Circuitmaker vs Eagle vs KiCad vs ?? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / beginners

author: jsi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2016, 09:18:17 pm
content: Hi everyone. I’ve spent the last couple of days evaluating PCB design software. So far Eagle, Circuitmaker, Circuit Studio, and KiCad have been installed and I’ve found things to like and dislike about all of them. Circuit Studio has been eliminated because at $995 it’s way, way too expensive for this hobbyist. IMHO all of the interfaces have a steep learning curve, every software has their fan/hate boys, so it's a wash on those points.Now to my question. Circuitmaker has one feature that stands out and that is their parts library. I really like how by rolling the mouse over the part it shows the parts specs, prices, availability and links to the data sheet. I really don't like Circuitmaker's forced lock into the platform and forced sharing of designs, but the parts library is a really compelling feature. Does anyone know if there are other PCB design tools that have a similar feature?(it maybe that I've missed the obvious or another package I should look at, but I did say that the learning curves are steep)

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2016, 09:28:54 pm
content: diptrace

author: jsi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 12:04:26 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 29, 2016, 09:28:54 pmAre you saying diptrace because it has the parts specs, prices, availability and links to the data sheet feature? Because if it does it sure doesn't mention it anywhere obvious.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 12:47:41 am
content: I use KiCAD. It's fine. Really.This is a hot topic around here, and you'll arouse the free/opensource/getwhatyoupayfor/fixityourself/proffesionalsbuytools arguments. I won't bother with all that, but KiCAD is fine. No limits. Very capable. Actively maintained and developed.My advice would be to grab the current stable version and get stuck into your project. The documentation is comprehensive, there is an active users mailing list, and you'll be able to google for Chris Gammel's (sp?) video introduction to get you started.Addressing your parts library concerns: KiCAD will do all that for you, and has extensive libraries available, but you will develop your own anyway. It doesn't take long to make a part. You have to go over the footprints with a fine-toothed comb to check them the first time you use them anyway.

author: MarkF
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 01:57:32 am
content: Quote from: jsi on August 30, 2016, 12:04:26 amI like Diptrace because the GUI is esay and quick to learn. Also, it's easy to create your own parts. Lastly, SilverCircuits accepts the Diptrace files directly for PCB manufacturing.

author: Dago
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:18:57 am
content: Quote from: MarkF on August 30, 2016, 01:57:32 amSeconded, IMO DipTrace is the best bang for the buck.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 09:55:33 am
content: Bearing in mind that I'm constrained by which EDA apps are available for Mac, I found them all to be frustrating to use. Or buggy. Or both.(I didn't try diptrace yet, so I'll give it a shot since so many of you are recommending it.)For a recent little project I ended up using EasyEDA, a Chinese Web based tool. But there's no way it could handle bigger projects.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 10:46:11 am
content: Quote from: jsi on August 30, 2016, 12:04:26 amprecisely.the pricing is very reasonable too, IMHOlibraries are still some kind of a mess, i always have to add some new parts.. but who doesn't? worst case scenario pick up a generic symbol and attach a different pattern (eagle apparently has had this feature since only a couple of revision ago. it was a god damn nightmare even to change resistor packages -replace part didn't work all the time- i ditched that crap as soon as i could)now diptrace also exports as an ascii file for those who wants to do versioningThe UI is so many times better to me too.. if i don't have the button on the toolbar -like unpour all- i just add a hotkey.i can't get around with kicad unfortunately (though i didn't try that hard, i wasn't actively looking for reasons to switch to another program after diptrace) but they say that if you manage to it will be a very powerful EDACircuitmaker, i don't see the point in something i can't use offline/can't add my parts/can't keep project private or whatever idiocy is left in it.In the two attachements you see a part with all the fields describing it... and the attachement pattern function. i can use a totally different one, rearrange pins as my liking, change names, look at the dimensions etc. It will work only for selected parts/patterns in the project. to changeit globally one has to change things from the part editor and then update the part in the projectQuote from: tooki on August 30, 2016, 09:55:33 amdo it! i sticked with it also because my main computer is a macbook. they finally fixed 3d rendering (at lieast on yosemite), it is a WINE bottled program so it runs as smootly as on windows

author: JacquesBBB
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 11:28:38 am
content: Quote from: tooki on August 30, 2016, 09:55:33 amEagle works well on a mac.It is free for boards up tp 80 * 100 mm.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 11:47:14 am
content: I don't know why anyone would recommend diptrace, it's a night mare. Progress on it is so slow and it has a way to go. Same for KiCAD (but that is free so you can't complain), for £180 you can get proteus if your desperate to be cheap.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:26:33 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on August 30, 2016, 11:47:14 amTried it last night again on my Mac OSX, after reading this thread. Didn't like it at all, not the look of it, not the library search, and not the navigation. Expected a more intuitive GUI. I am also sampling Kicad every 6-12 months, but don't like the disconnect between the schematic and PCB. Still looking for a good replacement for my faithful eagle. Tools that don't support windows/linux/mac are out of question for me since they provide less value for open source projects.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:31:10 pm
content: Quote from: JacquesBBB on August 30, 2016, 11:28:38 amYes, it "works". But the usability is simply atrociously bad. After a half hour I was borderline suicidal!

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:40:01 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on August 30, 2016, 04:31:10 pmUsability is subjective. This is why it's useful to actually try a few packages and see which one clicks with you.

author: Augustus
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:46:22 pm
content: I use KiCad. For me as a Hobbyist it has all it needs and it is free and unlimited. The "free" Version of Eagle strictly prohibits all commercial use and it is not exactly clear to me if I'm even allowed to give away some boards created with it (asking just my own costs) to friends. So why should I bother with Eagle...

author: jsi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:51:51 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 30, 2016, 10:46:11 amOK I'll give diptrace a try. I'm willing to pay, to a point, for a good software. I want to choose wisely at the beginning with a software that starts out free but can grow with me as my needs increase.The folks at Circuit Studio need to break their pricing into tiers. A 30 day trial and then the next step is $995 is too big of a jump for the home player.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:54:44 pm
content: Quote from: zapta on August 30, 2016, 04:40:01 pmWeeellll…user satisfactionis subjective.Usabilityis actually measurable. (Not that I performed a quantitative usability test, though my experience as a usability professional does give me some qualification to call my testing of it a mini "expert review".) In the half hour I tried it out, I found it to operate contrary to platform conventions (for Mac and Windows at least), had destructive commands without confirmation, etc. etc. etc. I totally recognize that professional tools are entitled to steeper learning curves than software for novices, but then there's just bad design, and Eagle (and KiCad) is very bad design.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 04:58:37 pm
content: The problem with diptrace is that the support is Putin style. They are always right and there is nothing wrong with their software. If you push them you find out there is only one developer that decided to have kids. They dish out peaice meal updates with no increase in quality of software. with Proteus I can ring them up and they will happily spend 15 minutes on the phone helping me.

author: jsi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 05:02:53 pm
content: Quote from: Augustus on August 30, 2016, 04:46:22 pmFrom this beginner's point of view all of these packages have a huge learning curve. Of the 3 packages in the title KiCad is in second place, because of their libraries. When I tried to add a common part to my test project it was lacking a footprint. My thought was "do I have to build every part from scratch?! I'd gladly pay to have them already created." I'm going to try diptrace tonight and see how that goes. As it stands right now Eagle and Circuitmaker are tied. It's kind of like Trump and Clinton, there is a lot to dislike about both of them

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 05:07:29 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on August 30, 2016, 04:58:37 pmThe mental image of Putin doing phone support!!!Quote from: Simon on August 30, 2016, 04:58:37 pmAt those prices, they'd better!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 05:08:28 pm
content: No program comes with complete and dependable libraries. I found one fuck up in the proteus library with pad sizes for a SOT363 chip being 1/4 the size of what they should have been. I am creating each and ever part myself including doing my own 3D models with my name on them as I tend to export the boards as 3D models for mechanical fitment and design.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 05:10:22 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on August 30, 2016, 05:07:29 pmWell the basic version is £180, I can't remember what I paid for Diptrace just over half but they soon came for more money offering virtually no improvement. I have told labcentre that not allowing cusatom copper pours in the basic version is extremely stupid but all I can say is they are from yorkshire and therefore very dense.

author: Augustus
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 05:12:03 pm
content: Quote from: jsi on August 30, 2016, 05:02:53 pmOTOH, creating footprints in KiCad is really easy, it never bothered me much if I had to do one

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 05:55:46 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on August 30, 2016, 11:47:14 amTo me eagle is a POS software with very bad design choices and gives me the slowest most painful workflow of all the EDA i've used but what they say, to each one is owninteresting thing about the developer... still, doesn't miss anything that eagle have i think

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 06:51:32 pm
content: I haven't done any board layouts for a while, but I found Diptrace very easy to get used to. I don't use any of the pre-made libraries, I always made mine from scratch so I'd know they were right. It's trivially easy.The last version of Eagle I looked at was 4.3 (I think). The interface was bizarre, as if designed by aliens from some other world. I managed to make one board with it then deleted the whole mess. The only thing it had going for it was the price (free). Maybe it has gotten better in more recent versions.

author: dferyance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2016, 06:56:34 pm
content: I've been playing around with Circuit Maker lately and really like it. It requires accepting the whole community sharing idea but I am fine with that with my projects. 3D view is really nice of course.I really like the idea of how you share components / footprints. It is a bit risky as who knows how careful someone created one but for doing stuff as a hobby it gets things going faster than having to do my own footprints all the time.The keyboard shortcuts have quite a bit of a learning curve as I have to read the documentation and the UI doesn't help point out what the different shortcuts are. But once you know them they work fine.

author: Dago
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 05:37:33 am
content: Quote from: Simon on August 30, 2016, 11:47:14 amI really don't understand how anyone could say the progress is slow on DipTrace. Off the top off my head features added within a year or so include: Differential pair routing, trace length matching, custom hotkey support, class-to-class rule support for pours (I made a wishlist request about it and they added it). I also recall seeing some demo videos of push & shove routing for DipTrace which itself is massive feature to implement. If they really do have just one developer then it is a fantastically fast speed of development... Compare that to say eagle which has gotten pretty much nothing in a decade. I guess they fiddled with the UI a bit for version 7 and added some kind of awful license server requirement that was immediately lifted (if I recall correctly) after releasing because people got upset because it was so retarded.Never had to call any support for any software so cannot comment on that. Bug reports/wishlist requests I've submitted to DipTrace were fixed/included in the next version so no complaints about that.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 05:50:20 am
content: The diptrace autorouter sucks and there are problems when trying to deal with multiple copper pours that make up nets and should have traces connected to them. Either you allow all traces to plough into the copper pour or you prevent any trace including those belonging to the same net from connecting. It is an extreme elevation of stupidity but they would not acknowledge the problem and said it was fine. Proteus can cope with this situation fine and the autorouter is better.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 05:50:43 am
content: So power design in Diptrace are a waste of time

author: Dago
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 09:30:39 am
content: Quote from: Simon on August 31, 2016, 05:50:20 amAutorouter is not really used in professional design so no wonder it is a low priority for the developers. It is only useful for extremely large and complex boards with large amount of requirements (length matching, differential impedance, crosstalk requirements etc.). And only with an autorouter that supports specifying these requirements, meaning a software with most likely a six digit price.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 11:53:59 am
content: Not really. I use autorouter all the time (professionally). But not like a child. I don't just dump my parts on the board and expect magic. I lay the parts out on the board. Hit autorouter get an idea of if I have done the placement right. Move a few things around. Do the important traces myself and let the auto router do the rest. Naturally my boards are not high speed etc. A judicious use of an autorouter can save time. But the diptrace autorouter was not made for real use. If you have no copper pours it is ok.

author: kasbah
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 02:46:02 pm
content: Quote from: jsi on August 30, 2016, 05:02:53 pmAs with everything with KiCAD, it's a community effort. Check out my super repo of KiCAD footprints I have sound so far:https://github.com/kasbah/kicad_footprints.It hase become really useful with the upcoming feature of being able to properly search for footprints when assigning them (if you run the product/alpha version you have this ability).

author: Galaxyrise
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 04:21:03 pm
content: I have tried diptrace, eagle, and kicad. I initially tried kicad, then eagle, then diptrace. Diptrace was the only one I was able to use initially.I disagree with Tooki, I found diptrace to have the most "conventional" ui (for a Windows user.) Everything I wanted to do, I was able to figure out. (Though I didn't use auto-routing at all.) The new key shortcuts feature addressed my biggest problem with Diptrace. However, I have still switched away from diptrace looking for something that supports more external automation (I want to generate schematic and pcb images or gerbers.)So I tried kicad again. I was able to actually make a board this time, and there were certain aspects of the experience I liked once I got the hang of it. But I generated a pretty big list of things that really irritated me about it. The UI inconsistencies between schematic, part editing, and pcb editing can be especially frustrating.Most recently I used Eagle. There are a lot of things I want to do that aren't there by default, but can be done via scripting. (Like getting a 3d preview, which is not a built-in feature!) I'm going to try using Eagle for a few more boards to see how it goes, and if I can script my way to an environment that works for me. I'm still too new to Eagle to know if you could add the library integration you want via scripting.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 05:13:12 pm
content: the 3D modelling support in Diptrace is crap. So many models from suppliers won't work and corrupt the whole model.

author: Gyro
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 05:31:32 pm
content: Starting to get the merest hint of an impression that you don't like Diptrace Simon.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 05:40:36 pm
content: Quote from: Gyro on August 31, 2016, 05:31:32 pmYes I am just a little disinclined to use it

author: MarkF
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2016, 07:51:43 pm
content: Quote from: Galaxyrise on August 31, 2016, 04:21:03 pmDiiptrace does all of that. The Schematic is a separate tool. Four tools in total (schematic capture, pcb layout, component editor and pattern editor). Run the Diptrace launcher.The "Schematic Capture" lets you draw the circuit. The "PCB Layout" will let you save a BMP of any/all layers, show 3D visualization of the PCB and generate the Gerber files. The "Component Editor" and "Pattern Editor" allow you to create your own components.You may be able to do automation via the import Diptrace Ascii script file??? That is how you import Eagle files.

author: Galaxyrise
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 01:28:14 am
content: Quote from: MarkF on August 31, 2016, 07:51:43 pmSorry if I wasn't clear; what I want to do is run a tool on the dch or dip and have it generate a png. Specfically, I want to do it from revision control to compare different versions of my project. I don't want to do it from the diptrace UI. I will look into this "ascii script"! I hadn't heard of that before.Edit: Did you mean the ascii import/export? I don't see a way to use that for my purposes, but I'm happy to be wrong.

author: jsi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 02:46:27 am
content: Hi, OP hereSo the fan/hate boys have had their say and this thread had devolved into the uselessness that happens to many of these threads. To the newbe that might be reading this let me tell you how this newbe reached the conclusion to do his first projects with diptrace. First let me start with what I want to do. I have a couple of ideas for potentially commercial projects. The software has to be fairly polished in how it works and be able to produce an output that can be used to create product in a timely manner. It also needs to be able to grow with me as my needs and skills improve.Circuitmaker: While I absolutely love open source projects, I want to choose when I give my projects to the cause. Because Circuitmaker removes that choice it is eliminated from the get go. I also don't like how circuit makers locks you into their proprietary system. It's kind of strange given their open source bent, but I understand how they might want to do that.KiCad: Ah KiCad. Ah, that open source software that we all love . . . to hate, and to love, and to hate. I've been using linux since 98 so I am oh so familiar with open source. KiCad is "free", but the user interface,I am more than willing to climb a learning curve. But, open source software is often times saddled with an interface designed by a techy. I'm a techy myself, but at least I know enough to not to design interfaces.Eagle: Eagle suffers from a common problem of older software. It was originally designed in the 80's/90's and it hasn't evolved since, kind of like that weird guy down the street that still wears a mullet. It happens all the time because a system has a base of users so if the changes from version to version are too big the company risks losing them. But, at time wears on, the competition doesn't have to keep a base happy and can create a better system.Circuit Studio: This one never really got out of the blocks. With no free version or opportunity to grow with the user over time I didn't do much more than look at the videos. It might be great, but I don't have a thousand dollars to gamble on a license. Some may argue that it is less expensive at the top end than the other paid options, which it maybe. For the young player I'd say it's just an expensive risk.All of the other players in this market: Ain't nobody got time for that. My goal is to create PCB's, not evaluate software. There are at least 20 other systems out there, sorry.So my choice is - Diptrace. Why? For a couple of reasons. First while running it through the creation of my test project it just seemed to click with me. Second, it has the least expensive commercial license, which will be good enough for my first projects. If in the future I do outgrow it, I'll probably be at a place where $$,$$$ for Altium will seem like a reasonable price.For the fan/hate boys thanks for your input. I'm sure I've made the best/worst choice of my life

author: Landrew2390
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 04:55:28 am
content: I've worked with both Eagle and KiCAD. In my opinion, KiCAD is more flexible than Eagle, but it's got some serious interface issues. Once you learn the keyboard commands, this becomes a much smaller issue and KiCAD becomes relatively easy to run. Having said that, I do 90% of my designs in Eagle. The biggest reasons I use Eagle are the automatic forward/back annotation and the fact that I got a Eagle Ultimate License from a professor who moved to Altium. They're both decent programs, but they're never going to be a six figure piece of software.If I had to start over, I'd go with KiCAD because that's what I have experience with. It's probably not the best of the bunch, but I don't want to spend months to learn a half dozen software packages just so I can make a fully informed decision. I would rather spend those months learning to drive a functional piece of software proficiently.

author: jesuscf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 05:52:11 am
content: Am I the only one using Ultiboard?

author: hendorog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 06:09:27 am
content: I started with Eagle and am now migrating to KiCAD.First a comment on the UI as it is a pain point for newbies - and it was for me:Eagle's UI actually makes a lot of sense for CAD type operations. First you select the Tool or operation and then apply it to the object - standard MS Windows UI is the opposite, i.e. you select the object and then select the tool.The Eagle way means you can - for example - select a drill size and then just run around clicking each via you want to apply it to.The Windows UI way would mean you have to multi-select all of the vias first and then select the tool. It would work fine but the Eagle way is just neater and much faster.Secondly why I am migrating to KiCAD:I decided to pay for Eagle so I could create 4 layer boards, it was a bit of an impulse purchase. Annoyingly I didn't realise there was a discount deal on until _just_ after I paid for it - if I had known then with the discount I would have only had to pay a little more to get the next license up.I contacted Eagle straight way, and then again a few days later, asking them for the discount and they just ignored my emails.I also realised that the area limitations of the license would quickly become an issue. Coupled with the personal use only limitation I concluded that I had screwed up by going with Eagle, despite the investment in time and money I'd made.So I thought I'd give KiCAD a serious go, I had dabbled with it before but never really got stuck in.KiCad is tough to learn, and several times I almost binned it. I'm glad I didn't though as despite it being well seriously funky in some places, ultimately it is very usable and worth investing time in.A few key points for getting started with KiCad:* Drawing a schematic is pretty straightforward - the pain comes later* You need to allocate a footprint to each of the parts in your schematic - google it.* Libraries in two parts and are configured separately - the schematic part (Component Libraries) and the PCB footprint part (Footprint Libraries which must live in directories named *.pretty).* Export the Netlist from the Schematic editor and import it into the PCB editor.* The 'Canvas' selection options in the PCB tool are _not_ just rendering options - they are completely different PCB layout engines and change the way the PCB tool works. Read this:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/kicad/default-opengl-and-cairo-what-are-these/* Create a via component you can use like in Eagle for stitching ground planes without having to route to all of the vias. Google this.* Before you can select a specific track width or a drill size first you need to define it in the Design Rules.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 07:02:23 am
content: The problem with chosing software based on price is that because of that one reason for choice you are forever locked into it's good or bad things. I am now running a system where by every part has a symbol so if it's a 1K resistor or a 1.2K resistor it's a different part. This make generating the BOM a breeze but it takes a long time to setup. not something I'd like to do multiple times because i took the cheap option and stuck with it until i found it untenable,

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 07:25:17 am
content: Quote from: Galaxyrise on August 31, 2016, 04:21:03 pmSlight misunderstanding perhaps; it was Eagle that I found so frustrating. I haven't tried DipTrace again, especially now that you say it's more intuitive. (For all the whining that happens in the Mac vs PC wars, the conventions of those platforms are more similar than they are different!!)

author: MarkF
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 08:18:05 am
content: Quote from: jsi on September 01, 2016, 02:46:27 amRequest the Lite version. It's free and gives you 500 pins instead of the 300 in the Freeware version.

author: obiwanjacobi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 10:08:46 am
content: I would really like Schematic and PCB software that does not copy the cookie-cutter standard from the 80's and provide a modern UI that supports a modern workflow.Working with component libraries is the most mind-boggling twisted piece of logic in most packages. I always feel that these packages are made by EE's and not by software engineers (and user experience/graphic designers)...I have, at one time, tried to join the KiCad dev team, but I aborted after seeing the code. That is one of the most unreadable coding standards I have ever seen. Oh, and there are no dev-docs, no info on the architecture, design choices, no class diagrams etc...Unfortunately, I am one of the few, because most EEs are set in their ways and (most) do not embrace change...

author: JacquesBBB
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 12:25:25 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on August 30, 2016, 04:31:10 pmMaybe 1/2 hour was not enough !Eagle interface is not usual, so it needs some practice. After looking to various softwares, I went through the tutorial widely available on the web, and ends up using Eagle.Once you grasp the general philosophy of the interface, things get much better.What I like in Eagle, is that you know that you will be able to do (nearly) anything,and you can shorten task by scripting them.Eagle files for parts are widely available, and all files are stored in readable text files, which is a bonus.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 12:46:49 pm
content: Quote from: JacquesBBB on September 01, 2016, 12:25:25 pm'You get what you pay for' applies also to time investment.Eagle has many advantages. I am yet to find a free PCB software that I will like more than eagle.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 03:43:23 pm
content: I already said in another comment that professional software is entitled to a steeper/longer learning curve than software for novices. But that doesn't absolve the developers from needing tomake an effortat intuitiveness!! Eagle's UI showszeroattention to detail — they haven't even fixed trivial low-hanging fruit that users have complained about for years, like renaming and adding a confirmation to the idiotic "drop" button in the component chooser dialog.My point isn't that Eagle is unlearnable. It's simply thatit's far harder to use than itneeds to be. There's no reason software cannot be powerfulandintuitive — it's been done before in many other fields. It just takes some effort on the developers' part. (For example, when Final Cut Pro came out originally, one reason it became so popular was that it was far, far more intuitive than Avid, the industry standard at the time. And it wasn't because it was dumbed down — it was a powerful tool even in 1.0. But it took a beginner 30 minutes of training in Final Cut Pro to be at the same level as someone with 6 hours' training on Avid. It was that big a difference.)And furthermore, any time a program requires you to learn "its way", it means it's a poor UI that departs from platform conventions. Adhering to platform conventions makes it faster to learn a new program, and pays dividends for long-term users in reduced errors and mental load. (If you constantly have to switch between mental modes for different apps, it's a higher burden than if everything works alike.)

author: Muxr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 03:52:25 pm
content: KiCad has some learning curve.. a few things can be hurdles.. like creating that first project specific footprint or component, you have to muck around with creating a new library, which couldn't be more unintuitive if they tried. Luckily there are guides and youtube videos explaining the process.However once you're passed these flaws.. KiCad is amazing. The actual UI is really not bad, everything has a keyboard shortcut and those are consistent across all the modules, like hover above a trace and hit M and you can move that trace, things like that. I find it very fast and efficient once you give it a few runs.I've designed 6-7 boards so far with it, and it all feels second nature now.It's open source, no restrictions, file formats are human readable and very easy to script. It's a worthwhile investment learning how to use it.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 05:44:48 pm
content: What puts me off Ki CAD for a 2nd time was the library organisation. I installed it on my PC and on my laptop. With difficulty I set up the PCB libraries in 2 different ways unintentionally. On one machine it would work and connect to the server on the other machine it wouldn't. One fine day they switched roles in this respect. The library management is clearly not yet ready and unfit for purpose. Neither as a hobbyist or somebody designing professionally to I want to have this sort of interference from above from people who think they are very clever. I do not want to get up one day and suddenly find my designs are trashed by a moron who keeps changing things because he thinks it better. Hence I decided to go out and pay for software so that I would have guaranteed support and increased reliability.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 06:12:24 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on September 01, 2016, 03:43:23 pmI don't think anybody here disagrees with it.

author: Kappes Buur
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2016, 06:54:44 am
content: I have used Proteus, Eagle, Diptrace, Designspark, Target 3001, Kicad, etc in the past to design some simple boards. But none of the programs really sat right with me. There always was some aspect which caused a problem, mainly with having to create symbols and footprints. For me, as a hobbyist, the cost of a full blown version was just not justifiable and the licenses are simply too restrictive. But I made do with the limitations.Then recently I stumbled upon the Youtube channel for Contextual Electronics and the multipart tutorialGetting To Blinky 4.0for using Kicad 3.x. Goodness gracious, the improvements made to Kicad are just phenomenal. What an easy program to use now. And it is freeware.My designs are still not all that complex, just microcontroller stuff, so I don't know how one would fare with it in a professional setting, I would suspect quite favourably though.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 02, 2016, 06:57:47 am
content: KiCAd is ok but is does not quite bling enough for me to use commercially.

author: kermitfrog
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2018, 10:00:55 pm
content: When did you try Kicad last? ...it's not your father's Kicad, LOL it's come a long ways. I'm looking forward to the improvements in version 5 which should be released around the end of this month

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 12, 2018, 07:58:23 am
content: quite some time ago now and I am also trying to run a business so at the time the prospect of getting up one morning and finding it had been broken by someone was not acceptable and it was buggy at the time so I had to pursue a commercial option and I'm on my third!

author: JohnPen
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2018, 10:21:34 am
content: Just as a hobbyist I have recently tried to use a small number of free CAD programs namely Express, KiCad and Diptrace. In the case of Express it is overall an expensive solution, although fairly easy to use, because one has to use Express for producing the PCB. KiCad I found fine for the schematic but it became steadily more difficult when moving to the PCB layout. It does have tremendous flexibility but the learning curve for KiCad was very frustrating. DipTrace was for me the easiest and certainly the most straightforward. It allowed me to quickly create a small PCB, 3 channel mixer, with minimum frustration. I can't answer for Professional use as I do not have that experience and once a particular CAD product is fully understood it obviously becomes much easier to use. However for small scale hobby use ease of learning is very important as one desires results relatively quickly and a long learning curve is very frustrating for what is often an occasional use. Based on my limited trial of these 3 free packages I found DipTrace the easiest to use and learn.There are various other free/trial versions of other CAD programs that I have not tried so there may be better or more flexible ones but for my purposes I believe I have found what I needed. If or when I need to exceed the 300 hole limits of free DipTrace that would still be a sensible choice for me.

author: fearless
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 11, 2018, 01:32:34 am
content: Short form: take another look at KiCad.I know this is resurrecting an old thread, but KiCad v5.0 is in "release candidate" stage and fixes many of the frustrating aspects of its predecessor.I've been using it and find its UI to be just as intuitive as Eagle's (read: not very)but I appreciate the lavish use of keyboard shortcuts -- once you learn the "finger macros" it becomes very speedy. And I tease my friend who pays a hefty annual fee for his Altium with KiCad's 3D renderings -- they look almost as good.

author: palpurul
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2018, 12:01:22 pm
content: I used Circuitmaker in the past because I liked the concept of "PCB design community". My experience wasn't really good. Everything that you do is uploaded to the cloud and you virtually reach your design from any computer. This feature seemed real nice if you like open hardware design, but it's slow as hell. Everytime you want to save, open, login or change your design you have to connect to the cloud which is annoying in my opinion. It is really similar to Alitum. If you used Altium in the past learning Circuitmaker is not going to be a nightmare. If you haven't used Altium in the past you kind a learn Altium in the background when learning Circuitmaker.As you pointed out Circuitmaker has massive library which makes things quicker. You can virtually find any part and modify them for your design.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 12, 2018, 12:09:26 pm
content: CM was altiums biggest misjudgement of customers but it did't matter because it's free. Instead of learning from the massive error they went and made matters worse with CS where they piss off paying customers........

author: TomS_
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2018, 12:22:46 pm
content: Quote from: jsi on August 29, 2016, 09:18:17 pmLearn how to make your own parts, and you can have as many and what ever you want.I spend quite a lot of time these days making my own parts if they either arent available as part of EAGLE, or I dont like the variants they have to offer. Its quite satisfying once youve made the part and can then continue on with your project.Personally I use EAGLE and I quite like it. It gets a lot of hate, but probably I dont have exposure to enough tools to realise why - in the end it does a job for me and does it well enough that I can be productive. I found that if you spend a couple of hours, watch a few videos on how it works and how to do things, go in to it not expecting anything to work in a particular way, learn to create schematics before doing PCB layout, practice and practice some more, then you might find it also works for you.Im still not sure what I think about the Autodesk subscription model, but I think Im gradually wearing down and might purchase one. I umm'd and ahhh'd too long and missed the boat to buy a perpetual license, but I think in the long run the subscription would work out better anyway because it will cover all future versions, rather than just a major version.

author: ^_^
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 02:39:13 am
content: I'll just add 3 cents about KiCAD.I've used it for years, during uni and after.Then I tried Altium at work which had a license, and man, never looked at KiCAD againLooking back, from a perspective: KiCAD is great for begginers and overall entry level stuff. But it's Altium (or some other proffesional studio) that will get you places and will count on your resume. Altium's license cost is like nothing from company's POV.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 06:53:49 am
content: Yes KiCAD became a bit of a joke I don't know what it is like now but I can't keep changing.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 01:35:43 pm
content: Quote from: ^_^ on April 15, 2018, 02:39:13 amTypical open source GUI app, IMHO. Tons of fans with modest needs calling it the [commercial app] killer, but lacking the features true professionals need. No, Writer is not equivalent to MS Word. No, the Gimp is not equivalent to Photoshop. And no, KiCAD is not equivalent to Altium.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 02:54:48 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on April 15, 2018, 01:35:43 pmYup and then when you have a problem it's a case of well what do you expect for free....

author: jgalak
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 08:33:54 pm
content: I don't think KiCad is trying to be the equivalent of Altium. I think it's trying to be the equivalent of Eagle.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 08:44:46 pm
content: I don't think anyone wants it to be the equivalent of anything, just a functioning program for the poor sods that use it would be a good start.

author: hendorog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 08:50:49 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on April 15, 2018, 01:35:43 pmThe open source products don't need to be equivalent to the top end closed source product to be of value. True professionals who need and would benefit from Altium are pretty common around here, but not so common in the average workplace.Much more frustrating are the people who swear black and blue they need the likes of Word or Photoshop, but really have basic needs and could use nearly any similar product. I see this very often at work with MS Office products. Brand whoring at its finest.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 08:56:24 pm
content: Yes work places like standards and despite MS office offering to use open document formats it still warns you you could loose data if you save a new file with them and encourages you to use MS formats

author: jgalak
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 12:06:37 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 15, 2018, 08:44:46 pmI tried KiCad years ago, and hated it. Used Eagle. I tried it again this year, because I was annoyed at the Autodesk Eagle phone-home thing, and absolutely love it. Admittedly, I'm very much a novice/hobbyist, but for what I do it works just fine, and is no more (or less) obtuse than Eagle was - just different.I'd love to use Altium - but until they come out with a $49.99 version, it ain't gonna happen...ETA: I'm also about to start work on an open hardware project, and using KiCad has a big advantage there - potential users of the project aren't forced to buy a commercial program to be able to open the design files.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 04:45:05 am
content: This is a pretty good review/comparison of several products in this category:https://www.sfcircuits.com/pcb-school/pcb-design-software-comparison-guide

author: VEGETA
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 06:00:16 am
content: QuoteYes, it won't happen.If I were them, I would have made CircuitStudio only and without CM. Then you could get a free version which is limited and a 50$ one which is a big bigger than the free version and also commercial. Then a 200$ or so...etc. Dave talked about this numerous times but they never listen and ever since I get into eevblog forum years ago I hear about Altium being stupid for no reason. I just lived enough to see it.Let's not joke ourselves, CM is nice but it is not and will not be the standard like eagle used to be. They offered us altium designer features for free which is good but also put too much limitations which killed it such as cloud-based only BS.QuoteIt is not the case here, KiCAD is not aiming at altium or even eagle IMO. Kicad is simply a complete open source package for PCB design that does the job well with 0$.If you argue about X being bad because it is not equivalent to Altium, then everything else is bad such as eagle and diptrace... and they cost $$$ while kicad is free.The good thing about kicad is that lots of people and corporations support it, which can lead to sustained improvement (unlike most open source stuff which gets dumped)... such as CERN (or SERN? if you get the joke xD >> which will cause dystopia for human race in future).For me, I like CM and will use it soon when I finish some projects, but if I am gonna get trouble with it then I will use KiCAD.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 07:15:43 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on April 16, 2018, 01:20:42 amGiven time and determination I'm sure you can do anything with KiCAD but some of us have to live in the commercial world where reasonable guarantee of a program to open and update the design with in 5 years time is attractive as is getting some sort of support. I once set about using KiCAD but became very uneasy.Somehow I once signed up to the developer list and witnessed a big fall out over a contributor not following the agreed protocols for releasing new code and it looked like the whole thing was going to grind to a halt, the scarier thing was that me throwing in some comments to help reconcile the situation seemed to help and I was nobody. I can't rely commercially on software produced like that - this was some years ago and i know the project leadership has changed but I'm sorry. Again what would be more useful to me is an open and recognised standard format for libraries and maybe even project files.

author: Wolfram
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 08:40:59 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 16, 2018, 07:15:43 amYou are basically implying that open source tools can not be relied upon for professional work, there are plenty of counterexamples in the real world. As for the capabilities of the recent versions of Altium, I have done commercial designs for production in both Altium and Kicad (30 kW DSP controlled SiC power converters, both isolated and non-isolated) and KiCAD is a perfectly adequate tool for the job, improving with every version. I agree that KiCAD is not completely up to the level of Altium yet, but it is not far behind.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 08:50:10 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 16, 2018, 07:15:43 amThe same happens to paid packages. They get assimilated by a company or competitor and development can suddenly take a left turn. You have all your boards and IP stuck in there at that point.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 09:05:54 am
content: Quote from: jsi on August 30, 2016, 05:02:53 pmThe default KiCad installer only comes with a subset of the full libraries. On top of the official GitHub respository of components, footprints and 3D models there are loads of 3rd party ones and they are very easy to install with the github URLs or unzipping them.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 09:23:18 am
content: Quote from: hendorog on April 15, 2018, 08:50:49 pmIt’s not brand whoring. It’s that there’s often one deal-breaker feature (or annoyance) that is missing in LibreOffice, and just becauseyoudon’t know about it, or understand why it’s important, doesn’t mean it’s not a valid complaint.Wanna talk about brand whoring? Look at the open source sycophants who insist emphatically that Gimp and LibreOffice are more than anyone would need. No amount of showing them that there’s a critical missing feature will ever convince them that you’re anything but an Adobe or MS “sheep” blindly following.I’m the first person to say that the average home user, and even many business users, needs nothing more than Writer or Google Docs. But when people insist that those tools are sufficient for all uses, it makes me angry, because it’s basically telling me that I’m wrong or stupid for relying on useful or necessary features in Word. But I’m not wrong, I use Word because a) I know it well and like it, and b) for certain documents, rely on features not present in the others. It’s all about using the right tool for the job. Sometimes it’s one thing, sometimes it’s another.Quote from: Simon on April 15, 2018, 08:56:24 pmWhich is absolutely correct, because the open formats do not actually fully represent the internal object model, never mind all the features, in Office (especially Word). It’s not that Microsoft doesn’t try, it’s that the open formats simply aren’t designed for Word.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 10:02:22 am
content: I can't stand the incessant evangelism of quite a few open source zealots. If you want to privately make a hobby out of being as open souce as possible, that's fine and probably adds to it being and becoming a worthwhile alternative. There does regularly seem to be a complete lack of realism when it comes to other people than themselves, though. Most people don't want to live with all kinds of concessions to avoid a few binary blobs or anything else not completley in line with the open source mindset. They just want their software to work and work reasonably well. Until the zealots get this, it's just holding the open source community back as a whole. It's never going to go prime time when people insist on being strict. People want solutions, not more problems.I really like the concept of doing things open source, but understand the practicalities of the real world and how it's not always feasible to go that route. That makes an "everything open or bust" attitude rather counterproductive. It's not just the application itself either, it's how it meshes with its surroundings and infrastructure and practicalities of being able to hire people who know how to use it too.

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 10:12:54 am
content: I'm wondering how will things go with Eagle. It seems that Autodesk has been pumping quite a lot of money into it's development since they've bought it. IIRC recently they've added a push&shove routing and 3d interface to Fusion 360. Diptrace has been better than Eagle for a few years, but now unless Novarm steps up their development game, they are gonna loose customers to Eagle.KiCAD is the same as any other open-source engineerign related software - kinda sorta resembles the real thing, and some people are almost able to show you that you can create a professional-looking product with it, but in the end it's lacking some basic features. Reason still the same: it's created by software developers who are at best hobbyists, not professionals and don;t know how this should work and what is required of such software.

author: hendorog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 10:13:03 am
content: Quote from: tooki on April 16, 2018, 09:23:18 amWe are talking about different things. My problem is with _non-professional_ users who insist they need Office/Photoshop et-al because it is Office or Photoshop. They are the definition of brand whores. These people who actually can't do anything in Office, but will bitch if you give them anything else.If you are an advanced or expert and can properly drive Word or Excel or Photoshop or Illustrator or whatever, then no problem, get what you need. However in your average workplace those people are not common. Instead they should get Google Docs. LibreOffice isn't really a good alternative despite the saving in licences. The support costs are the same or greater for that. The challenge though is when one person needs something specific and expensive but also needs to collaborate with someone else who doesn't.Really, the open source zealots are no worse than the Apple zealots and the Microsoft zealots and the x zealots. I have sat in so many meetings and copped abuse from numpties who think Outlook is the only email client in the world, Exchange is essential for life, and think everyone should have a Domain, OTOH they have never heard of LDAP and think unix is some sort of weird sex cult. Conversely, I don't ever recall sitting in a meeting where someone tried to stuff open source software down my throat.Hopefully we all grow up at some point and realise that one size doesn't fit all.Funnily enough LibreOffice Writer and it's ancestors back to Star Writer have always been (IMHO) more intuitive than Word in its use of Styles, and your average business user would do well to learn it as they will then not produce such complete shit Word documents. However my impression is that now it is starting to look more and more like Word so that advantage is going if not gone.QuoteHmm, Microsoft did actually specify the xml format themselves... They just didn't bother doing everything in XML which is the issue. I have spent some time in the depths of MS Word files, and the XML stuff is manageable enough, but the binary blobs are not. I also found that Word was reasonable to work with at the XML level, but Powerpoint was not. It was quite buggy and would crash and generally misbehave badly loading files which were valid but which were modified outside of Powerpoint.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 10:46:09 am
content: I think the Open Source haters need to look around and remind themselves how much of it they actually use. Also how much their proprietary software uses underneath and the infrastructure that allows them to use it uses. Almost everything on the internet is built on Open Source tech stacks. Open Source pretty much dominates general computing and network infrastructure because it encourages interoperability. Even Windows is full of it if you look close enough.I can understand specific professional domains favouring some commercial software because they provide certain defacto features, but at the same time the disadvantage of this paradigm is it stifles innovation and agility. The software become slave to the big spenders who have the clout to demand features or in some cases demand the lack of them, or even more often the lack of change.The biggest thing that attracts me to Open Source software is freedom. Freedom from corporate boxing in, proprietary formats which don't work outside of that companies golham licensing. Freedom from being told how I should use someone's software. The fact that, in a large part, things work together. This allows entire stacks to come from different vendors, which allows component-ization, reuse and component interchange which is simply not available in commercial proprietary software. On Linux you can swap whole layers and expect the layers above and below will still play nice. Linux entire desktop environments, logon managers or window managers.Analogously - Microsoft will provide you with a fully working PCB for your design, but it's potted and has only proprietary connectors for other Microsoft extension PCBs. Linux on the other hand is not potted and provides open standard connectors to work with any other PCBs. You can swap ICs or components because not only are the component standarised (though custom components exist), the full schematics are publicly published, they are at least fairly well documented and there is nothing stopping you modifying the design should you need.In commercial ventures however this is often seen as a disadvantage. It is often much more preferencial to have a single vendor, single support contract, single point to complain to and that point should be large, persistent and hopefully at the right price responsive.That said most proprietary vendors are embracing support for open source software. You can program Python in Visual Studio, although in a limited way. Still they peddle their locked in formats and openly discourage inter-operability with other software to keep you locked in and pumping revenue for them. At the same time, they steal innovations from Open Source software just as often as open source tries to emulate or be compatible with closed source software. KDE and Windows have been exchanging features for decades. It's an odd relationship.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 11:01:12 am
content: Quote from: paulca on April 16, 2018, 10:46:09 amI think you're touching upon another often seen issue with open source, which is the massive fragmentation. Every disagreement seems to be settled by a fork, so there's a huge amount of mostly similar alternatives out there. That's both a blessing and a curse, but tends to be the latter if you want to standardize something in an organisation and expect people to actually work with it. The variants that seem to do well generally have large orgnisations with good support behind them, which for many intents and purposes is the same as any proprietary supplier.Like you say, the world wouldn't be the same without open source and I think the practical sweet spot is a healthy mix of both.

author: VEGETA
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 11:22:14 am
content: QuoteYou just summarized the biggest problem in one line. You take my "Sayian prince award" for sure!!One big example of this is mplayer. This one is very good alternative to Windows-only packages which relies on codecs based on Microsoft's directshow. However, they perhaps disagreed and someone said "hey let's fork it and make it the best ever player!".They went on with "mplayer2". The problem is now we have both mplayer and mplayer2 being developed at the same time! which one to choose? However, VLC gave a comprehensive solution despite being weaker than mplayer-based players simply because it is one package from one source which gets developed by a true team.You guess it... later on some people made "MPV" which is the latest one forked or inspired by both mplayer and mplayer2... this one is good and maintained by true experts in the field.Same thing happened to media player classic as they made "media player classic - home cinema" and other made even more forks...!They could have just stayed with one package, one name, and one team!

author: agehall
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 11:32:39 am
content: Holy crap! This thread got me to watch the guided tour of Diptrace and that just knocked me out of my chair!I started with Eagle a few years ago and quite liked it. I was about to buy a license for it instead of just using the free license when they were bought and switched to the subscription model which I feel isn't very good for me. When I looked at the different packages available, I ended up going with KiCad because it was free had "no" limitations etc etc but boy, this choice made my life painful!I don't think there is anything you can't design in KiCad if you put your mind to it, but there are so many small things that are just annoying that I don't even know where to begin. Just turning layers (i.e. more than one at the time) on and off is a pain. I still have not figured out how the heck traces are routed when I move the wire tool around 100%. Moving a component after wiring it up (either in schematic or PCB view) seems to make the worst choices available etc etc.Basically, nothing that makes it impossible to use, but the usability of the package is horrible.I'm going to download Diptrace ASAP and give it a spin. If it does what I expect it to, I'll be buying a license from them pretty soon. I'm a pure hobbyist and when I design things, I want the best tools I can afford that helps me accomplish what I want and that are easy to work with. As I can afford more than $0 for my tools, I'm quite happy to buy myself a better experience when designing PCBs.

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 11:50:33 am
content: Quote from: agehall on April 16, 2018, 11:32:39 amDon't get it wrong. While Diptrace has been better than Eagle for a few years because it was developing, while Eagle was pretty much stuck, now things may change since Autodesk has bought Eagle and is apparently putting some serious resources into development. Diptrace development was never very fast, although support seemes to respond to issues and questions pretty quickly. Still, Autodesk can throw orders of magnitude more resources at making Eagle a useful software package.As for open source being open and free to use it how u see fit and so on, I think in case of PCB development, your job is to develop PCBs, not fiddle with software and make imprevements to it. It does not carry any value added with it, so no employer will devote resources into it. In reality neither my employer nor myself as a business owner after hours give a flying shit if something is open and I can improve it so that it finally works. It either works and produces something that can be sold or it doesn't. If it doesn't - it doesn't make money and is not worthwhile to use.

author: agehall
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 11:53:48 am
content: Quote from: poorchava on April 16, 2018, 11:50:33 amWell, until Autodesk changes it back to a product I can buy, it will probably not be my first choice ever. My preference is to own software.

author: VEGETA
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 12:00:36 pm
content: QuoteWe all said that until we knew about subscription based approach. No one will ever be convinced that this is the best way to guarantee product's development. It is mainly for gaining tons of money from users. I don't believe anyone should get subscription software, especially that there are lots of better and cheaper packages elsewhere.QuoteYes, Autodesk can release the kraken on it and it will be better, but still subscription based.Autodesk has the ability to make eagle one of the best packages, but this approach is just never gonna work. will you pay 500$ per year for a software that you can buy its alternative for the same price and keep it for you? NO! because next year you should pay another 500$ and so on! while if you got CS or diptrace, it will be yours forever... you just pay for maintenance and vault.

author: ^_^
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 12:03:32 pm
content: Quote from: agehall on April 16, 2018, 11:32:39 amGreatest pain KiCAD gave me was when trying to multiply single circuit on a PCB. On schematic you can do dumb Ctrl+C Ctrl+V, but on PCB...Also after you see how one can make footprints in Altium (using footprint wizard for standard packages) it's all just "what have I been doing with my life"Haha

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 12:25:08 pm
content: Quote from: ^_^ on April 16, 2018, 12:03:32 pmOf course the plus point of KiCad is that all the files are free text format. So you can write scripts to copy blocks with a lateral offset and place them back into the schematic. There are a few canned solutions for this out there already.Someone mentioned dragging/moving wired components on a PCB with the traces still attached in KiCad... is that even possible?

author: DrGeoff
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 12:31:16 pm
content: Quote from: agehall on April 16, 2018, 11:32:39 amI recently switched out of Protel99SE after using it for 17 years and migrated all the custom libraries, many circuit and PCB designs within the evaluation period to see how it performs as a replacement (as P99SE is long unsupported). I found it is be a satisfactory replacement and bought a license, and have since migrated another 100 or so designs across. It appears stable and very usable.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 12:17:07 am
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on April 16, 2018, 10:02:22 amThat view is a fallacy; I know, because I've stood in the same trap myself in the past. I worked on the kernel network components and related libraries (remember libsocket) of Sun Solaris at Sun Microsystems for five years in the 90s, and looked at Linux: nah, not going anywhere. Fragile. Not usable for production systems. Lacks critical production system features. Sun CC is so much better than gcc. Teamware beats plain sccs/rcs. Where is Sun Microsystems today? Doesn't exist. Sun CC? Doesn't exist. Teamware? Doesn't exist and git dominates. Solaris? Just kicked to the curb by Oracle last year, all but replaced by Linux.If you imagine this can't happen to Altium or anyone else you're delusional. Why did Linux become so prominent? Because it was worked on by competent, skilled engineers hired and paid to do so. Gcc? Same. If you think successful open source projects are the result of "hobbyists" you've missed the boat completely. KiCAD development is led by equally competent paid engineers - in fact it wasn't until CERN started funding it that it actually started to become more than a toy. And if you go look at the roadmaps, planning materials, presentations, schedules, and commit logs closing out items on the roadmap you can see this is not someone's hobby project. And THIS is the critical aspect of it, and exactly why Altium and every other vendor in this space should be concerned.

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 05:44:39 am
content: With Linux it's the case of software developers making something they'd use on their own and they know how they'd like to use it. I'd say one can be either a competent software developer or a competent pcb designer, but both is probably very, very rare and such people have enough stuff to do. For the said Linux case, one has only got to be a software developer.What open source engineering-related softwares need is constant feedback from the industry that is using those tools on what to improve and/or change.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 06:17:28 am
content: Quote from: poorchava on April 17, 2018, 05:44:39 am+1These are subtle, very insightful, and important distinctions

author: hendorog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 09:45:39 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on April 17, 2018, 06:17:28 amYeah, nah.Did you guys miss the comment above? High profile open source software like KiCad and certainly Linux is not developed by hobbyists. Read that again.That means it is mostly developed by paid professionals - just as commercial software is. Therefore what you are saying applies just as much to commercial products as it does to the open source ones._All_ software development needs constant feedback from subject matter experts.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 09:45:57 am
content: Quote from: bson on April 17, 2018, 12:17:07 amWhat exactly is the fallacy? I don't see an argument that's different from anything I've said. I addressed the larger Linux distros and applications being close to or the same as closed source, as they're developed by large paid teams with all the benefits and drawbacks that brings. I also addressed similar things happening to closed sources alternatives.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 05:58:50 pm
content: Quote from: hendorog on April 17, 2018, 09:45:39 amHi hendorog,I think we might be saying the same thing, or something similar.The intention wasn't in any way to take a shot at KiCad, or Open Source.The point was just that in the case of Linux a software developer can often be both an end user and a software developer. As an end user a software developer has a pretty good idea of what he or she would like in software in general and software OS's and tools in particular.In the case of other non-core IT applications (hardware circuit design software for hardware engineers, medical imaging software for radiologists, etc, etc, etc.) the end result (software that is enjoyable and productive to use, and hopefully reliable and affordable too) often requires input from the end users to the software developers. This collaboration between end users and software developers happens very naturally in the case of Linux (or other similar open source projects) because the end users and the software developers are often the same people – just wearing two hats.Whether an application development project is open source or a conventional commercial project the benefit of having end user input to the software developers is generally very important to the success of the project, of course. In both cases (open or commercial) the software developers can have a range of skills (from beginners to pros, and pro’s pro’s); the better the skill level the more likely the success. In both cases, the key is often knowing which end users to listen to. Often this requires some decision as to who the application is going be built for (beginning end users, intermediate end users, advanced end users, power users, etc – or some combination. Or maybe the market is segmented by enthusiast, intermediate/advanced amateur, freelance pro/small company pro, big company pro, etc.). In any event - to your point - collaboration between software developers and end users is generally pretty important for both commercial and open source projects.The point I think poorchava was trying to make (and that I agree with) is simply that Linux is an interesting (and somewhat unique) use case (relative to the broad spectrum of uses cases) for software development because many of the end users are software developers and vice versa. This isn’t generally the case with most application software. As poorchava pointed out, perhaps some hardware circuit design engineers (end users) are also software developers, but if so, they are probably pretty busy and they have to choose how much time they want to spend wearing one hat or the other, or both of their two hats (or maybe yet other hats if they are that talented.)My guess is we have some forum members who would like EDA tools that will help automate design and build processes - and there are others here who would like to help build EDA tools as well as use them. Most of us would at least like to find a tool that helps us become comfortably productive, and to the extent we don't find such tools we sometimes share our input as end users regarding our "requirements" for ease of use, functionality, price, etc. The chances of our specific end user requirements/preferences making it into some list of product requirements is not real high so we get to choose between the products available, unless we happen to be software developers who can make modifications - to the extent that is practical and permissible. In the case of Linux it's reasonably practical and permissible, in the case of EDA it's maybe somewhat less common but still feasible.EF

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 06:31:51 pm
content: Quote from: DrGeoff on April 16, 2018, 12:31:16 pmSwitched to Diptrace, I'm assuming? Is it really that much better? I've been using Protel 99SE for ages, and know where all the bodies are buried. It certainly does just about everything I need. Not only plain schematic and PCB, but I also know how to build schematic and PCB library parts, how to use the pick & place output, etc.And, I trust the PCB design rule checks completely. Just because there's no updates to P99 doesn't mean it is dead. It still works fine. I've also made a number of customizations to P99 so I can use keyboard shortcuts to do a lot of stuff, that is much better for me than clicking on menu items.I got a design in KiCAD, and it does work, but I don't completely trust the design rule checks, and the rest just seems cumbersome. I think I can make MUCH better schematics in P99, but the KiCAD PCB stuff seems to be pretty good. But, I'm nowhere close to an expert in KiCAD. I've been hoping KiCAD development continues, and maybe someday I'll make the switch.Jon

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 07:33:06 pm
content: Just downloaded KiCAD for a quick looksy at what progress has been made. Thing that i would have a problem with is the need to manually link footprints to the schematic. I'm at the point now where I pick the symbol, footprint, 3D model and MPN the moment I put a symbol on the schematic. that way design is much faster.

author: jgalak
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 09:44:42 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on April 17, 2018, 07:33:06 pmMy understanding is that it's a deliberate design decision, letting you choose components in the schematic before worrying about footprints.Honestly, I don't love it, especially since it's inconsistent - it works fine for generic components - passives, diodes, etc., but not for more complex ICs which are only available in a few packages and those packages may have different numbers of pins (necessitating different schematic symbols).I also often start by thinking about footprints, especially if trying to fit a certain size budget.But I can live with the annoyance.

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 10:00:32 pm
content: Quote from: jgalak on April 17, 2018, 09:44:42 pmIt's a good example of a difference between "nice feature" (thought the developer) and "WTF" (said almost anybody, who's ever worked in a bigger engineering company). In my book the one and only correct way to do libraries is when you have a single library entry for a single order code that is automatically put onto the BOM. And that generally has one footprint, perhaps some 2-3 variants in case of THT parts where leads can be bent in different ways or SMD L-N-M options.

author: DrGeoff
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 10:04:58 pm
content: Quote from: jmelson on April 17, 2018, 06:31:51 pmYes, Diptrace.It's better in that it is supported for future OS changes, whereas P99SE is likely to stop working one day after an OS update. I needed to be able to transfer significant amounts of IP to a new system before this happens. Diptrace appears to be very close in functionality to P99SE, so the time to get started was very short. The evaluation exercise convinced me that it was an appropriate replacement as I managed to easily reproduce my schematic and PCB libs from P99SE to Diptrace and then reproduce a few designs (as an exercise in navigating the software). There are a few differences with schematic/PCB interaction which are relatively minor however overall the results have been satisfactory and PCB's have been manufactured from it now. I rarely use autorouter functionality so I cannot compare this adequately.

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 10:32:54 pm
content: Quote from: DrGeoff on April 17, 2018, 10:04:58 pmWell, I run a Linux desktop, and use VirtualBox to run various Windows versions as "guest" OS's under that. So, I ought to be able to keep Windows XP or 7 running about as long as I care to. Yeah, most low- to mid-budget autorouters are somewhere between awful and hysterically bad. P99SE's autorouter seems to be in the latter category. KiCad's actually doesn't look too bad. I'll have to check out Diptrace. Just the name seems to shout "old school" so I've never looked at it before.Thanks,Jon

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 07:22:51 am
content: Quote from: jgalak on April 17, 2018, 09:44:42 pmIt's an old fashioned way of working that may have worked when all through hole parts were the same and perhaps computers could not handle the data (I've done PCB design in DOS on a 486). As soon as you need to produce manufacturing data so that someone else can build your boards you will find this a pain in the arse. I select parts as I design the schematic. I can't afford the time and errors of manually assigning footprints and writing BOM's so yes KiCAD is out. Congratulations to the guy that made a computer with it, I'm sure he assembled that himself and had lots of time on his hands. For business I need something better.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 08:25:59 am
content: It allows you do interesting stuff without redoing the schematic like have a switch on the schematic, but switch it to be a pin header on the PCB or change a THT design to be SMD without changing the schematic.I also allows me to create new components in the schematic without having to worry about the footprint yet.I like it, but I'm only a beginner.Possibly the ability to assign a "default" footprint to components might be a compromise to appease both camps.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 10:59:33 am
content: Like i say, wait until you are designing something for a customer and need to get a quote from an assembler.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 11:52:37 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 18, 2018, 10:59:33 amBut, assuming you know the footprints as you kind of need to know them to design your schematic in you paradigm, then it only takes a few minutes to assign footprints.I don't see the issue. A few minutes cost over a design and layout that might take days. I think those few minutes would be saved not having to hunt, select or remake components for different footprints every time.Having the footprint coupled to the part means you have to have hundreds of different resistor and capacitor components. One for each footprint. That makes the parts library, HUGE, which in terms of the schematic which technically doesn't care what the physical properties of a component are.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 12:32:10 pm
content: It depends on the size of the design but for anything over 20 lines it becomes a nightmare getting it quoted. As soon as I pick a part I have the correct footprint, 3D model and MPN, the assembler does not care what you want, they want the MPN on the BOM to be exactly what you buy.Yes It means I have to duplicate some parts, I have a resistor template and have 0805 and 1206 versions. Same for capacitors and make them quickly as I need them as the hard part is the footprint which is made once and reused over and over, the footprint data is linked so never duplicated.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 12:41:11 pm
content: I haven't used it, but KiCad supports BOM scripts which produce a BOM in whatever format you want. I believe it requires scripts as it will produce different formats for different suppliers/assemblers so it decouples it and leaves it up to you. I would imagine it provides your script with each component and footprint required + count in turn and lets you output whatever you want.There might be some generic ones out there worth investigating.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 12:56:58 pm
content: My script ? all this to get around just assigning everything required when a part is set up ? like I say, try doing commercial design and you will see.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 01:30:32 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on April 18, 2018, 12:56:58 pmI think it's just a different way of working and requires different procedures. I expect if you took the time to learn it you'd find it was probably just as fast.How does your current application create your BOM? I expect it's a script or a length setup you had to setup originally.I don't do commercial design, so it works for me. I was able to change an entire board from THT to SMT without changing the schematic once. I frequently change my mind about component footprints and change them. Granted in commercial the BOM is already more or less decided and changing a component is more difficult if you buyers are already ordering 400,000 of them.It also makes sense to me from an entity modelling and normalization point of view. The relationship between component and footprint is many to many, so data doctrine would always point to a normalised join of two entities. Thus you have ONE resistor and 100 different footprints. Those same footprints can be used with a capacitor, meaning you only need ONE 0805 footprint. KiCad actually has a resistor 0805 and a capacitor 0805 which is a bit weird, but I expect it's just to stop forum posts from people asking "Where are the 0805 capacitor footprints?"

author: jgalak
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 05:47:48 pm
content: Quote from: paulca on April 18, 2018, 01:30:32 pmSince the footprint includes silkscreen and assembly layers, it might also be so that they can have different graphics?

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 07:02:45 pm
content: Quote from: jgalak on April 18, 2018, 05:47:48 pmGood point.

author: P_Doped
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2018, 03:00:10 pm
content: I'll put my vote in for DipTrace.I'm definitely a hobbyist level user. I send out a board at most 1 time per 3 months. I wanted a program that was easy to learn and return to. I had used Protel many years ago.I feel DipTrace has a reasonable price point for a light user as well as a reasonable upgrade path if/when your use becomes heavier. I bought it at the Starter level (300 pins, 2 signal layers).I like to have my designs stored wherever I like and the software developed for the current OS, so I feel I can comfortably continue to use the software, even if the company goes out of business. I didn't want board physical size restrictions. Once again, though, I'm a hobbyist with respect to PCB's, so the software doesn't represent my livelihood.I can't comment on the quality of the copper pour for a heavy user or more than 2 layer capabilities. I typically use the autorouter with perhaps a few nets hand routed beforehand, finishing with a copper pour for ground, say. I'm not trying to have the program control impedances or define net classes; no power user here.I tried Eagle & KiCad and found them too awkward for a casual user. DipTrace hit the sweet spot for me. I can make symbols, footprints, schematics, and PCB's with either a quick tutorial or the old copy/paste from existing, similar parts. I send my boards out to Oshpark and have never had an issue with the process or the results.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 07:50:16 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 17, 2018, 07:33:06 pmYou don’t need to manually link footprints to schematic symbols. For the last few years, you have been able to create schematic symbols with footprint names embedded in them and store those symbols in libraries. When you place the part on the schematic, the footprint is included, and you don’t need to do that CvPCB step to match symbols and footprints.Symbols with footprints and proper part numbers are called “Atomic parts,” and a lot of users rely on them. The latest KiCad-provided libraries use atomic parts, as does Digikey’s new library. The concept is well-supported.Search the discussions on theuser forumfor more details.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 08:07:00 am
content: Quote from: paulca on April 18, 2018, 08:25:59 amon diptrace: right click on part in the schematic -> attached pattern -> change and rewire the pattern as you like. Problem solved.Quote from: paulca on April 18, 2018, 01:30:32 pmNot weird at all. there are a TON of polarized 0805 capacitors, so the CAP_0805 in diptrace (actually all che SMD cap patterns) has this line to tell orientation. same for LEDs and diodes in 0805

author: cowana
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 09:48:48 am
content: Quote from: paulca on April 18, 2018, 01:30:32 pmThe actual reason (assuming both are unpolarised) is the different in height. Resistors are printed (thick/thin film), so are fairly low - this means the pads can be small and still get a good solder fillet on the outside of the lead. MLCC SMD capacitors are generally taller, so the pads are wider - this means the solder fillet will still wet to the entire outside of the part, and it'll be well mechanically attached to the board.Have a look at the difference in dimensions between an 0805 resistor and 0805 capacitor footprint - you'll find the copper pattern is different!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 04:16:53 pm
content: And in the real non KiCAD world with linked libraries including 3D models the different footprint includes a correct and accurate model. there is a certain pleasure in picking a part versus a symbol and being able to produce a purchasable BOM and accurate 3D model. In CS even in 2D mode the 3D information is being used and physical clashese in 3 dimensions highlighted.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 07:46:16 pm
content: Quote from: cowana on April 21, 2018, 09:48:48 amAlso, the footprints need to be different if they have 3D models attached.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 07:47:30 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on April 21, 2018, 04:16:53 pmTo whom are you replying? Kicad supports exactly what you want.

author: fearless
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2022, 03:13:55 pm
content: I'd like to see this thread re-opened, perhaps under a new title (perhaps citing KiCad 6.0?). A lot has changed in the last four years...

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2022, 11:03:54 pm
content: Noooo!!It's not a productive discussion, but there are fairly recent threads on eevblog if you search for them.