[sdiy] Eagle, Proteus, DIPTrace, DesignSpark & Kicad

[Robin Whittle]

I am replying to a message from Jason Tribbeck which was sent to the
list, but does not appear to have been sent to list members or the
archives.

On 21/02/2011 5:07 AM, Jason Tribbeck wrote:
> Since I've used Eagle a fair amount, I'll stick in some comments on it.
> 
>>      Eagle      http://www.cadsoft.de <http://www.cadsoft.de/>
>> 
>>                 Probably does everything I could want to do.  Is very
>>                 widely used.  From all indications, it has a difficult
>>                 user interface.
>> 
>>                 Huge set of user-contributed libraries.
>> 
>>                 Runs on Linux.
> 
> And Mac OS X (doesn't need X11 for later versions).
> 
> I wouldn't say it's difficult to use; just a bit quirky (the UI is a
> bit dated; apparently due to change for the next version).

OK - I hadn't heard of a forthcoming change in user interface.

>>      Eagle        I don't like the look - for instance hexapod.sch.  Here
>>                   is a page with some examples:
>> 
>>                       http://junzo.sakura.ne.jp/dsp101/dsp101.htm
>> 
>>                   Schematic export to PNG or clipboard, in any resolution
>>                   with colour or monochrome.   Examples use box resistors
>>                   which I do not use - I like zig-zag resistors, which
>>                   I am sure I could use instead.
> 
> I hope you know that that's the difference between US and EU
> components; I'm in the EU (UK), so I prefer "box" resistors. Since
> CadSoft is a German company (with a US wing), I'm not surprised that
> their examples are EU-centric.

I guess all these systems have both box and zig-zag resistors, and I
recall something about the traditions behind them.  So its not a big
deal which type the demo files use.  Still, I was happy to see a a
well drawn zig-zag resistor in a Proteus schematic!

My objection to the boxy ones is that the schematic is full of boxes
already.  Zig-zag resistors are unmistakable, not just another box,
and portray the resistance track.


> Since you're using UK English spelling for "colour", I'm a little
> surprised you're using zig-zag resistors :)

Optimize, optimise, fibre, fiber, colour, color . . .  I get tired
choosing which to use, so I use them all at various times.

>>      Eagle        Has a bad reputation for the overall interface.  It
>>                   looks like all the menu options have keyboard
>>                   equivalents.  I think this is vital.
> 
> Unfortunately, not everything can be switched with a key (I've got a
> bug open with them about some changes in the Mac OS X version that was
> made a while ago).

OK.

>                   There were only 16 fixed colours to choose from: View >
>                   Hide/display layers.  This seems very limited.  There
>                   were 16 textures too.  Surely there's a way of adding
>                   colours, but it wasn't obvious to me how.
> 
> The colours are changeable - I've added a few myself, but it does
> involve changing some of the configuration files.

I think that earns Eagle one full point in the klunkiness stakes.

I think it may at times be good to make complex library components
with a text editor, but I wouldn't want this to be the only way.  I
didn't look at library creation for schematic or PCB, but I guess all
these programs have a GUI-based approach.  If some can also do it via
text, I think that would be an advantage.


>>      Eagle    I guess it can do everything, but it is apparently awkward
>>               - and I couldn't see how to alter its colours.  I do not
>>               like its schematics - so this pretty much rules it out.
> 
> Again - quirky, rather than insufficient. It also has scripting
> capability (I didn't see you mention this). I can understand not
> liking the schematic - there's a couple of things I don't like about
> it, but nothing that stops me from using it.

I did mention there was an internal programming language - but I don't
know much about Eagle, so what I wrote was more to prompt discussion
rather than to argue against it.

>>     Proteus provides updates for 6 months.  There is some kind of contract
>>     and other prices for keeping a program updated for longer than this,
>>     or upgrading to a later major version.  So its not for free, or
>>     inexpensive.  However, the cost of investing in a program which
>>     seriously annoyed or limited me would be much higher.
> 
> Eagle's upgrades are free for the major version; I bought 5.3
> professional a couple of years ago, and I just upgraded to 5.11 at the
> beginning of the year. Version 6 will be a paid upgrade though.

OK.

> But you are right: you've got to be able to use the tool. There is no
> point in having something you swear at every time.
> 
> I did use a PCB program in DOS (VGA card) a while back in the '90s
> which had an atrocious user interface. That one I swore at a lot.

I bought Protel for DOS - both Schematic and Autotrax - around 1991.
I got to know its quirks and was able to do good work, within its
limits.  I fixed a bug in the PCB (I think) code itself which caused
the left and downwards mouse/trackball cursor movements to skip a grid
position.  I disassembled the video driver and adapted it to a modern
(in the late 90s) Trident card, creating my very own cursors in the
process.  I still have a PC with such a card to run it.

So for a once in two decades upgrade, I want to choose something which
won't annoy me too much.  I quite liked the minimal schematic style of
that old program, but there were various gotchas I had to be wary of.

  - Robin