PCB CAD

[Don Prescott]

I'd rather hear you make a compelling case for using closed source
tools. I heard you the first 10 times when you said, "open source PCB
sucks".
Now let's hear from you why close source PCB CAD is so great.

In any of the messages have you seen me use the term "open source PCB
sucks"....?

What I am saying is that in commercial organisations the EDA tools are
a means to an end only; a link in the chain leading to the final
production product. These organisations buy products that are ready
to use, reliable, and are supported. How to you think Cadence brings
in $1billion a year...? A hard-node, skunkwork, Engineering VP is
unlikely to be interested in considering an open source solution if a
commercial product is available. AND they are available at all sorts
of prices. Nowadays, quality PCB CAD products can be purchased for
several hundred dollars.

If you say I'm wrong then OK show me well known companies that do use
open source PCB CAD solutions for their mainstream PCB design
operation. AND PLEASE don't come back with words or phrases I haven't
used, or refer to non-PCB CAD apps like FPGA or file servers.

Prescott

 

[David]

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:00:32 -0800, Don Prescott wrote:

[OT Question] Why do you keep starting new threads, rather than continuing
posting in the same thread?

I'd rather hear you make a compelling case for using closed source
tools. I heard you the first 10 times when you said, "open source PCB
sucks".
Now let's hear from you why close source PCB CAD is so great.

In any of the messages have you seen me use the term "open source PCB
sucks"....?

Several of your messages could be summed up as saying "all open source
software sucks, and no commercial organisation would use them for
something important, especially not pcb design".

What I am saying is that in commercial organisations the EDA tools are
a means to an end only; a link in the chain leading to the final
production product. These organisations buy products that are ready
to use, reliable, and are supported. How to you think Cadence brings

If you are happy now to retract your previous claims regarding open source
software in general, and concentrate on specifically pcb design software,
then that's fair enough. As someone who does schematic design, pcb
design, fpga development and embedded systems programming, I have a
tendancy to lump together a lot more under the heading "EDA" than just pcb
design.

in $1billion a year...? A hard-node, skunkwork, Engineering VP is
unlikely to be interested in considering an open source solution if a
commercial product is available. AND they are available at all sorts
of prices. Nowadays, quality PCB CAD products can be purchased for
several hundred dollars.

Only a half-wit, PHB would not consider using an open source solution. I
think in the case of pcb design software, as it stands today, few
(outside the very lowest budget users, or those with particular
requirements for openness) would choose it simply because there are
commercial packages that provide a better solution for most uses. In the
future, as the open source packages develope, then who knows which will
make the most sense?

My point is not that there are open source pcb design tools available
today that are a good choice for a commercial organisation - they are not
currently suitable for my own uses, and I doubt if they are suitable for
more than a small percentage of users. It is merely that the idea of
dismissing open source software out of hand simply because there are
commercial alternatives is absurd - it's an old-fashioned and out of date
prejudice that is being repeatedly proven unwise in other software fields.

If you say I'm wrong then OK show me well known companies that do use
open source PCB CAD solutions for their mainstream PCB design
operation. AND PLEASE don't come back with words or phrases I haven't
used, or refer to non-PCB CAD apps like FPGA or file servers.

Prescott

 

Most humble apologies for the ruffling of feathers Clearly it was
unfair treatment to say that your posts suggested you thought Open
Source PCB software "sucks".

I am glad that you do not think it "sucks", however let me point out
some of the things you said, verbatim that IMHO indicate to the broader
audience that you think it does "suck":

-"raw, unsupported, buggy, pieces of software "
-"Useless if you're trying to design a real product that's gotta go out
the door on time"

You are correct. You did not say it sucks.

My bad.

Chris


Don Prescott wrote:

I'd rather hear you make a compelling case for using closed source
tools. I heard you the first 10 times when you said, "open source
PCB
sucks".
Now let's hear from you why close source PCB CAD is so great.

In any of the messages have you seen me use the term "open source PCB
sucks"....?

What I am saying is that in commercial organisations the EDA tools
are
a means to an end only; a link in the chain leading to the final
production product. These organisations buy products that are ready
to use, reliable, and are supported. How to you think Cadence brings
in $1billion a year...? A hard-node, skunkwork, Engineering VP is
unlikely to be interested in considering an open source solution if a
commercial product is available. AND they are available at all sorts
of prices. Nowadays, quality PCB CAD products can be purchased for
several hundred dollars.

If you say I'm wrong then OK show me well known companies that do use
open source PCB CAD solutions for their mainstream PCB design
operation. AND PLEASE don't come back with words or phrases I
haven't
used, or refer to non-PCB CAD apps like FPGA or file servers.

Prescott