-
I use Eagle. Here is a board I did that is 9 x 9.5 inches. Its 4 layers.
The stats for the above example are attached. -Bob
Ok, so more than 2000 pins which means that the unlimited version of Proteus would be required ............ at a cost of US$2022. This is 3.7 times more expensive than the USD$549 you paid for your version of Eagle
I'm much rather use Proteus, but I do understand where you're coming from. -
Well, I've been using Altium a little bit and I have to say, it blows Eagle out of the water. Period.
And I've been driving a Tesla and I have to say, it blows the Nissan Leaf out of the water. Period.
So?
(and, i wish...) -
Its a board that synthesizes 32 frequencies (PLL generated) derived from a line frequency locked 30 MHz VCO. It is used in a system for a neonatal optical brain scanner. My client is a major EEG market leader. Because it is medical stuff everything that connects to this board must to be optically isolated.
I use two fully loaded 27 inch IMac i7s to do much of my CAD work. You guessed correctly, GERV was the tool for generating the board rendering from gerbers. Unfortunately the EEVBLOG forum limits max file size to <1MB, so the res is kinda poor.
Hope this helps you and others understand that Eagle is not as horrible as the bashers claim it is. BTW, I have done much RF and microwave work in my 35+ years as a practicing EE and would have no qualms or concerns in generating critical board structures like radial stubs or waveguides with Eagle. Also, the lies and mistruths I read regarding diff pair routing, no dimensioning aids etc plus other misconceptions with is pure, unsubstantiated horsesh*t. However, the library management and plethora of ULPs and scripts which attempt to make up for Eagles shortcomings is annoying and a piss poor excuse for not doing it properly from the ground up in the first place. No forgiveness Cadsoft.
Don't believe all you read on this forum. I tried Diptrace recently and it is just as retarded as the others. Dont even get me started on Altium's bloat and pathetic and costly support. So as the French say " a chacun son goût ".... or....... " to each his own taste" - Bob
I know Altium provides tools to automate placement and routing of blocks (channels) like you've got on your board as I've used the feature at work but I've not figured it out with Eagle yet. Is there a trick to it or did you simply place and route each of the blocks individually while trying to make them look same? -
Compared to KiCAD, Altium is a steaming pile unless you work for Apple and need 4 dimensional flex circuits with BGA components.
-
Quote from: scientist on Today at 06:15:14 PM
Compared to KiCAD, Altium is a steaming pile unless you work for Apple and need 4 dimensional flex circuits with BGA components.
Would you like to elaborate on what you mean.
"steaming pile" does not make sense - Is it good or?
Is it one thing that is good or several things? -
Compared to KiCAD, Altium is a steaming pile unless you work for Apple and need 4 dimensional flex circuits with BGA components.
Have you ever used Altium? I'm going to assume you haven't, because otherwise your statement is just mad
I've barely gotten started using Altium, but I can already tell you that it's in an entirely different league than Eagle, KiCAD, Diptrace, etc. It's not even really fair to compare them, they are so far apart. -
Use Kicad (been using it for around 7 years) and then save up for Altium. Don't waste your money on any of the pin limited or board size limited packages. I've spent money in the past on Ultiboard, Quickroute, Niche software and Eagle. Decided it's best to invest in the best you can afford and have done with it.
Kicad is fine for ALL my simple quick and dirty PCB's and I can work VERY quickly in it. I use it all the time at work and recomend it to everyone. Altium is my number one choice for more complex stuff.
David.
PS Regarding RF work Kicad has a set of built in Microwave traces on a toolbar and one the developers are currently working on a trace length matching feature. -
I am using Target 3001 (http://ibfriedrich.com/index.htm).
Pretty powerful program, good price and very intuitive and simple to use. After opening my own electronics development company I tried several programs before purchasing decision (in the end - it's not cheap!) including Altium, Target, and Eagle. Did 3 projects in all programs and then decision was pretty simple.
Altium didn't impress me (has really many options, but I don't need 90% of them and it's really expensive) and Eagle ... Well, it just doesn't fit me (way of "thinking") and doesn't look "nice". I found Target "by mistake" (when checking e-wheelie project) and after starting playing with it, it really impressed me.
There is a free non-commercial version avalible (with limited number of pins), which you may try.
Regards,
Gregor -
Is anyone using Pulsonix? Seems to be a good bang for the buck at first glance.
-
Hi
8 year back i used pulsonix , then someday made a complex 4 layer board for a customer
one complete i try to generate Gerber ,surprise gerber output was not what was on screen
pulsonix support was not able to quickly fix it ,so for avoid lose my contract and customer
need to redraw from scratch in P-CAD ,since pulsonix not export in in any documented format
so once a desing was make in pulsonix you stuck whit it ..
big problem whit pulsonix was that beta tester was way to much "fan" and no one use it for big complex thing
for reals big project so you may quickly fall in unexplored zone whit unpredictable result
i still have a valid license but not have used it for very longtime..
honestely even if i was a big fan of Zuken and some license start a bit under 2000$ i think that altium was a good solution
and normally it will come whit a lower priced version soon ..
but keep away of ANY cad that not export in ASCII file format
finally you may try cadstar here http://www.zuken.com/en/products/pcb-design/cadstar/resources/express
300 pins and 50 components , yep it zuken learning curve was sharp ,but once you knot it it very hard to beat
-
Is anyone using Pulsonix? Seems to be a good bang for the buck at first glance.
I looked at the demo package about 18 months ago (remember you can't save anything with the demo package), but decided that the UK developed Proteus was still better value for the features offered & usability. Remember the unlimited pin version of Pulsonix is still over $5K (so 2.5 times more than Proteus unlimited).
http://www.element14.com/community/message/27128?tstart=0
Proteus is used by tens of thousands of professionals who feel that Altium is too expensive (or offers features they don't require) for their needs.
For work I use Altium & DipTrace & used Proteus last year which was owned by the company I completed the Design work for. I was really impressed with its menus & functionality. A pleasure to use. -
Can Proteus do differential routing and measure track lengths?
I had an old demo of 7.9 and it didn't seem to have it, which Eagle does, which is why I continued to use Eagle, but Proteus is nice and quite easy to use! -
Can Proteus do differential routing and measure track lengths?
Sure can:
4th post down in the link below shows the screen shot:
http://www.electro-tech-online.com/threads/differential-pairs-in-proteus-ares.133038/
-
Hi DerekG
Thanks for the reply,
I didn't know Proteus could do that, I guess it can't do differential pair routing like Eagle can though? -
Compared to KiCAD, Altium is a steaming pile unless you work for Apple and need 4 dimensional flex circuits with BGA components.
As someone who has used KiCAD for a few months, then Altium for almost 2 years, I can only reply with:
-
Well, for a small project, kicad was way easier to learn and a way smaller download.
-
Well, for a small project, kicad was way easier to learn and a way smaller download.
That I don't doubt that. Many programs are easy to learn at first and severely limiting shortly after. And an added advantage of actually being legal to freely download, not just smaller. -
sacherjj,
You would recommend Altium then I presume?
(If it was under 2k!) -
If I had access to Altium under $2k, it would be no contest. Altium is under $2k per year. There is a pretty big hump to get past all the learning for Altium, but I have been surprised how much is out there and indexed by Google.
Before I had access to it, I liked DipTrace. KiCAD is not a bad product, but as with many open source designs, the UI was annoying.
It is unfortunate that Altium is being stupid about the low end support. A $1k version of Altium, would totally change the equation.
Many things in Altium are annoying at first. Until you understand them. Like Rooms. What are these stupid red things doing on here. Until you lay out a 16 channel design and copy and paste the layout of a channel onto the other channels. It is like magic. A complex routing, duplicated 15 times.
The main thing that even lets Eagle enter the conversation is Inertia. -
It's really a shame Altium doesn't have an inexpensive version for hobbyists like Eagle does (pin or space limited). My university teaches Eagle in courses because there's the free non-commercial version, so Altium is losing all of these future engineers as potential customers.
People use what they're familiar with, so if hobbyists and engineering students use Eagle for years because of the free version, then it makes sense that if they get a commission to make a PCB they're going to use Eagle and not shell out $7k to use software they've never even seen before (you can't even download a trial of Altium without going through a process of speaking with a rep first).
I guess Altium knows what they're doing, but it sure seems to me like they'd be opening themselves up to a whole new market if they would release a sub $1k version with a few limitations (like limited pins, board area, or high speed design features removed). -
Well, for a small project, kicad was way easier to learn and a way smaller download.
That I don't doubt that. Many programs are easy to learn at first and severely limiting shortly after. And an added advantage of actually being legal to freely download, not just smaller.
I'll learn Altium in a few years when I actually need to, and use KiCAD for now. I'm not doing anything fancy now; plus, it's a big credo body for small projects to be able to say you used an open-source EDA program. By the time I actually need to know Altium I will be learning the newest version, not trying to forget the quirks of an old one.
-
I've found Eagle very crude and frustrating. If it had an inference engine like Sketch Up or any decent 3D cad program, it would be far better. But without that, or anyway to create patterns, you are left manually keying in the coordinates for footprints. It turns what should be a one minute long job into a twenty minute job. Other elements of the interface just seem clunky, inconsistent or half assed. I think I'll give KiCad a chance next. I know it has it's own problems, but I hear there is a lot of investment into it right now.
-
I'm working with Ultiboard for almost 10 years now.
Together with Multisim, it's a very powerful program in my opinion.
Powerful but waaaaay to expensive.
There are also some really annoying bugs I'm having in the newest version 13.
Sometimes,the auto zooming on finding a part doesn't work (it just zooms somewhere) and the clearance is messed up sometimes (even though it's correct in the settings)
Not a big deal with small projects, but a different story with a four layer DSP design with a lot of things going on.
And this is really what I don't get about those expensive software programs.
Sometimes some really basic instructions are buggy as hell.
The point is, that I'm looking for an alternative for years, but haven't found any program that is as fast as Ultiboard.
Because the great thing I like about Ultiboard is the quick way you can add, place, copy components, without the stupid restrictions some other programs have.
(like it's not possible to copy a multi part component or something, which is really annoying if you have like a 6 way output buffer )
Even changing the value is just double clicking the component and directly hit the numpad keys.
Very fast and very intuitive.
I still wonder how people can make a big schematics when you need to scroll trough a long list all the time to place a component or something.
(or even adding the value)
And why on earth choice some programs to use odd short-keys?
(even for normal copy-pasting)
Anyway, like I said, I'm still looking for a free or less expensive alternative.
Still don't like the popular ones, unfortunately
-
I was going to start a new thread as even $2k is more than I want to spend but on the other hand free/super cheap versions are probably too restrictive.
I'd like to get a package for around the $500 or £350 mark without major restrictions - it will be mainly for my own use but if I sell some boards I don't want to feel I'm breaking some licence agreement.
From reading threads on this forum and elsewhere the candidates are (I've selected here the nearest compatible levels price wise, not the options I'd necessarily go for - for instance I'd probably only go for the level 1 on Proteus to start with which is 1000 pins):
Proteus level 1+ (2000 pins 1 shape-based power plane per layer )
$650 approx +VAT
Dip Trace Extended (2000 pins 6 layers)
$595
Eagle Standard without the Autorouter (6 layers 16x10cm)
$575
They all seem to have different restrictions. Comparing 2000 pins to 16x10 board size is difficult. How much of a restriction is having only one shape-based power plane per layer? (I'm not sure I even know what that means.)
The general advice is to try all the options in their free/cheap versions but as I am going to have to learn which ever one I get I'd really rather just learn one and base my decision on long term usefulness rather than short term ease of learning. Once I invest the time and effort in learning one, as well as any initial cost, I'm likely to want to stick to it so I need to decide first.
Proteus is the more expensive option but the users on this forum and elsewhere seem very happy with it (unlike a lot of Eagle users) and the simulation options for microprocessors look like they might be useful for embedded. DipTrace users also seem a happy bunch but I get the impression that Proteus is a bit more extensive.
Any comments from people who have used more than one would be very helpful and in particular are there any Proteus users who can tell me how much of a restriction this power plane business is ? -
Any comments from people who have used more than one would be very helpful and in particular are there any Proteus users who can tell me how much of a restriction this power plane business is ?
I own Altium 6.9 & the latest version of DipTrace. I have used Proteus quite extensively on a 4 month outside contract some 18 months ago.
Altium is the most powerful (but has a pretty steep learning curve if you are just starting out), then Proteus, then DipTrace.
Of the three, I like Proteus the most. It is quite intuitive & does not have the learning curve of Altium. It also has fewer quirks than DipTrace.
Power Planes - these are extensive copper areas which are connected (normally) to either a power source, a signal source or to ground. The most usual use is to connect them to ground to reduce noise emanating from the board & to reduce the cost of board manufacture (remember board manufacturers must reclaim, reuse then dispose of the copper which all costs money when you get into volume boards).
Restricted Proteus versions allow one power plane per layer & it must run edge to edge. Whether this restricts you will depend on the type of designs you do. 90% of my designs would have a power plane on the bottom later connected to ground & perhaps another one on the SMD layer (also connected to ground). So, this restriction would not normally affect me.
When designers get into high voltage circuitry, they often elect not to have a power plane connected to ground around the HV components - for obvious reasons. This restriction would affect these designs (mind you, you could manually add in fill areas to your hearts content - just takes more time).
The other area where power planes get used a lot is on multilayer boards. Two layers would be used normally with a third layer being the most used power supply voltage & the fourth layer being used for ground. This significantly reduces the real estate required to power up chips/micros/components as you can drop power down to these via blind & buried vias.
The restricted versions of Proteus allow you to use 16 layers & so you can take full advantage of power planes & ground planes as described in my paragraph above.
Now for the cruncher. Are you going to design boards as a contractor for other companies? If you are then you will probably need Altium at some stage as it is slowly becoming the defacto standard for high end work. Be prepared to outlay $9K if you order before the end of June & 11K if you order in July.
I hope this info helps.