Anything but. It was originally a one man hobbyist project and very obviously a few DOS programs run independently.
Since V5 it has gathered steam and a large pool of software engineers writing it. It has become much more integrated with a more consistent UI. V7 is mature now, I would not want to go back to V6 or earlier. CERN just provide hosting and a neutral identity.
There ain't such think as a free lunch. I can understand why ExpressPCB would want you to provide them with some form of payment for their software.
I generally despise proprietary software. I only suggested ExpressPCB because it's easy to learn. It's very close to drawing the board manually on paper (or directly on the PCB material with a DALO pen).
Tom
Totally agree, although the learning curve should be about the actual process of designing electronics and PCB.
A bad/poor user interface has nothing to do with that and is just a very poor excuse, extremely often misused as "learning curve".
Especially as a professional, I would like to focus on the design itself (which is often complicated enough), instead of having constantly being annoyed by just poor software programs.
When really doing complicated or (very) last minute projects, that is extremely distracting as well.
But overall, yes I totally agree with you, not just for electronics.
If you want to gain knowledge and get skilled into something, you have to put the effort into it.
No matter what you do or subject it is.
At the current version with Fusion, there are no limits as far as I am aware.
Go watch Robert Feranec on Youtube.
Even for people who have been in this field for decades, his stuff and interviews are fascinating.
Exactly!
I don't recall the KiCAD learning curve being particularly steep either, but that's probably a function of my background. Once I got tired of drawing boards by hand I moved to Protel AutoTrax for DOS. Then OrCAD for DOS. Then OrCAD for Windoze. I quickly learned the symbol->schematic->netlist->PCB layout->Gerber files workflow so I knew what to search for when I started with KiCAD.
Drawing symbols is always tedious. I wish KiCAD would feature automatic increment for busses so D0, D1, D2, ... could be placed faster. Same for net names. But that's a pretty small gripe. Few parts have busses these days.
OrCAD is/was a collection of programs run independently. Even the more modern Windoze versions are that way so that's not something out of the ordinary in my view.
One could easily argue that KiCAD is a collection of programs run independently too. It just so happens that they tie together nicely. I love the "Update PCB from Schematic" feature (and PCB->Schematic as well). That's way more intuitive than OrCAD's back-annotate feature (which would output a text file that you then had to import into the schematic somehow). It's also nice that the field for the PCB footprint in KiCAD is labeled ... "footprint" (gasp!) ... rather than being some arbitrary property field as it is in the old OrCAD (even more recent Windoze versions).
I looked at Eagle some 20 years ago and hated it immediately. I could not move past the fact that the bindkeys were assigned arbitrarily. F1 = trace, F2 = pad, ... (or whatever it was). Could we maybe get T for trace and P for pad? No. Not with Eagle. It was also obvious that it was a DOS program that had been ported to Windoze without any further changes so the UI was quite awful. Out! Next!
In all fairness the newer versions are probably much better. But I have to pay a pretty high licensing fee to use them for commercial purposes, so that dims my interest considerably. If I have to pay several $k/year in licensing I might as well go with Altium or recent versions of OrCAD.
I looked at KiCAD 5.x much more recently and found it to be very *nix/Solaris-like in the way it worked. It seemed like capable software but the editor was still stuck in the 1990s. Out! Next!
If you haven't looked at KiCAD since version 5.x I highly recommend that you take a look now. Version 6.0 brought the editor up to current day. It is a joy to use. There are quirks and things I could wish for, but they're few and far between. Most importantly, the PCB editor has the fewest quirks (at least the way I use it). That's nice as that's where I tend to spend the most time in KiCAD.
Speaking of quirks... One of my "favourite" is in Altium where there are three ways of opening a file that all produce different results. Let's take the simplest task and make it complicated. Yay Altium! Grr...!
Tom
Last edited:
Hi Tom,
Most ecad sw is like this as you say. Some run from a cockpit like orcad layout except capture which is a separate tool but is tightly integrated. It has to be integrated or you would not be able to cross-probe from layout to capture. So I do not know what version of orcad capture you are speaking of that uses text files for back annotation, that must go way back before I used it, maybe to a very old version using ms-dos 3.1.
I use the last version of orcad v16 before cadence scrapped layout and replaced it with allegro. It works good enough for me for simple audio or digital layouts. Enough that I have no reason to use kicad. A lot of ecad time is spent building libraries. I always find problems with the libraries that come stock in the distributions. Like is said earlier about bom creation, the symbols needs a data base behind them in order to create a bom that has useful info for a proper bom, other than just a ref, symbol, value, footprint. When I worked at HP, they had an internal development group to customize Mentor to make it more productive since out of the box it was seriously lacking productivity improvements. HP also had a library group as well.
I am kind of on a branch suggesting kicad when I never used it. I know if I tried it I’d find something to complain about since I have used many ecad sw and none are perfect imo. many need workarounds to make them do what you want from them
But for Jan it depends on what level of functionality he needs for his course or tutorial
It’s like using this apple phone to communicate = erg
Rick
Last edited:
I use easyeda, kicad, fusion360 and designspark for beginners i advice designspark. They have great parts libraries and good tutorials on youtube. And when you got more experience and want to ad new components then in designspark it is easy to do.
I have made my own elektor look a like symbols, tube library and lots of 3d models.
I have made my own elektor look a like symbols, tube library and lots of 3d models.
Last edited:
Not in my opinion do any of them have good libraries. If mentor( now seimens) , cadence do not I can’t see how less capable can. Like I said it depends on what you want from the toolset
Show me an example of a bom that your best schematic capture tool produces to prove your point. I have different bom formatting depending on what its needed for. I have one for import to excel, I have one for bom import to mouser. Are you able to upload a bom generated from your ecad to create a mouser project or shopping cart? I’d bet that you spend more time creating a mouser shopping than the time to enter the schematic
Show me an example of a bom that your best schematic capture tool produces to prove your point. I have different bom formatting depending on what its needed for. I have one for import to excel, I have one for bom import to mouser. Are you able to upload a bom generated from your ecad to create a mouser project or shopping cart? I’d bet that you spend more time creating a mouser shopping than the time to enter the schematic
Last edited:
OrCAD 9.3 does that. I used it in grad school so it is ... um ... "a few" years old now.
Yep. I have KiCAD spit out a CSV file with the BOM information. I usually massage it a bit in Excel but that's mostly to make it pretty for my customers or my assembly house. I can take the file directly to Mouser and get a shopping cart out of it. Getting to that point takes time, though. I spend considerable time searching for parts on Mouser/Digikey and entering the information in the schematic. But I only have to do that once. I often copy parts between schematics which copies the manufacturer, manufacturer P/N, and Mouser P/N as well.
Even if you do have to enter the BOM information from scratch, the BOM tool in KiCAD (new in version 6 I believe) is actually pretty intelligent. It allows you to enter the information once and have it apply to multiple components. That's handy for all those 100 nF decoupling capacitors.
Having an up-to-date component database would certainly be easier and faster, but keeping that database up-to-date would be a major chore. I just choose components that are normally stocked by Mouser/Digikey and deal with obsolescence and out-of-stock at order time.
Tom
And this is what differs the more professional (and more expensive) tools from other tools.
To answer this question literally, no I don't spend more time, because I know websites like digikey and mouser like my back pocket, plus I have my default go-to components and/or already take that into account while making the schematic and PCB.
For a bigger business and companies, this is an entire different story.
Especially when production/assembly is involved as well with different people (often from different parts of the world) having to rely on components. Different departement on buying in parts and components.
This headache is even worse, when times pass with huge chip shortages (like a while back).
I don't consider most audio boards, big/complicated enough to be problematic.
The exception here is big mixing consoles.
(I have done a few, and just the amount of parts makes your head explode)
Btw, I haven't drawn any footprints and made any libraries in quite some time now.
These days, you can literally order them for about 20-30 bucks, my time is more expensive in a paid job.
That being said, it is definitely something you want to put an teach in a electronics course!!
Mostly all the pitfalls and problems.
Like sometimes dimensions not being present from PCB point of view, or certain countries who like to count pins the opposite direction.
Trap for young players, and things that can REALLY ruin your day.
Still bump into strange things every so often to catch you off guard.
My point exactly, it’s all in the library creation process, how the tool can be made to work to your advantage, that’s what separates the boys from the men.
Btw what ecad sw did you use for your big mixing console?
Thanks Tom for giving me more insight on kicad. From the sounds of it I am better off sticking with 10+ year old orcad 16, maybe another day or revision of kicad for me.
I saw the other day that TI is using orcad capture for some of its spice tools.
Last edited:
I don't like to call it that way, because it sounds kinda arrogant (nofi btw).
It means that it totally depends on the projects you're doing.
I have done some very last minute multi-layer LED prototype/(client) demo design projects.
Starting around 17:30 (5:30 pm) and had to be finished before midnight on a Friday.
This was incl ordering the boards and getting them assembled.
By far, the easiest and fastest in this case would be EasyEDA with their LCSC store.
They can ship within a week (delivered), assemble everything for you, for about 100-200 bucks.
Obviously this doesn't work for a company with a huge production rate that has to comply to all sorts of regulations, and a VERY slow way of working because it has to go through a lot of departments.
Total different animal.
Which is interesting, because that LED PCB was technically a lot more complicated and tricky.
Makes you wonder who is the boy and who are the men?
I just bought my first order from LCSC, a good experience. Are SPTech njw3281 equivalent to an onsemi part? but the part selection i have reviewed it is a small fraction of what I can get from mouser or digi-key so based on that I could not get one of my designs built using their parts inventories.
The bottom line to all this is, if your toolset, process, suppliers meet your needs your all set and no need to change
Interesting to see what Jan decides on
The bottom line to all this is, if your toolset, process, suppliers meet your needs your all set and no need to change
Interesting to see what Jan decides on
Last edited:
Lesson number one with these kinda companies; please really tone down your expectations!
I mean that for real.
I have had absolutely great experiences, but also incredibly bad. (like nightmare bad).
I just see it as one of the many tools that someone needs to have in his tool box these days.
Btw, often I do a hybrid approach, getting some easy parts assembled and do the rest myself for example.
Be especially aware of fake parts, ooooh boy..... Talking about ruining not days but weeks.
That’s the difference between an authorized supplier vs one that’s not.
Is LCSC qualified or authorized for any component mfr? Flags go up right away imo.
Ever notice how the auto industry has tighter source traceability on there component qualifications?
Same goes for library creation imo. I build everyone of my library components for the same quality reasons or at least scrutinized everyone I source externally. Usually means some sort of editing. Lots of latitude in DIYAudio since not much at stake only your time and $, but your a$$ is on the line for your professional job and reputation however, my point on boys vs men
How’s Jan’s evaluations going?
Is LCSC qualified or authorized for any component mfr? Flags go up right away imo.
Ever notice how the auto industry has tighter source traceability on there component qualifications?
Same goes for library creation imo. I build everyone of my library components for the same quality reasons or at least scrutinized everyone I source externally. Usually means some sort of editing. Lots of latitude in DIYAudio since not much at stake only your time and $, but your a$$ is on the line for your professional job and reputation however, my point on boys vs men
How’s Jan’s evaluations going?
Last edited:
In the first post, OP said "Keywords: free, 'good enough' for audio, not too hard to learn to get going." but then later added that schematic and PCB design must be interactive in the software. Not sure if you can have it all if you need all of that except with ExpressPCB.
If the goal is to expose newbies to PCB design, the simpler the better and I think that ExpressPCB is as simple as it gets and there is a way to connect the schematic and the pcb in software.
After many years I still use ExpressPCB to design my boards and then use a separate software package to convert the ExpressPCB to Gerber to send to JLCPCB. That conversion software is no longer available for purchase from Copper Connection but it does seem to be available here but I can't vouch either for the site or for the software that is available there. I purchased my copy a long time ago from the author.