What is your favorite PCB software?

Direct co-ordinate entry is always nice. I've used Scripting for downstream extraction, such as Pick and Place info, or BOMs, if you use Assembly variants.

-jg

Reply to
Jim Granville
Loading thread data ...

Please, the last discussion I saw from them on it they seemed to be mystified that anyone would find it useful.

Robert

** Posted from
formatting link
**
Reply to
Robert Adsett

For the router I got the following prices: (From memory)

8 routing layers US$2400 16 routing layers US$4000 32 routing layers US$6000

2 and 4 routing layer versions are also available at lower cost. There is also a Lite version available which is limited to 125 nets and which is freely downloadable. This is still quite useful.

Regards Anton Erasmus

Reply to
Anton Erasmus

KiCad

formatting link

Free, Schematic -> Netlist+Component -> PCB Layout.

Includes:

- Library editors for your own SCH & PCB components

- 3D PCB model preview (provided you use components with their corresponding 3D .wrl model files) !

The auto-place & auto-route are a bit brain-dead but for simple jobs it's quite useful.

Chris.

Reply to
cth

I just downladed and tried it, and was not impressed. The autoplace demo didn't allow any manual placing, the autorouter demo crashed, and there was no demo allowing me to evaluate schematic capture.

--
misc.business.product-dev: a Usenet newsgroup 
about the Business of Product Development.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Guy Macon

Does anybody use Pro/E's ECAD-MCAD Collaboration Extension for boar geometry or component placement? Its not a bad system as Its much easie to do complex shaped boards using an actual modeling program.

Reply to
Joel

I don't recall and that is the problem. I *have* to remember how Eagle works vs other tools that just plain work like most other packages that are even vaguely related to drawing anything. One thing that I think Allan got very right when he wrote FreePCB is the scroll button zoom. He not only centers the screen on the cursor when you turn the wheel, he *only* centers it on the first click and doesn't start zooming until the second click. I don't recall what Eagle does, but this works better than any other program I have used for any sort of drawing. FreeRouter does the opposite in the sense they instead of moving the image so the cursor is the center of the screen, they use the cursor as the center of the zoom! Instead of zooming in on a feature or being a controlled way of panning the window, I find this very, very frustrating.

The package tool is something that is a part of FreePCB. Allan calls it the Footprint Wizard. It does a pretty good job of creating SIPs, DIPs, QFPs, BGAs, headers with two methods of numbering pins, etc. I even use it for oddball parts since it will throw a bunch of pins on the page that I can then tailor to suit the part.

Actually, the LED thing is likely not something that would come up very often. But it can be useful to use a "pattern" to place and route identical sections of logic. Someone was talking about that in the FreePCB forums and I recently found use for it. I guess it could be a tricky thing to make work correctly, especially the user interface.

Reply to
rickman

That may be true, but the simple fact that it is different is a major issue. Like I said, I learned the old interface once, then when I wanted to use it again 6 months later, I had to learn it all over again! That is not a good interface unless you use the tool all the time. My projects are typically on a 6 month cycle.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it "brilliant"! It works and you can get used to it. But I found I work in different modes and the typical interface does a good job with all of them. The only thing I don't like about nearly every package I have seen (don't recall if Eagle is like this or not), to do a basic move, you have to select the object(s) and *then* select a move command! Other than PCB layout, I have not seen a program that doesn't allow you to move objects by just simple clicking and dragging! That is a significant time waster in my opinion.

I can't say anything about how well the new interface works as I won't be using this tool. Someone else mentioned how using a third party footprint or schematic can result in your designs being "infected" with an illegal copy stamp resulting in the loss of support (possibly for all time). Sorry, I'm not interested.

I could get going on a long rant about licensing and software locks. But I'll just say that I *much* prefer to use software that has no lock regardless of the cost. This includes intended locks such as hardware dongles or software keys, but also includes proprietary format files and the like. Ultimately the important part of tools is getting the work done. Locks get in the way of getting the work done.

Is it an open database? Can I write tools to pull data out of it and to update it without using Eagle? For example, if I design in a part and in procurement the part is substituted, do I have to go into Eagle to make the change or can I change the database externally?

Reply to
rickman

I don't follow Rick. If the part is form and function compatible then there is no need to update the PCB or schematic. If they are not then you need to go into the programs to changes the schematic and/or PCB. Surely you're not thinking of keeping approved source in the PCB/Schematic? (I know people who object to keeping resistor values in the schematic, preferring to keep them separately for configuration flexibility)

Robert

** Posted from
formatting link
**
Reply to
Robert Adsett

PCB has an option for whether you want zooming to recenter the crosshairs or not. I like "not" but both ways have their followers.

I prefer "not" because I'm of the opinion that the applications should NEVER move the mouse cursor. The mouse is an input device, not an output device.

Reply to
DJ Delorie

I put part numbers in my schematic. I then generate a BOM from the schematic using those part numbers. I don't have any sort of data base to track component changes, so I update the schematic when I change components. Not including resistor values would certainly make reading a schematic difficult without the lookup table for the values.

It has occurred to me that this is a good reason to use company part numbers. A company part number can be equated to multiple qualified parts for that socket. But this is another level of complexity that I am not currently prepared to support.

There are still plenty of situations where I would want to edit the parts information in the schematic like it was a spread sheet or externally update it. Orcad actually provides this capability and would only be better if they did a more complete job of it.

It doesn't even matter if you agree with my example. The point is that open formats are better for many reasons. I don't want to work with closes proprietary design files anymore and I won't. For my next design I will not use Orcad any more and I won't be using Eagle if their file formats are closed.

Reply to
rickman

Here are two such reasons from my personal experience.

Example #1 A major aerospace company has over thirty thousand documents in WordPerfect for MS-DOS format -- remember when that was THE standard? The document have all been part of bids on military contracts, and edited versions have to look the same when printed out on new printers that had not been invented yet when WordPerfect Corp. went belly up. And, of course, the new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system chokes on the files, so a parallel set of text versions needs to be maintained.

Example #2 A small company has a product line that has been in production for many years and is still quite profitable. All the PWBs were created with the 1992 version of AutoCAD for Apple Macintosh Release 12. So when a change is made they hand-edit the Gerber.

So, what are you happy FreePCB users using for schematic capture?

--
Guy Macon
Reply to
Guy Macon

I still have Orcad which I don't care for. Many of the "hobbyist" users are using TinyCad. I took a quick look at it and I don't care for it, but may be I just need to look harder. Some use a variety of tools such as gEDA. There certainly does not seem to be a consensus, but TinyCad is likely the single most popular.

I am just surprised at how useful the FreePCB program is and that it is written by *one* person! No team, no business plan, no venture capital. Just one guy who likes using and writing CAD software. Doesn't that say something about how businesses write programs?!! All of the source is available, so you can even make your own customizations if you want.

Reply to
rickman

the

example).

applied

I'd bet you don't put resistor part numbers on your schematic (just resistance values) so you are already part way there :)

And how do you deal with variant stuffing?

Seriously, if you are producing more than one or two boards just for yourself you need to do this, it'll keep you sane as part supplies vary. Part specs can be as simple as listing approved manufacturers and their associated part number up to a full set of critical to quality parameters to make it easier for a contract manufacturer to suggest alternates. Something like Parts and Vendors helps a lot with the first.

That I won't disagree with.

For myself, I find copy protection far more disagreeable and potential dangerous. Eagle does have that drawback as well even if it is one of the lighter forms. Eagle does have provision for getting at their database programmatically and writing it out so it's not fully closed.

OTOH, I wouldn't want to give up the tight coupling between schematic capture and layout that Eagle provides. It's not impossible to get the schematic and PCB out of sync but you have to work at it a bit.

The last time I checked the open alternatives they were pretty much in their infancy, little coupling between PCB and layout, and difficult to install.

Robert

** Posted from
formatting link
**
Reply to
Robert Adsett

[ ... ]

AFAIK, Eagle zooms using the scroll wheel, centered on the cursor position. You can move the schematic within the screen by zooming out on one center and zooming in on another. Once upon a time I was getting along quite well with Eagle, and the secret seemed to be to get familiar with the text commands; there were manipulations of nets and what not that couldn't be done any other way. I stopped using it for a couple of years and now I can't remember what it was I used to do.

Mel.

Reply to
Mel Wilson

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.