Author Topic: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?  (Read 6810 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MrOmnos

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 240
  • Country: np
  • BE in Electronics and Communication
Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« on: June 05, 2016, 08:24:14 am »
Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use? Why do they still have stupid 17th century grid system where you have to count the grids like a f-ing retard to place the components at a desirable distance only to know the distance were in inches but you measured all you components in mm. I thought the world used metric system ffs. It has ruined my life and my days of work. I am going to jump off a cliff. It's a curse to be a noob in this hearless world. |O |O |O |O |O
 

Offline Dubbie

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2016, 08:31:15 am »
Because the developers have no interest in bringing it into the 21st century.
Either that or no ability to...
 

Offline Artlav

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 744
  • Country: ru
    • Orbital Designs
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2016, 08:38:03 am »
Upper right part of the panel have a grid-like icon. You can switch to metric in there and change the grid's size and presence.
There is still a big conservative country in North America that uses inches and feet, which also happen to be a place where most of the software gets made, therefore the odd defaults.
Hacking the universe since 2008
Having a life since 2013
 

Offline jpanhalt

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 664
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2016, 08:38:21 am »
You probably find it painful because you haven't learned how to use it.  You may also have limited experience, if any with other electronic design packages.

1) You can use the 21st century command line to place a component wherever you want to.   There is also the measure tool, if you are mouse addicted. 

2) Inches vs. mm is not an argument worth continuing.  Each has its advantages and disadvantages.   At present, most through-hole electronic components and many SMD's have pins on an inch increment.  Get used to it or use only metric components.  You can also set one grid on an inch increment and the alternate grid on a metric increment so you will have both to snap to and can change quickly between them.  Caution:That will probably aggravate you in some other way when you start to route.

3) As for trying to fix your ruined your life, that is the sort of advice I used to charge for.

John 
« Last Edit: June 05, 2016, 10:15:26 am by jpanhalt »
 

Offline MrOmnos

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 240
  • Country: np
  • BE in Electronics and Communication
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #4 on: June 05, 2016, 08:57:05 am »
You probably find it painful because you haven't learned how to use it.  Yo may also have limited experience, if any with other electronic design packages.


No, I have not learned it to use because I was trying to learn. Now, I won't even try to learn because it is not worth it. It is not better than any other free ones out there. It's not worth it. They have been in the business since 1988 I suppose they could have done a better job. They could have made something that allows you place your components relative to other components where you know how far your components are from each other and how big they are, instead of counting grids. And they could have made it a bit noob friendly since the market is changing and professionals are not the only one to use such software. There's a huge community of hobbyist that use it. Making it noob friendly means letting you know what measurement setting are default and stuff like that.
 

Offline Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6023
  • Country: gb
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #5 on: June 05, 2016, 09:07:06 am »
No, I have not learned it to use because I was trying to learn. Now, I won't even try to learn because it is not worth it.

No, you won't try because you've had a hissy fit and given up.

Quote
They could have made something that allows you place your components relative to other components where you know how far your components are from each other and how big they are, instead of counting grids.

They did. There's a whole coordinate system, a position readout, a command line which takes both absolute and relative coordinates, and even a way to set a marker for relative coordinates.

By the way, counting grids is exactly how everyone knows how big a component is and how far away they are, in any tool. That's WHY THERE'S A GRID.
 
The following users thanked this post: XFDDesign

Offline Tandy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 372
  • Country: gb
  • Darren Grant from Tandy, UK.
    • Tandy
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2016, 09:33:07 am »
In my experience a lot of the frustration with CAD type packages is that every manufacturer has their own way of building a user interface. Unlike simple applications like word processing and spreadsheets there is no universally copied way of doing things. Also many of these packages have long histories that date back to before modern operating systems so they have quite a legacy of old interface elements that they have kept because they have thousands of users who have already learnt to use their package that way.

Complex software such as an EDA requires a significant investment in time to learn, there are packages such as fritzing that make PCB design simple but they are a world apart from each other on what you can actually archive.
For more info on Tandy try these links Tandy History EEVBlog Thread & Official Tandy Website
 

Offline JPortici

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2560
  • Country: it
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2016, 09:56:10 am »
Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
I know! That's why i use a better EDA (Disclaimer: better is a relative term of course. my definition of better may be different than yours)
Quote
Why do they still have stupid 17th century grid system where you have to count the grids like a f-ing retard to place the components at a desirable distance only to know the distance were in inches but you measured all you components in mm.
it's been a long time since i was forced to use eagle but i remember i could change from imperial to metrics with the click of a button on the main window (so no menu diving). The grid system is fine. And at the very least the machines you'll use to fab the pcb and assemble the board will move on a grid plane (though this is probably not an actual problem for low end CNCs anymore)
Yes it's a pain we still live in a world where we have to use the imperial system, but be thankful that you don't have to convert inches to foots or whatever when designing a pcb.

Quote
I thought the world used metric system ffs. It has ruined my life and my days of work. I am going to jump off a cliff. It's a curse to be a noob in this hearless world. |O |O |O |O |O
how good it is to rant every now and then :)? even if you don't realize how stupid you were afterfards you feel much better because you really needed it
 

Offline Jeroen3

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3333
  • Country: nl
  • Embedded Engineer
    • jeroen3.nl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2016, 12:20:11 pm »
You can make a .scr file with your settings in it to quickly load them if the .epf has forgotten them
Code: (example from my .scr) [Select]
BRD:
Grid MM;
SET WIDTH_MENU 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.25 2.5;
SET DRILL_MENU 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2;
Assign C+R 'ratsnest';
Assign F8 run mirror-board.ulp
Assign F9 'Grid mm 1 on; Grid alt mm 0.25;';
Assign AF9 'Grid mm 0.1 on; Grid alt mm 0.025;';
Assign F10 'Grid mm 1.27 on; Grid alt mm 0.127;';
Assign AF10 'Grid mm 0.127 on; Grid alt mm 0.0635;';
Assign F11 'Grid mm 0.20 on; Grid alt mm 0.05;';
Assign AF11 'Grid mm 0.10 on; Grid alt mm 0.01;';
Assign F12 'Grid mm 0.3175 on; Grid alt mm 0.15875;';
Assign AF12 'Grid mm 0.15875 on; Grid alt mm 0.079375;';
# Top
Assign A+T 'display none; display 1 17 18 19 20 21 23 25 29 51 48 39 41 43';
# Top copper only
Assign S+A+T 'display none; display 1 17 18 20';
# Top silk
Assign A+S 'display none; display 17 18 20 21 25 29 31 35 41 43';
# Bottom silk
Assign S+A+S 'display none; display 17 18 20 22 26 30 32 36 42 43';
# Bottom
Assign A+B 'display none; display 16 17 18 19 20 22 24 26 30 52 48 40 42 43';
# Bottom copper only
Assign S+A+B 'display none; display 16 17 18 20';
# All
Assign A+A 'display none; display 1 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 29 30 51 52 48 39 40 41 42 43 46';
# None
Assign A+N 'display none';
# Unrouted
Assign A+U 'display none; display 19';
# Production view top   
Assign CS+T 'display none; display 20 21 25 18 29';
# Production view bottom
Assign CS+B 'display none; display 20 22 26 18 30';
# Production view for DRC   
Assign A+P 'display none; display 44 45 46 20 20 30 29 22 26 25 21 16 17 18 1';

The first time I had to use Eage I also didn't like it. It felt ancient, counter productive and utterly basic. But this is also why it's such a great tool.
Before I had only used Altium, which is pcb designer heaven. But it also has it's quirks.
After a job in Eagle, I had to use NI Ultiboard, and let me tell you, you'll love how stable and predictable eagle behaves. And if eagle does not support something, there is an ULP that does.
I also have a ton (800 MB) of libraries for eagle, and Element14 has Eagle part generator scripts in their catalog for some parts. Not the best quality schematic symbols, but it saves you time.

With V7 they switched to an XML based file structure. Which is a huge plus since now you can effectively use version control on the files. You can't freely merge. But see what's changed instead of it being new proprietary binary dump. If you ever need to know what version of Eagle was used, open the file and read it. If you'd need to know what libraries were used, open the file and read it.
It even includes the full part from the library instead of referencing. When opening a project from someone else, or after 5 years it won't tell you it's missing 20 libs and refuse to render.
 
The following users thanked this post: XFDDesign

Online CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3359
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2016, 03:15:00 pm »
I will add that in addition to the steep learning curve for ALL ECAD programs, individuals have their own unique world views that can either clash with or mesh with a particular user interface.  You apparently clash with Eagle.  I do too.  But there are many, many people who don't.  Many of those people clash with other EDA products.

Just be thankful that there are many products out there.  One or more of them will likely fit your style.  Try KiCad, many like it.
 

Offline karoru

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Country: pl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2016, 03:59:29 pm »
For me main problem with Eagle is lack of sane default keybindings. Of course I can spend time and make my own but it's kind of counterproductive in any group environment.
 

Offline ECEdesign

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 173
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2016, 04:30:38 pm »
I have really been liking Altium Designer so far.  After watching videos on how to get started and the big library support things are pretty quick to do.  OrCAD may be another option.  They have a good series, basically a full online class that walks you through how to do everything on it.  You can try out the OrCAD lite version to give it a spin.  KiCAD is good if you need opensource/free but I wasnt the biggest fan of the UI.  Free version of Altium is Circuit Maker which is actually quite nice if you dont mind your designs being open to everyone.  They just recently added the same keyboard commands as the full Altium Designer!
 

Offline ZeTeX

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 601
  • Country: il
  • When in doubt, add more flux.
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2016, 08:02:21 pm »
Wait people dont count with their mouse today? oh well

You should try using KiCAD, I really like it and it is easy to use.
Or you could download cracked version of Altium, what ever works for you.
if you hate eagle - dont use it.
 

Offline Wilksey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1153
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2016, 10:38:32 pm »
In short, it's not painful to use, it can be painful to learn I guess, though I never had any issues learning it, or any other CAD package, if you work through their tutorials you get to know it quite well.

Having said that, I did start may moons ago with Seetrax Ranger....ahem, you complain about eagle?!
 

Offline rrinker

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1914
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #14 on: June 06, 2016, 01:23:19 am »
 Way back when in my University days, I had a copy of OrCAD from one of my professors. I really liked it. I've more recently tried KiCad, and Fritzing, and Eagle, and I find them all frustrating compared to the OrCad I remember.  But such it is will all complex software like this - at my first job, I learned CadKey for mechanical drawing alongside our drafting department so I could support them. I got to be quite good with it - and as such I DESPISE AutoCAD. I've been using the same model railroad CAD program for some 12-14 years now, there are some newer, even free cross-platform ones that I've tried, but they just don't come close. The free cross platform one can't even do a height setting, the one I use not only works in ZX, Y , and Z axes, it also displays a full 3D rendering which you can spin in any direction to view all sides.
 I really want to like KiCad, but it seems so alien. Eagle was the closest to how previous programs I used worked, so I will probably stick with that.

 

Offline timofonic

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 904
  • Country: es
  • Eternal Wannabe Geek
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #15 on: June 06, 2016, 02:59:30 am »
I bet KiCad UI will improve over time, some developers want to make it more same. Chris Palvina is one of them. You can give them useful feedback and if course, patches are welcome ;)

I used Eagle for class. I liked the command line concept (but it could be a lot more sophisticated, I'm a Linux nerd too) , but it has too many annoying quirks.

ULP and SCR system is far from perfect, but it works. I hope KiCad scripting gets really a lot more complete and robust, it's very limited at this moment too. I hope to be able to not just have Python, but others like Lua and even Scheme (why not? They use SWIG).

http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaVersusPython

I really like footprints and symbols get embedded in project files in Eagle, that's very good to have. I really hope this happens in KiCad eventually!
 

Offline MarkF

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1413
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #16 on: June 06, 2016, 03:06:29 am »
I gave up too.  It's just too much of a pain to learn.
Try DipTrace 3.0 Freeware

You can upgrade it to DipTrace Lite to get 500 pins and 2 layers for free if your use is non-profit.  You need to goto the BUY-->Non-profit page and send them an email with a brief description of how you intend to use it and they will send you an upgrade key to type in (usually the next day).

That's what I did for my home projects and it was intuitive and easy to learn.  It meets all my needs.
 

Offline timofonic

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 904
  • Country: es
  • Eternal Wannabe Geek
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #17 on: June 06, 2016, 03:26:11 am »
I hate a lot the EDA software for one very main reason: Vendor lock-in.

You have another file format, converters are kinda crappy and faulty.

That's why I want KiCad to succeed: Fuck you, EDA Mafia.
 
The following users thanked this post: CatalinaWOW

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5737
  • Country: nl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #18 on: June 06, 2016, 07:21:09 am »
How many hours have you put in Eagle?
If you got stuck did you check an online tutorial or watch some of the many youtube tutorials?

I think personally you just give up to easy and if you are young you better start learning to dig in and get things done instead of running away after the first setback :scared:
Eagle is not difficult to learn, it has its quircks but it is a very small package to master.
If you spent 5 to 10 hours learning every feature and the three modules (libs,schematic, board) and take some youtube tutorials you should be able to create and make your own pcb's and libs for parts.
 

Offline Wilksey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1153
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #19 on: June 06, 2016, 09:48:05 am »
If it was that bad then so many others wouldn't use it - and continue to use it, especially now there are so many other alternatives.
It's good that companies such as Olimex are taking up KiCAD, I quite like KiCAD, but EAGLE has played a large part in their business.

It would be a good job interview question, if they can't learn EAGLE then they are too lazy for the job!  :-DD

Seriously, if you WANT to learn it then it is not that hard, if you want to attempt to use it so you can say how crap it is, well, then that's even easier!  :popcorn:
 

Offline NANDBlog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4482
  • Country: nl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #20 on: June 06, 2016, 12:51:04 pm »
How many hours have you put in Eagle?
If you got stuck did you check an online tutorial or watch some of the many youtube tutorials?

I think personally you just give up to easy and if you are young you better start learning to dig in and get things done instead of running away after the first setback :scared:
Eagle is not difficult to learn, it has its quircks but it is a very small package to master.
If you spent 5 to 10 hours learning every feature and the three modules (libs,schematic, board) and take some youtube tutorials you should be able to create and make your own pcb's and libs for parts.
Eagle is not intuitive, and it is missing soo many features, that it is hard to even start. I made an intra-company comparison for Eagle and Altium. My conclusion was, that even though we have an eagle license, it is cheaper to use altium because the time spent learning it and messing around with the unproductive UI, system, the 2D-ness results way way worse time to market. And they just spend the license cost to my salary trying to learn it. Because after a month of mocking around in eagle, it was working in it painfully slowly. And my FPM (fuck per minute) ratio was over the top.
Free packages are better for hobbyist. Professional packages are better for professionals. I would not recommend eagle for anyone. Yes, it is possible to design something in it. I had 0 confidence that it will actually do what its supposed to, and you can design a PCB with a pen and some papers. I described it as the Unicycle of PCB design.
 

Offline uncle_bob

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2425
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #21 on: June 06, 2016, 01:04:15 pm »
Hi

Let's see, first time I heard this was in .... errrr ... 1974. I'm *sure* things will get better real soon now. The answer back then was to write a full blown layout program from scratch (which we did). Probably a valid answer today if you want one that works "your way".

Bob
 

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5737
  • Country: nl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #22 on: June 06, 2016, 01:12:16 pm »
Eagle is not intuitive, and it is missing soo many features, that it is hard to even start. I made an intra-company comparison for Eagle and Altium. My conclusion was, that even though we have an eagle license, it is cheaper to use altium because the time spent learning it and messing around with the unproductive UI, system, the 2D-ness results way way worse time to market. And they just spend the license cost to my salary trying to learn it. Because after a month of mocking around in eagle, it was working in it painfully slowly. And my FPM (fuck per minute) ratio was over the top.
Free packages are better for hobbyist. Professional packages are better for professionals. I would not recommend eagle for anyone. Yes, it is possible to design something in it. I had 0 confidence that it will actually do what its supposed to, and you can design a PCB with a pen and some papers. I described it as the Unicycle of PCB design.
Where do you see the professional, the TS could not even figure out how to set Eagle's grid to metric  :palm:
I do not argue with you that Altium is probably way better than Eagle, but someone starting a topic like this and not even spending two hours googling or watching a tutorial is probably also doomed on Altium, or will it do everything automagically?  ;)
 

Offline Wilksey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1153
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #23 on: June 06, 2016, 08:07:58 pm »
No there is probably a reason why Altium training material is commonly found in Chinese and people charge almost as much as the great package itself to teach, personally, I just got stuck into it and with in a week or so I was quite happy using it.

Yeah it's good, of course it is, so is Cadence, and yes it is expensive, most people doing hobby type designs will not use 1/100th of it's capabilities, so I never recommend it to anyone personally because if they NEED it the company who employs them will pay for it, if you have to pay for it yourself (and you don't work for yourself) then chances are you don't NEED it, it might be nice to have, but so is a Ferrari, most of us can't afford one of those either for pottering around town!

I have 100% confidence that I can do what I need to in Altium, Proteus, EAGLE, DipTrace, CadStar, Ranger ( :--), RS Design Spark, Mouser /NI MultiSIM and KiCAD, as those are the packages i've trialled / used, for work stuff, it doesn't matter, most of us are limited to what they have purchased at said place of employment, for personal / home stuff, I use KiCAD, I have used EAGLE previous to switching to KiCAD.

 

Offline XFDDesign

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 432
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #24 on: June 07, 2016, 03:54:31 pm »
Eagle does indeed have a reasonably steep learning curve for an absolute first timer. Allegro more-so. The worst package I've ever had the unfortunate opportunity to use, is Mentor Graphics PADS.

Others have already pointed out, Eagle has a means to manage units and grid snap. Mixing Imperial and Metric is a non-issue with Eagle, or most packages.

Maybe it's the facebook generation, but things that are worth doing, require time and commitment to get into. Surrendering at the first hill is not going to solve the problem. Posting about it, is not going to solve the problem. Figuring out the issue, and working through the problem is almost the essence of Engineering. Suck it up, it's time to get off the tit.

 

Offline karoru

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Country: pl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #25 on: June 07, 2016, 06:00:06 pm »
One thing I'd like to see in Eagle that would make it much easier to use for average beginner is easier addition of components. Some kind of wizard, I want to create new part, I choose name of part, package, names of pins (and maybe some basic ability to put them on left/right in vanilla rectangular symbol) and it creates symbol, footprint and so on for me and adds it to my default library. I'm not so new to Eagle and still I have to read documentation again every time I want to add some random DIP8 IC to the library.
 

Offline XFDDesign

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 432
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2016, 06:09:48 pm »
One thing I'd like to see in Eagle that would make it much easier to use for average beginner is easier addition of components. Some kind of wizard, I want to create new part, I choose name of part, package, names of pins (and maybe some basic ability to put them on left/right in vanilla rectangular symbol) and it creates symbol, footprint and so on for me and adds it to my default library. I'm not so new to Eagle and still I have to read documentation again every time I want to add some random DIP8 IC to the library.

Most CAD tools really fall down at the documentation side of things. With Eagle, about the only part a Wizard would be actually helpful for is a BGA package. Give me a footprint drawing, and I can punch out most packages (even high pin count) in a matter of a few minutes. It's only because I actually know the tool and the tricks, which would be communicated in good documentation, but that's a rare thing.
 

Offline bktemp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1623
  • Country: de
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2016, 06:54:07 pm »
With Eagle, about the only part a Wizard would be actually helpful for is a BGA package.
You can use a ULP for generating complex parts: make-symbol-device-package-bsdl.ulp
It reads the BSDL file many manufacturers provide and generates the package, the symbol and conects them in the device. You only need to enter the package type and dimensions.
I find it rather easy in Eagle to generate new parts.
 

Offline XFDDesign

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 432
  • Country: us
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2016, 07:28:25 pm »
With Eagle, about the only part a Wizard would be actually helpful for is a BGA package.
You can use a ULP for generating complex parts: make-symbol-device-package-bsdl.ulp
It reads the BSDL file many manufacturers provide and generates the package, the symbol and conects them in the device. You only need to enter the package type and dimensions.
I find it rather easy in Eagle to generate new parts.

I've never needed to do a BGA footprint, but thanks for pointing that out. So in essence someone already made a 'wizard' script for it  :-DD nice!
 

Offline Jeroen3

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3333
  • Country: nl
  • Embedded Engineer
    • jeroen3.nl
Re: Why is eagle cad soft so painful to use?
« Reply #29 on: June 07, 2016, 08:41:59 pm »
I've never made a standard footprint in eagle, they're already there.
Only connectors and fancy parts.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf