Migration from Eagle

[pyromaniac4382]

I currently use Eagle for all of my design work. I have gotten used to its quirkiness and oddities, but it is rather annoying at times. I currently use the free version, and I am starting to get very frustrated with the size restrictions, since I am in need of a bigger design area. I don't want a work around nor do I want to start paying for a software package that has open source alternatives.

So I figured I would jump on learning one of these open source alternatives. I took a look at the free/open-source options that are listed here,

http://www.eevblog.com/wiki/index.php?title=PCB_CAD_programs

Which would be my best option for migration from Eagle?

[Rigby]

The best for you won't necessarily be the best for anyone else, so without further clarification on what kind of stuff you're building or what your workflow is like, I'm not sure how much help you're going to get.

KiCad is gaining a following but is still heavily laden with usability issues.  All these years and they still haven't even fixed the mere NAMING of the applications for the sake of improving usability...  If this isn't proof enough alone that engineers are terrible at usability then I don't know what is.  Everyone's first verbal reaction every time I show them KiCad is "what the hell does eeschema mean," or "what in the HELL is cvpcb?"  etc.  KiCad has another 65 years to go before it can even compete, imho.

So, at this point, I have to ask "what's your budget," and "what are you going to do?"

by the way, a budget of zero is fine, just specify that.

Despite lots of opinion to the contrary, there are some web-based design tools that are free and quite capable.  They have their own usability issues, for sure, but the price is right and they're easier to use than KiCad, IMHO.

[vortexnl]

I'm kinda in the same situation as the OP. I have used eagle for years, but I'm getting into FPGA's and want to design in something better that has support for length matching and maybe some impedance controlled traces. I would like to use Altium, because its professional and its probably the software package I will use in my career as well, but cost wise that is not an option...

[Rigby]

There are several free options that can probably meet your needs, but I don't know of any.

Eagle can probably do differential pairing properly (kind of) if you write a script to measure and report the length of traces with given net names.  Then, you tweak the length manually and rerun the script, and so forth until they match.  So, that's one option, and you can try your hand at it now if you have interest in such a solution.

I don't think DesignSpark or known-good paid tools like DipTrace can do differential pairs automatically, so similar hacks like the one I described above would likely be needed.

Best of luck.

[baljemmett]

Eagle can probably do differential pairing properly (kind of) if you write a script to measure and report the length of traces with given net names.

As it happens, one such script comes bundled with it - length.ulp - so you can do RUN LENGTH <list of signals, including wildcards> and it'll give you a table showing total, unrouted and relative lengths of the specified traces.

[48X24X48X]

I don't think DesignSpark or known-good paid tools like DipTrace can do differential pairs automatically

The guys at Diptrace are working on this!

[krenzo]

Yeah, Diptrace said differential pair routing is coming in the next version.  As of now, you can have the length of traces displayed for you in real-time.  I would recommend you try Diptrace which is free with a limit of 300 pins.  That's what I started with and upgraded as I needed more pins.

[PedroDaGr8]

Yeah, Diptrace said differential pair routing is coming in the next version.  As of now, you can have the length of traces displayed for you in real-time.  I would recommend you try Diptrace which is free with a limit of 300 pins.  That's what I started with and upgraded as I needed more pins.

Since you are a hobbyist you can get a 500 pin license (Non-Profit Lite) for free! Just have to email them.

http://diptrace.com/buy/non-profit/

Personally, I love DipTrace but like with anything different strokes for different folks. The recent upgrade helped fix a lot of the issues with the library management system (which used to be really bad). It's a very solid usable program and the makers Novarm seem to actually care what their users think. They are working hard to make a solid product (especially considering its like 9-10 guys programming it) and I respect it. The program has grown in power as well as grown much fasterover time.

[Wilksey]

I have been using several programs on and off (depending on customer req's and tied into various packages), from Eagle, Diptrace, CadStar, SeeTrax Ranger, Proteus, AD.

Eagle, for all of it's faults, has quite a lot of features, it can do length matching/meander and differential pairs (add to the name of one signal P and the other N for example), I would ask yourself WHY you want a different package?

Proteus and Diptrace can't do this, Proteus has a primitive length measure but you have to sort it out yourself (the last ver I used you had to anyway).
Yes, they may be "working" on it, but Eagle already does it.
I can understand not wanting to go TO eagle from another package as it does take some getting used to it's UI, but it's like everything, you have to work with it and get used to it.

Altium would be the only upgrade path I would go to from Eagle TBH, purely personal opinion. OrCAD might also be a good option.

Proteus is good at simulation,  the others are just different. 9 times out of 10 people slate Eagle because they do not know how to use it.

KiCAD is getting better and better, but I wouldn't say it's better than Eagle if you have a Eagle license.  If you are using the freeware version then KiCAD might make more sense from an unrestricting point of view, but people still complain about KiCAD's way of life.

For FPGA, well, Eagle can lay out QFP and BGA with no trouble, there are a ton of ULP's to do fan outs and the like, if you are after FPGA tools, well, stick with the vendor's tools (XILINX ISE, Altera Quartus II etc) as they are much better than the built in tools you find in Altium for example.

If it were me i'd stick to Eagle, and move onto AD or OrCAD if budget permits, overpriced for what they are, and Eagle in my opinion has a huge presence still in the industry you don't need AD to be an EE.  One place I worked at switched from Easy PC to Eagle and they do military and aerospace cable test systems, no issues doing HV or HS designs with micro's and FPGA's.

[pyromaniac4382]

The only problem I have is the board restriction. The other problem I have is paying for a software I am not intimate with. I am good with Eagle, but it does not seem worth the money to upgrade. I don't want to sit and use/learn a free version of another software package just to end up in the same trap, thus why open-source seems to be the best option. I am not opposed to paying a reasonable amount of money for design software. I just want to know that I will get what I pay for. Budget if that were the case in under a few hundred dollars.

I normally work on small boards because of size restrictions in Eagle. I am just a hobbyist, and make the occasional break-out board, and micro-project. I am working on a bigger system now that will require a bigger board, thus why I am on the boat to switch to something else, or fork up the dough.

[Wilksey]

In that case then, try KiCAD, you have nothing to loose apart from a bit of time testing it, it will import Eagle files as far as I remember, so you should be able to use your existing libraries etc.

[PedroDaGr8]

The only problem I have is the board restriction. The other problem I have is paying for a software I am not intimate with. I am good with Eagle, but it does not seem worth the money to upgrade. I don't want to sit and use/learn a free version of another software package just to end up in the same trap, thus why open-source seems to be the best option. I am not opposed to paying a reasonable amount of money for design software. I just want to know that I will get what I pay for. Budget if that were the case in under a few hundred dollars.

I normally work on small boards because of size restrictions in Eagle. I am just a hobbyist, and make the occasional break-out board, and micro-project. I am working on a bigger system now that will require a bigger board, thus why I am on the boat to switch to something else, or fork up the dough.

This is why I suggested DipTrace, for hobbyists their pricing is very reasonable and there are NO board size limits. Also, there is no limit on the number of ground and power planes, only signal planes.

Non-Profit prices:
DipTrace Lite - 500 pins, 2 signal layers - FREE!
DipTrace Standard - 1000 pins, 4 signal layers - $125
DipTrace Extended - 2000 pins, 6 signal layers - $248
DipTrace Full - Unlimited pins and layers - $ 348

Plus, let's say you purchased DipTrace Standard because you need the 1000 pins or 4 signal layers. Later on you find yourself working on a project where you need 6 signal layers. You don't have to pay another $248 to get the Extended verison, you just pay the difference between the version you already own and the version you need; $123 in the case of this example. It also works when converting between Non-Profit and For-Profit licenses. This allows you to expand and grow as NEEDED not because you are worried about losing money in the long run.

[pyromaniac4382]

That seems very fair. I think I may try both KiCAD and DIPTrace out then.

[apelly]

I'm not about to say kicad isn't quirky, but if you give it a crack for a project, work with it instead of fighting it and tolerate its strange names and conventions, I think you'll see that it's actually quite a powerful tool.

There are plenty of legitimate-ish concerns raised about it here regularly, but none of them are show-stoppers for me:

• There is no stable release
• I have to compile it myself
• It's not Altium, it's a mere toy not worthy of me

YMMV, but I find it more than adequate.

[Rigby]

I hope they address the toy-like feel of the tool; the odd naming and thrown together UI makes it feel like it was designed by someone that doesn't know a thing about board design for r board design software, which makes me distrust its capabilities.

[dsc-pcb]

What we are using is mostly Protel or PADS Software. I think if you want to switch, and get a cheap software, maybe you could try to buy an old version. It must be cheaper.