Still lots of bugs???

[Assaff]

Hi,

We have been using Ultiboard for almost 10 years since version 4.x In the last few years reporting bugs and getting actual fixes to them had become such a waste of time that we didn't bother. I want to know if this has improved? I ask because while we use the latest version 10.x the same bugs that we saw years ago still appear and trying to read in some of our older designs is a complete nightmare. I would like to know if there are actually software engineers actively working on fixing the bugs and adding "modern" components to the software or if it has not improved. Any personal feedback would be appreciated as some of the bugs really do waste so much time and cost so much in reworking boards.

Thanks

[nestor-sg]

Hi Assaff,

I am interested in hearing directly from yourself what defects are you referring to. I have to be honest, more than once I have heard about users who reported defects in the past, but these reports were not handled appropiately and therefore never reached the right personnel.

After NI acquired the Electronics Workbench business we have made big efforts on setting up the correct systems and procedures so that every single defect report is handled in the right way an gets properly prioritized. I want to make sure that the defects that you have come across are in our database and that we are working (or will work) on them.

The best way to reach me for this manner, click at the top (or bottom) of this webpage in the "Contact NI" link, then in the contact page you will see at the bottom-left a section called "Product Feedback", follow the links in that section, make sure that you select Multisim or Ultiboard and send the feedback with your contact details, I will follow up as soon as I receive it. First I will check if they are in the database, if they are, what's the status and if they are still reproducible in the latest versions.

Thanks!

[Assaff]

Hi Nestor,

Sorry for the delay in replying I have been abroad on business. I tried accessing the NI Contact form as you suggest but it either goes to a suggestions page instead of a bug report page or it goes to a knowledge database listing possible suitable replies.

Anyway to give you an example of a typical bug that has been around for a long time and still exists in the latest version try this:

1) create a new circuit and add a DSUB9 connector in multisim.

2) rename the label of the component from J1 to DATA

3) forward annotate to Ultiboard

4) In ultiboard change the part from for example a horizontal DB9 connector to a vertical one.

5) back annotate to Multisim and it will delete the component!!! If you haven't saved the circuit then you have just lost it and any nets connected to it.

Fairly basic but over the years hundreds of wasted hours fixing circuits or constantly saving changes just in case something happens.

I can give you other examples too.

[Assaff]

Hello Nestor???

Anyone to help?

[_user32]

Assaff,

Hello - I'd be glad to help you...  I'll answer both questions about the product feedback/support.

1. Feedback/Product Support... 

There are 2 links in the "Product Feedback" section that Nestor pointed out when you click the 'Contact NI' link at the top of the page.  

a) 'feedback' - The best one to use when giving us a listing of bugs/suggestions is to click on the 'feedback' link - this will go to our the appropriate Product Support Engineer for the product.  Although you may get confirmation that you have submitted feedback, you may not get a detailed response back from our team using this method, unless you specifically request.  However you can give us specific details (after clicking through to the 'details' section) and can even attach a listing of your issues/suggestions in any document (spreadsheet, word processing, text) format convenient for you.

b) 'Request Support' - If you have an immediate issue and need a prompt response about a bug or some general help, use this method (note that the 'Phone NI' or 'Email NI' options require an active maintenance contract).  The web tool will first browse similar topics in our knowledge base on the keywords within your question.   If you see your answer, great - if not go on and when using the phone or email option, this action will cause a service request number to be generated and someone will get back to you promptly to try to resolve the issue.

2.   Regarding your specific issue with the DB9 connector and back annotation:   I am following the steps you outline (ver 10.1) and I am not seeing the same issue - the DB9 component is not getting removed with a backannotation step when the J1 is changed to DATA - which version are you using? 

In geneneral we have improved on the reliability on back/forward annotation and we are continually working on improving the process of back/forward annotation...  in general there are some best practices for forward/back annotation and I can highlight these in another thread.

Regards,

Patrick Noonan
Business Development Manager
National Instruments - Electronics Workbench Group
50 Market St. 1-A
S. Portland, ME 04106
Email: patrick.noonan@ni.com
Tel. (207) 892-9130
Fax. (207) 892-9508 

2.

[nestor-sg]

Hi Assaff,

Sorry for the late response, I have been out of the office as well giving training and in other projects. I noticed that Pat replied but he didn't got a response.

You will be glad to hear that a forward and back annotation complete re-work is one of the major projects we are currently working on. We have a some months ahead still for completion, testing, and all the work involved in this process. Users will see a whole new and fresh look in an interface that will give them complete control and decision on this task.

The reason why you see the component going away right now, is that the new footprint you are selecting in Ultiboard is not attached or listed as a valid footprint (and correctly pin-mapped for this matter) in Multisim for the symbol used. This was enhanced for version 10.1.1, which is the current version, and I just made the test that you did mention and it works OK, it back annotates the footprint change with no problem. What version are you running?

On any case, in the near future, we are going to prevent things like the one you experience with the new system.

Additionally, you did mention you had more feedback. The link I am referring to is under the "Product Feedback" block in that webpage I explained on my previous message, underneath, you will read "Give us feedback to improve our products." You have to click in that feedback link. Don't request support, which is the next paragraph.

Best regards,

[Assaff]

Hi Nestor,

Yes, my reply is also intermittent as I have been at various Expos recently.

OK, well unfortunately I can no longer try it on 10.1.1 as the demo has now expired. We use 10.0.1 Power Pro.

I stopped the support & upgrades some time ago as we didn't feel we were getting support. I tried the demo version from the internet of 10.1.1 last month as I wanted to check if bugs from some time ago had actually finally been resolved or not. I still found issues with it so for the moment we will stick to the older versions. I sent in one example but came across a number of others, as well as not being able to read files from older versions of Multisim, which seems fairly important.

Hopefully at some point in the future.....

Best regards

Assaff Rawner

Managing Director

Mark Roberts Motion Control Ltd.

Academy Award Winning Special Effects Equipment

[_user32]

Assaff,

Thanks for your reply.  If you would like to give our recommended changes a try we can extend the demo license for another trial period.  You will need to contact me directly.

Regards,

Patrick Noonan
Business Development Manager
National Instruments - Electronics Workbench Group
50 Market St. 1-A
S. Portland, ME 04106
Email: patrick.noonan@ni.com
Tel. (207) 892-9130
Fax. (512) 683-7754 

[Uncle_Victor]

Hi Folks, I am also a very long time user of Ultiboard (more then 20 years now)

And indeed some bugs never get fixed.

I intended also a few times to stop my SSP, as you really get nothing back for it.

I still stick to version 10.0.x as being the most usable one.

For me, one of the most nasty bugs in 10.1 is indeed the fact that components are removed in the Multisim as you change then in Ultiboard.

What I most do is just simply change the shape - you backannotate and bye bye component.

I finally found the time to install the version 11 I received a few weeks ago, as I still pay for my SSP. (when I log in, NI has a different meaning about it - saying I don't have a valid SSP so I can't mail support and have to put my complains on the forum)

So I made a simple test circuit in Multisim, send it to Ultiboard, changed a few shapes and backannotated the thing. And what did I see? You got it. All components I changed are deleted in Multisim.

So they spend 35000 hours of engineering on it? Doing what?

Where are the days of the original Dutch Team who made the first versions? Oh they had also bugs... but you phoned them (sorry, in those days there was no email) and they fixed it in a few days.

[_user32]

Uncle_Victor,

Let me explain the behavior you are seeing and recommend a workaround.  The current method you are describing has been requested, but will need additional updates to our database technology before it can be implemented.   Currently back annotation does not automatically link back footprints to symbols and it has to do with the limitations of mapping Multisim components (symbols/models) in the database to the Ultiboard footprints database.

However, with this limitation, the forward / back annotation has been updated and you can in v11 manuallly override the removal of the component from Multisim when prompted with the back annotation changes.  The behavior you are seeing is due to limitations in our database mapping and not really a back annotation issue (this would be a new feature and has been requested previously).   Likely we could take a look at making this a default setting for back annotation (default of not removing any symbol from schematic) as currently in the new v11 you have to manually override this change.

Currently if you swap a footprint in Ultiboard and do a back annotation, a new Multisim database reference is NOT created (basically you are adding a new footprint to the symbol and since the software does not automatically assume that you are mapping the pins 1:1 (footprint 2, pin 1 -> footprin 2, pin 1), the mapping does not happen automatically.   When you back annotate in v11, the software will show you that it is changing a component, and I suggest overriding this change, and instead making the symbol to footprint mapping change in Multisim.

Making changes to the mapping between symbols and footprint shapes are *still* best done in Multisim first.   If you have identified that a new footprint is required in a component (U1) while routing in Ultiboard, I recommend going back to Multisim and mapping the component (U1) in Multisim to the new/existing footprint shape and then forward annotating.

Multisim Forward Annotation:

Symbol -> new Footprint Mapping or Changes 

Forward / Back Annotation:

Reference designator changes (U1 changed to U21, etc...)

Constraints, layer settings, etc... 

Also, somewhat related, is that in v11 we have  improved the ability of browsing a new footprint from Multisim that was created in Ultiboard.   Previously when you created a footprint in Ultiboard, you would have to type in the exact shape name before the new footprint could be found.   Now you will see any new Ultiboard footprint shapes automatically.  However, as I mentioned, the symbol to footprint mapping still needs to be specified by the user (it is not assumed to be 1:1.   Lastly there have been *lots* of issues and little features that have been improved and updated in the v11 Ultiboard tool, so I am hoping you have noticed at least some of these.  Some of these are detailed in the release notes, but if you would like I would be happy to produce a listing of some of these that you can try out yourself.

Also if you have a listing of things that you are still not happy with in either Multisim or Ultiboard, please email them directly to me.   Please also give me a priority ranking as well (what top 3 issues would you like to see changed for instance).

I have been working directly with our R&D team to try to improve the EWB tools as related to PCB prototyping.

Regards,

Patrick Noonan

National Instruments

patrick.noonan@ni.com