On 3/4/2023 1:26 PM, Ricky wrote:> On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 11:18:09 AM UTC-5, John S wrote: >> On 3/3/2023 8:34 PM, Ricky wrote: >>> On Friday, March 3, 2023 at 7:06:11 AM UTC-5, John S wrote: >>>> On 3/2/2023 7:38 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 9:18:10 PM UTC-4, John S wrote: >>>>>> On 3/2/2023 5:25 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>>>> Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Which version of LTSpice? >>>>> >>>>> Did the UI change? I must have missed that. This is 17.0.36 >>>>> >>>> Yes, it changed from IV to XVII. >>>> >>>> I don't use 17. >>> >>> Ok... Are you suggesting the UI has significantly changed between the two lineages??? Are they still updating IV? >>> >> I'm not sure about all the UI changes > > So it may not have changed? >Well, how could I know? I have already stated that I did not continue using V17. Have I misinterpreted your question? -- Dogs make me happy. Humans make my head hurt.
LTSpice UI
Started by ●March 2, 2023
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On 3/4/2023 1:47 PM, John Larkin wrote:> On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 10:17:54 -0600, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> wrote: > >> On 3/3/2023 8:34 PM, Ricky wrote: >>> On Friday, March 3, 2023 at 7:06:11?AM UTC-5, John S wrote: >>>> On 3/2/2023 7:38 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 9:18:10?PM UTC-4, John S wrote: >>>>>> On 3/2/2023 5:25 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>>>> Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Which version of LTSpice? >>>>> >>>>> Did the UI change? I must have missed that. This is 17.0.36 >>>>> >>>> Yes, it changed from IV to XVII. >>>> >>>> I don't use 17. >>> >>> Ok... Are you suggesting the UI has significantly changed between the two lineages??? Are they still updating IV? >>> >> >> I'm not sure about all the UI changes but I had some undesired results >> using V17 when it first came out so I decided to stay with V4. No, they >> are not updating V4. I don't need updated components because I am always >> checking out my crazy ideas in small, simple networks just for sanity's >> sake. > > ADI has been adding a lot of device models, but some are mediocre or > worse. >Yeah, I'm not surprised. The best days are probably behind us. -- Dogs make me happy. Humans make my head hurt.
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On 3/3/2023 8:53 PM, John Larkin wrote:> On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 06:05:58 -0600, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> wrote: > >> On 3/2/2023 7:38 PM, Ricky wrote: >>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 9:18:10?PM UTC-4, John S wrote: >>>> On 3/2/2023 5:25 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>> Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? >>>>> >>>>> I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. >>>>> >>>>> I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. >>>>> >>>> Which version of LTSpice? >>> >>> Did the UI change? I must have missed that. This is 17.0.36 >>> >> >> >> Yes, it changed from IV to XVII. > > Not much. And there is a setting for roller zoom direction. > >> >> I don't use 17. > > Why not? It works great and has all the new ADI models (of various > quality)I made a choice some time ago. You ever do that? Sort of like asking someone if they ever jack off in public and, when they say no, you ask why not? -- Dogs make me happy. Humans make my head hurt.
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 3:40:06 PM UTC-5, Simon S Aysdie wrote:> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 3:25:38 PM UTC-8, Ricky wrote: > > Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? > It's okay. Not bad, for sure. All LTspice does is spice sims, so it doesn't need a lot. Because I've used Mentor means I've had much greater suffering in my life than using LTspice. > > I think the editor has a lineage somehow aligned with Cohesion Designer. But I am not sure. > > I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. > Scroll wheel works the same as other progs for me. (Some other programs need the CTRL button pushed simultaneously with wheel scroll, but the direction is the same.)Someone mentioned that the scroll wheel direction is a selection in the control panel, so that is now fixed. But it is still a hurky-jerky mess. Very sensitive to the speed. This results in aberrant zooms of much more speed than expected, while also being very insensitive to slow movements of the scroll wheel. Now, I need to get used to it being like other apps... lol. It doesn't take long to mess up decades of muscle memory.> Alt+backspace is still undo after 20+ years. It isn't documented anymore, I think. It is also F9. Rather odd. But you can change these. See > > C:\Users\%username%\AppData\Roaming\LTspiceXVII.iniYes, I've found the nearly impossible to view settings table for the keys. Fortunately I make few mistakes, so this one doesn't matter... lol As if!> > I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. ... > > I don't see the point, frankly, unless he's writing one for TI. > > > ...There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. > > TI loses SMPS business because ADI/Linear have a simulator and fast SMPS sim models. I mean, that was the whole point. It was first called "SwitcherCAD."Yes, and TI tried with their own. But LTspice has a lot of inertia. I believe it is used in schools a lot. Right now I'm fighting the PWL format. I need to measure the spectrum of an IRIG signal. The only way I can think to generate a realistic one is to use a PWL file to control the amplitude of a 1kHz sine wave. I expect there's a feature somewhere that lets you do this with some "simple" feature, but it's faster to work with what you know, than to always be trying to learn new things about LTspice. I don't use it that often and it's hard to remember the arcane details of how to use this tool. It would seem Mike didn't really consider users who are not professional simulator writers. Imagine if cars were made this way! But it works, mostly. We'll see how much more time I have to spend on getting the spectrum of this signal. Then tomorrow I'll find where someone already did this. -- Rick C. +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 3:44:39 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:> On 3/4/2023 1:26 PM, Ricky wrote: > > On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 11:18:09 AM UTC-5, John S wrote: > >> On 3/3/2023 8:34 PM, Ricky wrote: > >>> On Friday, March 3, 2023 at 7:06:11 AM UTC-5, John S wrote: > >>>> On 3/2/2023 7:38 PM, Ricky wrote: > >>>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 9:18:10 PM UTC-4, John S wrote: > >>>>>> On 3/2/2023 5:25 PM, Ricky wrote: > >>>>>>> Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Which version of LTSpice? > >>>>> > >>>>> Did the UI change? I must have missed that. This is 17.0.36 > >>>>> > >>>> Yes, it changed from IV to XVII. > >>>> > >>>> I don't use 17. > >>> > >>> Ok... Are you suggesting the UI has significantly changed between the two lineages??? Are they still updating IV? > >>> > >> I'm not sure about all the UI changes > > > > So it may not have changed? > > > Well, how could I know? I have already stated that I did not continue > using V17. Have I misinterpreted your question?Previously, you replied to my question...> > Did the UI change? I must have missed that. This is 17.0.36 > > > Yes, it changed from IV to XVII.This would imply you know something about it. But apparently not. -- Rick C. ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
Am 06.03.23 um 21:52 schrieb John S:> On 3/3/2023 8:53 PM, John Larkin wrote:> I made a choice some time ago. You ever do that? > > Sort of like asking someone if they ever jack off in public and, when > they say no, you ask why not?Even worse: "have you stopped beating your wife?" Say yes or no.
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On 2023-03-06 17:56, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:> Am 06.03.23 um 21:52 schrieb John S: >> On 3/3/2023 8:53 PM, John Larkin wrote: > >> I made a choice some time ago. You ever do that? >> >> Sort of like asking someone if they ever jack off in public and, when >> they say no, you ask why not? > > > Even worse: > "have you stopped beating your wife?" > > Say yes or no.At Scrabble. ;) Cheers Phil Hobbs
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 2:17:14 PM UTC-8, Ricky wrote:> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 3:40:06 PM UTC-5, Simon S Aysdie wrote: > > On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 3:25:38 PM UTC-8, Ricky wrote: > > > Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? > > It's okay. Not bad, for sure. All LTspice does is spice sims, so it doesn't need a lot. Because I've used Mentor means I've had much greater suffering in my life than using LTspice. > > > > I think the editor has a lineage somehow aligned with Cohesion Designer. But I am not sure. > > > I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. > > Scroll wheel works the same as other progs for me. (Some other programs need the CTRL button pushed simultaneously with wheel scroll, but the direction is the same.) > Someone mentioned that the scroll wheel direction is a selection in the control panel, so that is now fixed. But it is still a hurky-jerky mess. Very sensitive to the speed. This results in aberrant zooms of much more speed than expected, while also being very insensitive to slow movements of the scroll wheel. Now, I need to get used to it being like other apps... lol. It doesn't take long to mess up decades of muscle memory.You probably have a funky mouse. Mine has never been sensitive w/LTspice. I've never changed the default.> > Alt+backspace is still undo after 20+ years. It isn't documented anymore, I think. It is also F9. Rather odd. But you can change these. See > > > > C:\Users\%username%\AppData\Roaming\LTspiceXVII.ini > Yes, I've found the nearly impossible to view settings table for the keys. Fortunately I make few mistakes, so this one doesn't matter... lol As if! > > > I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. ... > > > > I don't see the point, frankly, unless he's writing one for TI. > > > > > ...There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. > > > > TI loses SMPS business because ADI/Linear have a simulator and fast SMPS sim models. I mean, that was the whole point. It was first called "SwitcherCAD." > Yes, and TI tried with their own. But LTspice has a lot of inertia. I believe it is used in schools a lot.TI "didn't try." Tina was always a joke. Just terrible. The PSpice version they are now trying to pawn is a crippled version, like the old EDU version of PSpice was. LTspice is not crippled. You can put as many parts in there and do as large a sim as your time and memory allow. LTspice should be used it schools because it is free. Just like they should use Octave instead of matlab. I am always shocked when talking to recent graduates that their Profs had them using the EDU version of PSpice. Crazy.> > Right now I'm fighting the PWL format. I need to measure the spectrum of an IRIG signal. The only way I can think to generate a realistic one is to use a PWL file to control the amplitude of a 1kHz sine wave. I expect there's a feature somewhere that lets you do this with some "simple" feature, but it's faster to work with what you know, than to always be trying to learn new things about LTspice. I don't use it that often and it's hard to remember the arcane details of how to use this tool. It would seem Mike didn't really consider users who are not professional simulator writers. Imagine if cars were made this way! But it works, mostly. We'll see how much more time I have to spend on getting the spectrum of this signal.I'm no expert either. I'm not sure if there is a more elegant way. Sorry. I haven't heard the term "IRIG signal" since I worked for Symmetricom. You can use behavioral elements to modulate--I made an ideal multiplier. But it is the same Q: where does the modulated signal come in to drive the multiplier? Your complaint is largely the same for every professional tool. None are easy to figure out if use is infrequent. That's the way it always goes. LTspice is a bit less documented and there is no paid support. But it is free. Because it is free there is a massive user group, informal support, and other user documentation (including nice utoob vids). You can take this tool with you from one employer to the next. While it is owned by ADI, it is essentially non-proprietary from the user's perspective. That is worth a lot. I have library parts I made a couple of decades ago that are still in my library.> Then tomorrow I'll find where someone already did this.You complain a lot about something very powerful, ubiquitous, and free.
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:46:03 -0600, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> wrote:>On 3/4/2023 1:47 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 10:17:54 -0600, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> wrote: >> >>> On 3/3/2023 8:34 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>> On Friday, March 3, 2023 at 7:06:11?AM UTC-5, John S wrote: >>>>> On 3/2/2023 7:38 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 9:18:10?PM UTC-4, John S wrote: >>>>>>> On 3/2/2023 5:25 PM, Ricky wrote: >>>>>>>> Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Which version of LTSpice? >>>>>> >>>>>> Did the UI change? I must have missed that. This is 17.0.36 >>>>>> >>>>> Yes, it changed from IV to XVII. >>>>> >>>>> I don't use 17. >>>> >>>> Ok... Are you suggesting the UI has significantly changed between the two lineages??? Are they still updating IV? >>>> >>> >>> I'm not sure about all the UI changes but I had some undesired results >>> using V17 when it first came out so I decided to stay with V4. No, they >>> are not updating V4. I don't need updated components because I am always >>> checking out my crazy ideas in small, simple networks just for sanity's >>> sake. >> >> ADI has been adding a lot of device models, but some are mediocre or >> worse. >> > >Yeah, I'm not surprised. The best days are probably behind us.After they acquired LTC, they had thousands of parts to write models for, and Mike quit. I ran one ADI opamp model that used 1e17 amps on the positive power rail. Only the positive rail! They seem to be coding models that have internal grounds. Internal current sources can be fun too.
Reply by ●March 6, 20232023-03-06
On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 12:40:02 -0800 (PST), Simon S Aysdie <gwhite@ti.com> wrote:>On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 3:25:38?PM UTC-8, Ricky wrote: >> Is there anyone here who thinks LTspice has a good UI? > >It's okay. Not bad, for sure. All LTspice does is spice sims, so it doesn't need a lot. Because I've used Mentor means I've had much greater suffering in my life than using LTspice. > >I think the editor has a lineage somehow aligned with Cohesion Designer. But I am not sure. > >> I've been working with it for a week or so, after not using for over a year. It's very hard to reacclimate to the zoom in and out being backwards from every UI I know under Windows. The Function keys will become familiar again, if I continue using it, but what an uphill climb. > >Scroll wheel works the same as other progs for me. (Some other programs need the CTRL button pushed simultaneously with wheel scroll, but the direction is the same.) > >Alt+backspace is still undo after 20+ years. It isn't documented anymore, I think. It is also F9. Rather odd. But you can change these. See > >C:\Users\%username%\AppData\Roaming\LTspiceXVII.ini > >> I saw in an LTspice post that Mike E. is writing a new simulator. I hope he makes it compatible with the existing models. But I suppose he would not be able to work with the company models that don't have accessible contents. I'm wondering how useful it will be to the engineering community as a whole. ... > >I don't see the point, frankly, unless he's writing one for TI. > >> ...There are lots of models you just can't get other than as locked by ADI. I think TI has given up on the idea of TINA being their goto simulator. LTspice just has too much steam on the boiler. > >TI loses SMPS business because ADI/Linear have a simulator and fast SMPS sim models. I mean, that was the whole point. It was first called "SwitcherCAD."TI is now using a version of Pspice or something. One of my guys knows how to run it. TI has some great little switcher chips that are a tenth of the price of the LTC parts and much quieter. TPS54302 family. I just breadboard them. I don't entirely trust switcher simulations. They are usually OK for loop dynamics and efficiency, but not for noise.
