Over the years I've become proficient at using Eagle.
I may soon be in the position where I need to purchase Eagle again. I
briefly tried some of the free alternatives about 5 years ago but the
learning curve was difficult, combined with the fact that I already
know Eagle very well.
If you have used both Eagle and something like KiCAD (or other) would
you give us a quick understanding of how you like both?
On 2012-04-25 13:05, M.L. wrote:
> Over the years I've become proficient at using Eagle.
>
> I may soon be in the position where I need to purchase Eagle again. I
> briefly tried some of the free alternatives about 5 years ago but the
> learning curve was difficult, combined with the fact that I already
> know Eagle very well.
>
> If you have used both Eagle and something like KiCAD (or other) would
> you give us a quick understanding of how you like both?
If you haven't seen it, Dave from EEVblog did a few video reviews of diptrace and KiCAD.
On 4/25/2012 8:05 AM, M.L. wrote:
> Over the years I've become proficient at using Eagle.
>
> I may soon be in the position where I need to purchase Eagle again. I
> briefly tried some of the free alternatives about 5 years ago but the
> learning curve was difficult, combined with the fact that I already
> know Eagle very well.
>
> If you have used both Eagle and something like KiCAD (or other) would
> you give us a quick understanding of how you like both?
>
I too was having to look at purchasing some new software but I really didn't like Eagle and a lot of the free alternatives didn't have all the features I wanted. I did stumble onto one paid program that I really like and the learning curve was very small. Adding things like devices not included takes minutes. The program doesn't try to restrict you to a set of rules that everything must follow, it is more of a , you need a board created and design it how you want, with whatever method you want. If you suddenly decide to change a trace size or part location, change it without worrying about some template needing changing or a DRC error popping up. I found it so easy to use that I never even read the help . I had never heard of it before last year so I think the company should advertise much more.
> http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
part 1 2272 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (decoded quoted-printable)
At 02:26 PM 4/25/2012, Mark Hanchey wrote:
> I too was having to look at purchasing some new software but I really
>didn't like Eagle and a lot of the free alternatives didn't have all the
>features I wanted. I did stumble onto one paid program that I really
>like and the learning curve was very small. Adding things like devices
>not included takes minutes. The program doesn't try to restrict you to a
>set of rules that everything must follow, it is more of a , you need a
>board created and design it how you want, with whatever method you
>want. If you suddenly decide to change a trace size or part location,
>change it without worrying about some template needing changing or a DRC
>error popping up. I found it so easy to use that I never even read the
>help . I had never heard of it before last year so I think the company
>should advertise much more.
> > http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html
I've been using a software package called Lochmaster from those guys for many years now. Its a layout package designed specifically for Veroboard (what a lot of people call "stripboard").
I love it because it makes documenting one-off projects so easy and quick. And - I've done some fairly hairy designs that I was able to simply give to a summer student and have them build for me. I call them 'hairy' because they were a mixture of DIP IC packages and SMD components, with a few through-hole passives thrown in where needed.
Lockmaster made it easy to figure out where the components needed to go and where to do the trace cuts such that the SMD components would simply either jump a cut trace or lie across two adjacent traces.
In fact, I'll upload a copy. This is a mic preamp followed by couple of cascaded filters that then feed the comparitor input on a 12f675. I'd have to go back to the schematics to make sure, but I think that its a 4th order hi-pass filter @ 200Hz or so followed by a 2nd order low-pass filter @ 4KHz. The layout doesn't show the (few) flying wires that join nodes that are widely separated. It also doesn't show the mic gain control which is connected between pins 1 & 2 on the quad op-amp.
dwayne
part 2 25677 bytes content-type:image/jpeg; name="Filter2.jpg" (decode) part 3 263 bytes content-type:text/plain; name="ATT00001.txt" (decoded base64)
planet.eon.net>