Autodesk buys Eagle

[KE5FX]

Altium has been after me for $10k license - maybe I should be patient. I don't design a big volume of boards, but when I do - I am in a huge hurry and they get more complex every time.

IMHO a higher end package also saves a lot of time when it comes to the logistics part. This is often overlooked by the lower end offerings. The Orcad package I'm using produces a ready-to-go bill of materials (including manufacturers parts numbers, order codes, etc, etc) with one click. AFAIK this is impossible with Eagle and Kicad.

It's easy enough to write a BOM generator that reads EAGLE .sch files, as an example of what can be done with the aforementioned XML format.  But now I have an inventory database problem.  I've been getting by with a hand-edited XML file with entries like

Code: [Select]

<part device="OPAMP_CFB_X3" value="LMH6733" package="TSSOP-16" type="SMT" pins="16" description="Opamp, CFB, 3 channel, BW=1 GHz">
  <manufacturer name="TI" PN="LMH6733MQX/NOPB" />
  <vendor name="DigiKey" PN="296-37393-6-ND"     USD="4.4682" qty="100" />
  <vendor name="Mouser"  PN="926-LMH6733MQ/NOPB" USD="4.74"   qty="100" />
  <stock date="9-Mar-2016" count="70" bin="vp"/>
</part>
... but that's going to get pretty cumbersome over the next few years.   I'm taking a leap of faith that I'll eventually find an easy way to pull this file into a real database program with a real UI.  If that doesn't happen, I will eventually end up growing an entire ERP system by accretion.  The curse of the compulsive programmer...

[rx8pilot]

I have written a few ULP's and Python scripts to help with BOMs and provide direct export to my P&P machine. At the end of the day, I get the data but it is so remarkably cumbersome and expensively slow to do this. The Eagle fans always say, 'but you can do that with a ULP - it is so powerful'. For those in a real business where time is currency - I don't want to write my own operational software. Not only does it take a bunch of time, it generally sucks in the end because I am not a real software developer and these patches of scripts are similar to putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound.

Eagle was a fantastic opportunity for me to learn PCB layout without any financial risk. I did not even know if my business was viable when I started with Eagle. Buying Altium right out of the gate would have been irresponsible. Now that I am fully committed and designing and manufacturing electronics is my sole source of income - I am over Eagle. I am actually scared of new designs and revisions. On the mechanical side (where I have decades more experience to be fair), I use SolidWorks that almost begs me to design parts and assemblies. From the very first day with SolidWorks (1998), it is easy and intuitive. It just makes sense and I tend to focus the vast amount of my energy on design, not the software. There is no command line crap to memorize either.

Eagle, on the other hand, is the inadvertent star of the show. When I need to put a new part in the design, I try my best to avoid it because making new parts is such a pain in the ass. That is before I have even drawn a single trace. If I designed boards all day every day, I would be better at it, but I only spend part of my time designing PCB's. If I was designing all day with Eagle, I would have switched a long time ago I guess.

I am hopeful that Autodesk can polish the system in a useful way. When the pop-ups for the 'new and exciting' version 7 came up, I was curious. They wanted a some money of course in the neighborhood of $500 if I recall correctly. When I watched the webinar roll-out, I almost died laughing - USELESS updates. I can't think of one helpful feature of the new version that would make any contribution to a better or faster PCB layout.

All of a sudden - $10k for Altium looks like a bargain compared to $1250 for Eagle (guessing about current price).

[Karel]

Altium has been after me for $10k license - maybe I should be patient. I don't design a big volume of boards, but when I do - I am in a huge hurry and they get more complex every time.

IMHO a higher end package also saves a lot of time when it comes to the logistics part. This is often overlooked by the lower end offerings. The Orcad package I'm using produces a ready-to-go bill of materials (including manufacturers parts numbers, order codes, etc, etc) with one click. AFAIK this is impossible with Eagle and Kicad.

It's easy enough to write a BOM generator that reads EAGLE .sch files, as an example of what can be done with the aforementioned XML format.  But now I have an inventory database problem.  I've been getting by with a hand-edited XML file with entries like

Code: [Select]

<part device="OPAMP_CFB_X3" value="LMH6733" package="TSSOP-16" type="SMT" pins="16" description="Opamp, CFB, 3 channel, BW=1 GHz">
  <manufacturer name="TI" PN="LMH6733MQX/NOPB" />
  <vendor name="DigiKey" PN="296-37393-6-ND"     USD="4.4682" qty="100" />
  <vendor name="Mouser"  PN="926-LMH6733MQ/NOPB" USD="4.74"   qty="100" />
  <stock date="9-Mar-2016" count="70" bin="vp"/>
</part>
... but that's going to get pretty cumbersome over the next few years.   I'm taking a leap of faith that I'll eventually find an easy way to pull this file into a real database program with a real UI.  If that doesn't happen, I will eventually end up growing an entire ERP system by accretion.  The curse of the compulsive programmer...

Eagle supports attributes for devices. This way you can store all kind of information.
In the *.sch or *.brd files it wil look like this:

Code: [Select]

<attribute name="C-TYPE" value="E"/>
<attribute name="DIGIKEY" value="NC7SZ125M5XDKR-ND"/>
<attribute name="FARNELL" value="2453005RL "/>
<attribute name="MANUFACTURER" value="Fairchild Semiconductor"/>
<attribute name="MAN_PN" value="NC7SZ125M5X"/>
<attribute name="MOUNTING" value="SMD"/>
<attribute name="MOUSER" value="512-NC7SZ125M5X"/>
<attribute name="PACKAGE" value="SOT23-5"/>
<attribute name="PRICE" value="0.284"/>
<attribute name="RS-COMPONENTS" value="670-9807P"/>

When you export the BOM in Eagle,  there will be a colon for every attribute, e.g. "Farnell" with in that colon the ordercodes of
all parts available at Farnell.
It can store it as txt, html or csv. This way you can easily import it in Calc (or excel).

[Wilksey]

Eagle is only perceived "unusable" or "crap" to those who don't care to take the time to learn how to use it or those who don't need / want to use it as they have access to a higher end tool.

I'm sure many who use it daily also consider it crap.

The UI is prehistoric.

The wildcards in the library are cool (technology and package variants) but the tight coupling to footprints is horribly awkward.  The library management itself is just awful.

Scriptability is cool but having to do so much via scripts is not.  BOM mgmt (via scripts) is a chore.  A huge problem with scripts is having to know so many things by rote instead of discovering it through the UI.

You can't even flip the PCB over to view from the other side!!  Are you kidding me?

Only if they are "forced" to use it, there are far more that like it than those who don't.
The UI works just fine!

The footprint and library association is just a quirk to get used to.
The script-ability is what makes it so powerful, it's quite a treat in fact.

Who cares if you can flip the PCB or not, I certainly don't need this feature, it might be useful but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker! 

[KE5FX]

Eagle supports attributes for devices. This way you can store all kind of information.
In the *.sch or *.brd files it wil look like this:

Code: [Select]

<attribute name="C-TYPE" value="E"/>
<attribute name="DIGIKEY" value="NC7SZ125M5XDKR-ND"/>
<attribute name="FARNELL" value="2453005RL "/>
<attribute name="MANUFACTURER" value="Fairchild Semiconductor"/>
<attribute name="MAN_PN" value="NC7SZ125M5X"/>
<attribute name="MOUNTING" value="SMD"/>
<attribute name="MOUSER" value="512-NC7SZ125M5X"/>
<attribute name="PACKAGE" value="SOT23-5"/>
<attribute name="PRICE" value="0.284"/>
<attribute name="RS-COMPONENTS" value="670-9807P"/>

When you export the BOM in Eagle,  there will be a colon for every attribute, e.g. "Farnell" with in that colon the ordercodes of
all parts available at Farnell.
It can store it as txt, html or csv. This way you can easily import it in Calc (or excell).

Yep, but that's not the best approach in my situation.  A BOM generator is useless without a parts database.  An unstructured key-value store isn't a real database, and in any event, a parts database doesn't belong in a particular CAD program's schematic, board, or library file.   EAGLE isn't a database manager (not that my text editor is  .) 

The various BOM generation options for EAGLE also aren't very flexible.  That includes third-party contributions, some of which are fairly decent -- Xess's comes to mind -- but still hardwired to someone else's way of managing inventory.

All of which isn't to criticize EAGLE, or to argue that Autodesk should add a database module to it, but to point out how it's actually a pretty great EDA tool for people with specific needs but limited budgets.

[PCB.Wiz]

I don't think the asset purchase itself is worrisome -- Eagle is crap and I am surprised that it would be worth buying.  Easier to start from scratch if you have those kind of resources.

Hardly, Eagle has a wide installed base, a wide database of real designs, and a good script community.

What should be worrisome though is the shot across the bow that Autodesk is entering the e-cad market.  Tight integration between e-cad and m-cad is a huge opportunity and the market is begging for it.   Altium and Mentor have no answer for this.

Yes, Altium and Mentor will be very worried by this.
Mentor are very late into 3D and do so with 3rd party cobbled 'solution'.

But even that said, this isn't a play for Altium and Mentor customers.  Eagle isn't in the same league as Altium.  This is a play against CircuitWorks (SolidWorks module).

Yes and no.

Eagle may not go after the top-end Altium and Mentor customers, but a large number of Altium and Mentor seats do not go above 6 layers.
Even the planned new free Eagle can capture those (other limits not mentioned yet?)
There is substantial overlap in accessible user base, and easy for AutoDesk to nibble away more...
That is why Altium and Mentor will be very worried by this.

Average end user Board complexity, I would even venture, is reducing these days, as things like WiFi and Bluetooth  and PiZero (etc) allow designers to swallow large chunks of tight layout into something you just buy.

There are actually not many PCB seats in the world, designing Cell Phones

[PCB.Wiz]

Only if they are "forced" to use it, there are far more that like it than those who don't.
The UI works just fine!

To someone like AutoDesk, UI changes will be quite easy.

The footprint and library association is just a quirk to get used to.

Yes, but pretty much true of all EDA tool flows.

The script-ability is what makes it so powerful, it's quite a treat in fact.

It is that 'engine room' stuff that gives the solid base. UI interfaces can always improve over time.

Likewise, KiCad has Python script access, in the PCB, which I'm impressed with.
(Python still coming in SCH, currently that has a simpler script system - currently, I see 4 BOM scripts as samples in SCH side)
 
In contrast, Mentor threw scripts overboard, in one of their lower-cost 'experiments'.

[nctnico]

Altium has been after me for $10k license - maybe I should be patient. I don't design a big volume of boards, but when I do - I am in a huge hurry and they get more complex every time.

IMHO a higher end package also saves a lot of time when it comes to the logistics part. This is often overlooked by the lower end offerings. The Orcad package I'm using produces a ready-to-go bill of materials (including manufacturers parts numbers, order codes, etc, etc) with one click. AFAIK this is impossible with Eagle and Kicad.

It's easy enough to write a BOM generator that reads EAGLE .sch files, as an example of what can be done with the aforementioned XML format.  But now I have an inventory database problem.  I've been getting by with a hand-edited XML file with entries like

Code: [Select]

<part device="OPAMP_CFB_X3" value="LMH6733" package="TSSOP-16" type="SMT" pins="16" description="Opamp, CFB, 3 channel, BW=1 GHz">
  <manufacturer name="TI" PN="LMH6733MQX/NOPB" />
  <vendor name="DigiKey" PN="296-37393-6-ND"     USD="4.4682" qty="100" />
  <vendor name="Mouser"  PN="926-LMH6733MQ/NOPB" USD="4.74"   qty="100" />
  <stock date="9-Mar-2016" count="70" bin="vp"/>
</part>
... but that's going to get pretty cumbersome over the next few years.   I'm taking a leap of faith that I'll eventually find an easy way to pull this file into a real database program with a real UI.  If that doesn't happen, I will eventually end up growing an entire ERP system by accretion.  The curse of the compulsive programmer...

Eagle supports attributes for devices. This way you can store all kind of information.
In the *.sch or *.brd files it wil look like this:

Code: [Select]

<attribute name="C-TYPE" value="E"/>
<attribute name="DIGIKEY" value="NC7SZ125M5XDKR-ND"/>
<attribute name="FARNELL" value="2453005RL "/>
<attribute name="MANUFACTURER" value="Fairchild Semiconductor"/>
<attribute name="MAN_PN" value="NC7SZ125M5X"/>
<attribute name="MOUNTING" value="SMD"/>
<attribute name="MOUSER" value="512-NC7SZ125M5X"/>
<attribute name="PACKAGE" value="SOT23-5"/>
<attribute name="PRICE" value="0.284"/>
<attribute name="RS-COMPONENTS" value="670-9807P"/>


But you have to enter that information for each part in the schematic... right? And how to update many parts at once or change to a different part in a schematic? And that is where the logistics problem is. With Orcad CIS I have a seperate Access database (but it could be any other database) where each part has a part number, symbol, footprint, order code, etc, etc. Orcad allows me to pick parts from the database and place them in the schematic. This links the part number to the part in the schematic so for each part the BOM generator can fetch the most up to date information from the database. There is also a part manager in Orcad. This allows to link parts in the schematic to different parts in the database. Think about upgrading MLCC capacitors to a higher voltage rating or changing a bunch of 0603 resistors to 1206. And the same part manager tool can be used to check consistancy (values, footprints, etc) between the parts in the schematic and the database. The best thing is: it all works out of the box and no need to write extra software or scripts yourself.

[PCB.Wiz]

I don't know about Kicad, but to produce ready-to-go bill of materials (including manufacturers parts numbers, order codes, etc, etc) with Eagle is a breeze.

KiCad has a BOM button, and I see 4 BOM scripts included as examples.
I've not tried editing those yet, but I did edit a Netlist generator script to fix some version issues.

[PCB.Wiz]

The various BOM generation options for EAGLE also aren't very flexible.  That includes third-party contributions, some of which are fairly decent -- Xess's comes to mind -- but still hardwired to someone else's way of managing inventory.

All of which isn't to criticize EAGLE, or to argue that Autodesk should add a database module to it, but to point out how it's actually a pretty great EDA tool for people with specific needs but limited budgets.

The benefit of ASCII databases like Eagle and KiCad, is it is quite easy to scan/insert attribute lines, which means Autodesk could add a database module to Eagle, with little risk & comparatively low effort.

A trend today, seems to be to align with Part Distributors, and auto-generate this information.
RS has a good starting point example, that generates BOM and also footprint and SCH (tho SCH is a primitive box, it does work) in ASCII

AutoDesk has the clout to work with Distributors on this.

Closed-database efforts are destined to fail.

[Karel]

But you have to enter that information for each part in the schematic... right?

You do that once you create the part. If, later on, some properties of the part changes, for example, a distributor or an ordercode,
you only need to change that property once in the library. Then, for every schematic/project you select "update from libraries"
and that's it. No need to change that property or attribute of a part for every schematic/board again.

[ehughes]

Interesting times.     Circuit Studio just got a price cut to $995.  CircuitMaker is now running under Linux via wine so CircuitStudio should work as well.

http://circuitmaker.com/blog/Blogs/3-steps-for-installing-circuitmaker-on-linux

Autodesk is really going to have to step up or EAGLE will die on the vine at its current price.

[MarkL]

Interesting times.     Circuit Studio just got a price cut to $995.  CircuitMaker is now running under Linux via wine so CircuitStudio should work as well.

http://circuitmaker.com/blog/Blogs/3-steps-for-installing-circuitmaker-on-linux

Autodesk is really going to have to step up or EAGLE will die on the vine at its current price.

Wine is a poor substitute for native support, in my experience.  And unless the wine method is officially supported, it isn't viable for any kind of professional use.

As bad as many people think Eagle is, they still have multi- native OS going for them.

[rx8pilot]

Yesterday, I needed to modify an existing design. Simple tasks like board outline and swapping a MOSFET for a physically larger one. The pain was real. The outline change took what felt like an eternity even after I knew the exact geometry from SolidWorks. The geometry creation and modification is uselessly cumbersome (even very minor stuff). I ended up outputting a DXF from SolidWorks which has to be converted to a script by a third party utility. What seemed like a thousand mouse clicks and fiddly figuring - I had updated the PCB outline. The change in SolidWorks took seconds. The change in Eagle took around 2 hours which included pushing all the original design in X-Y, creating a new PACKAGE that is the new outline, and verifying that it lined up with the features of the old outline. I am sure that a die hard enthusiast could show me all kinds of command line shortcuts and ULP's that they wrote for this and it takes them far less time. Great. After a 2 year run in Eagle, I am not a beginner but I admit that because it is so frustrating, I don't want to dedicate huge amounts of time learning what I consider work around solutions.

The next task was creating the new MOSFET that was not in my library. I was looking for a tall bridge to jump from! At 3AM I gave up after many hours. Now I am back at in on Sunday, wasting more time on what should be small, easy, and fast changes to an existing design. I don't think that Altium walks on water, but I saw some demos of these types of changes and it looked VASTLY easier. 2D geometry creation and dimensional references are a fundamental need. You should be able to take the numbers directly off a data sheet an plug them in in less than a minute. Very simple, yet Eagle fails big time in this area.

[BMF]

This is very encouraging for EDA users. Autodesk has the skills to integrate MCAD features and design analysis to a reasonably priced package. Their Fusion 360 is amazing for the price. I just hope Autodesk doesn't lock down the file formats. Hopefully the resulting product will push other companies to either cut prices or offer something worth the money.

[LabSpokane]

Interesting times.     Circuit Studio just got a price cut to $995.  CircuitMaker is now running under Linux via wine so CircuitStudio should work as well.

Where?  Newark still lists it at $2990 USD.

[H.O]

The thread pertaining to THAT topic says the price change is from July 6.

[KE5FX]

You should be able to take the numbers directly off a data sheet an plug them in in less than a minute. Very simple, yet Eagle fails big time in this area.

Frankly I blame the draughtsmen who create those data sheet drawings for this.  Every time I need to create a new package, I always seem to have to reach for a calculator to derive the most fundamental dimensions like pad sizes and centerlines.  The dimensions I need to plug into EAGLE often seem to be the only ones that aren't given explicitly.

[PCB.Wiz]

.. The outline change took what felt like an eternity even after I knew the exact geometry from SolidWorks. The geometry creation and modification is uselessly cumbersome (even very minor stuff). I ended up outputting a DXF from SolidWorks which has to be converted to a script by a third party utility. What seemed like a thousand mouse clicks and fiddly figuring - I had updated the PCB outline. The change in SolidWorks took seconds.

Sounds like you should look at KiCad.
It can import Eagle designs, and has direct DXF import into both PCB and Footprint areas, I believe using code they derive from 2D CAD LibreCAD.
I've not tested SolidWorks DXF import, but other CAD DXFs were ok.

...After a 2 year run in Eagle, I am not a beginner but I admit that because it is so frustrating, I don't want to dedicate huge amounts of time learning what I consider work around solutions.

The next task was creating the new MOSFET that was not in my library. I was looking for a tall bridge to jump from! At 3AM I gave up after many hours. Now I am back at in on Sunday, wasting more time on what should be small, easy, and fast changes to an existing design.... You should be able to take the numbers directly off a data sheet an plug them in in less than a minute. Very simple, yet Eagle fails big time in this area.

If you are expert in SolidWorks, then DXF could be a good way to make complex new footprints.
Outlines are exact, and you can place circles at all terminals, and a vertex at any important reference like placement origin.

Most PCB packages come a distant second to real CAD pgms, when it comes to line editing.

KiCad can query any vertex or pad, and you can copy/edit numbers directly off a data sheet and also reset the grid origin to any user entered value (for small arrays of terminals).

Not yet in KiCad, (but something I noticed in LibreCAD & have suggested they add to KiCad) is a smarter grid/entity snap.
With this, at higher zooms, it hops on grid points, but if an entity vertex (line end,circle centre etc) is nearby, it will hop to that first.
That would make Add-Terminal & DXF-Imported-Snap a breeze, coupled with their nifty adaptive mouse-wheel Zoom.

[PCB.Wiz]

Frankly I blame the draughtsmen who create those data sheet drawings for this.  Every time I need to create a new package, I always seem to have to reach for a calculator to derive the most fundamental dimensions like pad sizes and centerlines.  The dimensions I need to plug into EAGLE often seem to be the only ones that aren't given explicitly.

..Then there are those drawings that miss an important dimension entirely !!

[rx8pilot]

I definitely don't want to do the DXF export/import routine. All I want is a simple 2D geometry creation with dimensional relationships. Data sheets can call out the dimensions in a myriad of ways and the CAD program should allow the definition of this. You almost always are making symmetrical parts around a center point too - so that should be a priority. Autodesk is no stranger to 2D geometry with dimensions and relationships to other geometry. It is really great to just draw a box, pick and edge of that box and tell it how long that dimension is. Pick any two points or lines and tell it how far apart those things are. Pick any center and tell it how far from an edge it should be.

I did this super fast demo that shows an example of how SolidWorks goes about 2D geometry. Not only do you tell it dimensions, you can also tell it about relationships - vertical, horizontal, parallel, coincident, perpendicular, etc, etc.

Example was a PowerPAK type MOSFET even though I say SO-8.

https://youtu.be/5sdRQHFU0rQ

[uncle_bob]

Hi

Each time you create a "pad" in the copper layer, you also (obviously) create an opening in the solder mask and an opening in the solder screen. You also obstruct any silkscreen that may be wandering around in the vicinity. None of that is rocket science. It's all a set of rules. I find it amazing just how many programs make the "rest of the layers" harder than it should be.

Bob

[rx8pilot]

Being able to grab edges and points and define a distance would be a massive improvement. I feel like I am in 1987 all over again. Everything in Eagle is defined from the center of the object (pad) and referenced only to the grid zero.

[langwadt]

.. The outline change took what felt like an eternity even after I knew the exact geometry from SolidWorks. The geometry creation and modification is uselessly cumbersome (even very minor stuff). I ended up outputting a DXF from SolidWorks which has to be converted to a script by a third party utility. What seemed like a thousand mouse clicks and fiddly figuring - I had updated the PCB outline. The change in SolidWorks took seconds.

Sounds like you should look at KiCad.
It can import Eagle designs, and has direct DXF import into both PCB and Footprint areas, I believe using code they derive from 2D CAD LibreCAD.
I've not tested SolidWorks DXF import, but other CAD DXFs were ok.

...After a 2 year run in Eagle, I am not a beginner but I admit that because it is so frustrating, I don't want to dedicate huge amounts of time learning what I consider work around solutions.

The next task was creating the new MOSFET that was not in my library. I was looking for a tall bridge to jump from! At 3AM I gave up after many hours. Now I am back at in on Sunday, wasting more time on what should be small, easy, and fast changes to an existing design.... You should be able to take the numbers directly off a data sheet an plug them in in less than a minute. Very simple, yet Eagle fails big time in this area.

If you are expert in SolidWorks, then DXF could be a good way to make complex new footprints.
Outlines are exact, and you can place circles at all terminals, and a vertex at any important reference like placement origin.

Most PCB packages come a distant second to real CAD pgms, when it comes to line editing.

KiCad can query any vertex or pad, and you can copy/edit numbers directly off a data sheet and also reset the grid origin to any user entered value (for small arrays of terminals).

Not yet in KiCad, (but something I noticed in LibreCAD & have suggested they add to KiCad) is a smarter grid/entity snap.
With this, at higher zooms, it hops on grid points, but if an entity vertex (line end,circle centre etc) is nearby, it will hop to that first.
That would make Add-Terminal & DXF-Imported-Snap a breeze, coupled with their nifty adaptive mouse-wheel Zoom.

this looks quite neat: https://youtu.be/VvjcI67Qpw4

[KE5FX]

I did this super fast demo that shows an example of how SolidWorks goes about 2D geometry. Not only do you tell it dimensions, you can also tell it about relationships - vertical, horizontal, parallel, coincident, perpendicular, etc, etc.

That's definitely a powerful tool, no question about it, but I wouldn't call it super fast.  You still had to do an absurd amount of clicking and dragging to enter an utterly trivial amount of information: X,Y centers for five pads with two unique W,H dimensions.  If the drawing had simply stated that information directly, entering it into EAGLE or any other package would take 10 seconds.