Want opinions on "EDA" software

You should try Kicad. It is free, open source, runs on windows and Linux and has an excellent set of integrated tools plus a lively user community.

Ian

I've been keeping it installed on my Linux partition for years - since May 10, 2000.

I've used it a little, and it seemed to be no worse than Orcad 4, which I did use extensively back in 1993, and the later versions of Orcad which I used on and off up until 1999. I went through a period where I couldn't get Linux to recognise my ADSL modem, and the gEDA suite got lost in an upgrade that went wrong, but I finally bit the bullet and got an Ethernet-based ADSL modem, and I've now got a recent package installed and running under SuSE 10.0. I've yet to get around to using it again.

I do lurk on the gEDA mailing list - one of their regular posters ( DJ Delorie ) is also active here, with posts every few days - and there seems to be a lively group of developers working on various aspects of the suite. If you live in the vicinty of Boston, you could attend one of their regular get-togethers.

There has been a little discussion of Kicad on the gEDA mailing list - it seems to be easier to get into that the gEDA suite, but gEDA iis claimed to be more powerful once you've built up some experience.

I do (of course). gEDA is great for people who (1) have the patience to learn something new, and (2) expect to create their own symbol/footprint libraries anyway. If this isn't you, Kicad is often a better fit as it's easier to learn (gEDA is more "expert friendly" than "newbie friendly") and eagle has a bigger library (although you might end up making your own symbols/footprints anyway, it's a rapidly changing market).

I've had feedback from people doing *very* complex boards with it, so far we haven't heard of a case where it couldn't handle the complexity. Still doesn't let you rotate parts outside of 90 degree increments, though, and the autorouter needs work (it's still only a gridless autorouter). Also, no blind or buried vias, although we've talked about them. We also just picked up a new project manager program.

We've been doing a lot of work recently on usability and functionality, if you haven't tried it in the last year or so it's worth a re-try. We're certainly open to constructive criticism and suggestions. There are a LOT of hotkey combinations in these programs, but once you learn the ones you like, you find you can do things a lot faster than you expected.

Yes, it works on Windows now, although nobody has put together click-to-install packages for it yet, like we have for the various linux and bsd targets. The PCB layout program runs on MacOS too.

PCB limitations: effectively none. PCB supports 16 layers out of the box (the default is 8, with add/remove/move layer commands) but you can change one line and recompile it for more if you need (I tested

I just finished a couple of online footprint generators, and have a quick-turn "box symbol" generator (i.e. most micros), here:

Stuart maintains an up-to-date ISO installer. Just burn it to a CD-ROM (or loop-back mount it) and go; it builds all the packages for you (from source!) and installs them. There's also RPMs and DEBs available somewhere.

That is quite likely true. Kicad is somewhat younger than gEDA some I am not surprised the latter is more powerful. IMHO Kicad has a better UI and overall integration. gEDA adheres to the Unix paradigm of each program doing one thing well which IMHO in less appropriate in a tightly coupled suite of programs like an EDA package.

Ian

Stuart Brorson and DJ Delorie are developers on the project and post all the time to sci.electronics.* (especially sci.electronics.cad). The Usenet Archive is your friend.

DJ is like a proud Papa, extolling its virtues

Lots of critiques of gEDA already exist

Testimonials too.

For more, start here:

On this one - I fixed the max_layer incompatibility thing. One pcb binary supports, by default, 2-16 layers. If you recompile for more, it still supports boards with less. I've got one board that uses 10 drawing layers (it's a two-layer board, but I wanted to manage the copper fills separately).

. Ian Bell wrote:

Notes on Free Dog's test drive of KiCAD (Aug 2005): http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:JKSJr-O4t7MJ:archives.seul.org/geda/user/Aug-2005/msg00023.html+nice+better+outstanding+This-is-not-natural+logical+consistent+netlist+multi-page+footprint-editor+Gerber+multiple+doesn't-build-nicely+scriptable Update (Oct 2005)

Summary of gEDA-vs-KiCAD by Ales Hvezda (another gEDA developer):

I'm reminded of Jim Weir's CAD evaluation metric:

The schematic capture (schgeda) is quite allright, but the pcb program isn't.

Nothing beats Orcad for schematic capture.

If you are serious about this, write a better PCB layout tool and be sure to attach the net names to the tracks and copper pours. Orcad PCB Layout has a powerfull feature which allows you to modify object parameters on the PCB (components, vias, traces, etc, etc) in a spreadsheet form. This works way better than loads of dialogs in which you can edit parameters.

Or, even easier, modify the existing pcb layout tool to what you want. That's what open source is all about!

I'll use nothing then. Where can I download it?

You've already got it, check between your ears ;-)

Tim