Which EDA software package improves productivity the most? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: eecook
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 01:38:00 am
content: Yes, if you are proficient with one software that's the one where you'll be most productive.I am a hardcore Altium user, I recently did a job using Allegro and my lack of experience reflected clearly in the time it took me to wrap up the design. I am currently going through the same process with Eagle.I am wondering how do people who consider themselves productive in at least 3/4 EDA packages feel about this?

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 06:39:27 am
content: The most productive is the EDA software is one one that you know how to use.With big PCB software its impossible to quickly learn about the huge collection of features they offer. And its usually the grand sum of all these little features and helpers that make the software more productive. Things like automatically generating IPC standard component footprints, generating symbols from a table of pins, easy management of large component libraries, automated generation of fabrication output files.... down to some of the smaller things like via stitching planes with a few clicks, easy quick cross referencing between pcb and schematic etc...Tho one thing that is not just a feature is how well the track placement tools work. This is mostly a PCB thing (All decent EDA packaged can figure out how to do schematic editing well enough) where the tools for placing tracks behave nicely in doing 'single net autoroute' to your mouse cursor, hug existing tracks, goes between pins etc... You have to be able to route a whole bus with one click etc... If its missing these features then it's never going to be competitive in terms of productivity since drawing traces is 90% of the time spent in a PCB editor window.Not sure what the state of Eagle is now but when i last used it like over 10 years ago it was missing all of these PCB routing comforts. Heck back then you even had to manually hit F2 to redraw the screen after moving a lot of stuff.

author: Warhawk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 09:26:34 am
content: Quote from: Berni on January 14, 2020, 06:39:27 amThis!(valid also for operating systems or practically any tool).

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 11:08:42 am
content: Quote from: Warhawk on January 14, 2020, 09:26:34 amIF ONE DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE THEM... (not even what they do..)HOW THE HECK WOULD YOU COMPARE THEM FOR PRODUCTION?bottom line: after the learning curve step...Best one depends on your targetPretty much they compete in featuresBeing FILE FORMAT incompatible among themselvesThat final result matters a lot depending on time and budget constraintsAFTER you have at least mastering their basic features...Paul

author: Ysjoelfir
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 12:18:03 pm
content: Quote from: Warhawk on January 14, 2020, 09:26:34 amI wouldn't totally agree. I use(d) more than one EDA tool on a regular basis (Pulsonix at work, Altium for my self employment, EAGLE before that) and I notice a significant difference in the workflow speed.Working with EAGLE was fine then, it did the job reasonably fast. No complaints there. When they switched to that subscription model I switched to Altium (that 500€ mid price thing) and noticed a rather rapid improvement in productivity - the built in 3D features are great for my purposes, the useability utilising keyboard shortcuts are great and very fast. At work we use Pulsonix which in comparison feels ultimatively slow. even slower than EAGLE. The UI is rather limited, keyboard shortcuts don't work that well and many features (like board cutouts or moving and selecting stuff) feel unneccessary complicated and slow.And don't get me started about exporting a 3D File of your design with <100 parts, <200 pins and around 1000 Vias. Take an hour to let it do its thing, maybe then it is done exporting what altium does in real time.Sooo... yeah. It's not completely depending on your experience with the software. If the software is limited, no experience can speed that up.

author: eecook
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 02:17:18 pm
content: Quote from: Ysjoelfir on January 14, 2020, 12:18:03 pmAbsolutely

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 06:43:29 pm
content: Quote from: Berni on January 14, 2020, 06:39:27 amNo. At some point I had to make changes to a (2 layer) board layout in a package which I have used a lot but I still found it more efficient to just redo the board layout in a different package because that was less tedious to work with.It also depends on how well a package scales. If you have a very large layout then some packages may start to slow down considerably while other packages keep working.

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2020, 09:56:48 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on January 14, 2020, 06:43:29 pmI meant with the EDA tool providing all the basic modern creature comforts.Its more of a problem for new inexperienced people that only ever learned one tool. It was like that with Eagle for me. Its the first PCB tool i learned and i was perfectly happy with it for quite a while. It did take me a bit to learn its weird confusing ways of doing things, but once i did i was happily drawing PCBs one after the other, didn't even bother to use the schematic. I just assumed this is what all PCB tools are like and used it. Then once i tried Altium i slowly discovered all the nice creature comforts of the editor helping you run traces and being able to easily move an entire bus by simply dragging it over. That's when i saw how awkward and time consuming Eagle really was. Suddenly i saw it what a outdated crude barbaric way of drawing PCBs that thing is.Its a similar thing discovering SMD soldering methods. When you first see these fine pitch chips you are certain they are near impossible to hand solder and are scared of ever using one of those. But then you learn the tricks of just flooding it all with solder and sucking the solder bridge shorts away. You learn the importance of flux, you discover hot air stations etc... and all of a sudden you find you can actually even do BGA chips by hand. Add a microscope to the mix and even the tiny grain of sand 0201 passives are easy to hand solder. Its only then you see how wrong you are by using that old unregulated soldering iron to solder 0.5mm pitch pins one by one careful to not short any pins.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2020, 04:11:43 pm
content: Quote from: Berni on January 14, 2020, 06:39:27 amEven when that's not true, this is actually what looks true to most of us. So, I can certainly question what you just said here with objective arguments, but it usually won't serve any purpose.Not all tools are equal, and you may be using one that you're very familiar with, and still waste time on some tasks that would take a lot less time with another tool. But there'd be a learning curve, which would initially look like a waste of time in itself and make your productivity plummet, making it look like sticking to the tool you're used to would have been the right decision.Of course this will also all depend on your particular needs, but it often happens that we just don't bother to see if something could be improved when it just "works". This is our "autopilot" mode, and how we function most of the time.Back to the question, I've used Altium, Cadstar, Orcad, and Mentor tools (PADS...) (and other open source tools such as KiCad). I've personally often found that Mentor tools were easier to use and were feeling more "productive" to me, but I'm sure YMMV a lot.

author: Feynman
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2020, 05:58:45 am
content: Well, I don't think that "the tool you know best" improves your productivity the most, either. Sometimes it's specific features.I do a lot of PCBs for safety relevant applications and thus parts of the schematic and layout are often duplicated. Its really handy if you only need to route once and the tool has a feature to duplicate specific parts of the layout (component placement and tracks). Also a decent sketch router is a big time saver. Or generation of production files. In EAGLE (at least version 7.7, I don't know about newer versions) it was a pain in the ass to generate a complete set of production files.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2020, 03:05:51 pm
content: Quote from: Feynman on January 17, 2020, 05:58:45 amThis functionality is a gigantic time-saver for layouts containing repeating blocks and guarantees that they are all routed the exact same way, which is tough and takes a long time if you don't have it.Not all layout editors support it. Some do, but it's very quirky. So that's definitely an example for which the tool would make a difference.

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2020, 05:15:23 pm
content: Ah yes automatic duplication of multichannel designs is indeed a feature that is not part of the standard features you find in EDA tools.Tho it also depends how well it works. Altium does have it but for some things its pretty annoying, especially when you don't have space to dedicate a section of the board to a channel and have other traces running trough its area. It always makes a mess when you try to update it in a board revision. But hey still beats having to duplicate the design manually.