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 2ยข
Markus