rickman wrote:
<snip>
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

In article <C4266E4A.19771%spam2@stratforddigital.ca>, James Morrison
says...
Please, the last discussion I saw from them on it they seemed to be
mystified that anyone would find it useful.

Robert
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:00:59 +0000, Guy Macon
<http://www.guymacon.com/> wrote:

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

MK wrote:
KiCad http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/

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.

Anton Erasmus wrote:
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.
-- Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/>

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.

On Apr 12, 1:48 pm, James Morrison <sp...@stratforddigital.ca> wrote:
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.

On Apr 10, 9:49 pm, James Morrison <sp...@stratforddigital.ca> wrote:
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?

In article <2c0987d9-e17d-4797-9adf-4960fd3f3b6b@
8g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, rickman says...
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 http://www.teranews.com **

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
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.

On Apr 20, 9:53 pm, Robert Adsett <s...@aeolusdevelopment.com> wrote:
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.

rickman wrote:

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
<http://www.guymacon.com/>

On Apr 21, 3:46 am, Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/> wrote:
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.

In article <36270c91-22f2-4be2-8324-5d613ab1d0a1
@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, rickman says...
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 http://www.teranews.com **

rickman wrote:
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.