".
>>
>>*The* fundamental reason companies buy other companies, is to take their
>>*existing customers*, via the *products* that they *sell*. Its because the
>>other company is eating into their markets or markets they want to enter.
>>Its that simple. It has to be hard profit and loss quantifiable motives,
>>that convince investors and shareholders.
>>
>>I propose that  LTSpice played no part whatsoever in Analog Devices
>>decision. Lets see if Mike pops up to contradict me.
>>
>>
>
>
>>LT Spice has sold a lot of LT parts.
>
>Maybe, maybe not. How do know? What physical evidence is there of that?
>
>

>The fact that it is available for download, free. And the fact that
>other semi makers are offering similar free simulators for their
>parts.

None of that is *evidence* that providing simulators sells any parts at all, 
let alone, lots of parts. Its quite likely that it will improve sales a tad, 
but just how much is guesswork.

>And because the LTC people physically told me so last week.

That is some evidence, in the legal sense, but without numbers, and reasons 
for the numbers, it don't mean what they said was accurate or even the 
truth. As I noted, what would you expect them to say. "LTSpice is a total 
loss to us".

When I was designing board level stuff, I would evaluate pretty every single 
semiconductor company for the equivalent part I was planning to design in. 
Its part of the process of being an engineer. You are going to try and get 
the best compromise of performance, cost and availability. It would be just 
insane to design in a part just because that was in the kit of your freebe 
sim tool. Like, you aren't going to check out any alternatives? This is the 
real world. I don't believe any competent engineer would do such a daft 
thing.

So, no, I don't believe that LTSpice makes much of a difference in sales.



-- Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - SuperSpice
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/index.html 

On 3/13/2017 12:26 PM, Kevin Aylward wrote:
> "John Larkin"  wrote in message
> news:80bdcclpctdk8lageprr2rpsf4rduih7sf@4ax.com...
>
>
>>>>
>>>> Pardon?
>>>
>>>> I suspect that part of the motivation and value of the Analog Devices
>>>> purchase of LTC was LT Spice; a couple of billion dollars worth maybe.
>>>
>>> I have to say, no way josa, and ROTFLMAO. :-)
>>>
>>> John. Not a chance in a billion that LTSpice has a business worth even
>>> remotely near that value. Its a freebe, so it would be simply
>>> impossible to
>>> justify it as shareholder value as anything more than dubious
>>> "goodwill".
>>>
>>> *The* fundamental reason companies buy other companies, is to take their
>>> *existing customers*, via the *products* that they *sell*. Its
>>> because the
>>> other company is eating into their markets or markets they want to
>>> enter.
>>> Its that simple. It has to be hard profit and loss quantifiable motives,
>>> that convince investors and shareholders.
>>>
>>> I propose that  LTSpice played no part whatsoever in Analog Devices
>>> decision. Lets see if Mike pops up to contradict me.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>> LT Spice has sold a lot of LT parts.
>>
>> Maybe, maybe not. How do know? What physical evidence is there of that?
>>
>>
>
>> The fact that it is available for download, free. And the fact that
>> other semi makers are offering similar free simulators for their
>> parts.
>
> None of that is *evidence* that providing simulators sells any parts at
> all, let alone, lots of parts. Its quite likely that it will improve
> sales a tad, but just how much is guesswork.
>
>> And because the LTC people physically told me so last week.
>
> That is some evidence, in the legal sense, but without numbers, and
> reasons for the numbers, it don't mean what they said was accurate or
> even the truth. As I noted, what would you expect them to say. "LTSpice
> is a total loss to us".
>
> When I was designing board level stuff, I would evaluate pretty every
> single semiconductor company for the equivalent part I was planning to
> design in. Its part of the process of being an engineer. You are going
> to try and get the best compromise of performance, cost and
> availability. It would be just insane to design in a part just because
> that was in the kit of your freebe sim tool. Like, you aren't going to
> check out any alternatives? This is the real world. I don't believe any
> competent engineer would do such a daft thing.
>
> So, no, I don't believe that LTSpice makes much of a difference in sales.

Maybe, maybe not. How do you know? What physical evidence is there of 
that? Your opinion is no better than John's.

On 3/13/2017 12:00 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:29:22 +0100, Robert Loos <1209@baer-gmbh.com>
> wrote:
>
>> May be it looks a little bit home made and uses odd shortcuts but it has
>> one feature that makes entering schematics as fast as no second program
>> I know:
> [snip]
>>
>> Robert
>
> Monumental BS.

Considering his statement, your reply is a bit lacking in logic, isn't 
it Jim?

He gave no indication that he knows MicroSim PSpice, so his statement is 
not necessarily "Monumental BS".

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:26:38 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
<kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:

>"John Larkin"  wrote in message 
>news:80bdcclpctdk8lageprr2rpsf4rduih7sf@4ax.com...
>
>
>>>>
>>>>Pardon?
>>>
>>>>I suspect that part of the motivation and value of the Analog Devices
>>>>purchase of LTC was LT Spice; a couple of billion dollars worth maybe.
>>>
>>>I have to say, no way josa, and ROTFLMAO. :-)
>>>
>>>John. Not a chance in a billion that LTSpice has a business worth even
>>>remotely near that value. Its a freebe, so it would be simply impossible 
>>>to
>>>justify it as shareholder value as anything more than dubious "goodwill".
>>>
>>>*The* fundamental reason companies buy other companies, is to take their
>>>*existing customers*, via the *products* that they *sell*. Its because the
>>>other company is eating into their markets or markets they want to enter.
>>>Its that simple. It has to be hard profit and loss quantifiable motives,
>>>that convince investors and shareholders.
>>>
>>>I propose that  LTSpice played no part whatsoever in Analog Devices
>>>decision. Lets see if Mike pops up to contradict me.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>>LT Spice has sold a lot of LT parts.
>>
>>Maybe, maybe not. How do know? What physical evidence is there of that?
>>
>>
>
>>The fact that it is available for download, free. And the fact that
>>other semi makers are offering similar free simulators for their
>>parts.
>
>None of that is *evidence* that providing simulators sells any parts at all, 
>let alone, lots of parts. Its quite likely that it will improve sales a tad, 
>but just how much is guesswork.
>
>>And because the LTC people physically told me so last week.
>
>That is some evidence, in the legal sense, but without numbers, and reasons 
>for the numbers, it don't mean what they said was accurate or even the 
>truth. As I noted, what would you expect them to say. "LTSpice is a total 
>loss to us".
>
>When I was designing board level stuff, I would evaluate pretty every single 
>semiconductor company for the equivalent part I was planning to design in. 
>Its part of the process of being an engineer. You are going to try and get 
>the best compromise of performance, cost and availability. It would be just 
>insane to design in a part just because that was in the kit of your freebe 
>sim tool. Like, you aren't going to check out any alternatives? This is the 
>real world. I don't believe any competent engineer would do such a daft 
>thing.

Engineering is expensive. Risk can be expensive. Performance can be
valuable. Getting a product to market matters. There's more to
engineering than minimizing the BOM cost.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/PCBs/TEM2_Power_Board.JPG


>
>So, no, I don't believe that LTSpice makes much of a difference in sales.

There wouldn't be a tad of jealousy there, huh?


-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing   precision measurement 

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

"Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> writes:

> "John Larkin"  wrote in message
> news:80bdcclpctdk8lageprr2rpsf4rduih7sf@4ax.com...
>
>
>>>>
>>>>Pardon?
>>>
>>>>I suspect that part of the motivation and value of the Analog Devices
>>>>purchase of LTC was LT Spice; a couple of billion dollars worth maybe.
>>>
>>>I have to say, no way josa, and ROTFLMAO. :-)
>>>
>>>John. Not a chance in a billion that LTSpice has a business worth even
>>> remotely near that value. Its a freebe, so it would be simply
>>> impossible to
>>>justify it as shareholder value as anything more than dubious "goodwill".
>>>
>>>*The* fundamental reason companies buy other companies, is to take their
>>>*existing customers*, via the *products* that they *sell*. Its because the
>>>other company is eating into their markets or markets they want to enter.
>>>Its that simple. It has to be hard profit and loss quantifiable motives,
>>>that convince investors and shareholders.
>>>
>>>I propose that  LTSpice played no part whatsoever in Analog Devices
>>>decision. Lets see if Mike pops up to contradict me.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>>LT Spice has sold a lot of LT parts.
>>
>>Maybe, maybe not. How do know? What physical evidence is there of that?
>>
>>
>
>>The fact that it is available for download, free. And the fact that
>>other semi makers are offering similar free simulators for their
>>parts.
>
> None of that is *evidence* that providing simulators sells any parts
> at all, let alone, lots of parts. Its quite likely that it will
> improve sales a tad, but just how much is guesswork.
>
>>And because the LTC people physically told me so last week.
>
> That is some evidence, in the legal sense, but without numbers, and
> reasons for the numbers, it don't mean what they said was accurate or
> even the truth. As I noted, what would you expect them to
> say. "LTSpice is a total loss to us".
>
> When I was designing board level stuff, I would evaluate pretty every
> single semiconductor company for the equivalent part I was planning to
> design in. Its part of the process of being an engineer. You are going
> to try and get the best compromise of performance, cost and
> availability. It would be just insane to design in a part just because
> that was in the kit of your freebe sim tool. Like, you aren't going to
> check out any alternatives? This is the real world. I don't believe
> any competent engineer would do such a daft thing.

It depends entirely on the expected production volumes doesn't it? There
are also a lot of unique / niche parts.


-- 

John Devereux

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:17:58 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
<kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:

>"John Larkin"  wrote in message 
>news:65bdcctmdjne57af6j70j2hihcgvhhrsss@4ax.com...
>
>On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:33:47 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
><kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>wrote in message news:4t2ccc969i3l4h4o36f52hsaa1saj63du7@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:58:33 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:46:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:20:41 -0700, John Larkin
>>>><jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 20:15:18 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:42:31 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
>>>>>><kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"John Larkin"  wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:pi2bcc1mmrc1027fui30jm0p0rr39n4nh8@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:46:53 -0000, "Kevin Aylward"
>>>>>>><kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"M Philbrook"  wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:MPG.332f37eeea23385398a015@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In article <o9veuf$50c$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Every time I want to do something with LTspice I have to fight the
>>>>>>>>> UI
>>>>>>>>> something wicked.  Doing anything relating to commands is pure
>>>>>>>>> torture.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I eventually figured out how to do what I wanted, but it is 
>>>>>>>>>> amazing
>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>> poor not only the UI is, but the documentation.  I have learned
>>>>>>>>>> programming languages by reading the manuals.  But I can't 
>>>>>>>>>> decipher
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> .MEAS statement in LTspice along with many other features.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please be advised, LTspice and those like it are real programs
>>>>>>>>> designed
>>>>>>>>>for serious users in mind looking for real productivity tools for
>>>>>>>>>those
>>>>>>>>>that are PRODUCTIVE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Pardon?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I suspect that part of the motivation and value of the Analog Devices
>>>>>>>>purchase of LTC was LT Spice; a couple of billion dollars worth 
>>>>>>>>maybe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have to say, no way josa, and ROTFLMAO. :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>John. Not a chance in a billion that LTSpice has a business worth even
>>>>>>>remotely near that value. Its a freebe, so it would be simply
>>>>>>>impossible to
>>>>>>>justify it as shareholder value as anything more than dubious
>>>>>>>"goodwill".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>*The* fundamental reason companies buy other companies, is to take
>>>>>>>their
>>>>>>>*existing customers*, via the *products* that they *sell*. Its because
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>other company is eating into their markets or markets they want to
>>>>>>>enter.
>>>>>>>Its that simple. It has to be hard profit and loss quantifiable
>>>>>>>motives,
>>>>>>>that convince investors and shareholders.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I propose that  LTSpice played no part whatsoever in Analog Devices
>>>>>>>decision. Lets see if Mike pops up to contradict me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I would suggest that LTSpice gets LT repsonisble for a huge share of
>>>>>>its high margin business.  It's the way they support smaller companies
>>>>>>(where the margins are higher).  There is no other way to justify
>>>>>>their prices.
>>>>>
>>>>>We had a team of LTC folks visit us last Wednesday, partly to tell us
>>>>>about the expected effects of the ADI acquisition. They agreed with me
>>>>>that LT Spice is going to be important to ADI, and that LT Spice has
>>>>>probably sold gigabucks of parts so far.
>>>>>
>>>>>Some of their parts are good deals. Not gumdrop opamps or regulators,
>>>>>but things like fast ADCs and multi-channel serial DACs.
>>>>>
>>>>>We've used thousands of their LTM micro-brick switchers. Nice quiet
>>>>>little things.
>>>>
>>>>Way too expensive.  When we can buy SMPS regulator chips for well less
>>>>than $.50 (and add another $.20 for passives), these sorts of things
>>>>don't hold the interest much.
>>>
>>>"Expensive" depends on the context. They are small, convenient, and as
>>>I noted, very quiet. Two inches away from a 250 MHz, 12 bit ADC, I
>>>don't want a lot of switching spikes in my ground plane.
>>
>>>You've just stated my point about LTSpice, and LT in general.  Great
>>>stuff, if you're making tens or hundreds a month.  Not so great if
>>>you're making thousands or hundreds of thousands.  TI doesn't give
>>>much support for people making tens or hundreds but...
>>
>>>It's a matter of market.  LTSpice allows LT to go after the high
>>>margin business, where they want to play.
>>
>>This claim makes no sense. LTSpice is *only* a *simulation* program.  A
>>simulation program can't "allow" them to sell parts.
>>
>>LTSpice is, essentially, an advertising tool. It simply puts the name LT on
>>the desktop. Sure, this has value, but purchasing departments don't buy
>>parts based on simulating LT chips on a computer, its, does the part meet
>>the performance required, at a cost I am willing to be, with an acceptable
>>lead time .
>>
>>
>>
>
>>Purchasing departments buy what engineers put on the BOM. If the part
>>is sole-source, they have no choice.
>
>>In most cases, an engineer can even declare an LM317 to be
>>sole-source. Much less an LTC2242.
>
>>My purchasing dept is not allowed to overrule an engineering decision
>>and buy whatever they want. Heaven help companies where they are.
>
>>I know lots of engineers who pull a part off the LT Spice parts menu,
>>sim their circuit, and design in the LTC part.
>
>Let me clarify,
>
>For engineers, its, does the part meet the performance required, at a cost 
>the company is willing to pay, with an acceptable lead time.

I get to decide what the company is willing to pay, so that simplifies
the process some. 

But not many purchasing departments are going to challenge an engineer
on his design choices.

>
>If an engineer does not design in parts based on that basis, he is not an 
>engineer.

We seem to have different definitions of "engineer."

Part of what I do is amuse myself and learn things. Sometimes I do
things new ways, or use new parts, for other reasons than piece price.




-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing   precision measurement 

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:00:24 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:29:22 +0100, Robert Loos <1209@baer-gmbh.com>
>wrote:
>
>>May be it looks a little bit home made and uses odd shortcuts but it has 
>>one feature that makes entering schematics as fast as no second program 
>>I know:
>[snip]
>>
>>Robert
>
>Monumental BS.
>
>I invite anyone who thinks that the LTspice GUI is "as fast as no
>second program I know" to drop by, if you're in the East Valley area
>of the Phoenix 'burbs, and see a demonstration of a real schematic
>capture.
>
>Bring your laptop.
>
>At that time we'll locate a mutually acceptable schematic image off
>the web, you can enter it in LTspice, I'll enter with MicroSim PSpice
>Schematics... you'll get your ass whipped >:-}
>		
>                                        ...Jim Thompson

Challenge them to a drag race too. And a fist fight.

But not a cook-off. You'd lose that one.


-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing   precision measurement 

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

>"John Larkin"  wrote in message 
>news:66sdccpjrn4sgm0dohodvrhlosuuru05hp@4ax.com...

>
>>And because the LTC people physically told me so last week.
>
>>That is some evidence, in the legal sense, but without numbers, and 
>>reasons
>>for the numbers, it don't mean what they said was accurate or even the
>>truth. As I noted, what would you expect them to say. "LTSpice is a total
>>loss to us".
>
>>When I was designing board level stuff, I would evaluate pretty every 
>>single
>>semiconductor company for the equivalent part I was planning to design in.
>>Its part of the process of being an engineer. You are going to try and get
>>the best compromise of performance, cost and availability. It would be 
>>just
>>insane to design in a part just because that was in the kit of your freebe
>>sim tool. Like, you aren't going to check out any alternatives? This is 
>>the
>>real world. I don't believe any competent engineer would do such a daft
>thing.

>Engineering is expensive. Risk can be expensive. Performance can be
>valuable. Getting a product to market matters. There's more to
>engineering than minimizing the BOM cost.

Sure, but one needs to step back a bit here, and examine reality.

Are you really claiming that  a competent  engineer is not even going to 
spend 30 mins on the web. Like *30 min* out of months of development costs, 
simply to check out if another suitable part might even exist?


>So, no, I don't believe that LTSpice makes much of a difference in sales.

>There wouldn't be a tad of jealousy there, huh?

No. I have given a lot of thought to what is the value of freebee stuff like 
this, and it is not a lot, imo. The reality is, and taking into account your 
valid comment in principle of minimising development time,  its simple not a 
rational way to develop products to not do even the most minimal check of 
alternative parts. Its even usually a requirement to design, whenever 
possible, a product where you can second source parts.

So, no I don't believe that a competent engineer, using LTSice, will refuse 
to even go on the web for *5 minutes* to check if something else is 
available. Its utter nonsense to suggest that this wouldn't happen. So, 
LTSpice cannot possibly be a genuine *cause* to buy an LT part. The LT part 
will be compared to another part, and the then optimum chosen, and it wont 
matter whether LTSpice is there or not.

This is how advertising works.

The fundamental point of advertisement is to let the customer know that you 
actually exist. Period.

In 1985, if MicroSim did not advertise in magazines, no one would know about 
it.
if Intusoft did not advertise in magazines, no one would know about it.

Once engineers know about them, they *WILL* technically evaluate *which* one 
suits them best. They don't go, oh, ok, I'll just take the first one I find. 
This is not selling perfume.

Today, we have Google. We can all discover TI, Analog Devices  and LT, so 
the value of freebees, today, has been greatly diminished.

An engineering product is designed based on technical, objective 
considerations. Not even spending 5 bloody minutes looking for an 
alternative via Google is fantasy. I don't believe for a second that any 
engineer does this. Once alternatives are discovered, an engineer will 
evaluate them to see if they are a better option.


-- Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - SuperSpice
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/index.html 

>"John Devereux"  wrote in message news:87pohlf007.fsf@devereux.me.uk...


>>The fact that it is available for download, free. And the fact that
>>other semi makers are offering similar free simulators for their
>>parts.
>
> None of that is *evidence* that providing simulators sells any parts
> at all, let alone, lots of parts. Its quite likely that it will
> improve sales a tad, but just how much is guesswork.
>
>>And because the LTC people physically told me so last week.
>
> That is some evidence, in the legal sense, but without numbers, and
> reasons for the numbers, it don't mean what they said was accurate or
> even the truth. As I noted, what would you expect them to
> say. "LTSpice is a total loss to us".
>
> When I was designing board level stuff, I would evaluate pretty every
> single semiconductor company for the equivalent part I was planning to
> design in. Its part of the process of being an engineer. You are going
> to try and get the best compromise of performance, cost and
> availability. It would be just insane to design in a part just because
> that was in the kit of your freebe sim tool. Like, you aren't going to
> check out any alternatives? This is the real world. I don't believe
> any competent engineer would do such a daft thing.

>It depends entirely on the expected production volumes doesn't it? There
>are also a lot of unique / niche parts.

Sure, but if it was unique to LT, then they would buy it because its unique 
to LT, LTSpice wouldn't matter .


-- Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk - SuperSpice
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/index.html