Ok, I'll try to say this the most polite way possible : I cannot fathom the fact that you are charging money for this software.
I haven't even touch the PCB layout UI, only schematic and component library, and I'm amazed on how bad this software is. Granted, I used Altium in the past (and about to go back to it ngl).
Item #1 : Please, please, please, Dark UI. NOT BACKGROUND. (Copy Altium on that).
Item #2 : I can't adjust the pin length in symbols, I can only choose between 3 length, all three set on imperial dimension. I work in metric, I want to have my pin length in mm, otherwise I'm always off grid and I hate it. In fact, I want to have my pin length as I please. Don't even think to propose that I select the "point" length and trace lines. I would be very insulted.
Item#3 : When adding a component to the schematic, can't use the spacebar to rotate, but when I MOVE the component, I can rotate it with spacebar... What in the schottky diode is this...
item #4 and #5 : Sometimes, it is good to put 2 identical pin/pad name. LET ME PUT THE SAME NAME ON TWO PINS/PAD. In fact, do like Altium, let me name the pin/pad as I please, and put a designator as ID, which is unique.
Item#6 : I need a library to put power ports. This software is 4 year old for heaven's sake. I should be able to add power port with 1 click. Altium does it since DXP... Eagle did it if I'm not mistaken.
Item#7 : Importing STEP files for packages. Ok, you made the choice that Fusion will be 100% cloud. I'm OK with this, when it's well made. When I want to add a 3D body to my package, a non standard 3D body, I need to UPLOAD the step file into the cloud, then I need to wait (your bandwidth is bad, let just put it that way), then I need to add to the current design, click OK to place, then I need to break the link (otherwise I cannot delete it from my workplace), and THEN, I can position it properly. Once saved, then I go to the original step file and delete it (because why would I keep the original Step file ?). Do you know how many clicks I need to do in Altium to do the exact same thing ? 3 clicks. I click first on 3D body, then browse, then OK. And no waiting after updload BS.
Item#8 : I cannot see my footprint and 3D body togheter, always one or the other, I find it easier to trace component perimeter on the overlay layer when I can switch rapidly from 2D to 3D.
Item#9 : The net label tool is frustating to use. If I place a Net label on a net, I expect the net to take the new name. I can place a net label on a net, and the net won't change. Just call it text then. Furthermore, if I change the net name at one place, it changes everywhere... Context : I have two CAN busses, both name similar, but the first is CAN1 and the other is CAN3. I made a typo, and named CAN1_L and then CAN1_L again (I was supposed to put CAN3_L). Cannot just change it, I need to delete the net altoghter otherwise if I change the second, the first changes also.
Item#10 : Speaking of text, I cannot put a text BOX ????? Let say I need to add instructions or explaination on my schematics, that... I don't know, have 30 words in it. You expect me to manually do the line return ?
Item#11 : Unstable : it crashes a lot, especially in component editor.
Item#12 : The NC option on symbol pins should be done in the schematic, not in symbol editor. If you want me to explain why, please find a new occupation.
The 3D part of fusion (to create standard packages) works very well. That's about the only positive aspect I found to this software.
I tried the SnapEDA plugin, works OK, but I still need to import the generated component into my library from another, which is again many clicks.
For me, all items presented here are fixable in a short period of time, I highly doubt you go into meetings and ask "how can we make the day of our users worst ?", but it sure feels like this, especially when you check the sheer amount of ranting in these forums.
Edit : I removed a sentence where I was not being polite.
I added the net changing every where at item#9.
Regards,
Antoine
Hi Antoine,
I can totally feel your frustration but really appreciate you taking the time to list out the things you have come across and this will be incredibly helpful for us to make the application better. We have already shared your findings with the team.
Thanks!
Hello @agpinard,
Just to give you some small tips to alleviate some of these.
#2 You can use a metric grid but for schematic symbols you should stick to the default grid spacing of 0.1"(2.54mm) deviating from it will make it difficult to get connections to line up. That's why the pin lengths are multiples of that default spacing.
#3 The spacebar working for rotate is actually incidental. The recommended approach for rotation in Fusion is to use Right-click.
#4 and #5 Pin names must be unique in electronics. You can work around this in 2 ways. If you want to have a 1:1 relationship between symbol and footprint then you can use the @ symbol to give pins the same name. For example, GND@1, GND@2, GND@3, etc. In the schematic editor they will all appear as GND.
The other more preferred approach is to use a single GND pin and tie all the individual GND pads to it.
#6 If I'm translating Altium's jargon correctly, we call these supply symbols. There are multiple libraries containing these and you can even rename them to attach them to whatever power net you want.
#9The label command just surfaces the current net name.
One thing that may help, is to level set that Fusion and Altium are different programs with different lineages and behave in different way. Only Altium behaves like Altium, give Fusion a little time get to know it's nuances.
Happy to help with any questions you may have.
Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.
Best Regards,
Hi Jorge,
I know that Fusion will behave differently, but the fact remains that I lose effeciency while using Fusion. I would be better off with Kicad, which is free. In my opinion, your main problem is that you tried to adapt a 3D parametric design software to make 2D design. It does not work, it can't.
Also, I hope it was clear in my ranting : Fusion does what it's supposed to, but it does so in a way that I loose time if I continue to use it. I gave it a try because we already work with AutoCAD, Inventor and the Vault, so integrating design on Fusion would (should? haven't tried yet) be easy and trouble free, but I was deeply troubled by the commnents on this forum... So I gave it a try anyway, but now I'll live with the extra steps of integrating designs made on another software to improve the time required to develop.
Furthermore, you only propose workarounds or plainy admit that your software cannot do that. How can I trust that you'll improve the basics while those have been pointed out again and again by your user base ? I don't beleive you can, as your approach, in my opinion, is doomed from the start.
I do hope Autodesk will come up with an effective solution, because the idea behind is very good.
Regards,
Antoine
Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.