Which Design software Is the best of all??

[mario5000]

Greetings Every one.
From the technical school who i start to learn design. I learn on NI Multisim platform (it was electronic workbench back then) so i still use them today (the last version). But the last four years this platform are start to abandoned. So last year i take a new project... The Multisim have old library and i'm obliged to make the most models my own...  I'm tying to find the next design platform where i will use. ***HELP ME PLEASE*** The criteria are: NEW BIG LIBRARIES,Easy to find new models, Easy to use, Reliable simulation. I use already Eagle and i don't like it. Now i think about Altium and the KiCAD.

THANKS   

[coromonadalix]

easyeda is free  once registered, the auto router is kinda fragile,   meaning if you dont close the nets EX: ( define unused pins )   it may stall without saying anything,  large database

Kickad  a huge 1.2 gig setup file loll,    free,    large database

Eagle 7.70  was the last before autodesk acquisition, not free  the 7.60  license is okay to use with 7.70,  but  kinda outdated as you can guess

Autodesk Eagle  9.6 ...  has a free version

Altium designer,   not free i think ?
Pulsonix,   never tried, not free i think
Cadence  ??

Solid Works 2020 - 2021, not free, this on has electrical and schematics plugins / add ons   

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes  you need to build / make your  component

Kickad and Eagle  i think, generates  industry standard  pcb and schematic file(s)

EasyEda  not so ...  pretty closed,  i use it time to time for simple and easy designs,  you have some differences between the web version and the local one,  earlier versions had problems like rotating parts  IE:  could do it with the local version, not the web version ??  but the software is a work in progress, a recent version update helped a lot


--------------------------------------------------------

Some websites  will offer supplemental parts libraries, you can add them into Kickad and Eagle

EDITED
I'm a hobbyist,   But  i would say  Kickad and Eagle are OR could be your best options ??

I never done complex multilayered board,  so i can't vouch



Some parts distributors like Digikey, Mouser, Electro Sonic  offers Kickad and Eagle parts design in their documents.

[beanflying]

This is a loaded question with the correct answer being the one the respondent uses making all others clearly inferior 

Just did a quick and dirty first look at Fusion/Eagle and Kicad in the last few days. I have been using Fusion for a few years now so my view might be a little clouded as the workflow seemed 'logical' to me with Fusion/Eagle. Also I have used Eagle in the past.

Of the two the Fusion option looks more continuous and logical in the GUI but there is still some glaring bits that need work to me before I would call it fully finished even after a year in the world. There is two free tiers available a startup and hobbyist so pick what suits and give it a go.

KiCad I tried a few years ago and uninstalled it from my life. This time around it was a pleasent surprise where it is now at  The GUI looks like someone has thrown 6 different ones at a wall and applied one to each module. This doesn't aid it looking logical in terms of workflow but with a bit of use this will diminish as a negative.

Eagle unless you have or can buy outright a recent perpetually licensed copy cheap might be time to look elsewhere as Autodesk support might be in question in time (more than now).

I am not decided on either KiCad or Fusion/Eagle but they seem to make the moist sense currently and watching KiCad in particular even if you go elsewhere makes sense as it is improving quickly.

[tmd63]

It depends on what you want to create?
A ferrari is great for speed on perfect flat roads. But a 4x4 landrover is much better for hill climbing.

EasyPC is a simple to use system in mid range.

Cadnetix and Cadence Allegro is a high end expensive package.

KiCAD and Design Spark are low end, quick and dirty packages for simple designs.

Each has a market, it just depends on what you need. Design Spark from RS have libraries for every part they stock (which may be useful)

[Dave]

Vendor libraries are garbage anyways. I always draw my own.

Couldn't agree more. I've had awful experience with Microchip libs once (nearly ended up missing an important deadline because of that).
Taking 10-15 minutes to create your own component, is time well spent, if it saves you several hours of debugging later. And if you do fuck up, at least you only have yourself to blame.

I use Altium Designer. It's good, but it's a bit of a love-hate relationship. There are lots of good features that you couldn't go without, and then there are some bugs that make you want to scream at the computer.

[AndyC_772]

I use Cadence OrCAD.

Last year it was on offer; IIRC I paid £430 for a perpetual licence, which is ridiculously, stupidly cheap for what you get. Even though I already had a previous version, I paid for it all over again just to get an update to the latest version.

If you outgrow it, you can just update from the Standard edition to Professional, and then on to Allegro. They're all the same binary, so your knowledge never becomes obsolete and you can always open and update your previous designs. You may never have to learn another schematic or PCB tool.

[phil from seattle]

Asking for the best is a very good way to display your naivete.  There is no such thing as best without qualification.

So, the qualification I use for my answer is "Best EDA for a beginner without a lot of money to spend".

The key attributes are cheap/free, widely used (for good support/tutorials/available designs to dissect) and capable of producing complex multilayer designs.

Kicad and Eagle are two good choices. Eagle is not free/unencumbered (beware geeks bearing subscriptions).  Kicad is free.  I have used both.  Eagle for 20+ years and then switched to Kicad 5.x 6 months ago. Both have severe learning curves.  Eagle's UI is modal and pretty much anti-Windows in that regard. But once you understand how it works it becomes pretty easy.  Kicad is probably easier to get started with but the library system is very complex and maintaining multiple versions of a given design is PITA. In competent hands, either one be used to create very sophisticated designs.

Both Kicad and Eagle are accepted formats by some board houses. OSHPark, for example.

If I were starting out today, it would be Kicad.  Not only is it highly capable but has significant momentum and 3rd party support. For example, there are scripts that will take your board and produce the appropriate files for assembly.  I have run Eagle and Kicad designed boards through JLCPCB. Kicad is hands down easier and a LOT less error prone.

And I would be remiss to not directly address the subscription issue.  While Eagle may be "free", it is still a subscription.  When you are up for renewal, it may not be free to you.  Autodesk, however, is free to change the terms of their deal at any time and have done so several times in the last few years.  Do you really want to invest your time learning something that might not be "free" in the future? I'm no socialist but want certainty with my tools. With Kicad, I know that I can use it forever. In 10 years, I will be able to open a design I did today and make changes if I want.  With Eagle?  Who knows.

[phil from seattle]

Vendor libraries are garbage anyways. I always draw my own.

Couldn't agree more.

+ 10^googol

That was an expensive lesson I learned many years ago. I do not understand why people spend so much time looking for libraries when every EDA has tools for creating your own.  Sit down with a datasheet and it is easily done. No magic at all. And you understand your PCB better.  Kicad's split between footprint and symbol actually makes it a lot easier than Eagle.  Literally, in Kicad it has taken me longer to look around (and maybe download) for a given footprint than it did to create it from scratch.

[EDIT] For what it's worth, the simple stuff, Rs and Cs, are usually fine.  Always "dry test" your board.  Print it on paper at actual size and position the components to make sure there are no glaring errors.  This will not save you from .1mm errors but it does catch the larger ones.

[alexanderbrevig]

Back when I started "for real" (I got hired to do an IoT gadget without knowing what a part number was) I sat down for a few days with all the CADs I could get hold of.

Long story short, I got my employer to get an Altium license, I bought a DipTrace license for myself, and I kept a nightly of kicad.
Two years ago I uninstalled DipTrace and Altium

For me, KiCAD is best! (Now, I have my eyes on Horizon EDA made by a member here, and I like a lot of what's happening there!)

For parts, I recently did a fairly complex mcu project with only parts off of snapeda.com and it worked like a charm!

IMHO you are more likely to misread a datasheet than a team of engineers. Borrowing footprints and symbols should not be shamed.

TL:DR; you could probably use any tool with joy, find what is best FOR YOU

[CatalinaWOW]

While I agree that no one should plan to use libraries without looking, I often find it easier to check and possibly modify a library part than to start from scratch.  But nothing is ever totally painless.  Large high pin count parts are the ones which save the most labor in checking/modifying.  They are also the easiest ones to overlook an error.  Also easiest to make your own errors when starting from scratch.

[rdl]

My opinion is that it's definitely more important to have easy, quick part creation than it is to have large libraries.

Years ago I found it almost impossible to figure out how to make a part in Eagle. Well, actually most things in Eagle were difficult. I don't have any recent experience with it though. The first time I tried DipTrace, I was able to create a new part without even looking at any instructions.

Which OS you prefer and how much you want spend are probably the biggest factors to consider. There is also the whole cloud/subscription thing. You have to decide whether you want to deal with that crap or not.

[mario5000]

First of all I really Appreciate the interesting and all of your opinions thank you! 

This is a loaded question with the correct answer being the one the respondent uses making all others clearly inferior 

Just did a quick and dirty first look at Fusion/Eagle and Kicad in the last few days. I have been using Fusion for a few years now so my view might be a little clouded as the workflow seemed 'logical' to me with Fusion/Eagle. Also I have used Eagle in the past.

Of the two the Fusion option looks more continuous and logical in the GUI but there is still some glaring bits that need work to me before I would call it fully finished even after a year in the world. There is two free tiers available a startup and hobbyist so pick what suits and give it a go.

KiCad I tried a few years ago and uninstalled it from my life. This time around it was a pleasent surprise where it is now at  The GUI looks like someone has thrown 6 different ones at a wall and applied one to each module. This doesn't aid it looking logical in terms of workflow but with a bit of use this will diminish as a negative.

Eagle unless you have or can buy outright a recent perpetually licensed copy cheap might be time to look elsewhere as Autodesk support might be in question in time (more than now).

I am not decided on either KiCad or Fusion/Eagle but they seem to make the moist sense currently and watching KiCad in particular even if you go elsewhere makes sense as it is improving quickly.

Second Eagle is heavy with no reason and is more difficult than to flight a space shuttle. Eagle just waste the users time! I'l like the altium but it i don't have use them so much.Also i heard for some bugs and i scared a bit:

Vendor libraries are garbage anyways. I always draw my own.

Couldn't agree more. I've had awful experience with Microchip libs once (nearly ended up missing an important deadline because of that).
Taking 10-15 minutes to create your own component, is time well spent, if it saves you several hours of debugging later. And if you do fuck up, at least you only have yourself to blame.

I use Altium Designer. It's good, but it's a bit of a love-hate relationship. There are lots of good features that you couldn't go without, and then there are some bugs that make you want to scream at the computer.

 
Thank's blueskull that was very enlightening... no joke.

It depends on what you want to create?
A ferrari is great for speed on perfect flat roads. But a 4x4 landrover is much better for hill climbing.

EasyPC is a simple to use system in mid range.

Cadnetix and Cadence Allegro is a high end expensive package.

KiCAD and Design Spark are low end, quick and dirty packages for simple designs.

Each has a market, it just depends on what you need. Design Spark from RS have libraries for every part they stock (which may be useful)

tmd63 I completely Agree. Also I do not have never use the dip trace neither the Allegro so i'l try them. Both have demos. 
 
THANKS AGAIN

[nctnico]

For parts, I recently did a fairly complex mcu project with only parts off of snapeda.com and it worked like a charm!

IMHO you are more likely to misread a datasheet than a team of engineers. Borrowing footprints and symbols should not be shamed.

A couple of weeks ago I downloaded a connector footprint from Snapeda. The sizes are OK but the pads where wrong (no thermal reliefs). In the end I spend nearly as much time creating the footprint from scratch compared to downloading a ready-to-go footprint. Nowadays being able to import a 3D model and fit that on top of your footprint is an extremely useful footprint verification tool. Also, many packages come with footprint wizards. I just create a 64 pin BGA package in 20 minutes. Getting the pad size right was the biggest job. And it was the first time I used Allegro's package wizard.

@tmd3: There are several license options for Orcad Allegro each with their own pricing. As AndyC_772 already wrote: you can start cheap (Orcad PCB designer) and upgrade from there according to your needs. An Orcad suite comparable to Altium is actually cheaper.

[Mecanix]

The What's your favorite motor-oil thread!

Personal use: I'll have to +1 on KiCad. Been using it for a good month.5 already and it just doesn't deceive, yet anyway. Pretty impressive if I may add...

Commercial use: as in if you can easily dump the cost onto your customers/accounts then Altium Designer is not a bad choice (its productivity focus part isn't bad at all). Not a recommendation though, that's the only one I know of and forced to use, in a way...

[exe]

I like diptrace so far. It's a tool that I was able to use with little to no initial training. It also works on Linux and has attractive pricing.

May be one day I switch to kicad if they do something with UI. Actually, I'd like it to be paid software, this way they might have more money and that could accelerate development. Or they could hire a UX designer.

[pardo-bsso]

Obviously the best is the one that gets your project done.

I use Cadence OrCAD.

I remember using OrCAD when they mailed demo cds across the globe if you asked. They  had a good package back then (about twenty years ago).

[AmnevaR]

+1 to KiCad. It's free and open source. Runs on Windows, Mac, Linux,  so if you send your files to someone they won't have any problems to open and modify them

[temperance]

The best design package is:

-your brain
-paper and a pencil
-the will to invest time and learn something.


On the software side there is no such thing as the best software only your budget.

[Scrts]

Vendor libraries are garbage anyways. I always draw my own.

It's interesting tho... Every. Single. Layout. Engineer draw their own libraries. So much effort into something repeated for the same thing by millions of engineers  And we're talking about efficiency in year 2021 

[coromonadalix]

The best design package is:

-your brain
-paper and a pencil
-the will to invest time and learn something.


On the software side there is no such thing as the best software only your budget.

Good points

The best software will the one you will master over time and learning how to make librairies or needed parts   etc ...



Just had many problems with Easyeda almost gone, with a recent update and stupids mistakes i've made,  you need to answers a few things : like closing unfinished nets etc ....  the autorouter would not operate and simply close without saying anything

Boy i did loose hours, but in the end i learned a few things,  read all documentations / forums / bugs reports ...

[nctnico]

Vendor libraries are garbage anyways. I always draw my own.

It's interesting tho... Every. Single. Layout. Engineer draw their own libraries. So much effort into something repeated for the same thing by millions of engineers  And we're talking about efficiency in year 2021 

The problem is that a footprint also has to match the PCB technology. When I draw a footprint (more importantly: the anti-copper and thermals on the pads) I generally create it so it can be used in a .15mm width/space PCB. That way I don't have to worry about being able to produce a PCB or not. For another engineer this may not work because that person needs high density PCB designs where every 10th of a millimeter counts. Heck, it is likely that some companies have several footprints for the same component depending on the PCB technology they are using.

And then there can be different standards where it comes the drawing the mechanics. Like having the center of the footprint at pin 1 or the center of the body. Connector entry indicators, pin 1 indicators, solder mask defined / pad defined BGA pads, assembly layers, silk screen layers.

The list with how footprints can be different for valid reasons goes on and on and on. If a vendor wants to provide a library which is useful then they likely need to provide 10 different footprints for the same package and still not cater to all customers. Some packages don't even come with libraries. Not so long ago I switched to Orcad Allegro (PCB Designer) and guess what? It doesn't come with a footprint library. Nothing, zilch, nada. Yes, you can get a library subscribtion from Orcad but then you are stuck with what they think is appropriate.

Oh, and let's not forget about the many ways you can draw symbols... 

[phil from seattle]

Vendor libraries are garbage anyways. I always draw my own.

It's interesting tho... Every. Single. Layout. Engineer draw their own libraries. So much effort into something repeated for the same thing by millions of engineers  And we're talking about efficiency in year 2021 

Not every single layout.  I draw mine once and use many times.

Secondly, not every vendor (or kind hacker) drawn footprint is usable straight away even if it is correct.  For example, when I draw connectors that need to live at the edge of board, I add the board edge position to the footprint.  Not every vendor does that. 

And symbols for schematics, I find vendor symbols are often not conducive to clear expression of the schematic intent. It is funny, they often don't follow the datasheet symbols.  I like to have my power pins at the top and ground/-V symbols at the bottom, for example. Also, I will often group related pins together, even if they aren't consecutive on the chip.  SPI and I2C busses, for examples. And, just a small rant, I hate automatic power pins.

So, no, one size does not fit all. Efficiency here is a false economy when it gets in the way of clarity.

[Scrts]

So at least 2 engineers above me replied about custom footprints. I have my own and my fellow engineers have them too. How many of them match and how many can be re-used? If we are talking about 10 different footprints for the same component - that's fine, but I bet we have hundreds of engineers drawing the same footprints. So same job done 100 times...

There should be a database where everyone could contribute.

[harerod]

Scrts, I am sure you know what one round of prototyping for a fully compliant design costs in money and time?


Speaking strictly for myself: When a new component comes along, I do a quick check if there is an object in my libraries, which could be adjusted for that new component. I might check for and even start from public libraries, but when that component enters a design, it has been checked in every aspect (pinout, pin connections, stop/cream/etc.-masks ...). Still the most effective way to work. Owning an existing, proven library is one of the main reasons why one stays with a certain CAD-system, even if it is EAGLE 7.7.0.


Although there are standards for component design (IPC), libraries may be adjusted for specific manufacturing processes, to reduce overall failure in series production. So the library is actually a joint work by several parties who work towards a common goal - reliable and cost effective designs.

[nctnico]

So at least 2 engineers above me replied about custom footprints. I have my own and my fellow engineers have them too. How many of them match and how many can be re-used? If we are talking about 10 different footprints for the same component - that's fine, but I bet we have hundreds of engineers drawing the same footprints. So same job done 100 times...

There should be a database where everyone could contribute.

AFAIK KiCad and Horizon EDA have public library systems. But you'd still need to check the footprint against the datasheet and if you find errors it would be nice to fix them and upload. But then again... what you might find an error is perfectly fine to others. IOW: a public library would need to have very clear rules and someone who is checking the footprints against those rules.

BTW: bigger companies have seperate departments which deal with symbols and footprints for CAD to make sure every component is up to the company's standards.

[phil from seattle]

So at least 2 engineers above me replied about custom footprints. I have my own and my fellow engineers have them too. How many of them match and how many can be re-used? If we are talking about 10 different footprints for the same component - that's fine, but I bet we have hundreds of engineers drawing the same footprints. So same job done 100 times...

There should be a database where everyone could contribute.

AFAIK KiCad and Horizon EDA have public library systems. But you'd still need to check the footprint against the datasheet and if you find errors it would be nice to fix them and upload. But then again... what you might find an error is perfectly fine to others. IOW: a public library would need to have very clear rules and someone who is checking the footprints against those rules.

BTW: bigger companies have seperate departments which deal with symbols and footprints for CAD to make sure every component is up to the company's standards.

Yup!

User contributed libraries - For years, there were Eagle device libraries where there were a lot of user contributed devices.  A good amount were just plain wrong.  Another chunk were mediocre at best.  I got burned a couple of times early on and never trusted user supplied libraries again.  I would use them but only after a consultation with the datasheet and a paper fit test.  That takes about as much time as making the symbol and footprint myself.  I don't think anyone would call verifying the footprint as wasting time. So, choose your approach.

[exe]

In diptrace I've seen a j3elly-bean component (like lm317 or a bjt) with two pins swapped .

What I do now is I try to download ready components from, e.g., ultralibrarian, but then I verify footprint and pin assignment against the datasheet. Typical problem: do-not-connect pins have wrong labels, or indicated as ground. Here is a relatively recent horror story: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/so-vs-soic-packages-do-they-differ-between-manufacturers/msg3484828/#msg3484828 .

[fcb]

Hands-down Altium if you're going to learn something that has wide industry acceptance.  Else KiCAD if your paying for it, or it's a hobby, or cash-constrained. IMO Altium is better than KiCAD, Eagle, Diptrace, etc.. but it COSTS alot more.  I last tried Eagle, Diptrace in 2017 and KiCAD 5.

Haven't tried KiCAD 6 yet, heard good things.

Just pick one and learn it - the skill in PCB design isn't knowledge of the tool - it's the sheer practice of 100's and 1000's of hours behind the screen designing PCB's that matters.

[nctnico]

Just pick one and learn it - the skill in PCB design isn't knowledge of the tool - it's the sheer practice of 100's and 1000's of hours behind the screen designing PCB's that matters.

I don't agree with this fully. Designing a PCB takes some talent (basically solved 3D puzzles), experience with the tool (which takes a couple of hundred hours) and understanding what you are doing. The talent part you either have it or not. The understanding part can be learned and is universal knowledge you can apply to any PCB. Learning a PCB CAD tool however is something you'll need to do for every new tool you encounter.

If you are a student then it is a good idea to dabble a bit with Altium, KiCad and Orcad. Make 2 or 3 PCBs with each of the packages. That will give you a head start compared to other applicants for a job.

[exe]

How good is kicad's schematic editor? If I remember correctly, last time I tried a couple of years ago, when I dragged/moved components the wires either disconnected, or wires formed weird angles. Did I do something wrong?

[mario5000]

The best design package is:

-your brain
-paper and a pencil
-the will to invest time and learn something.


On the software side there is no such thing as the best software only your budget.

YEAH "every idiot can count to one" 

Unfortunately there is no time to draw every single part by hand or made by your self... Sure if you want to design something you must to search and study but the time isn't grow in the trees.
In February i was work on a project with an NXP SC16IS750IPW,128 which have only 24 pins. Well on Multisim 24 pins is 24 minutes... Don't ask for bigger parts (maybe hours) 
 

[phil from seattle]

The best design package is:

-your brain
-paper and a pencil
-the will to invest time and learn something.


On the software side there is no such thing as the best software only your budget.

YEAH "every idiot can count to one" 

Unfortunately there is no time to draw every single part by hand or made by your self... Sure if you want to design something you must to search and study but the time isn't grow in the trees.
In February i was work on a project with an NXP SC16IS750IPW,128 which have only 24 pins. Well on Multisim 24 pins is 24 minutes... Don't ask for bigger parts (maybe hours) 

Yes, Idiots and broken clocks...

1 minute per pin would kill me.  In Kicad, the symbol could be banged out in about 5 minutes. The table tool makes it really fast. The footprint, probably about the same. For foot prints, I drop one pad, make it the correct type and size and then drop the remaining ones in the approximately correct positions.  Then modify the properties for each one to set X and Y exactly.  Draw a reasonable courtyard and silk screen outline and you're done.

[exe]

Unless the algorithm is smarter than you, dragging is always less polished than hand drawn connections.

Well, me too. But in many free EDAs I tried wires don't move with components. I'd need to manually reconnect wires to pins, or schematic would be broken. I don't mind manually adjust wire placement if they are a bit off after moving/rotating parts. But re-drawing every wire after every movement or rotation of, say, an MCU with many pins is nonsense. So, how does it work in kicad?

[Bassman59]

Unless the algorithm is smarter than you, dragging is always less polished than hand drawn connections.

Well, me too. But in many free EDAs I tried wires don't move with components. I'd need to manually reconnect wires to pins, or schematic would be broken. I don't mind manually adjust wire placement if they are a bit off after moving/rotating parts. But re-drawing every wire after every movement or rotation of, say, an MCU with many pins is nonsense. So, how does it work in kicad?

The upcoming Kicad v6, which is in beta now as v5.99, supports dragging symbols and "rubber-banding" the wires.

Actually, I just checked and v5.1.9 (the latest stable) supports dragging/rubberbanding as well. So the feature has been in Kicad for likely a year now.

[exe]

The upcoming Kicad v6, which is in beta now as v5.99, supports dragging symbols and "rubber-banding" the wires.

Will it keep wire angles at 90 degrees, or it will make weird angles when dragging?

[Bassman59]

The upcoming Kicad v6, which is in beta now as v5.99, supports dragging symbols and "rubber-banding" the wires.

Will it keep wire angles at 90 degrees, or it will make weird angles when dragging?

It makes weird angles. It tries to not cross other parts.

I think that the dragging feature is more complicated to implement than you might think. Should it do right angles on drag, or should it just maintain connections between the part-being-dragged's pins and other pins? My guess is that no matter how it's implemented, there are going to be users who say, "do it the other way."

[phil from seattle]

Eagle does rubber banding and I would spend a lot of time cleaning that after up.  Frankly, I prefer the disconnected drag approach. If you can multiselect  the various pieces, disconnected drag is pretty easy to fix.

[nctnico]

Eagle does rubber banding and I would spend a lot of time cleaning that after up.  Frankly, I prefer the disconnected drag approach. If you can multiselect  the various pieces, disconnected drag is pretty easy to fix.

I agree. What I've seen from auto-connect is that it always results in a mess. The way Orcad Capture works is quite OK for dragging horizontally and vertically (with multiple components / lines selected if necessary). Just like PCB design it is better to put the major components on the schematic first, determine optimal locaction and then start drawing connections. Being able to move horizontally / vertically is enough with such a workflow.

[exe]

I think that the dragging feature is more complicated to implement than you might think.

I like the way it works in diptrace. I had some limited experience with circuit maker (based on altium?), it also worked well. I drag and rotate components a lot and I can't imagine living without this. In easyeda dragging works fine, but wires break on rotation. Breaking wires is a no-go for me because I can reconnect them wrong.

I'm not saying this is a very simple feature, but I think I'd be satisfied with simple solution, such as make two connections from orthogonal wires which are easy to clean-up (if needed). Diptrace definitely does more than that (like, trying to avoid overlapping of wire segments), but there is a diminishing return for me. I'd say sometimes this intelligent wire placement creates a mess.

It's very interesting how this is not a problem for other people, esp. for professionals. I'd expect people to demand a more intelligent schematic editor. Am I the only one who prefers parts to remain connected when dragging, and wires keep straight angles? Or is it altium pricing that makes people be tolerant to schematic editors?

[nctnico]

I think that the dragging feature is more complicated to implement than you might think.

I like the way it works in diptrace. I had some limited experience with circuit maker (based on altium?), it also worked well. I drag and rotate components a lot and I can't imagine living without this. In easyeda dragging works fine, but wires break on rotation. Breaking wires is a no-go for me because I can reconnect them wrong.

I'm not saying this is a very simple feature, but I think I'd be satisfied with simple solution, such as make two connections from orthogonal wires which are easy to clean-up (if needed). Diptrace definitely does more than that (like, trying to avoid overlapping of wire segments), but there is a diminishing return for me. I'd say sometimes this intelligent wire placement creates a mess.

It's very interesting how this is not a problem for other people, esp. for professionals. I'd expect people to demand a more intelligent schematic editor. Am I the only one who prefers parts to remain connected when dragging, and wires keep straight angles? Or is it altium pricing that makes people be tolerant to schematic editors?

I'm finding this an interesting question/position and I want to stay far away from any judgement whether it is good or bad to demand such a feature.

I guess the preference boils down to what you are used to and what software you have used in the past. Personally I have been using mostly Orcad (first DOS then Windows) and it doesn't have this auto-rewire function. On top of that I have worked with someone who did lots of cursing on UltiCap (from Ultiboard) because it would rewire (=mess up) all his painstakingly, manually drawn wires (to make the schematic look pretty & readable) when he had to move a part. So all in all I'm not very motivated to use (or require) auto-rewiring but that might be a shortcoming/oversight from my side.

This leaves me wondering: what do your schematics look like in the end?

[exe]

This leaves me wondering: what do your schematics look like in the end?

I attach three sheets from my current project: a power supply. I'm posting power (analog) part, digital control and shunt switch. There are other stuff that are not essential, such as power rails, etc. It is work in progress.

I wonder how do you find it. I'm fine with criticism.

PS After posting it I realized that analog part and shunt switching should probably be on the same sheet, while pre-reg could be on another sheet. This way all analog circuitry would be on one page.

[nctnico]

For the analog stuff it looks OK but around the microcontroller things do start to get messy; including 3 seperate wires turning into one wire at the bottom left corner. How can you read such a schematic in a few years? This likely isn't an issue due to auto-wiring, the schematic just needs tidy-ing up to make it more clear.

[exe]

For the analog stuff it looks OK but around the microcontroller things do start to get messy; including 3 seperate wires turning into one wire at the bottom left corner. How can you read such a schematic in a few years? This likely isn't an issue due to auto-wiring, the schematic just needs tidy-ing up to make it more clear.

Fixed, thanks .

May be there is some misunderstanding. Auto-wiring at perpendicular angles doesn't prevent mess (at least not in diptrace). It just makes it easy to clean: in the example you highlighted I just selected three pins and moved it one grid cell to the right. Now connections are straight again.

I like my schematics looking clean, so I spend a lot of time tidying and re-organizing things. This is easy for me to do in diptrace. May be more skilled engineers less move components?

PS LTSpice is ok for me. Less convenient than diptrace, but it doesn't break wires when dragging/rotating, and all components/wires/etc aligned to the grid. But I often find myself fixing weird angles.

PPS I will work more on digital part of the circuit to make it more readable. I'll organize MCU connections into named buses.

[harerod]

@exe, for whatever that's worth, your schematics' structure look alright to me. I am surprised that you use American symbols though.

Question, out of curiosity: Are you comfortable with the nightmode-display? Is that standard for your tool? Last time I saw something like that, was on some 1990s CAD. Wouldn't that require some basement office, where they have to pump the light in?

[exe]

I am surprised that you use American symbols though.

Ah, got used to it . Probably, you mean resistors, right?

Question, out of curiosity: Are you comfortable with the nightmode-display? Is that standard for your tool? Last time I saw something like that, was on some 1990s CAD. Wouldn't that require some basement office, where they have to pump the light in?

It comes with two themes (dark and light), I think dark theme is default. Yeah, I use dark themes everywhere, so are many of my colleagues on the previous jobs (software engineers). To my surprise, in my current company very few people do it.

Speaking of 90-x, what do you think of screenshot I'm attaching? A colleague of mine told me he felt like blast from the past (actually, I use it almost daily, it's called Midnight Commander).

[nctnico]

A fellow Midnight Commander addict!!   

[harerod]

@exe: Take the following with a grain of salt, please:

Regarding the symbols: in the late 1980s there was this joke about Siemens plotters having trouble with those wriggle lines. So they used their market power to introduce the current European symbol set.

In my younger years I preferred cave-like lighting at the workplace. On my Atari ST SM124 b/w-monitor I used inverted mode (dark).  As the years moved on I had to work with DOS-machines, which NC/MC made, err, usable.  Then Win95 came along, with a GUI topping the stuff available on GEMDOS a decade earlier. I guess it was Win95, Trinitron-tubes and my dimming eyesight that brought me to the light side.