Homebrew PCBs

Can anyone please tell me what is considered the standard commercial application in the electronics industry for PCB design? Or is
there one??

Tnx Bob AD5VJ

That is an excellent question. I don't think there is one answer to
that, however I am also very interested in the answer(s).

Yep, the guy who started the list still hasn't picked out a schematic
capture/PCB program... I'm still using CorelDraw. Just picked up a
slightly less than new TurboCAD Pro 11 but haven't taught myself much
about it yet.

Steve Greenfield

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "AD5VJ  Bob" <rtnmi@...> wrote:
>
> Can anyone please tell me what is considered the standard commercial
application in the electronics industry for PCB design? Or is
> there one??

And what I'd -really- like to see, is people adding links to their
favorite Schematic Capture/PCB Routing programs to the Links area in
the PCB_Schematic_CAD_Programs folder.

It's helpful if, in the descriptions for the links, you include the
starting price.

Thanks,
Steve Greenfield

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <alienrelics@...> wrote:

>
> That is an excellent question. I don't think there is one answer to
> that, however I am also very interested in the answer(s).
> 
> Yep, the guy who started the list still hasn't picked out a schematic
> capture/PCB program... I'm still using CorelDraw. Just picked up a
> slightly less than new TurboCAD Pro 11 but haven't taught myself much
> about it yet.
> 
> Steve Greenfield
> 
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "AD5VJ  Bob" <rtnmi@> wrote:
> >
> > Can anyone please tell me what is considered the standard commercial
> application in the electronics industry for PCB design? Or is
> > there one??
>

There are several.

Two common ones are Protel and ORCad.

Larry

On Nov 12, 2007, at 8:07 PM, AD5VJ Bob wrote:

> Can anyone please tell me what is considered the standard  
> commercial application in the electronics industry for PCB design?  
> Or is
> there one??
>
> Tnx Bob AD5VJ

On 13/11/2007, Steve <alienrelics@...> wrote:

> That is an excellent question. I don't think there is one answer to
>  that, however I am also very interested in the answer(s).

For contract work, I use Protel (well, Altium Designer 6), but I also
have older versions of Orcad (came bundled with Specctra) and Pads
(bought for me by a customer for one job).
The combination of AD6 and Specctra makes most things possible, from
titchy single-layer projects to relatively dense open-source stuff
like
http://www.balloonboard.org/ , to high volume commercial stuff in
various technologies.

There's no clear winner out there. PCB shops see a lot of desgn packages.

I occasionally dip into gEDA, but never convince myself (yet) that I
can get a serious project out of the other end without a massive
amount of effort - and, in my experience, effort = errors. Automation
& automated checking (plus effort) delivers working boards. Trustable
libraries matter, too - either my Protel libraries I've built up over
the years, or manufacturer libraried. The probability of error on a
hand-entered 700+-pin BGA, as well as the catastrophic dullness, means
it's a last resort, at best.

For boards that can be home-etched, I dunno. Any non-toy package can
do them trivially. Some of the macros you'd want to improve yield as
far as possible aren't built-in, since they're tactics you wouldn't
want to be using for real.

Steve

I have used both Protel and OrCad. I pefer Orcad and
still use it. It's much better than the lower cost
freebies that are availble. But in my case I have had
it for near 12 years.

I have also used P-Cad under DOS. I still have the
entire P-Cad disk set.

Bob Macklin
Seattle, Wa..

--- Larry Geib <LJGeib@...> wrote:

> There are several.
> 
> Two common ones are Protel and ORCad.
> 
> Larry
> 
> 
> On Nov 12, 2007, at 8:07 PM, AD5VJ Bob wrote:
> 
> > Can anyone please tell me what is considered the
> standard  
> > commercial application in the electronics industry
> for PCB design?  
> > Or is
> > there one??
> >
> > Tnx Bob AD5VJ
> 
> 
> 
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new
> Links, Files, and Photos:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> mailto:Homebrew_PCBs-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
> 
> 
>

"Steve Wiseman" <sjwiseman@...> writes:
> I occasionally dip into gEDA, but never convince myself (yet) that I
> can get a serious project out of the other end without a massive
> amount of effort - and, in my experience, effort = errors.

Well, at least it can be done - I've seen a number of really complex
boards get done with it.  All the developers are users too, and we're
actively working on it these days.

> Trustable libraries matter, too

Yup.  There are a couple of gEDA users that only use their own
libraries.  We've talked (recently) about dumping the current
libraries and starting from scratch, with more control and design, and
less "this looks good!" ;-)

> Some of the macros you'd want to improve yield as far as possible
> aren't built-in, since they're tactics you wouldn't want to be using
> for real.

Like?

Me, I have a teardrop plugin for PCB (gEDA) that I use on all my
boards, home etched or otherwise.  I had one board's trace break right
at the annulus while reworking a connector, and decided I didn't want
to have to debug that again.

On 13 Nov 2007 16:42:45 -0500, DJ Delorie <dj@...> wrote:

>  Well, at least it can be done - I've seen a number of really complex
>  boards get done with it.  All the developers are users too, and we're
>  actively working on it these days.

Do you have links for complex stuff? Things like BlackfinOne are an
order of magnitude or two simpler than I'd like...
Then again, my first real gEDA project ought to be a toy, rather than
a 12-layer 4-thou uBGA monstrosity, I guess :)

>  > Some of the macros you'd want to improve yield as far as possible
>  > aren't built-in, since they're tactics you wouldn't want to be using
>  > for real.
>
>  Like?

For home etching, to give yourself the best possible chance, I'd say
you wanted as many as possible out of: trace spreading, trace
fattening, trace centring, teardrops and pad expansion, solder
thieving, copper balancing, etchant use minimisation, are all
tempting. They'd all need to be balanced against each other, too. Far
from trivial. It might be easier to do it by hand, if the board's
small... Rules-based stuff is hard, and people are clever.

>  Me, I have a teardrop plugin for PCB (gEDA) that I use on all my
>  boards, home etched or otherwise.  I had one board's trace break right
>  at the annulus while reworking a connector, and decided I didn't want
>  to have to debug that again.

For sure - teardrops are great. They can be bettered, though. And,
interestingly, real PCB shops don't care if they're there or not.
Holes are drilled before etching (to allow PTH), so the via pads don't
break out enough to be worth protecting.

Steve

On 13 Nov 2007 16:42:45 -0500, DJ Delorie <dj@...> wrote:

>  > Trustable libraries matter, too
>
>  Yup.  There are a couple of gEDA users that only use their own
>  libraries.  We've talked (recently) about dumping the current
>  libraries and starting from scratch, with more control and design, and
>  less "this looks good!" ;-)

Is there any way to import existing libraries from other packages?
Protel's happy to export cleartext ASCII libraries, and import at
least some others, so it's a possible route. Of course, the IPR
implications will be dull, but manufacturer-supplied libraries would,
you'd hope, be fair game.
If I could release stuff in gEDA, that would be superb. It's a pain
working on open projects with tools this expensive. A tolerable
alternative would be to export from Protel to gEDA when the design
finished, so people could make changes without paying $$$ for tools,
yet I could still be $$$-tool-productive. Next time I get some free
weeks, I'll have another try.

Steve

> DJ Delorie wrote:
> <SNIP>
> Me, I have a teardrop plugin for PCB (gEDA)
> that I use on all my boards, home etched or
> otherwise.  I had one board's trace break 
> right at the annulus while reworking a
> connector, and decided I didn't want to
> have to debug that again.

I have manualy teardropped pads for many
years when I used protel.  When doing home
etched boards (read hand drilled) the
ammount of time lost doing teardrops is
saved in amount of time fixing things
afterwards.

I have now moved to gEDA and tried the
teardrop plugin but it seemed to make a
complete mess of oval pads.  No worries
really as I am convinced of the value of
a teardrop on a hand drilled board with
no solder mask and am used to manually
doing them so I am no worse off than
when I was with protel.

Away from teardrops and back to the
thread about PCB SW and gEDA.

Here are my observations about gEDA.

The software itself seems quite
reasonable.  It can do anything a 1980s
vintage full featured commercial PCB
package can do.

There are certainly features in it I
would like to see but I can live without
them.  The nice thing is that it is open
source so if you DO need a feature you
can try add it.

It is however let down quite badly by
libraries and documentation.

I am building my own library of parts I
trust so that is not too much of a
problem for me.  It would be nice if
the libs that shipped where consistant
as that can turn away a new user very
fast.

"Steve Wiseman" <sjwiseman@...> writes:
> Do you have links for complex stuff?

The really interesting boards are all NDA.  I have them so I can fix
pcb bugs.  Suffice to say, one of them was the reason PCB can do more
than 16 layers.

> Then again, my first real gEDA project ought to be a toy, rather than
> a 12-layer 4-thou uBGA monstrosity, I guess :)

12@4 isn't that hard for PCB.  I think the prime factor at the moment
is how "busy" your ground/power planes are, because of how we manage
polygons.

> trace spreading, trace fattening, trace centring,

I've thought of these.  The global puller was supposed to be that, but
I discovered that the always-arc technique I used produced good
results with a lot less work.  I still want to do that, though -
something like "copper hates other copper, proportional to how close
they are, up to a point".  So, you'd say "I can do 8/8 rules, but I'd
prefer 20/20 when it fits".  You'd want automatic necking too.  I
figured out the math once, but never wrote the code.

> teardrops

Got that one.  At least, for the types of teardrops I like.  There
doesn't seem to be a "standard" for teardrops.  Mine are designed to
minimize mechanical strain between the trace and the annulus.

> and pad expansion,

That can probably be a plugin.  "expand pads to the most that our
space rules allow" would be easy.  Checking for traces between would
be harder, but not a lot so.

> solder thieving,

Which kind?

> copper balancing, etchant use minimisation,

What I do is just plop a rectangle over the whole board when I'm done,
that fills in all the big areas with copper.

> It might be easier to do it by hand, if the board's
> small... Rules-based stuff is hard, and people are clever.

I think some of those are better as house-specific plug-ins, too.
Part of our (pcb's) task is to provide the right hooks to make writing
those easier.

> For sure - teardrops are great. They can be bettered, though.

I once thought of a plug-in that fattened the traces leaving all vias
to the diameter of the via's copper, for a short distance, when the
rules allowed it.

> And, interestingly, real PCB shops don't care if they're there or
> not.  Holes are drilled before etching (to allow PTH), so the via
> pads don't break out enough to be worth protecting.

It wasn't the drilling.  I was removing a jumper block and the abuse
fractured the connection.

"Steve Wiseman" <sjwiseman@...> writes:
> Is there any way to import existing libraries from other packages?

The geda/pcb file formats are well documented, public, and ASCII.  The
only limiting factor is getting the other packages to produce
something in a format we can parse, and someone writing a converter.

Of course, there's the copyright issues too.

> Next time I get some free weeks, I'll have another try.

I can help with understanding the geda formats.

"Andrew" <andrewm1973@...> writes:
> It is however let down quite badly by libraries and documentation.

Sadly, we agree.

Looks like I am lost on Geda too bad it looks like something that my son could use in order to get used to the way things work with
EDA for sure. I like the idea of the individual applications comprising the suite.

Only problem is I am using WINXP and know nothing abt other operating systems so guess I would have to buy a new box for linux or
UNIX in order to even use it.

Cant afford that right now. Maybe down the road.

A friend of mine at work today said something about trying 'AUTOCAD' said he had an older copy of it I could use at home, but after
looking it up on the web, I dont see where it does EDA work looks like it is mainly for Drafting type work. 

Bridge builders, ect.

Someone mentioned Eagle, I looked it up and it has a windows version would it do about the same as Geda as far as being a good place
for a beginner to start?

tnx Bob AD5VJ

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of DJ Delorie
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 5:36 PM
> To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard
> 
> 
> "Andrew" <andrewm1973@...> writes:
> > It is however let down quite badly by libraries and documentation.
> 
> Sadly, we agree.
> 
> 
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, 
> Files, and Photos:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>

"AD5VJ  Bob" <rtnmi@...> writes:
> Only problem is I am using WINXP and know nothing abt other
> operating systems so guess I would have to buy a new box for linux
> or UNIX in order to even use it.

Or run gEDA on Windows.  A little trickier to build and install, but
it can be done.

> Cant afford that right now. Maybe down the road.

Linux is free, you can run it under vmware or something.

> Someone mentioned Eagle, I looked it up and it has a windows version
> would it do about the same as Geda as far as being a good place for
> a beginner to start?

The free version of Eagle is severely limited compare to gEDA, and all
versions of Eagle have a nasty habit of locking up your IP if they
even suspect you might have even a trace of a connection to some
pirated copy.  If you're going to spend money on EDA software, buy
from someone that respects its customers.

The "free" version of gEDA (i.e. any version of gEDA :) is limited to
as many schematic pages as your disk can hold, and I've personally
tested pcb with 53 layers and a board 1/4 mile square.

As others have said Protel(Altium) and Orcad are definitely some of
"the" names in the business.
But there is not really any problem to use another decent sofware
since gerber is the accepted standard for production, and just about
any non-toy software can produce that.
I don't think there is an easy answer to which is best, especially if
the budget is not unlimited. Depending on the complexity a much
simpler software will do, as long as you can work with it.
Many design packages can also export/import from other brands, but i'm
not sure how well that works in reality.

ST

On Nov 13, 2007 5:07 AM, AD5VJ  Bob <rtnmi@...> wrote:
> Can anyone please tell me what is considered the standard commercial application in the electronics industry for PCB design? Or is
> there one??
>
> Tnx Bob AD5VJ
>
>
>
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, Files, and Photos:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

On 13 Nov 2007 18:33:42 -0500, DJ Delorie <dj@...> wrote:

>  "Steve Wiseman" <sjwiseman@...> writes:
>  > Do you have links for complex stuff?
>
>  The really interesting boards are all NDA.  I have them so I can fix
>  pcb bugs.  Suffice to say, one of them was the reason PCB can do more
>  than 16 layers.
>
>  > Then again, my first real gEDA project ought to be a toy, rather than
>  > a 12-layer 4-thou uBGA monstrosity, I guess :)
>
>  12@4 isn't that hard for PCB.  I think the prime factor at the moment
>  is how "busy" your ground/power planes are, because of how we manage
>  polygons.

OK, cheers. Sounds like it's time for another try, once this
rush-job's out of the way. Where's a good place to hang out for
support & tips on geda?

Steve

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "AD5VJ  Bob" <rtnmi@...> wrote:

> Only problem is I am using WINXP and know nothing abt other
operating systems so guess I would have to buy a new box for linux or
> UNIX in order to even use it.

No, there are several options open to you without buying a new computer:

- buy a second hard disc, put Linux on the second disc. 
- use VMWare Server (which is free, and doesn't need to actually be on
a server). gEDA and PCB will run fine on a vmware'd system, they don't
hammer the hardware.
- get rid of Windows (might not be practical, but I did it over 3
years ago now and haven't missed it one bit, then again, I have been
using Linux in some form since Jan. 1992)
- resize your Windows partition, and put Linux in another partition on
the same disc and "dual boot".

gEDA's PCB is the first and only PCB application that I've used, and
I've got on fine with it. Apart from being Free (i.e. Free with a
capital F, i.e. freedom, not just gratis) it has open and transparent
ascii file formats which makes version control easy, as well as
modifying a layout with a script etc. 

I didn't even consider Eagle, because you have to pay a lot of money
for it not to have crippling restrictions (and I've heard some not
good things about being locked out of your own work with no appeals
just because you downloaded a footprint for a component that was made
by someone else with a pirate copy).

"Steve Wiseman" <sjwiseman@...> writes:
> OK, cheers. Sounds like it's time for another try, once this
> rush-job's out of the way. Where's a good place to hang out for
> support & tips on geda?

geda-user@...
http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist/

Well, even if you have a fully paid eagle license you'll still feel as
if you were working with a crippled free test version, so bad is the
lack of functions.
I asked the support what was the best way to add outline measurements
to your layout (you know the arrows and stuff). Guess what the reply
was, can't do that. I was however pointed to a ULP, which i installed,
and which inserted some very rudimentary lines and numbers in places i
didn't care for. Total waste of time that. If i'm paying for a
commercial software i expect it to at least perform all elementary
tasks of PCB design, _without_ external user supplied ULPs. A lot of
the stuff i draw, i have to draw by coordinates. I feel like i'm using
a 20 year old system just short of feeding it with punch cards.
After a day of working with this awful thing, i really can't fully
express my opinion about it within the constraints of polite
conversation so i won't go any further.

As a regular user (not by choice) i can only recommend to stay well
clear. There are many much better packages, even in the same price
range.

ST

On Nov 14, 2007 11:02 AM, alioth10 <dyls@...> wrote:

> I didn't even consider Eagle, because you have to pay a lot of money
> for it not to have crippling restrictions (and I've heard some not
> good things about being locked out of your own work with no appeals
> just because you downloaded a footprint for a component that was made
> by someone else with a pirate copy).
>
>

Stefan Trethan wrote:
> Well, even if you have a fully paid eagle license you'll still feel as
> if you were working with a crippled free test version, so bad is the
> lack of functions.
> I asked the support what was the best way to add outline measurements
> to your layout (you know the arrows and stuff). Guess what the reply
> was, can't do that. I was however pointed to a ULP, which i installed,
> and which inserted some very rudimentary lines and numbers in places i
> didn't care for. Total waste of time that. If i'm paying for a
> commercial software i expect it to at least perform all elementary
> tasks of PCB design, _without_ external user supplied ULPs. A lot of
> the stuff i draw, i have to draw by coordinates. I feel like i'm using
> a 20 year old system just short of feeding it with punch cards.
> After a day of working with this awful thing, i really can't fully
> express my opinion about it within the constraints of polite
> conversation so i won't go any further.
> 
> As a regular user (not by choice) i can only recommend to stay well
> clear. There are many much better packages, even in the same price
> range.
> 
> ST

Such as...

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Peter Harrison" <peter.harrison@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard



>> As a regular user (not by choice) i can only recommend to stay well
>> clear. There are many much better packages, even in the same price
>> range.
>> 
>> ST
> 
> Such as...

Easy-PC: http://www.numberone.com

Advanced Circuits gives away a free version of it.

Leon


Leon

Such as just about any other package. At home i use Target 3001 and
that gets the job done more comfortable, quicker, and cheaper, than
eagle. It'll also run the odd simulation and front panel drawing. The
english language translation used to be bad though. And i actually do
not consider Target a professional package like Protel and Orcad, but
it is more than enough for most things. If you want to design PC
motherboards it might not be suitable;-)

Back when i selected my PCB software i tried a handful of packages,
quite a few were acceptable, some weren't. The free ones all lacked
features (coming from orcad i was not easy to please). Please don't
ask me for names it was years ago and i forgot. I do remember there
used to be a page on the web somewhere with a long list of different
packages. Try as many as you can before you put your money towards
one.

Also consider support and update scheme. Again, i can only talk about
Target and Eagle (Orcad was a student version so no support or
updates). I only used the eagle support once and they prompty replied
(but only had to say "no can do"). I used the Target support several
times and they are OK, they implemented a couple of features i
suggested but also ignored me once or twice, but most of the time they
really try to help. They expect you to pay for an big update about
once a year (or two years?), roughly half price of the full license.
Small updates in between are free. I can accept that, implementing new
features and support costs money so they can't provide free updates
forever. Rarely you will find a software company which will even
consider adding a new feature for a single license customer so overall
i'm fine with that scheme.
Eagle updates? What's an update? I suppose there must have been
updates at some point, because my version is 4.something so there
ought to have been earlier ones. Doesn't look like Bill had invented
windows yet when they made that last update though, or they just
didn't notice, or bother to care ;-)

Libraries? Forget them. Orcad had the best libraries in my opinion,
with the others i prefer to make my own parts. It only takes a minute
with a decent software and you know it's exactly what you want. Make
sure parts are easy to make and the whole library thing makes sense
and is well thought out. Guess how many points Eagle scores on that
last sentence.

Do i sound negative? Sorry about that, no slander intended.

ST

On Nov 14, 2007 8:15 PM, Peter Harrison <peter.harrison@...> wrote:

> Such as...
>
>

That was one of those i tried back when.
It looked like a possible candidate, but i had previous experience
with target so that won out.

Definitely one i would also recommend to try though.
Do you have any experience with the support Leon?
I believe to remember there was an Easy-PC person here on the list
back then which got me to try it.

ST

On Nov 14, 2007 8:29 PM, Leon <leon355@...> wrote:

> > Such as...
>
> Easy-PC: http://www.numberone.com
>
> Advanced Circuits gives away a free version of it.
>
> Leon
>

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Stefan Trethan" <stefan_trethan@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard


> That was one of those i tried back when.
> It looked like a possible candidate, but i had previous experience
> with target so that won out.
>
> Definitely one i would also recommend to try though.
> Do you have any experience with the support Leon?
> I believe to remember there was an Easy-PC person here on the list
> back then which got me to try it.

I used Easy-PC for 15 years, until I switched to Pulsonix. They are both 
owned by Westdev, now. I've just been trying the latest version 11, it's 
still the best value package on the market for non-professional users. 
Support has always been excellent.

PCB-Pool gives away a free version of Target, I tried it but didn't like it 
much.

Leon

Is Ultimate still a contender in the semi-cheap world?
http://www.ultiboard.com/u_board.html implies it's part of the EWB
collection now. I used to use it quite happily- still got a bunch of
dongles for it, but nothing in maintenance...
Come to think of it, I've still got a Seetrax dongle, too. Good grief,
how much have I spent on CAD software over the years?

Steve

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Steve Wiseman" <sjwiseman@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard


> Is Ultimate still a contender in the semi-cheap world?
> http://www.ultiboard.com/u_board.html implies it's part of the EWB
> collection now. I used to use it quite happily- still got a bunch of
> dongles for it, but nothing in maintenance...

I downloaded the EWB demo and tried the PCB design part of it. It didn't 
impress me.

Leon

"Leon" <leon355@...> writes:
> PCB-Pool gives away a free version of Target, I tried it but didn't
> like it much.

I've sent PCB's gerbers to PCB-Pool with success, the only "issue" is
converting them to something non-gerber to avoid the gerber fee.
Anyone know gc-preview's file format?

On Nov 14, 2007 9:26 PM, Leon <leon355@...> wrote:

> I downloaded the EWB demo and tried the PCB design part of it. It didn't
> impress me.
>
> Leon


One must be careful about this too. If you are used to some software
anything new doesn't look half as good since you don't know how to do
all the things. I also was "not impressed" with Easy PC at a first
glance but after some looking around it seemed to have most things i
would need. The way i used is simple, make a list of things it _can't_
do, and confirm every item using the help/manual to make sure it
really can't do it and it's not just that you don't find it. At the
end see which list is shortest and contains only items you can live
without.

ST

Stefan Trethan schrieb:
>
> Such as just about any other package. At home i use Target 3001 and
>



I think Eagle comes out a tad bit too bad in this discussion. I tired 
Target back when I evaluated packages and did not managed to do even a 
simple design and found myself totally lost. Might be that I'm just too 
stupid.

It was me who made the bad experience with CadSoft locking my IP that 
was mentioned several times in this thread. However, I found a pair of 
ULPs (on CadSofts Download area actually!) that let me export all the IP 
into an ASCII file and back in from there so I actually only lost the 
time for the utterly embarassing e-mail comunication with CadSoft 
support in this case.

I have to say though that thereafter (well, forced to continue to use 
Eagle for monetary reasons so far) I called CadSoft support many times 
and always got very friendly help where help could be given.

IMHO CadSoft is having the following "problems" with Eagle these days:

a) they definately should introduce more advanced features like bus 
routing and signal analysis. Instead I have the impression they sit a 
bit on what they have achived so far, introducing features that are not 
targeted towards making PCBs but more for drawing electrical 
installation plans and stuff like this.

b) Their user interface is still not fully "windows" complying. That 
said there are anoying things of how you have to use the software where 
one would expect more standard behaviour these days. With "windows 
complying" I mean just what got standard behaviour in GUIs these days 
like how you cut&paste, move around objects or expect actions to take 
place based on selected objects etc. etc.

c) Their strengt of having an extremly powerfull user language (ULP) 
seems also to be their biggest weakeness in that I get the impression 
they are happy if a problem gets solved with an ULP instead of directly 
implementing this feature. In the longer run lots of routine tasks are 
done with ULPs and this leads to an overall clumsy working style.

Apart from the above, I consider Eagle to be a good mid class EDA 
package. What makes me sleep well is the fact that using their ULP 
language and the fact that you really can access the last bit of 
information within schemas, boards and libraries will allow me to export 
that information into whatever ASCII format a new EDA software will 
support. So I'm sure a very high degree of the work I do in Eagle will 
be portable to whatever package I end up with. If time permits I 
probably will eyeball gEDA, but I'm actually also ready to spend the 
money for a more professional package supporting high speed simulation, 
digital bus routing and things like that. Should gEDA arrive at this 
level by this time - well, one has the right to dream - right? :-)

Just my 2\ufffd

Markus

On 14/11/2007, Markus Zingg <homebrew-pcb@...> wrote:
> but I'm actually also ready to spend the
>  money for a more professional package supporting high speed simulation,
>  digital bus routing and things like that. Should gEDA arrive at this
>  level by this time - well, one has the right to dream - right? :-)

Bus routing's a bit of a contentious issue with me. It's a sure-fire
EMC horror, and a signal integrity nightmare waiting to happen, too.
It may look all neat and tidy, but all those current loops, all going
in the same direction, with their wavefronts all arriving at the same
time? Nightmare. Give me matched(ish) length scattered tracks any day.
High speed simulation is also a bit contentious, until models stop
sucking so badly. Again, following sane design guidelines seems to
deliver tolerable results. A bit of maths for the stripline stuff,
where necessary, and careful placement and pinouts, delivers tolerable
results. Full simulation seems to be pissing in the wind.

Steve

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "DJ Delorie" <dj@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard


>
> "Leon" <leon355@...> writes:
>> PCB-Pool gives away a free version of Target, I tried it but didn't
>> like it much.
>
> I've sent PCB's gerbers to PCB-Pool with success, the only "issue" is
> converting them to something non-gerber to avoid the gerber fee.
> Anyone know gc-preview's file format?

They accept Pulsonix files, now. I used to send them GC-Prevue files, but I 
don't know the format. I suppose it could be reverse-engineered, but it 
might be difficult.

Leon

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Markus Zingg" <homebrew-pcb@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard


> Stefan Trethan schrieb:
>>
>> Such as just about any other package. At home i use Target 3001 and
>>
>
>
>
> I think Eagle comes out a tad bit too bad in this discussion. I tired
> Target back when I evaluated packages and did not managed to do even a
> simple design and found myself totally lost. Might be that I'm just too
> stupid.

I find Eagle just too difficult to use and requiring far too many keystrokes 
and mouse operations. FWIW, Pulsonix does a very good job of importing Eagle 
schematics, PCBs and libraries. I actually once helped someone who was 
having problems with Eagle by importing his PCB into Pulsonix and sorting it 
out for him. 8-)

Leon

I agree, i don't consider full simulation of the circuits i make much
use. The models are by far not accurate enough to give me much
information (and i am not prepared to put in the time to make them
more accurate). What i would like to do is simulate parts of circuits
to test concepts and such. I generally much prefer bench testing, but
back when i had orcad the pspice simulation worked really well and was
nice for some things. Not having to use a different software for
simulation is something i would consider an advantage. Target has
simulation, but so far í'm not really friends with it and rarely use
it. Eagle: simulation, what's that? (Does he mean pretending to be a
windows app.?)

Yes Markus Eagle does come off a bit too bad. That's because i'm
p(§§ed off with it after having to use it all day and hating it's
guts. It would still not rank high in a subjective comparision, is my
opinion. I agree with all the points you made about it.


About Target, i promise one _can_ actually make a board with it ;-).
It is however very true that there is only one or two ways to do
things, not 5 or 10 ways like in Orcad (and eagle, if it can do it at
all). So you really need to find the right ways, the Help helps ;-). I
still firmly state that the Target UI is way, way more intuitive than
the Eagle thing, and the Library management is also very good since
you can work on parts right in and out of schematic/PCB while still
maintaining systematic order.


ST

On Nov 14, 2007 10:01 PM, Steve Wiseman <sjwiseman@...> wrote:
> Full simulation seems to be pissing in the wind.
>
> Steve
>

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, DJ Delorie wrote:
> I've sent PCB's gerbers to PCB-Pool with success, the only "issue" is
> converting them to something non-gerber to avoid the gerber fee.

I wonder why pcb-pool charge for gerbers? I simply avoid pcb-pool - there
are plenty of quality PCB makers who DON'T charge you for gerbers and have
a lower base price!

On 14/11/2007, Stefan Trethan <stefan_trethan@...> wrote:
> Not having to use a different software for
>  simulation is something i would consider an advantage.

I accept this. Altium has some (seemingly decent) mixed
analogue/digital simulation. I ignore that, and simulate the bits I
care about with LTSpice. It's free, as in beer, and I trust it. Since
I rarely simulate more than 50 components at a time, the effort spent
in knocking up a simulation schematic is no big deal, comared to the
thought involved in the design. Some day, I ought to investigate
Altium/Protel's simulator - but not just this week :)

Steve

Everyone has their favorite pcb cad program.  It all depends on your
end use and how deep your pocket is. Pulsonix is a good cjoice for the
rich hobbyist or businesses who can "write off" the costs.

After looking at quite a few over the last 20 years, I've found that
DIPTRACE is a great product and excellent money value for the
hobbyist. The free version is only limited by the number of pins (250)
and the number of layers (2). All other functions including gerber
output and board size are enabled.

It is definitely worht checkong out.

www,diptrace.com


Myc

On Nov 14, 2007 4:30 PM, Dylan Smith <dyls@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > I've sent PCB's gerbers to PCB-Pool with success, the only "issue" is
> > converting them to something non-gerber to avoid the gerber fee.
>
> I wonder why pcb-pool charge for gerbers? I simply avoid pcb-pool - there
> are plenty of quality PCB makers who DON'T charge you for gerbers and have
> a lower base price!
>
>
>

This one looks interesting for sure. What do they mean 250 pin limitation. the hole board can have no more than 250 holes in it or
one component can have no more than 250 pins?

tnx bob 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Myc Holmes
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 3:40 PM
> To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard
> 
> Everyone has their favorite pcb cad program.  It all depends 
> on your end use and how deep your pocket is. Pulsonix is a 
> good cjoice for the rich hobbyist or businesses who can 
> "write off" the costs.
> 
> After looking at quite a few over the last 20 years, I've 
> found that DIPTRACE is a great product and excellent money 
> value for the hobbyist. The free version is only limited by 
> the number of pins (250) and the number of layers (2). All 
> other functions including gerber output and board size are enabled.
> 
> It is definitely worht checkong out.
> 
> www,diptrace.com
> 
> 
> Myc
> 
> On Nov 14, 2007 4:30 PM, Dylan Smith <dyls@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > > I've sent PCB's gerbers to PCB-Pool with success, the 
> only "issue" 
> > > is converting them to something non-gerber to avoid the 
> gerber fee.
> >
> > I wonder why pcb-pool charge for gerbers? I simply avoid pcb-pool - 
> > there are plenty of quality PCB makers who DON'T charge you for 
> > gerbers and have a lower base price!
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, 
> Files, and Photos:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "AD5VJ Bob" <rtnmi@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard


> This one looks interesting for sure. What do they mean 250 pin limitation. 
> the hole board can have no more than 250 holes in it or
> one component can have no more than 250 pins?

It usually means that the total number of component pins must be < 250. Vias 
usually don't count.

Leon

AutoCad can do just about anything you want but it is very expensive.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned DipTrace, give it a try, you can 
download a free version to try it out.

So far a like it.



Ben

Hi all,

I'm using Cadstar (http://www.zuken.com) Prices start from about USD 3000 for 
the basic package.
Once setup, it works great. Problem is that it can be a real PITA to 
setup to your liking (took me almost 2 years to set it up till I don't 
have to fiddle anymore)

Regards,
Eugene

Hi, new to the group,

I've wondered about using a CAD package like AutoCad to get large planes of copper for switch mode circuits, rather than using a PCB package, not sure if you can fill polygons in AutoCAD though.

I know it's not an industry standard, but what about freePCB? 

http://www.freepcb.com/

I've had a play with it and it seems quite good - and it's free, compatible with TinyCAD, and generates gerbers (which I thought was the universal way to send a design to a manufacture?)

Gavin

Ben <bhleavi@...> wrote:                               AutoCad can do just about anything you want but it is very expensive.
 
 Not sure if anyone has mentioned DipTrace, give it a try, you can 
 download a free version to try it out.
 
 So far a like it.
 
 Ben
 
 
     
                               

       
---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Leon wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Peter Harrison" <peter.harrison@...>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 7:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard
> 
> 
> 
>>> As a regular user (not by choice) i can only recommend to stay well
>>> clear. There are many much better packages, even in the same price
>>> range.
>>>
>>> ST
>> Such as...
> 
> Easy-PC: http://www.numberone.com
> 
> Advanced Circuits gives away a free version of it.
> 
> Leon
> 
> 
> Leon
> 

Can you only use it to order boards from Advanced Circuits?

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Peter Harrison" <peter.harrison@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB DESIGN industry standard


>> Advanced Circuits gives away a free version of it.

> Can you only use it to order boards from Advanced Circuits?

Of course! It doesn't generate Gerbers etc.

Advanced can supply them for a charge, I believe.

Leon

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "AD5VJ  Bob" <rtnmi@...> wrote:
>
> This one looks interesting for sure. What do they mean 250 pin 
>limitation. the hole board can have no more than 250 holes in it or
> one component can have no more than 250 pins?
>

On every pin-limited EDA package that I've seen, a 250 pin limitation 
means that you can have no more than 250 individual component pins on a 
layout. Each hole on through-hole parts and each SMT pad on surface 
mount devices counts toward that limit.


Regards, Bob

I have tried freepcb a while ago and found it lacking many many
functions. That may have improved meanwhile.

Gavin is right, filling large planes of copper is an important feature
for SMPS layouts. This is just about the only thing i like with eagle,
it does that OK.

ST

On Nov 15, 2007 6:19 AM, Gavin Dingley <dingley76@...> wrote:
> Hi, new to the group,
>
> I've wondered about using a CAD package like AutoCad to get large planes of copper for switch mode circuits, rather than using a PCB package, not sure if you can fill polygons in AutoCAD though.
>
> I know it's not an industry standard, but what about freePCB?
>
> http://www.freepcb.com/
>
> I've had a play with it and it seems quite good - and it's free, compatible with TinyCAD, and generates gerbers (which I thought was the universal way to send a design to a manufacture?)
>
> Gavin
>
> Ben <bhleavi@...> wrote:                               AutoCad can do just about anything you want but it is very expensive.
>
>  Not sure if anyone has mentioned DipTrace, give it a try, you can
>  download a free version to try it out.
>
>  So far a like it.
>
>  Ben
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, Files, and Photos:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>