Just curious about what everyone uses. I've been using Orcad PCB editor.

On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 09:19:52 -0500, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and "Joel" <joelbenway@gmail.com> instead replied:

http://ezr2000plus.com/index_files/Page371.htm

Brilliant! Easy to learn and use. Very capable. Don't let the price
fool you.
--
Ray

On 2008-04-07, Joel <joelbenway@gmail.com> wrote:

I use Eagle. It's cheap, and it runs on both Linux and OSX. I
tried open-source gEDA stuff once upon a time, but the
learning curve was a bit too tough for me.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! !! I am having fun!!!
at
visi.com

Joel wrote:

Been using Eagle since about 2000:

http://www.cadsoft.de/


Considering I now have probably a man*yr of effort into developing my
own Eagle device libs, it's unlikely I'll ever change. Unless I have to
do something dramatically outside the scope of Eagle's abilities.

I have no complaints about Eagle. It is one of the most stable programs
I run. (On Linux).

Consider carefully what software you choose, because if you put effort
into package/device design, the longer you do it the more wedded you
will be.



--
Good day!

____________________________________
CRC
crobcREMOVETHIS@BOGUSsbcglobal.net
NOTE, delete texts: "REMOVETHIS" and
"BOGUS" from email address to reply.

gEDA/PCB exclusively.

I tried Eagle once, but one of the first footprints I used was wrong
(common part, subtle but fatal error) and the free version couldn't
handle the board I was designing.

On 7 Apr, 15:19, "Joel" <joelben...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://www.pulsonix.com

Leon

Joel wrote:
GSCHEM and PCB here under FreeBSD

"Joel" <joelbenway@gmail.com> wrote in message
newsOidnUGOS6oVsGfanZ2dnUVZ_ramnZ2d@giganews.com ...
Easy PC - simple, cheap, stable a bit limited - ie running out of steam on
6 layer design with 256 pin BGAs where you start wishing you had fancy
pin-swapping-to-optimise -routing features.

Michael Kellett

www.mkesc.co.uk

I am using Altium Designer since two years.
It had some oddities in the beginning, but they have added some real nice
things
I've been wishing for in the latest versions.

--
Best Regards,
Ulf Samuelsson
This is intended to be my personal opinion which may,
or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB

MK wrote:

Well you have got some pin swapping, which should be fine on an FPGA or
the like, where the IOs are (mostly) equivalent. It's definitely not
fancy though- it can't warn you if you blithely swap with some power or
special purpose pin, and it doesn't know about groupings, so gate or
opamp swapping needs a bit of care. And it's not automatic at all, and
you end up with a lot of schematic tidy-up when you've finished.

But I'd concur that it's a very good low- end package.

JS

On 2008-04-07, Joel <joelbenway@gmail.com> wrote:
Has anyone here looked at Vutrax (http://www.vutrax.co.uk) and if so,
what did you think of it compared to the alternatives ?

(I'm not associated with them, I have just used the free version
occasionally in the past.)

Thanks,

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980's technology to a 21st century world

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

I use it and am pretty happy with it.

Pros: Does what I need, runs on linux and windows. (I use the linux
one). It is pretty flexible and complete. Scriptable. Free version up
to n pins (256?). Stable, no problem reading files I did 15+ years
ago. Still actively supported and updated. Good technical
support. Buzzword compliant, e.g. Heirarchical schematics,
forward&back annotation/modification, 3D view, autoplace,
autorouters. DXF import(?)/export. Design rule checking. Gerber
RS274X, drill file generation. Export of parts lists, pick and place
files. Extensive control of plotting and on-screen display.

Cons: It has a steep learning curve and unfamiliar interface.
Development has slowed in recent years. The best autorouter is 3rd
party (Elektra), windows only(?) although quite good and reasonably
priced IMO. Some lack of integration with operating system, more so on
linux.

--

John Devereux

On Apr 7, 10:19 am, "Joel" <joelben...@gmail.com> wrote:
I use FreePCB. It is an open source package under Windows only.

I looked at Eagle and found it to be incredibly arcane and difficult
to learn. I find it interesting that one person says that gEDA was
too hard to learn, but didn't find Eagle to be awkward.

FreePCB is fairly capable although there are some features that are
lacking. Many of them are being added as we speak. The main thing I
like about it is the high level of support available. It is better
than I have seen with nearly *any* software package regardless of the
price.

rickman wrote:
and on Macintosh computers under VirtualPC.

As it doesn't have an integrated Schematic Capture capability.
back-annotation is non-existant (as was mentioned recently).

....and no one has mentioned about EAGLE:
**NEVER USE SOMEONE ELSE'S LIBRARY COMPONENTS **
until you have learned how to defeat the DRM that Cadsoft added.

On 2008-04-08, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe that was me. What I couldn't figure out how to do
was to get the gEDA/PCB stuff to work together: how to export a
netlist from the schematic editor and then auto-route it, then
modify the layout and back-annotate the schematic.

In Eagle, all that stuff "just works". I've heard people
complain about the Eagle UI. The library-related stuff is a
bit clunky, but the basic schematic capture and board layout
stuff seemed fine to me.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I want the presidency
at so bad I can already taste
visi.com the hors d'oeuvres.

Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> writes:
http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/gs/

You want the "blinker board" tutorial.

Sorry, no back-annotation yet. Forward annotation is pretty easy
though. What I do is use pcb to determine the changes I need, then
make them in gschem and forward annotate.

In article <7dGdnfFvs-K3UmbanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@visi>, Grant Edwards
says...
I'l go further and say I found it very straight forward, even easy.
Their non-rectangular group selection is unusual but I find it better
than the standard windows convention (which they also have). The
biggest thing I find missing is the lack of hiearchy in the schematics,
a rather curious blind spot on their part.

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

On 2008-04-08, John Devereux <jdREMOVE@THISdevereux.me.uk> wrote:
Thanks for the reply.

Yes, it's free up to 256 pins.

The steep learning curve and unfamiliar interface is what keeps me from
using it more often, especially, since this is for hobbyist use, I am not
using it every day.

I do find some of the other free packages easier to pick up again when
I haven't done any circuit design for a while.

As you have noted, it does appear to be feature rich however.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980's technology to a 21st century world

"Joel" <joelbenway@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
pOidnUGOS6oVsGfanZ2dnUVZ_ramnZ2d@giganews.com...
Proteus (www.labcenter.co.uk), for its very good mixed signal simulation
tools as well as its solid PCB design features, well adapted to complex
manually routed boards (rf, etc). Moreover I like the look of its
schematics, far more pretty on a customer report than Eagle's I think.

Robert

Disclaimer: My company sells EAGLE online to customers in North America
(see sig below). But I'm also an engineer and I use EAGLE for _real_ work
on a daily basis.

I like EAGLE. Version 4 and previous did take some getting used to the UI.
This is a stumbling block for some people. The main reason is that EAGLE's
motif was to pick your function, then pick your object. The idea being that
you typically will perform the same function on multiple objects. And in
reality I find this to be true, thus this i/f is generally the optimal way
to go.

However, Windows and other modern UI's are all object based: pick your
object then your function. Anyone who is used to this will find EAGLE's old
UI a bit obtuse at the start. But trust me, once you use it a lot you see
the brilliance of it all.

That all said, version 5.0 (due out soon) has the best of both worlds. You
can use it like 4.1 if you're used to that or want to use it, and you also
right-click on any object and then pick your function. So this should
satisfy most complaints about the UI. It is also based on QT4 which means
it runs natively on Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X with file compatibility
between all platforms.

The real reason I like it is that the schematic and PCB are coming from the
same database (other s/w has this to, PCB123 from Sunstone is one example).
Thus there is no forward or back annotation--all modifications are applied
to both simultaneously. This is a big bonus and seriously cuts down on
chaos when things change.

To some degree you can get used to any tool, but I have used pretty much
every major tool out there and when its my money on the line (like it is in
my business) then I'll choose EAGLE every time since it provides the best
value for the dollar that I've ever seen. This argument is coming from a
professional point of view where things like unlimited, free support forever
and the cost of crashes and other quality issues have a real cost associated
with them. For hobbyists the value equation is different so using it for
complicated design may not make as much sense if you count your time as
worthless or can make due with something that is completely free.

That all said, I like gEDA from the point of view that it seems to be
getting to the point that it is a viable option for some and as it gets
better it is going to force commercial products to get better too. That
helps us all.

Cheers,

James.

--
James Morrison
www.eagletoolkit.com
EAGLE Design Expert
North American Online EAGLE Dealer
EAGLE Enterprise Toolkit

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