Eagle is beautiful software

[Monkeh]

Is there some place on the internet where a proper objective comparison can be found of all active eda design tools?

Because this is useless.

Your best bet is to try them.

[Jeroen3]

That is not a objective comparison. And that is a time consuming comparison.
Not to mention expensive.

[Monkeh]

That is not a objective comparison. And that is a time consuming comparison.
Not to mention expensive.

And the only way you'll be able to make a decent decision.

Or you're just looking for bog reading material..

You can try the most popular packages for free.

[daqq]

Eagle sucks overall, certainly, and it does function as intended with the features he described.

I guess that at the end of the day it's about pricing vs quality - for eagle you get a fair amount of bang for your buck:

1 user - 1200 USD
5 users - 2500 USD
( http://www.cadsoftusa.com/shop/pricing/ )

As such it's good enough for small-ish companies/hobbyists. I completely agree that it lacks many great features, but I'd sum it up into: Great considering the price.

Yeah, it could be better. What couldn't be?

[nctnico]

That is not a objective comparison. And that is a time consuming comparison.
Not to mention expensive.

Unfortunately it is the only way. Some tools help you by providing a structured way of doing things. Orcad Layout for example doesn't allow to just add a trace somewhere. You have to create something it calls an 'obstacle' (which can be anything from a copper pour, a line, route keepout, etc) and leave it floating or connect it to a net. Other software allows to draw traces wherever you want (Layo1) and some even go so far a trace gets connected to a net because it touches a pad connected to that net (Geda PCB).

It depends entirely on what you are comfortable with and what you are willing to learn. It also depends on your requirements. Personally I will never ever use a CAD package which can't use a component database which links a component to a symbol and footprint and cannot produce a ready-for-production BOM (with order numbers) with a single click. It is just too tedious to select&check footprints on every design or having to add part numbers to a BOM.

[XFDDesign]

To get hate from both sides, I'm going to state a particular opinion:

Eagle, Protel/Altium, etc. are all tools. You find the tool that works for you, and you use it. If you find something that lets you work better, you use it.

At my place of employment (a fair sized semiconductor manufacturer on the East Coast of the US), the de-facto PCB tool is Allegro. It is the second worst-POS-tool I have ever had the misfortune to attempt to use. So, I don't use it. I got work to buy a copy of Eagle pro because it's cheap and I can use it to get my job done in a timely manner. It might not do 32 layers like Allego, but I'm not doing 32 layer projects. It might not do multi-site simultaneous editing, but I'm not doing multi-site simultaneous editing. The list goes on. Eagle, at the end of the day, does the job I need it to do, at a price work was willing to pay without so much as a fuss towards forcing me to use Allegro.

The absolute worst package I have ever used, was Mentor Graphics' PADS. If there were ever a software tool developed for the "money grows on trees" thinking of the dot-com era, it was PADS. You spend $4000 on the basic editor interface. You want to route? Extra $1500 please. You want to edit your own packages? Extra $1,500 please. You want to use hotkeys to change your view? Extra $1,500 please. I am only mildly exaggerating (you can route with the out-of-the-box tool, but little else). Every single feature you expect to be common in even a low-end CAD tool, cost you $1,500 per feature.

Honestly, the best package I have had the pleasure to use, was Protel (now branded Altium). It had a good flow, nice schematic capture tool, it incorporated all the bits from advanced trace rules down to a really nice router. But, it is (or was when I last looked) $10,000+. As I mentioned earlier however, EaglePro does the job I need it to do. If I needed the extra features that Eagle doesn't offer, I would need to reasonably push for a better tool. At home? It is doubtful I would ever need anything more than Eagle.

[Evil Lurker]

Learning to use all the features in Eagle is like trying to learn how to dance ballet... in high heeled shoes. When the learning process is over, the end result is indeed beautiful. Problem is figuring out how not to ragequit and blow your brains out in frustration until you reach that point. In some ways Eagle is a lot like Sony products...

[Wilksey]

Learning to use all the features in Eagle is like trying to learn how to dance ballet... in high heeled shoes. When the learning process is over, the end result is indeed beautiful. Problem is figuring out how not to ragequit and blow your brains out in frustration until you reach that point. In some ways Eagle is a lot like Sony products...

Unfortunately that is down to the individual, I personally had no issues what so ever learning about Eagle, Altium or most of the other packages I have tried, they all kind of do the same thing, just a bit differently, the first program I used was Electronics Workbench and Circuit Maker 2000 before using Protel, then progressing to the modern CAD architecture.

I honestly can't figure out what the issue is with learning different packages because I never had these frustrations / issues, yeah I had a few "stumbling blocks" but I got over them with little ranting and dolly throwing.

Everything expressed here regarding CAD packages are all of personal opinion, try them for yourself, don't let others "lead" you into thinking something is rubbish when in fact, they just don't know / don't want to know how to use it.

[Corporate666]

Unfortunately that is down to the individual, I personally had no issues what so ever learning about Eagle, Altium or most of the other packages I have tried, they all kind of do the same thing, just a bit differently, the first program I used was Electronics Workbench and Circuit Maker 2000 before using Protel, then progressing to the modern CAD architecture.

I don't know how you can say such a thing?  That's like saying a bulldozer and a hand trowel do the same thing, just a bit differently.

There are many, many, many things that Altium does that Eagle just can't do - and those things are unrelated to 'how' Eagle works, but just many features that simply don't exist in Eagle (see video above, for example).

[Wilksey]

Not really,

Ok, eagle can't route 8 tracks at once...but it can do them individually, routing 8 tracks at once makes it easier for the designer, yes, but it doesn't stop you from routing the 8 tracks, it can do differential pairs, length matching, blah blah blah.

I can't see what AD can do that Eagle cannot in terms of putting copper down, it might take longer to do in Eagle but you can do it. 

BTW, I use both, AD at work and Eagle, and Eagle at home.

[rx8pilot]

I would agree that you can 'eventually' get a PCB out of Eagle, like almost any other package. Technically, pencil and paper could eventually accomplish the same task.
The change I am hoping for is that I don't have to beat the software into submission with ULP's and other workarounds. I will write a big check to the company that produces the software that allows me to get through a layout with the least amount of time and effort. Built-in and intuitive features are the way that happens. Relying on a ULP or convoluted workaround is not a real solution and it is certainly NOT beautiful at all.

[XFDDesign]

I would agree that you can 'eventually' get a PCB out of Eagle, like almost any other package. Technically, pencil and paper could eventually accomplish the same task.
The change I am hoping for is that I don't have to beat the software into submission with ULP's and other workarounds. I will write a big check to the company that produces the software that allows me to get through a layout with the least amount of time and effort. Built-in and intuitive features are the way that happens. Relying on a ULP or convoluted workaround is not a real solution and it is certainly NOT beautiful at all.

What kind of project are you doing, that your concern is "eventually" getting a PCB out of Eagle? That is, what kind of project is so meticulously intricate and complex, that Eagle is outright incapable and so you need an ocean of ULPs and hacks to do the job? For such a project, given the implied complexity, why are you not using a $25k+ package which caters to every such need?

[LabSpokane]

For such a project, given the implied complexity, why are you not using a $25k+ package which caters to every such need?

He's a one-man-band (like many).  CAD packages seem to be like accounting / business management software.  There's this huge gulf between introductory and corporate scale that really takes a commitment to cross. 

[Wilksey]

That is Eagles way of working, you either get used to it or you don't and move onto another package.
When you get used to the differences in the package it really isn't that bad at all, yes the likes of Altium makes it easier to do certain things, you can organise your schematics and PCB's a bit better (rooms etc), but most people don't need that level of functionality, it might be "nice to have" but then so is an Audi R8, but a Audi A3 will do the job of getting you from home to work just as quick in rush hour traffic and cost a lot less.

If you can afford the likes of Altium for your own business or even for home use (insane!) then by all means go for it, in my opinion all of the major players in the PCB CAD world are good, from KiCAD, through to Eagle and Diptrace right through to OrCAD and Altium have their place in the market and have their own upsides and downsides.

[rx8pilot]

He's a one-man-band (like many).  CAD packages seem to be like accounting / business management software.  There's this huge gulf between introductory and corporate scale that really takes a commitment to cross.

This is true.

CASE 1:
When I started my first business, I used Excel to keep track of accounting. In the early part of the business it made total sense because the accounting was extremely simple. Eventually, I crossed the line where the limitations of an Excel spreadsheet was not enough to run a business and I was spending more time maintaining the spreadsheet than anything else. No problem, I get QuickBooks and an accountant to help me set it all up. QuickBooks, surprisingly works reasonably well but I am keenly aware of its limitations. Those limitations are worked around for years until I get to the point where they are slowing me down and it is time for a whole new solution again. A few thousand dollars later, I have switched over to dedicated fincance and management software for my particular business. It was expensive to buy and slow to learn. What do I get in return from it? Time. Lots and lots of time. The QuickBooks limitations required a whole bunch of spreadsheet band-aids to keep track of things that QuickBooks cannot deal with. I was unable to make decisions or even understand what was going on without embarking on a research project. The new software ties all of my business together.

CASE 2:
When I started a design business in the mid-90's, I got some cheap software because it was all I could afford at the time. I spent a few months getting through a fairly simple project. It all turned out well, but took a long time. I used the money from that project to buy SolidWorks which was stunningly expensive at the time. I immediately realized that the project I had just done could have been completed in a fraction of the time with SolidWorks. I paid for 2 weeks of classes, but only went for about 2 days. SolidWorks is so intuitive and powerful that I was doing exactly what I needed right out of the gate. If I stayed with the old software - that could get the same thing done, I probably would not have been able to keep the business.

CASE 3:
When I purchased my first CNC milling machine, I purchased some CAM software called BobCAM for about $1200 US. Again, I did not have much cash on hand and thought this will get me going. Sort of. I was able to machine parts with the programs it made but it was slow to get anything done, especially making changes after a program was made. I started looking around and found some software called CAM Works which is a plug-in for SolidWorks. The cost was about $13k but I decided that it was the only way I could have a chance of programming fast enough to have a business. Sure enough, I was able to make and update CNC programs an order of magnitude faster (at least). It crashed and did all sorts of dumb things but was still FAR better than the $1200 Bob CAM. After a few years of that, I got 5 axis CNC mills and needed more speed and sophistication - so I got MasterCAM for SolidWorks for another $16k. Huge productivity increase again.

Eagle is the only EE CAD package I have used so far and it seems to be repeating the same song. The 3 cases outlined above are only a few software cases that I have experience with over the past 25 years, but they are relevant. Speed is the most critical overall benefit I am looking for in new EE CAD software. My layouts are not so complex that Eagle cannot make it happen, I just want it to happen as fast as humanly possible. As LabSpokane pointed out, I am a one-man-band. That means I am the CEO and the janitor and everything in-between at the same time. I am highly motivated to spend every minute of the day very wisely to avoid having to hire anyone. Nearly everything I buy and do has something to do with saving time. If I run out of time, I have two choices - I can work through the nights and weekends or hire people. To hire someone is not a straightforward process either since I don't have full time work for any particular skill. I need a little engineering, a little PCB layout, some CNC programming, maybe a little software development, sales, website, shipping, accounting, supply chain management, and the list goes on and on. Side note, I had all those people on payroll a little over a year ago and I had less money and time than I do now. I spend all my time managing people and keeping them busy. It occurred to me that if I had next to no overhead and did everything myself, I may actually end up with a 'bigger' business. It turned out to be true much to the dismay of the 10 people I had to let go.

I have focused on efficiency, efficiency,efficiency and it is paying off. Getting Eagle has turned out to be a fantastic decision that has enabled my business to transition from mechanical design to mechanical and electrical design and manufacturing. I don't really know much about Altium Designer other than the videos and demos I have done so I cannot say anything about it's capability. From what I have seen so far, it is likely similar to the cases I outlined above. Time saved is time earned. To me it's having a free weekend with the kids, its making a better design, its lower stress.

From my experiences listed here, it can cost a lot of money to save money. Buying the right tools for the job has always been the lowest cost for me even when the tools are the most expensive available.

[Corporate666]

Not really,

Ok, eagle can't route 8 tracks at once...but it can do them individually, routing 8 tracks at once makes it easier for the designer, yes, but it doesn't stop you from routing the 8 tracks, it can do differential pairs, length matching, blah blah blah.

I can't see what AD can do that Eagle cannot in terms of putting copper down, it might take longer to do in Eagle but you can do it. 

BTW, I use both, AD at work and Eagle, and Eagle at home.

I've listed things that Eagle simply cannot do

-It cannot do 45 degree copper pours (see :http://www.kg4cyx.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/wpid-imag3465.jpg - warning, huge image).  Eagle can only do 90 degree. 

-It cannot import CAD drawings.  It has a crappy ULP that only work with straight lines in older versions of some CAD files.  If you have an arbitrary board outline with curves or splines, Eagle simply cannot import it.

-It cannot show you the back of the PCB "as the user sees it", only looking through the PCB

-Eagle cannot dimension parts from other reference points other than the origin.  This makes drawing footprints for new components a chore, especially when the component uses a lot of relative dimensions

-Eagle cannot render a 3d board view

There are so many more things... but I'd agree with the above posts that if your standard is "it may take longer, it may be full of kludges and workarounds, but it can do it eventually", then you could also argue that you can also do everything Eagle can do with transparencies and masking tape.

[rx8pilot]

-Eagle cannot dimension parts from other reference points other than the origin.  This makes drawing footprints for new components a chore, especially when the component uses a lot of relative dimensions

This one really pisses me off.

[Wilksey]

Well, as I said, I use both so I am not going to bias towards or against either Altium or Eagle, they both have their uses and places but to address your issues:

Flipping the board was an issue for me to begin with, but you learn to get used to it by turning on / off layers.

I find the "Mark" tool useful when drawing footprints in Eagle.

I have imported from DXF, some more complex drawings I convert to HPGL then import that, not ideal, but gets the job done.

I have never been required to do 45 degree copper pours, but I am not convinced a ULP couldn't help.

There are solutions (3rd party Sketchup tools and 3rd party POV ray tools) to render 3D.

I fully agree with you and others that it is not the easiest / quickest tool to use, but it is, for use of a better word, capable (considering it's price).

[rx8pilot]

I have the DXF ULP to get PCB outlines into Eagle. In the end, it does the job, but not exactly a straight path of course.

How does the 'Mark' tool work/help on footprints? I could use a tip or two on footprints. I am slow.

Eagle does not deserve any bashing - as you said it has a good bang for the buck. The thread title describing it as beautiful seems like an amazing stretch though. I would describe Eagle as 'Good Enough' which is what I needed when I purchased it. Other purchases are prioritized ahead of replacing Eagle because it is working good enough. It's only a matter of cash-flow before I push it off to the side. I have no plans to upgrade it any more.

[Wilksey]

At least someone is passionate about Eagle! 

The Mark tool allows you to set a "false origin" effectively, so if you have a "known" distance from another pad, but not from the starting origin, you can tag the pad as the new origin and measure from there, you can do it the usual way by adding to the offsets of the pad from the origin, but I find it easier and more intuitive to set the false origin using the Mark tool.

If you look at the Eagle manual it will probably give you a better insight.

Footprints have always been a ball ache for me, you do get used to interpreting various datasheets, but it wouldn't bother me if I didn't have to make a single footprint, ever again!
Some people are sadistic and actually LIKE making them, 

[Rigby]

Not really,

Ok, eagle can't route 8 tracks at once...but it can do them individually, routing 8 tracks at once makes it easier for the designer, yes, but it doesn't stop you from routing the 8 tracks, it can do differential pairs, length matching, blah blah blah.

I can't see what AD can do that Eagle cannot in terms of putting copper down, it might take longer to do in Eagle but you can do it. 

BTW, I use both, AD at work and Eagle, and Eagle at home.

Not going to argue with what you said.  I will add that by that logic there is no fundamental difference between Altium Designer 15 and using opaque tape on transparency and photolithography to make boards.  You can build a board with both, but one will take longer.  A LOT longer.

Now that the contrast is a bit more extreme, it is easier to understand why comparisons between Altium Designer and Eagle feel so forced.  They just are't even in the same class in terms of functionality.

[Wilksey]

Yeah if you want to be really really really really expansive on your logic.

You could say that a hammer does the same job as a bulldozer, or a big ass JCB does the same job as a gardening trowel, but it would take a LOT longer with that logic.

I really don't get all of the hate around Eagle, OK, it's not "beautiful" as the OP put it, but neither is AD, it's full of bugs and crashes frequently (as others have noticed also).

Just because we now have different (note, not better) tools such as DipTrace and KiCAD (which you will never beat for price vs features as it is FREE!) does not mean it should be discounted, if nothing else it holds a place in history of exploding the hobby electronics scene, as it was the tool of choice by many for many many years, just so happens it does a good job at commercial stuff to, just look at what Olimex has achieved with Eagle, not bad for a "shit" package eh!

At the end of the day as I have said it is all about opinion, of others want to discount it because someone said they couldn't use it then that's up to them, it won't hurt anything, Eagle isn't going to go away despite what people say it is still a widely used package, people will use what they want to use.

I for one, do not have an issue using it I don't need Altiums features at home and I can't say it makes things 100 x faster in AD than Eagle, it's footprint wizard is a nice feature, but if you are that bad at making them you can always use the free library creation tool PCB librarian or Ultra librarian or whatever it's called.

[alank2]

I am with the OP, maybe because I don't know any better, but I agree with all of its points about the strengths Eagle has and Eagle has done everything I've needed.

They have made a change to make the copy more intuitive, but I actually prefer the old way now that I'm used to it.

[HackedFridgeMagnet]

Eagle is beautiful software

when I saw the title of this thread I was sure it was sarcasm.
For the OPs sake hopefully he has better taste in women.

[westfw]

comparisons between Altium Designer and Eagle feel so forced

Well sure.  Eagle costs between 0 and about $2000, while Altium starts at about $9k...

I understand that there is a lot that EAGLE doesn't do.  I'm pretty much OK with that.  I'd be shocked if a package were 4x the price and didn't offer additional features.  I'll even allow that there are some designs (maybe even "many designs") for which those extra features are somewhere between "useful" and "necessary."

But that's all different than the usual "EAGLE is a piece of crap", isn't it?

I don't really understand the complaints about the EAGLE UI being "backward."  Maybe I'm just from a time when it wasn't expected for all applications to have common UI philosophies.  Maybe it's an EMACS vs VI sort of thing.  Maybe I just don't use enough "modern" applications...