alternatives to eagle

[Anonymous]

Like me I'm sure many of you were using Eagle precisely because they did NOT have screw-your-customer-subscription-model.

I have been an eagle customer since 1.0.  I use to get tech support directly from Klaus 🙂  I'm so freaking disappointed.

I'll have to use 7.6.0 for the time being.  It seems stable enough that it may be good enough for my work for at least a couple of more years, maybe longer.

So I am looking for recommendations for a different schematic capture/board layout program.  The choices are getting quite thin.  A lot of ridiculously expensive pay-for-it-all-the-time programs out there.

I'll start things off with KiCAD which I have already seen mentioned several times.

http://kicad-pcb.org/

i have not used it yet, but I'll certainly be trying it out soon.

RIP Eagle.

[wingedpower]

Aside from it being an accounting/support issue, I never really got, from a practical standpoint, why when companies start offering a subscription model, why they don't offer the standalone pricing as well.

Adobe did this for Lightroom because of the strong demand for a standalone Lightroom. And in doing this(along with having a dual track upgrade/update policy), they were able to get people on board in both camps:

Those who weren't willing to go month-to-month, could pay up front for the software one time, understanding that updates to the standalone version may not come as frequently as it will for the cloud version.

Those who were willing to go month-to-month got the latest and freshest updates on a regular basis. 

It should be noted, though, that with Adobe, the user's content was never forced into the cloud. Cloud just meant that the software was installed from the cloud.

Given the IP rights management headaches that would result, it would not benefit Autodesk to force people to upload everything to the cloud. From what I understand, the only thing that is coming from the cloud is the software(for installation) and the occasional phone-home to validate right to use the software.


Having said that, if Autodesk is moving forward with a cloud model, why not do what the FPGA chip makers have done and make previous versions of the software free? I realize the business model is not the same. Ie, chipmakers make money from selling chips and Autodesk makes money from selling/licensing software. 🙂 But it would be nice to have a separate page for people who want to buy/signup for the pre-cloud version to do so, with the understanding that updates to that version will no longer happen. I mean, why turn away customers who are willing to pay for the software, so long as they understand what they are paying for? (Well, maybe updates for things that are broken/fixes/etc.)

I mean, the software is written. It's packaged. It's ready to be used. The licensing servers/engines/code hasn't gone anywhere. You have people who have noted they are committed to not going with the subscription model. Why not accept their patronage and sell them the standalone version and in a few years time, when they want the new features, can reconsider switching over?

[Anonymous]

I have been an EAGLE user for close to 5 years and just 12 days ago upgraded my single user licence to EAGLE 
Ultimate 
| 3 User | Perpetual License | 
Schematic + Layout + Autorouter. I chose EAGLE because it was widely accepted in the Maker community and beyond, and its purchase price was a mere 10% of ALTIUM's.

Based on my personal experience I committed my company to using EAGLE but am really shaken by AUTODESK's migration to a subscription model. I agonised through the unnecessarily ugly and painful Adobe process only to find that my favourite apps (Macromedia) were brutalised and eradicated in favour of inferior Adobe products.

Jetbrains tried the same tactic on its extensive programming user base only to be completely rejected. Their answer was to transform their per-product subscriptions into a very attractive product portfolio license that ended up being so attractive that making the choice to migrate became a "no-brainer." So I must point out that while subscriptions are not inherently evil, their implementations can be.

I perceive too much of the Harvard MBA/Adobe greed-based strategy in what I am reading about AUTODESK's value proposition, especially in the fact that they have not made any effort to include EAGLE's existing user base in developing or refining their new approach. This gives me pause to reflect on my reservations.

Furthermore, despite being a Mac user, my policy has always been to facilitate my staff's productivity ("each to his own") and this was a significant contributor to committing to EAGLE's cross-platform approach. In this regard I have always eschewed single platform (especially Windows) apps. AUTODESK is clearly committed to and experienced with Windows in its product portfolio. For decades, I considered AUTODESK products to be overly complex, ugly and arcane as far as the UI experience was concerned for designers, with the obvious exception of INVENTOR. I do not expect the EAGLE's UI to survive for long. It will be subsumed and transformed in the name uniformity, conformity and continuity of AUTODESK development activities.

Finally, I am appalled that we are all discussing up-front prices in our discussions. Our industries all accept the rule-of-thumb that the purchase price represents approximately 30% of the Total Cost of Ownership. That's right, ongoing costs can represent over double the initial Price! In my scenario and as has been pointed out by "246tnt" and "JanDeCeuster", that makes a multi-user multi-platform subscription almost prohibitively expensive!

I have always been impressed by the fact the CADSoft EAGLE was the exception to the "rule". However, even quick arithmetic shows that the new model falls right at the extreme upper end of the Rule-of-Thumb paradigm.

I would encourage AUTODESK to engage with its user community in developing their strategy and tactics, at least for EAGLE.

I would be sad to see the loss of EAGLE from my R&D toolbox mand workflow but "arnoldhuebsch" is right in observing that there could be a mass exodus of users.

[Anonymous]

The Cloud...

AUTODESK is forcing the user community to use "their" cloud for design storage. Well, I need to know where my design is physically located so that I can begin to understand the jurisdictional implications!

I live and work in Australia where I have reasonable grasp of the legal framework within which I operate. I am uncomfortable with some of the restrictions and limitations imposed upon me by a luddite government ruling a generally luddite populace.

What I don't want is for my work to be controlled by some foreign government following its own clandestine agenda. I don't want my information to be exposed to environment that may not accept or acknowledge my copyright to reuse or repurpose my design or creation. I don't care if that government is American, Chinese or Indian. In this day and age no government is trustworthy.

But what's worse is that the Cloud is non-deterministic, which means that I don't know where the "master" copy resides neither do I know how many "backups" exist, nor do I know where they are located. So even if I continue to subscribe but wish to remove my design documentation (that is, intellectual property), have I really removed it?

If I no longer subscribe, what obligations does the cloud provider have towards me and my intellectual property in perpetuity?

Who watches the watchers?

[Anonymous]

Couldn't agree more, I also fear that I/we will loose control of our designs, and stay as far away from the cloud as possible.

There is also the issue if you design something under a NDA or something like that, where do you then stand ?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

... There is also the issue if you design something under a NDA or something like that, where do you then stand ?

---

At the beginning of a long walk down a very short pier!

[jorge_garcia]

Hi bborun,

Only the licensing is cloud based. Your files and intellectual property are still on your computer in your possession.

Totally understand your concern though, and the data stays with you.

hth,
Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the link

also DipTrace looks well:

http://diptrace.com/

http://www.pulsonix.com/

perhaps DesignSpark, byt in my opinion it is focused on hobbysts

now I am considering purchasing DipTrace, any experience woul be appreciated.

Enough time to evaluate...

[jorge_garcia]

Hi AdiGital_Eu,

You can download V7.7 from ftp.cadsoft.de/eagle/program. Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

jorge,

please note that the url you keep posting to download 7.7 does not work:

Object not found!

The requested URL was not found on this server. If you entered the URL manually please check your spelling and try again.

If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster.

Error 404ftp.cadsoft.de
Fri Jan 20 23:36:51 2017
Apache/2.2.13 (Linux/SUSE)

here are the correct urls for download 7.7  

http://web.cadsoft.de/ftp/eagle/program/7.7/eagle-lin32-7.7.0.run
http://web.cadsoft.de/ftp/eagle/program/7.7/eagle-lin64-7.7.0.run
http://web.cadsoft.de/ftp/eagle/program/7.7/eagle-mac64-7.7.0.zip
http://web.cadsoft.de/ftp/eagle/program/7.7/eagle-win32-7.7.0.exe
http://web.cadsoft.de/ftp/eagle/program/7.7/eagle-win64-7.7.0.exe 

Dave 

[jorge_garcia]

Hi Dave,
It does work if your browser supports ftp downloads. Sometimes companies block ftp downloads. I use Firefox and Chrome here and they both reach that site. The advantage of the link I give is that it covers all versions of EAGLE where as these links are only covering V7.4.0.

You can also use something like WinSCP to do the ftp download, some users may find that easier.

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

jorge,

i corrected the URLs for 7.7 instead of the 7.4...

i just had 10 people on the irc test the url, not one of them is able to access it... i also tested with chrome and firefox on both ubuntu 16 and windows 10....

Dave

edit: this url does work - ftp://ftp.cadsoft.de/eagle/program

[Anonymous]

Works for me.  I even downloaded a copy of 6.6...

Regards,

Doug

[Anonymous]

---

@jorge.garcia wrote:

.................
Hopefully seeing all of the improvements made to EAGLE in the short amount of time can convince many to stick around or at least come back in due time.
.................

---

Hi Jorge,

migration to another tool (and honestly, there are enough good alternatives) is not extremely expensive as to money, but the largest investment is the plenty of time spent with learning, testing, library building and so on. So I do not expect many of those, who will leave, would come back under any circumstances. As preparing the migration, I think guys from DipTrace, Pulsonix, KiCAD and others must be very happy observing what Autodesk is making with good old EAGLE...

[Anonymous]

Hello Autodesk,

I've planned for this year to buy a premium version of Eagle, so I that I'll be able to create PCBs with more than 160 * 100m².

I dropped this investment.

Reason: your new purchase model

Instead, I will look for an alternative such as KiCAD.

And I will from now on NOT recommend Eagle anymore.

I'm using Eagle since 1994 and was always satisfied with its performance.

A really disappointed user.

Mounty

Edit:
The eevblog gives also a thumbs down:

http://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-965-the-(autodesk)-eagle-has-crashed/

Just in case the URL is getting removed: search for eevblog --> forum #965 (e.g. using google)

[andre.schmeets]

When using your browser to access an ftp server, try:   ftp://ftp.cadsoft.de/eagle/program/

Autodesk

Andre Schmeets

[Anonymous]

---

@wingedpower wrote:

Aside from it being an accounting/support issue, I never really got, from a practical standpoint, why when companies start offering a subscription model, why they don't offer the standalone pricing as well.

Adobe did this for Lightroom because of the strong demand for a standalone Lightroom. And in doing this(along with having a dual track upgrade/update policy), they were able to get people on board in both camps:

---

AVID has it with ProTools too to offer a perpetual license with an optional maintenance for updates.

Instead of an online authorization they use iLok for license management. Sure, using an online authorization, a license server for floating licenses or iLok which you can plug into any system you want to to use right now (besides authorize a machine without iLok) - all have pros and cons.

[justinulysses · Accepted solution]

There is no cloud, there's only somebody else's computer.  In this case, it's Autodesk's servers that must be accessible in order to run the software.  When those servers go offline (because the company went out of business due to their crummy business model, or simply dropped or sold Eagle due to poor sales after this fiasco, or any number of reasons beyond your control) it won't matter if my files are stored locally or on the Autodesk computer formerly known as the cloud.  I won't be able to access them because I won't be able to run that Eagle software.  That is why I won't move to a subscription model.  Autodesk is now the third owner of this title, so to pretend you have any control over it in the future is laughable.  

I can keep running 6.6 until a necessary hardware upgrade eventually forces me into a version of the MacOS that breaks Eagle 6.6 functionality.  At that point, as a professional user who makes a living in large part designing circuit boards, I'll have to move to something else.

Seriously, you guys. Let us know when you abandon this silliness and decide to offer a perpetual license.  Sure, offer the subscription model in parallel for the hobbyists and the clowns who don't bother securing their work or their investment.  But those of us who know what we're doing are going to run software that works without connecting to your server.

ulysses

[Anonymous]

---

@justinulysses wrote:

[…] In this case, it's Autodesk's servers that must be accessible in order to run the software.  When those servers go offline (because the company went out of business due to their crummy business model, or simply dropped or sold Eagle due to poor sales after this fiasco, or any number of reasons beyond your control) it won't matter if my files are stored locally or on the Autodesk computer formerly known as the cloud.  I won't be able to access them because I won't be able to run that Eagle software.  That is why I won't move to a subscription model.  Autodesk is now the third owner of this title, so to pretend you have any control over it in the future is laughable.  

I can keep running 6.6 until a necessary hardware upgrade eventually forces me into a version of the MacOS that breaks Eagle 6.6 functionality.  At that point, as a professional user who makes a living in large part designing circuit boards, I'll have to move to something else.

Seriously, you guys. Let us know when you abandon this silliness and decide to offer a perpetual license.  Sure, offer the subscription model in parallel for the hobbyists and the clowns who don't bother securing their work or their investment.  But those of us who know what we're doing are going to run software that works without connecting to your server.

ulysses

---

Looks like I can't send a private message to ulysses, as I'm not an Enterprise Customer I'm told when I click the button.

In fact, this happened to me with Bias-Inc. and their two track audio editor Peak when they closed business. Thankfully their license server is still online and I could change machines in the last years. It's till running up to OS X 10.12 (even better than under OS X 10.10). For the worst case I even bought a server license of OS X 10.6.8 to run one license in a virtual machine if it becomes necessary.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

 In fact, this happened to me with Bias-Inc. and their two track audio editor Peak when they closed business. Thankfully their license server is still online and I could change machines in the last years. It's till running up to OS X 10.12 (even better than under OS X 10.10). For the worst case I even bought a server license of OS X 10.6.8 to run one license in a virtual machine if it becomes necessary.

---

That's what I meant in my posting "I must provide long term support for my designs" (2017-01-20) and why I never buy any such software for EE projects, even if it is better, cheaper or has some other benefit.

Oliver

[bmeyer8J5TU]

I hope you're doing well. At this point we only have subscription based licenses. We definitely want to keep our customers, but we know that this is something that some are not used to and some won't accept.

Hopefully seeing all of the improvements made to EAGLE in the short amount of time can convince many to stick around or at least come back in due time.

Hello Jorge,  

With the amount of distrust and bad blood that the whole licensing issue has generated, I honestly do not think that this is going to be the case.  

EDA tools are not, and should not, be confused with the run-of-the-mill applications such as MS Office (and say Word for example).  

With EDA tools, there is a *huge* investment in time that a user has to put into a tool to become efficient.  

For a user to switch an EDA tool - especially if they have been using their current tool for any length of time, means they are effectively throwing away a huge investment of time (not only in the basic familiarity with the existing tool, but also with any customised workflow and any library base that they may have built up over time).  

This is *not* something that they are going to be doing lightly and on a whim.  

For a user to get so irate and cranky with the vendor that it would push them to switch (and that means that they are willing to accept that they are going to loose this time investment and IP investment), I am pretty sure that you will *NEVER* get that user back again.  

The other thing that is definitely *NOT* helping your cause at all is the:

        "Lets go quiet and hope it all dies of it's own"

All that is inciting is speculation and further bad blood.  If that is what the PR department is telling you to do, then you need to quietly take them aside and beat them with a stupid stick.  

If Autodesk are to dig themselves out of this mess, they need to be thinking this through *very* carefully, and they need to be acting and then following this up, otherwise it will get worse ... not better.  

What that means is that if the current model is here to stay and that is final, then this should be communicated in clear and concise language and acknowledge that for certain customers, they will need to find an alternative product .... "Don't beat about the bush" (ask Matt what that means if you don't understand the comment).  

Be up front, be honest and and definitely don't bullish*t.  Let your existing user base *know* where they currently stand.  Saying nothing is in effect saying "we don't care for your business so go elsewhere", but in a weasel way.  

/BGM