Eagle Professional, Group or Pooling together license

[johnnyfp]

Hi,

Do you think it would be of interest that a group of use bulk buy a license of Eagle professional and get a discount on the license.

The only stipulation would be that the said license is registered to one user/Company and we would "in effect" be working for said company to meet the licensing criteria should eagle ask.

Is this something that would be viable or of interest to anyone? So for example instead of paying $1640 for full license you would only need to pay $492 for it.

What do you think?

Jfp

[EEVblog]

That's probably not legal, and is basically just a fancy way to try and defraud Eagle out of their license.

[johnnyfp]

Mmmh. I suppose your right. But then why would the offer such a discount for corps or induviduals that buy multiple licenses? I wonder what the markup is for this for say Element14 reselling this.

If we could drum up enough interest to bulk buy, do you think we could get a similar level of discount from Cadsoft?

[EEVblog]

Mmmh. I suppose your right. But then why would the offer such a discount for corps or induviduals that buy multiple licenses?
If we could drum up enough interest to bulk buy, do you think we could get a similar level of discount from Cadsoft?

Perhaps. And that would be fine.
But one "company" of people who band together ad buy a license and then everyone using it is not fair. That's what I thought you were getting at?

[johnnyfp]

No, you where right on the money there. That's what I was implying.

However, what I was debating was if it was ethical or not. Based on the fact that a Company buys a seat of a user to use, but if that user leaves then the seat is still available for the company for another user to use. What is the difference between a "Company of people" banding together to use a license vs a "Corporation" buying a multi user license for it's employee's to use.

Would it be wrong to, say, setup a new company, with 10 shares, each person who buys a share for $500 each, becomes a $0 earning employee of said company, and the company buys 10 licenses of the software equating to $500 a license. Now ethically/morally that could be constitute as bad, but illegal or against the rules, not sure? They are technically an employee of the company.

[Psi]

Maybe call and ask if a group of individuals can use the bulk offer?
The sales person answering the call might just say yes to get the sale without actually bothering to check.

If you record the convo you will have protected yourself.

[EEVblog]

However, what I was debating was if it was ethical or not. Based on the fact that a Company buys a seat of a user to use, but if that user leaves then the seat is still available for the company for another user to use. What is the difference between a "Company of people" banding together to use a license vs a "Corporation" buying a multi user license for it's employee's to use.

In theory, nothing.
I practice, a company can ensure more reliably ensure that only one user uses the one license at any one time.
I'm not sure of Eagle exact terms of use in this instance.

Would it be wrong to, say, setup a new company, with 10 shares, each person who buys a share for $500 each, becomes a $0 earning employee of said company, and the company buys 10 licenses of the software equating to $500 a license. Now ethically/morally that could be constitute as bad, but illegal or against the rules, not sure? They are technically an employee of the company.

Do you know how much it costs to set up and maintain a company here in Australia?
It just seems a ridiculously complicated way to go about it. Much easier to just ask if there is any bulk discount. e.g. sa 20 people from the EEVblog want to buy at once, what price can you give us?

[Dago]

Slightly offtopic but I would never ever pay a single cent for eagle nowadays considering there are totally free alternatives that are actually better (kicad). Pretty sure someone will disagree though Even DipTrace would go way ahead EAGLE. And thats coming from a person using EAGLE at work...

[zapta]

Even DipTrace would go way ahead EAGLE. And thats coming from a person using EAGLE at work...

That's subjective. Few months ago I gave diptrace a try but the experience was very poor (e.g. libraries did not have basic 0.1" headers). Then I switched to eagle and later got a license.

[IanJ]

Much easier to just ask if there is any bulk discount. e.g. sa 20 people from the EEVblog want to buy at once, what price can you give us?

I would be very surprised if CadSoft didn't offer some kind of discount this way. What exactly you'd get would be another matter.
My recent experiences of dealing with Cadsoft have gone very favourable.................so try them!

Ian.

[Kjelt]

If you have one company you only have one point of contact for support and questions, at least that is how other companies deal with it, not sure about CadSoft. So if you have a bunch of individuals they all are contacting the support dept. and I think most of the costs are in that kind of customer service. Probably if you want multiple licenses in one company you get some sort of floating license, so you need a global server etc. etc.  And you need to absolutely trust eachother, if the person on who's name (or company) the license is registered sells it.......

[sleemanj]

I gave diptrace a try but the experience was very poor (e.g. libraries did not have basic 0.1" headers)

The library management of DipTrace is probably it's biggest failing.  It's trivial to make your own header, and they probably are in there somewhere with some obscure name, but for such generic components conforming to defacto standards you'd think they should be right there up-front and easy to find.  That said, at least it's not kiCad's library system, which was simply unusable in my experience.

To be on topic; it might be worth mentioning that Adafruit sells Eagle licences now too - http://www.adafruit.com/index.php?main_page=adasearch&q=eagle

[nctnico]

Even DipTrace would go way ahead EAGLE. And thats coming from a person using EAGLE at work...

That's subjective. Few months ago I gave diptrace a try but the experience was very poor (e.g. libraries did not have basic 0.1" headers). Then I switched to eagle and later got a license.

Choosing a package based on libraries is not a very good way. If a package works well (allows making components and PCBs fast) then it is productive. I can't recall doing a PCB design for which I didn't need to create a special footprint. There are so many components out there that even with the libraries provided by a commercial package you'll end up having to design your own footprints.

[Dago]

I gave diptrace a try but the experience was very poor (e.g. libraries did not have basic 0.1" headers)

The library management of DipTrace is probably it's biggest failing.  It's trivial to make your own header, and they probably are in there somewhere with some obscure name, but for such generic components conforming to defacto standards you'd think they should be right there up-front and easy to find.  That said, at least it's not kiCad's library system, which was simply unusable in my experience.

To be on topic; it might be worth mentioning that Adafruit sells Eagle licences now too - http://www.adafruit.com/index.php?main_page=adasearch&q=eagle

In my opinion kicads and diptraces biggest advantages compared to eagle are the library systems... Eagle libraries are really cumbersome to make. With diptrace and kicad you don't need to unnecessarily "connect" the footprint and symbol and you can just re-use them.

I have no idea about the default component libraries. I literally never ever use premade components period (except some symbols, footprints never). In my experience that is the biggest source of errors in PCBs. By making them yourself you can be sure they are what they are supposed to be and it takes very little time. Especially with PCB library expert (http://www.pcblibraries.com/FPX/) which can gerate IPC-7351 standard compliant footprints faster than you can search a component from the premade component library. Just by entering the case dimensions and tolerances from the datasheet.

[Kjelt]

In my opinion kicads and diptraces biggest advantages compared to eagle are the library systems... Eagle libraries are really cumbersome to make.

It is getting used to, if you watched the youtube and did it three times you know how it works. If you also know that 98% of all possible footprints are already somewhere to be found (just have to look for the right name) it is not that difficult anymore.
Besides Farnell/Unit24 also has a lot of ready component eagle libraries to download in their database.

[Frost]

Especially with PCB library expert (http://www.pcblibraries.com/FPX/) which can gerate IPC-7351 standard compliant footprints faster than you can search a component from the premade component library. Just by entering the case dimensions and tolerances from the datasheet.

What kind of magic does this thing do?
I mean, 500$ for a single user license, it's a way more than
a Diptrace or Eagle license cost.

[Dago]

Especially with PCB library expert (http://www.pcblibraries.com/FPX/) which can gerate IPC-7351 standard compliant footprints faster than you can search a component from the premade component library. Just by entering the case dimensions and tolerances from the datasheet.

What kind of magic does this thing do?
I mean, 500$ for a single user license, it's a way more than
a Diptrace or Eagle license cost.

There is a completely free version "lite" that's identical (as far as I know) except you cannot do "batches" and libraries. It has been the handiest software I've found in ages.

[Frost]

There is a completely free version "lite" that's identical (as far as I know)

Ah, sorry I missed that. The lite version is for free.

[johnnyfp]

The crux of the matter here is that every man and his dog in the opensource community use Eagle.  Go to any Git Repo with a design and it's eagle.
Sure there are a load of better packages out there, but if you want to go into the spirit of the opensourceness then you have to go the way of the Eagle, whether you like it or not.

I myself use a Small UK made package called Proteus, it has a nice Processor simulator and is what I'm used too, I've put together an open source website to share everything I've done www.sharedcircuits.com and put up the package for download, but nobody can view them without a license to proteus, and a load of people have asked me, why don't I change it to Eagle.

If there was a free version of Proteus then I would be less inclined to convert it, but there isn't, and if I want to embrace this openhardware philosophy then I have to follow the crowd and the crowd is saying Eagle.

[tom66]

I disagree with it being necessary to provide schematic files.

A PDF is sufficient. If people want to  bulk copy your design, supply them the gerbers.

It is against the OSHW movement,  but it's silly to require certain packages.

99.5% of the time, the schematic is for: understanding the circuit (teaching others), repairing it, and for ideas in other projects. It's quite rare to want to add to an OSHW project in such a way that you wouldn't just start from scratch - the only exceptions I can think of would be very complex boards which the free version of Eagle would struggle to support.

[johnnyfp]

Maybe.

But could you not get a scenario where someone takes an existing design and improves it, either makes it on a smaller board, or changes some connector or holes.

I've done this already for a HDMI -> 480*800 pixel HTC touch screen.  The original guy made it so that the connectors faced downwards, and I wanted them to face backwards. The schematic didn't change just the PCB. But because I don't have Eagle Standard, the board was too big for me to edit in the free version and I had to painstakingly copy it into Proteus before I could then do the PCB.

[Kjelt]

Someone needs to come along and provide serious competition for Eagle. That way we will either end up with a battery, cheaper package to switch to or it will force Eagle to reduce prices.

I think Eagle's prices are really fair, esp. the hobbieist version which is more then enough for any serious hobbieist. I wish c compilers would be that well priced and had hobbieist versions, instead they give 40% discount if you sign a non commercial and non support license. Still would cost >1,5k$

[johnnyfp]

I like the pin count license model instead of the pcb size one. Proteus uses that, so I can have as large a PCB as I like but only 500pins. But then saying that I did recently go over that and was cursing Labcenter for that restriction.

There's no pleasing me!

[EEVblog]

I think Eagle's prices are really fair, esp. the hobbieist version which is more then enough for any serious hobbieist.

Depends entirely upon the board you are doing.
Try doing a simple single sided board with a few LEDs on it, but is 161mm long, you need to pay $1145 to do that in Eagle.

[johnnyfp]

Maybe, there's an opportunity here for a EEVBlog discounted version.

So if you are a member of EEVBlog you can get the full professional version for $800. Possible?