Altium Designer new pricing model and high end / low end tool in development

[n3wbie]

I would definitely be for a pin count limitation as well, for two reasons:

1. A lot of professionals design very small boards, which means if the only limitation was board size Altium would lose out on a lot of companies buying the full version licenses.

2. A lot of times hobbyists want to design simple boards that exceed the allowed dimensions in Eagle, which is very frustrating. For example, I have a friend who wanted me to make a PCB to hold four large push button switches (that's it, no other components!), but I couldn't do it in Eagle because he wants several inches of space between each button. It's just stupid that I would have to pay $1,600 USD to make a PCB with four push button switches.

[EEVblog]

That may be so, but what if Altium release a size limitation version?

I think I mentioned that in my video?
If they do, then it's better than nothing, but it's just a "me too" copy of Eagle, and hence runs the greater risk of not having that wow factor to take away market share. It's the safe "competing" option that might be too little too late.

The main difference between DT and Eagle apart from the interface, which I know everybody LOVES! Is the fact that one limits size, and one limits pin count, I guess you Dave are all for pin count limitation rather than size?

Yep, I hate board size limitations.
Why?
Because whilst I don't know what project I'll work on next, it's vastly more likely to be under a complexity limit than it is under a size limit. Size limitations mean you can't even do basic stuff like have two LED's on a single sided display panel. It's crazy.

What would be good is if CadSoft released Eagle in a lite mode but with the option to limit pin count OR limit board size, it wouldn't make the interface any better, but it would make it more desirable as a free package to people would it not?

Interesting thought.

[EEVblog]

2. A lot of times hobbyists want to design simple boards that exceed the allowed dimensions in Eagle, which is very frustrating. For example, I have a friend who wanted me to make a PCB to hold four large push button switches (that's it, no other components!), but I couldn't do it in Eagle because he wants several inches of space between each button. It's just stupid that I would have to pay $1,600 USD to make a PCB with four push button switches.

And that's the elephant in the room with Eagle. It's something I almost never hear about, yet I know happens with monotonous regularity, and almost certainly to every Eagle user given enough time. it's like you aren't supposed to talk about it...
So what does the average hacker/maker Eagle user do in that situation? My guess is they pirate the full version for that project.
Someone tell me I'm wrong...

[Wilksey]

I do see peoples point on the frustration against Eagle for limiting the size of the board, I think my suggestion of giving the option would be a good move for CadSoft, but I doubt they would change it now.

I guess a good option is to pirate Eagle, I have patched the latest version (6.5) myself for that reason.

However, for simple boards like previously mentioned, KiCAD would be more than sufficient, but it is another package to learn.

I can see why people also go for DT over Eagle for interface and price reasons.

I did see your video's Dave on KiCAD and DT, and I concluded that you didn't think much of either, would have been good to see your impressions of Eagle, but I guess you have already seen it or used it?  I have a version of DT and I must say I don't really like it all that much compared to what I am used to in Eagle.

And as I mentioned before, Eagle professional isn't "free" but compared to the cost of Altium, I do struggle to see why Eagle would be a bad choice for someone on a budget and is used to the lite or standard version, apart from personal preference to go with Zuken or DipTrace or A N other package.

[Rufus]

My reading of this is that this is just schematic capture with an online parts library - nowhere does it mention PCB layout - I suspect "Design service Providers" means PCB layout people who have their expensive tools.

If it does include PCB layout, it will be tied to specific PCB suppliers using a non-standard format, like expressPCB
 
I'm getting a very strong "Nothing to see here" feeling about this.

There is a concept which I think Altium has also envisioned where the CAD design package ties in with component, and PCB suppliers and assemblers via the web.

You design a PCB using regulated component libraries that everyone understands and submit the design in a format everyone understands to the 'cloud' where a bunch of companies will quote to supply the parts and/or PCB and/or assemble. A couple of days after submission you choose a quote, click a button and however many days later boards will be delivered to you. The service provider would likely handle financials. It is like ebay for PCBS.

The Altium vault crap is the cloud to hold and distribute the design information. The idea has a lot going for it but also huge issues with design security.

This Digikey/Mentor stuff smells the same.

[Wilksey]

I also have a version of AD 14, would that make it more "available"?
I think the bottom line is that it comes down to what people can afford and what people are comfortable with.

I don't make money on the PCB's I make with certain flavours of CAD packages, I use some of them commercially but they are fully licensed within my workplace.

Having said that, KiCAD is doing quite well for itself in the hobbyist community, which doesn't need any patching, and I believe you can make commercial PCB's with it?

[ludzinc]

I'm trying to move from (work provided Altium) to KiCAD.

The user interface is woeful.  KiCAD need to get that refreshed and then they will be on a winner.

[DerekG]

I'm trying to move from (work provided Altium) to KiCAD.

The user interface is woeful.  KiCAD need to get that refreshed and then they will be on a winner.

Fully agree. Plus you only have a choice of background colour of ............... black or white! This is 1980's stuff!

[marshallh]

That's because Kicad used to /still renders with graphical XOR. It's supposed to draw faster, but in my experience its barely usable on my 4ghz machine with a basic fpga board. Truly abysmal

[T3sl4co1l]

Graphical XOR, what is this EGA?  I'm not familiar with DirectX or OpenGL but something tells me such ancient modes and methods aren't even supported anymore.

Someone needs to pile up a bunch of disgruntled EEs (which is basically all of us, amirite?) with a couple good software people and an industrial designer, and build some actually useful EDA software from a brand new codebase.  The ancient bits in every existing platform from 1980 are embarrassing, but they'll never let them go no matter the pain.

Tim

[Mechatrommer]

Graphical XOR, what is this EGA?  I'm not familiar with DirectX or OpenGL but something tells me such ancient modes and methods aren't even supported anymore.

my suspicion is not that they are using ancient method, but several layers of "portable friendly" ( or "encapsulation crap"?) of wxwidget classes before reaching real Win32 GDI API, i doubt they've implemented a single line of code for DX or OGL with such kind of abysimal graphic performance. using direct implementation of Win32 GDI API alone (or even your own custom made bitmap raster operations library) is several magnitudes better than KiCAD's.

[Rigby]

Graphical XOR, what is this EGA?  I'm not familiar with DirectX or OpenGL but something tells me such ancient modes and methods aren't even supported anymore.

my suspicion is not that they are using ancient method, but several layers of "portable friendly" ( or "encapsulation crap"?) of wxwidget classes before reaching real Win32 GDI API, i doubt they've implemented a single line of code for DX or OGL with such kind of abysimal graphic performance. using direct implementation of Win32 GDI API alone (or even your own custom made bitmap raster operations library) is several magnitudes better than KiCAD's.

I just saw a video yesterday from CERN demonstrating their OpenGL KiCad renderer.

It looked nice and fast, but I have no idea what hardware was in that PC.

[Mechatrommer]

I just saw a video yesterday from CERN demonstrating their OpenGL KiCad renderer.
It looked nice and fast, but I have no idea what hardware was in that PC.

is it for both 2d (pcb) view and 3d view? or for 3d only? opengl doesnt need special harware, if you have decent/normal graphic card, you should be good to go, unless something wrong with the code.

[Rigby]

I just saw a video yesterday from CERN demonstrating their OpenGL KiCad renderer.
It looked nice and fast, but I have no idea what hardware was in that PC.

is it for both 2d (pcb) view and 3d view? or for 3d only? opengl doesnt need special harware, if you have decent/normal graphic card, you should be good to go, unless something wrong with the code.

The video didn't show 3D, IIRC. 

[dboyer]

2. A lot of times hobbyists want to design simple boards that exceed the allowed dimensions in Eagle, which is very frustrating. For example, I have a friend who wanted me to make a PCB to hold four large push button switches (that's it, no other components!), but I couldn't do it in Eagle because he wants several inches of space between each button. It's just stupid that I would have to pay $1,600 USD to make a PCB with four push button switches.

And that's the elephant in the room with Eagle. It's something I almost never hear about, yet I know happens with monotonous regularity, and almost certainly to every Eagle user given enough time. it's like you aren't supposed to talk about it...
So what does the average hacker/maker Eagle user do in that situation? My guess is they pirate the full version for that project.
Someone tell me I'm wrong...

I was helping a friend with an LED board that exceeded the required dimensions.  The parts off of the end of the board were simple, just the LEDs basically, with the microcontroller and associated parts were within the permissible space.  The solution ended up being to place what he could, work out the dimensions of the additional parts, and edit the XML file directly to place them were they needed to go. 

By the way, Eagle's XML file format >> whatever binary garbage Altium has going on.

[DerekG]

The parts off of the end of the board were simple, just the LEDs basically, with the microcontroller and associated parts were within the permissible space.  The solution ended up being to place what he could, work out the dimensions of the additional parts, and edit the XML file directly to place them were they needed to go.

No professional would waste their time doing this ................. but I guess it's fine for amateurs.

Like you said, you were using a version of a software package that would not allow you to do it properly.

[T3sl4co1l]

Wishful thinking.  I once did some mods to a board in OrCAD (schematic) / PADS (PCB).  I literally had to hand-edit the netlist to make it work.  Let alone the general horribleness of PADS.

Tim

[ehughes]

Disclaimer:   I own Altium and have brought 20+ seats to my current employer and other clients.   I have also used Eagle (which I like) for many years and still recovering from Orcad in the early 2000's


If the Mentor  does not cripple the PCB end of things:

http://www.digikey.com/product-highlights/us/en/mentor-graphics-designer-software/4171

it will be a huge deal.   I am involved both in commercial and open/hobby development.   At $300,  there will simply be no match.   

Yes, I have tried KiCad.    The Library/Component model is fundamentally broken.   The idea that footprints are matched to schematic when transitioning from Sch to PCB is absolutely dumb.   The CERN work looks promising BUT the library management aspect will keep it from being a good tool.   

Eagle is OK.  I do like the ULPs/scripting.     The manual routing tools just aren't there.  For me, it would be the tool I would go back to if I had to but I would really find the $$$ to buy something better.

I think a point that is missed is that Eagle is popular for "open "design as it is *STABLE*.  There aren't 100 different versions every month.      I don't need to compile from source,  apply some random patch from someone's repo, etc.    Design tools need to be be rock solid.   (This is something that Altium is failing at....).   The fact that EAGLE is closed source is inconsequential as it is stable.


I hope Altium gets its head of out of its rear end..... I doubt it as the board has ZERO members who are technically versed in PCB design and it is very sad as it is a great tool.

[DerekG]

If the Mentor  does not cripple the PCB end of things:

http://www.digikey.com/product-highlights/us/en/mentor-graphics-designer-software/4171

The press release for the Digikey/Mentor deal is for the schematic only.

It says "the tool does not include PCB layout functionality"

I hope Altium gets its head of out of its rear end..... I doubt it as the board has ZERO members who are technically versed in PCB design and it is very sad as it is a great tool.

So does Dave ......... & me too!

[EEVblog]

I hope Altium gets its head of out of its rear end..... I doubt it as the board has ZERO members who are technically versed in PCB design and it is very sad as it is a great tool.

This is one of the reasons why they hired the hardware group, including myself. They wanted us to give real-world feedback on how the product is used. It's right there on my employment contract 
Unfortunately it turns out that only meant they wanted feedback if it fitted in with their "vision".

[DerekG]

Unfortunately it turns out that only meant they wanted feedback if it fitted in with their "vision".

Come on Dave ............... "Altium" & "vision" are at the opposite end of the spectrum ............. unless you're talking about nano-boards & FPGAs of course.

[EEVblog]

Come on Dave ............... "Altium" & "vision" are at the opposite end of the spectrum ............. unless you're talking about nano-boards & FPGAs of course.

Altium have always been a (one mans) "vision" driven company. They had a few hits, but mostly crazy misses, to the detriment of customers and shareholders.

[Rigby]

Come on Dave ............... "Altium" & "vision" are at the opposite end of the spectrum ............. unless you're talking about nano-boards & FPGAs of course.

Altium have always been a (one mans) "vision" driven company. They had a few hits, but mostly crazy misses, to the detriment of customers and shareholders.

That's true of most places, really.  It's the few hits that carry you through the hundreds of misses.  Most places only get one hit, or zero, and ultimately die.  So many failed startups, and so few successes.

[ludzinc]

I hope Altium gets its head of out of its rear end..... I doubt it as the board has ZERO members who are technically versed in PCB design and it is very sad as it is a great tool.

This is one of the reasons why they hired the hardware group, including myself. They wanted us to give real-world feedback on how the product is used. It's right there on my employment contract 
Unfortunately it turns out that only meant they wanted feedback if it fitted in with their "vision".

Maybe we all need to send Altium a message.  Do as I did:

1.  Sign up for their beta test programme
2.  When the sales man calls to set it up, tell him you're only interested in beta testing the low cost home version

Maybe, just maybe, if they get a couple of thousand requests like this, they may get the message....

It't either that, or wait until KiCAD gets a not-insane user interface.

[Icchan]

I hope Altium gets its head of out of its rear end..... I doubt it as the board has ZERO members who are technically versed in PCB design and it is very sad as it is a great tool.

It't either that, or wait until KiCAD gets a not-insane user interface.

KiCad can be a good tool if it has enough developers and money (developers need to eat too). Most open source stuff is hideous to those who just need a tool because the development hobby driven and/or people doing it are grown into the way things work while developing it for themselves. More over, those programs are not made for users in mind. It's free so they don't care if you don't like it: "Just make your own patches or go away." And they're right... because those using the software without lending a hand in developing it are not very useful in the eyes of those who are developing it. If they would charge you for a license, they would have an incentive to make the usability better since they would need to compete with other programs for customers and because they could make more money if they have a good software. But for free? No way!

So that's that, one has to start developing KiCad or use another tool that does what he wants. It's all about a choice one makes.

That's why donations to the CERN branch are a good way of supporting open source if yo're not willing to start developing yourself. ode and design take time, and it's a finite resource, so have them eat while still making the development by donating.