Re: gEDA-dev: [Re: is all EDA as bad as gEDA/pcb?]

["John Luciani" <jluciani-at-NOSPAMgmail_dot_com>]

The subject asks the question --- Is all EDA as bad as gEDA/pcb?

EDA is difficult (especially simulation and PCB layout). If your
friend had started with Eagle the question would be "Is all EDA as bad
as Eagle?".

Back to the question --- the answer is NO. A lot of the EDA packages (in the
<$10K range) are worse. Considering the cost of the software, the
inflexibility of the interfaces and the cost of the time it takes to
determine the incantations to be reasonably productive they are a lot
worse.

The user interface of gschem is quite good and getting better. It is a
productive package. The user interface of PCB is a longer learning curve
but is also improving. To be fair there are a *lot* more details and subtleties
in performing PCB layout than in schematic capture.

The two library methods are confusing. Every month a new user has a
parsing error problem which is followed by a scripting tool debate.
I like Dan's idea of generating footprints at install time. After a succesful
install you have one library method.

(* jcl *)

-- 
http://www.luciani.org


_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev