Clearly, it's possible to do both good, clean, work with these devices, and it's possible to do poor work with them. It's much easier to do sloppy work on one of these boards, however, because their use necessitates long leads and the temptation to use leads left over from a previous project will discourage one from cutting them to precisely the correct length. As I've said before, a really common error is to use the same ground path for a return that carries current as for a control reference that doesn't. That risk is inherent in the way in which the inventor intended one to use the ProtoBoard. They provide ground and power distribution facilities but not truly low-impedance ones, and certainly not isolated grounds. The result is a really long and convoluted path back to the true ground reference at the regulator or power/GND terminals.

It is possible to create decent circuitry on one of these "ProtoBoards" but really not easy.

The fact that millions of people have bought them notwithstanding, actual use of a "ProtoBoard" to discern the operating characteristics of a circuit is possible but difficult. It is, further, difficult to imagine what one would be prototyping on such a board, as it in no way resembles a production circtuit. The wire gauge needed to penetrate the contact orifice is sufficient to carry a substantial amount of current, but not enough to provide a solid return for a circuit with several components, when one takes into account that the same return path is used for contrl/reference. The very architecture of the "ProtoBoard" misleads the user into bad practice, which he must learn to eschew, else he'll construct his circuit badly.

I simply believe, on the basis of many years' experience with these devices, that they're not suitable for prototyping. They are suitable, perhaps for "playing," with a circuit, and that can be educational, but only if one is profoundly cautious not to fool himself with all the possible mistakes that can be made with these devices.

RE