Author Topic: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant  (Read 16403 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ebclr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1997
  • Country: 00
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2016, 02:31:04 pm »
For hobbyst Have 2 nice and free options

www.circuitmaker.com
http://www.pcbweb.com/

If you need more, it's time to open the safe
 

Offline XFDDesign

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 435
  • Country: us
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #26 on: June 06, 2016, 04:44:42 pm »
I actually use Eagle pro, so that's my disclaimer.

There is another fault that can burn you as well in the licensing model. The "standard" version which is still area limited to the 160x100, is also layer limited to 4. So even within the area constraint, you can't do a 6 layer board or more, even if you needed to. It's a double-whammy.
 

Offline rob77

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1848
  • Country: sk
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2016, 09:06:22 am »
i'm using eagle, i bought the maker edition (non-commercial for individuals) - 6layers with 160mmx100mm area.
i'm not getting the point why would a hobbyist need a bigger area ? nowadays with small footprint components you can fit a pretty complex project to a 160x100.

and let me tell you a dirty trick - if you need a bigger pcb you can still make your own library with half sized components (yes create all the components you need as half-sized) and enlarge the board by a factor of 2 when printing the transparencies. this way you can easily make a 320mmx200mm board.

furthermore - i don't know how you guys are making your PCBs, but my laser printer is A4, i'm buying Riston and Dynamask in 30cm wide rolls and buying FR4 in A4 sized cuts. considering the effective print area of the printer and counting in 20-30mm of space on each side of the board to comfortably work with the photo-resist and solder mask films... i end up with something like 240mmx150mm technical limit for a pcb i can manufacture at home, which is not much bigger than the eagle limit.

if you want's to switch to "commercial" then you need a business license to do you commercial business and you can't upgrade your personal license anyway ( you can't re-sell you personal license to the business you are going to run ).
 

Offline Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5760
  • Country: nl
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2016, 09:43:49 am »
i'm using eagle, i bought the maker edition (non-commercial for individuals) - 6layers with 160mmx100mm area.
i'm not getting the point why would a hobbyist need a bigger area ? nowadays with small footprint components you can fit a pretty complex project to a 160x100.
The only time I ran into this area problem was when I wanted to design a long led strip my self. If you want to make a 50cm long led strip or larger, then the only choice you have with the current limitation is to make it multiple strips of 160mm and solder them together with wires. The problem arises when you only have one ledcontroller and hw on each strip and mechanically it is not ideal either. For the rest I agree, hobbieists could live with that board size limitation.

Quote
and let me tell you a dirty trick - if you need a bigger pcb you can still make your own library with half sized components (yes create all the components you need as half-sized) and enlarge the board by a factor of 2 when printing the transparencies. this way you can easily make a 320mmx200mm board.
Eeeeeh that is dirty, I am not going to go there.

Quote
i don't know how you guys are making your PCBs
Sent the Gerbers to China and let them make it professionally, I love that this is possible these days, all that problems I have had in the past with over/under-UV-exposure, over/under-etching, no via's, no soldermask, no silkscreen.
No thank you, been there done that and left it behind me  :)
 

Offline komet

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Country: ch
  • Shenzhen Retroencabulator Mfg. Co.
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2016, 09:58:42 am »
Has everybody forgotten about the time that an "incorrectly licensed" Eagle would hack your computer and send your details to CadSoft so that they could take you to court? That alone is reason enough to never give them any money ever again.
 

Offline rob77

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1848
  • Country: sk
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2016, 10:15:43 am »

Quote
Quote
i don't know how you guys are making your PCBs
all that problems I have had in the past with over/under-UV-exposure, over/under-etching, no via's, no soldermask, no silkscreen.
No thank you, been there done that and left it behind me  :)
only valid point is the vias (but you can solder a wire to all vias and it's ok i'm doing it like that) .
riston dry film photoresist is the stuff used in fabs as well - no issues with under/over exposure like with those positive presensitized copper clads.  dynamask is the dry film soldermask - a perfect one capable of very fine details.
if you need silkscreen - white uv curable paint if your friend (but i'm lazy to add more steps to have the silkscreen)
i have my 2 sided board ready to use including soldermask in less than 1 hour - don't have to wait weeks.

so for me the Eagle + making boards at home is the ideal combo ;)
« Last Edit: June 19, 2016, 10:18:56 am by rob77 »
 

Offline rob77

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1848
  • Country: sk
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2016, 10:18:02 am »
Has everybody forgotten about the time that an "incorrectly licensed" Eagle would hack your computer and send your details to CadSoft so that they could take you to court? That alone is reason enough to never give them any money ever again.

so you hate everyone who protects his property ? so if someone robs you , then you're ok with it because he's just "incorrectly behaved" ?  :-DD
 

Offline komet

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Country: ch
  • Shenzhen Retroencabulator Mfg. Co.
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2016, 10:30:26 am »
Has everybody forgotten about the time that an "incorrectly licensed" Eagle would hack your computer and send your details to CadSoft so that they could take you to court? That alone is reason enough to never give them any money ever again.

so you hate everyone who protects his property ? so if someone robs you , then you're ok with it because he's just "incorrectly behaved" ?  :-DD

There are lawful methods of protecting one's property and unlawful ones. CadSoft, if I remember correctly, were sentenced.
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3311
  • Country: de
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2016, 05:03:50 pm »
Has everybody forgotten about the time that an "incorrectly licensed" Eagle would hack your computer and send your details to CadSoft so that they could take you to court? That alone is reason enough to never give them any money ever again.

There are lawful methods of protecting one's property and unlawful ones. CadSoft, if I remember correctly, were sentenced.

I am not aware of this (either Eagle "phoning home" or CadSoft being sentenced for that). Would you have any links or other references which support these allegations?
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 18544
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2016, 06:04:59 pm »
I've also read stories about Eagle nuking files if the file was edited by an illegal copy during it's lifetime or used a component created by an illegal version even though the version the user was using was legit. According to the particular user Cadsoft was unwilling to unlock/repair the file and just told him "tough luck, GFY and beware of other people's files and libraries from now on".
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline komet

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Country: ch
  • Shenzhen Retroencabulator Mfg. Co.
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2016, 06:15:27 pm »
Has everybody forgotten about the time that an "incorrectly licensed" Eagle would hack your computer and send your details to CadSoft so that they could take you to court? That alone is reason enough to never give them any money ever again.

There are lawful methods of protecting one's property and unlawful ones. CadSoft, if I remember correctly, were sentenced.

I am not aware of this (either Eagle "phoning home" or CadSoft being sentenced for that). Would you have any links or other references which support these allegations?

It predates widespread Internet use, so information is sparse, but I did find

https://shop.heise.de/katalog/adressen-aus-bestem-hause

http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13681488.html

http://www.offiziere.ch/trust-us/ds/40/008_cadsoft.html

I think I read about it in Elektor, but I have thrown my copies from the time away. My memory may well be faulty.
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3311
  • Country: de
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2016, 06:41:28 pm »
Thanks Komet, those were good reads. Catching software pirates, 1992 style!  :P

I had assumed that Cadsoft had used an online approach, where the software would "phone home" via the internet. But no -- they mailed floppy disks with Eagle demo versions to users (who had ordered an older demo version before), had the demo search for pirated software copies on the computer, and print a coupon for a free printed manual if it found something presumably illicit. That coupon was in turn mailed (as in "sending a piece of paper via the mail"  ;)) to Cadsoft, who had their lawyer follow up with a threatening letter...

Amusing as it may be for the "pre-historic" approach, it does indeed raise concerns about privacy and spying out others' computers. The coupon did include a "serial number", which encoded some version data about the user's computer, as well as the number of cracked copies it had found on the computer.

It seems that CadSoft was under pressure at the time. A crack had been published the year before, which allowed users to unlock the free demo version into a full copy, and CadSoft claimed that their sales had dropped by 30%. I did not find any follow-up articles reporting on any legal action against CadSoft.
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4904
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2016, 07:17:10 pm »
So Eagle exists for 24 years at least and they didn't manage to add some features a professional EDA package should have (ok, some where added the last few years) :palm: I got an old hobby-grade licence for BAE, professional features but terrible user interface. Why should I buy an Eagle licence for hobbyist usage when there's KiCad?
 

Offline Karel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1434
  • Country: 00
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #38 on: June 19, 2016, 07:28:18 pm »
So Eagle exists for 24 years at least and they didn't manage to add some features a professional EDA package should have ...

Like what? push and shove? A pricetag of $8000,=?

For sure, Eagle isn't perfect but, at least for us, it gets the job done in the shortest possible time and it is very reliable and stable.
No way we are going to pay tripple the price for a package that forces us to use windows and stores projects in a closed
format we can't access with independent software.

 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4904
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2016, 08:13:49 pm »
So Eagle exists for 24 years at least and they didn't manage to add some features a professional EDA package should have ...

Like what? push and shove? A pricetag of $8000,=?

- symbols without footprint/package (IIRC, that was added 2 years ago)
- symbols supporting multi-footprints for one component (for example: C with 2.54mm and 5.04mm spacing)(also a quite new feature)
- manual routing for off-grid pads is very cumbersome
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3311
  • Country: de
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #40 on: June 20, 2016, 12:47:47 pm »
So Eagle exists for 24 years at least and they didn't manage to add some features a professional EDA package should have ...

Like what? push and shove? A pricetag of $8000,=?

- symbols without footprint/package (IIRC, that was added 2 years ago)
- symbols supporting multi-footprints for one component (for example: C with 2.54mm and 5.04mm spacing)(also a quite new feature)
- manual routing for off-grid pads is very cumbersome

So CadSoft don't seem to be doing so badly after all...  :P

Two of the features on your wishlist are already available, as you confirm yourself. And the third one, I'm not sure what problem with off-grid connections you refer to?  I just routed connections to an HDMI connector this weekend, and the traces nicely snap to the off-grid pads, and then make straight/45 degree connections to the next on-grid destination. Using version 5.x, which must be about 5 years old.

Again, Eagle is not my role model for usability. But I can't complain about the features -- more than what I need for my hobby needs. And maybe I am just lucky, but the restrictions of their hobbyist/"maker" version are acceptable for me, so the price tag is OK for me too.
 

Offline rob77

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1848
  • Country: sk
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #41 on: June 20, 2016, 09:47:16 pm »
And maybe I am just lucky, but the restrictions of their hobbyist/"maker" version are acceptable for me, so the price tag is OK for me too.

i think there will be more of us happily accepting the ~ 160Eur price tag for the hobbyist version ;)

btw.. i'm using Eagle because many years back it was the ONE AND ONLY USABLE software for designing PCBs running on Linux. and if i'm not mistaken it's still the only commercial package NATIVELY running on linux (diptrace runs in wine emulation only despite listing linux as a supported OS).
before i bought the make edition of eagle i learned and started to use KiCad, but found it less comfortable to use than Eagle (however KiCAd has some really cool and useful features which are not available in Eagle).
 

Online CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3460
  • Country: us
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #42 on: June 21, 2016, 12:49:18 am »
And maybe I am just lucky, but the restrictions of their hobbyist/"maker" version are acceptable for me, so the price tag is OK for me too.

i think there will be more of us happily accepting the ~ 160Eur price tag for the hobbyist version ;)

btw.. i'm using Eagle because many years back it was the ONE AND ONLY USABLE software for designing PCBs running on Linux. and if i'm not mistaken it's still the only commercial package NATIVELY running on linux (diptrace runs in wine emulation only despite listing linux as a supported OS).
before i bought the make edition of eagle i learned and started to use KiCad, but found it less comfortable to use than Eagle (however KiCAd has some really cool and useful features which are not available in Eagle).

One true and clear thing here.  ALL ECAD packages are worse than the ones you are proficient in.  With motivation the list on the "in" side of the line can change, but the answer remains the same.
 

Offline Karel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1434
  • Country: 00
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #43 on: June 21, 2016, 08:10:16 am »
And maybe I am just lucky, but the restrictions of their hobbyist/"maker" version are acceptable for me, so the price tag is OK for me too.

i think there will be more of us happily accepting the ~ 160Eur price tag for the hobbyist version ;)

btw.. i'm using Eagle because many years back it was the ONE AND ONLY USABLE software for designing PCBs running on Linux. and if i'm not mistaken it's still the only commercial package NATIVELY running on linux (diptrace runs in wine emulation only despite listing linux as a supported OS).
before i bought the make edition of eagle i learned and started to use KiCad, but found it less comfortable to use than Eagle (however KiCAd has some really cool and useful features which are not available in Eagle).

One true and clear thing here.  ALL ECAD packages are worse than the ones you are proficient in.  With motivation the list on the "in" side of the line can change, but the answer remains the same.

That's not always true. I have used Multisim & Ultiboard for a couple of years. It was full of bugs which were only solved with payed upgrades.
I have used Altium Designer for one year. Althoug not really bad, it crashed at least once a day.
I have used Zuken Cadstar for about six months, that one was definitely the most difficult to learn.
In the end I decided to go with Eagle and, despite the lack of some features, I haven't regret it once.
 

Offline IanJ

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1057
  • Country: scotland
  • Pro EE guy many years ago, now a hobby/home biz.
    • IanJohnston.com
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #44 on: June 21, 2016, 11:01:38 am »
Hi all,

Yep, I don't like the licensing model either...........I have a license for Eagle Pro, but find myself stuck at V6.6 as I won't pay the large amount to upgrade to V7 and beyond. With the current model structure they'll never get my money again........unless the come up with some fantastic features that begs me to upgrade, like push n shove or even much, much better library management and editing to tell you the truth. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bitter at all, it's just a fact.

The new naming for the different versions is confusing to me.......but I suppose that's because I am still stuck at V6.6 etc.

The secret to success is to entice new users, but also to entice existing users back again and again. Looks like Cadsoft don't want that and I guess probably because they aren't making enough income from the product. The accountants have taken over product development.

Ian.
Ian Johnston
www.ianjohnston.com
Manufacturer of the PDVS2 & PDVS2mini
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 18544
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #45 on: June 21, 2016, 12:46:59 pm »
One true and clear thing here.  ALL ECAD packages are worse than the ones you are proficient in.  With motivation the list on the "in" side of the line can change, but the answer remains the same.
Absolutely not true. I'm quite proficient in several packages but a few of them are really cumbersome to use so even though I have hundreds of hours of use on some of these packages I really wouldn't want to use them.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2016, 01:01:03 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4904
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #46 on: June 21, 2016, 12:51:04 pm »
btw.. i'm using Eagle because many years back it was the ONE AND ONLY USABLE software for designing PCBs running on Linux. and if i'm not mistaken it's still the only commercial package NATIVELY running on linux (diptrace runs in wine emulation only despite listing linux as a supported OS).

BAE ( http://www.bartels.de/basys/bartels_home_en.htm ). In my opinion it's more professional than Eagle. For example, it supports scripts for complex pin/gate swapping rules. Features Eagle just added are included in BAE for more than 10 years.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2016, 12:53:10 pm by madires »
 

Offline Robaroni

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 352
  • Country: us
  • Retired EE
    • Design Specialties
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #47 on: June 21, 2016, 01:20:05 pm »
I learned long ago that free EDA programs cost more in the end. I don't use Eagle (did once before Element 14 but any respectable EDA should have a built in simulator so I dumped it).

I bought the original CircuitMaker before Altium bought it and trashed it. There are people still using it and while it has some rough edges it has a nice simulator and will do small to medium size boards just fine. If you can find it around cheap it might be worth the effort to look into. I still have it on my computer somewhere so I expect it should work with Windows 7.

Look, you're getting a free program. That means you're at the mercy of the seller. So Eagle sucked a lot of people in and now they're changing tracks. First, it was OK cheap but not so great at a couple of grand. Now you spent time learning it and that's just what they hoped for, you're stuck, time is money and you just spent yours!

Buy a program, look at their track record and read their forum first, learn it and hope it will be around awhile. If you keep going to free, you'll keep getting burned.

I use Labcenter Proteus, not the cheapest but it has enough bells and whistles to keep me happy. It's much better  than the cumbersome Eagle and has a great simulator if you get the advanced version. I'm not trying to sell anything, I'm sure there are great programs out there but if you want a free one, again, you'll likely get burned.

OK, I do professional work and don't have time to fiddle and nickel and dime my way through EDA programs or write ULPs. If I was a hobbyist I'd look for a solid older program like the Protel based CM I mentioned above and see if I could find it cheap.

Rob
 

Offline rob77

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1848
  • Country: sk
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #48 on: June 21, 2016, 01:30:36 pm »
btw.. i'm using Eagle because many years back it was the ONE AND ONLY USABLE software for designing PCBs running on Linux. and if i'm not mistaken it's still the only commercial package NATIVELY running on linux (diptrace runs in wine emulation only despite listing linux as a supported OS).

BAE ( http://www.bartels.de/basys/bartels_home_en.htm ). In my opinion it's more professional than Eagle. For example, it supports scripts for complex pin/gate swapping rules. Features Eagle just added are included in BAE for more than 10 years.

ok so there is one, checked their web ... 190euro for a lite version for individuals... not bad... clicked download... and ....no...  thank you.... release from 23rd December 2013 ???  seriously ? furthermore - in requirements they say kernel 2.0.0+ and motif (no version mentioned)...  considering the really ancient kernel requirement, the motif version required will be ancient too - so there is a high risk of not being usable with recent linux distributions..

so sorry, but Eagle looks much better from this perspective...
 

Online H.O

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 636
  • Country: se
Re: Eagle debilitating licensing model rant
« Reply #49 on: June 21, 2016, 01:37:50 pm »
Quote
BAE ( http://www.bartels.de/basys/bartels_home_en.htm ). In my opinion it's more professional than Eagle. For example, it supports scripts for complex pin/gate swapping rules. Features Eagle just added are included in BAE for more than 10 years.
Their Light version costs €159 which, if the limitations are reasonable is fine. But once you outgrow that the next step up (the "Economy Version") is €2690 and it goes on up from there. By the way, what ARE the limitations of the Light version? I browsed around (quickly) and couldn't find a comparison of the various versions.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf