Altium Circuit Studio??

[DerekG]

basic drafting rules
- crossing lines NEVER connect
- T junctions ALWAYS connect

Yes, this is clearly set down in the international drafting standard & should be adhered to by all serious/professional users. In this way, the schematics are clearly understood by all readers, no matter what country they reside in.

[IconicPCB]

"I" before "E" except after "C"?

We have all been taught the rule, but Richard Lederer has compiled a list of 144 exceptions in his book Adventures of a Verbifore. When in doubt about the spelling of a word, go to a dictionary.

[Bud]

IconicPCB, Can you decipher your cryptic message?

[Bud]

in Altium there is an option under: dxp\preferences\schematic\general - in the options area it has: 'break wires at autojunction'

No such option in CS. Also there is no menu anymore, they changed to stupid ribbon which only takes screen real estate, brings confusion and makes things hard to find.

EDIT: And the ribbon looks ugly... childish color scheme and crude graphics, as if they were trying to mimic Android Lollipop 

[Bud]

I believe that 'X' junctions are bad form, and are to be avoided in schematics.  This is why Altium doesn't like them.

I do not think this is true, there was no problem whatsoever with X junctions in Altium (last checked 2-3 years ago).
This is how wiring looked in Altium and how it looks now imported into CS. Who the hell wants arcs at wire crossovers? To me it makes schematic cluttered and looking archaic as if it was drawn 70 years ago.

[IconicPCB]

Bud
You have deciphered the message.

There are rules and then there is how You like it...  in my opinion... as was echoed so many times in the past.

[ElektroQuark]

... this is clearly set down in the international drafting standard & should be adhered to by all serious/professional users...

Derek,

Can you provide a link or reference? I would like to have that document. Thank you.

[ajb]

Someone please convince me this is a feature and not a bug. I am trying to connect points A and B with a wire, and it removes the junction at  the A point and changes to unconnected crossover to point B !

It's probably a feature to avoid Altium's unreliable handling of 4-way junctions.  It's been known to spontaneously convert crossover junctions to unconnected crossovers.  Bit me once when working with a schematic drawn by someone else, and all the sudden several nets were broken.

I'd say preventing crossover junctions entirely is vastly preferable to allowing crossover junctions that spontaneously disappear.

[Rigby]

I believe that 'X' junctions are bad form, and are to be avoided in schematics.  This is why Altium doesn't like them.

I do not think this is true, there was no problem whatsoever with X junctions in Altium (last checked 2-3 years ago).
This is how wiring looked in Altium and how it looks now imported into CS. Who the hell wants arcs at wire crossovers? To me it makes schematic cluttered and looking archaic as if it was drawn 70 years ago.

Oh, I thought you meant an actual point where 4 wires connect electrically with the junction.

You're talking about just drawing them over each other.  That's different.  Earlier in the thread... I think it was this thread... Someone listed the preference location to change it from the jumps to non-jumps.  It's around somewhere.

[Bud]

Do you guys think Altium will jack up CS price every year by a few hundred $$ as they do it for Altium Designer ?

[george graves]

Do you guys think Altium will jack up CS price every year by a few hundred $$ as they do it for Altium Designer ?

No way.  Lower it each year...or go with the subscription model everyone is talking about.

[DerekG]

... this is clearly set down in the international drafting standard & should be adhered to by all serious/professional users...

Derek,

Can you provide a link or reference? I would like to have that document. Thank you.

The Standard is IEC60617, but the annual subscription is 600 Swiss Franks. Purchasers must sign a non-disclosure agreement & every copy purchased contains a watermark with the name of the purchaser on every page.

http://std.iec.ch/iec60617

But here is a public explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_diagram

Note that Circuit Schematics are considered as a collection of CAD Symbols.

[BloodyCactus]

Do you guys think Altium will jack up CS price every year by a few hundred $$ as they do it for Altium Designer ?

No way.  Lower it each year...or go with the subscription model everyone is talking about.

what track record can you point to that show this is what altium do with their pricing?

Right? It goes UP every year, not down.

so once your 11 months into your 12 month support sub, suddenly next year it goes from 500 to 800... then 11 months later its 1200, then 11 months later its 1500.

I have NO faith it would remain at 500.

[ElektroQuark]

... this is clearly set down in the international drafting standard & should be adhered to by all serious/professional users...

Derek,

Can you provide a link or reference? I would like to have that document. Thank you.

The Standard is IEC60617, but the annual subscription is 600 Swiss Franks. Purchasers must sign a non-disclosure agreement & every copy purchased contains a watermark with the name of the purchaser on every page.

http://std.iec.ch/iec60617

But here is a public explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_diagram

Note that Circuit Schematics are considered as a collection of CAD Symbols.

Thank you.

[Chipguy]

Hi !

I am an Eagle user since 1990. In fact I still have the 3 pcs 5.25" 360kByte discs with Eagle 2.0 on it.

Since a few years Eagle development seems to have got stuck in the past. There is no real 3D integration.
The Eagle Layout Editor can't even flip the board so you get the bottom layer first. And of course this also means you cant do anything 3D in the layout like 3 axis rotation.

For those who don't know, Cadsoft's aim was to make an "Easy usable graphical layout editor", that's what the "E.A.G.L.E." in german actually stands for "Einfach Anzuwendender Grafischer Layout Editor". However a 3D integration won't make the software harder to use since you are not forced to place or edit any 3D objects. It could still be made so you won't have to bother with them.

So eventually I had to switch to Altium Designer since late 2013, a decision I don't regret.
The 3D integration in this could be much better, but it is usable. Placing object by entering numbers is a bit daft, but it works.

Farnell seems to have figured out that only supporting Cadsoft Eagle is not the future and they started to talk to other players in the market who are not depending on the goodwill of a handful coders who are heading towards their pensionists age. New competition like free KiCad won't make it easier for them. And Cadsoft survival will depend on bringing Eagle into the 3D makerworld or not.

We shall see.

[DerekG]

Since a few years Eagle development seems to have got stuck in the past.

Unfortunately this is true. Once a world leader in this field, Cadsoft has been falling behind at an ever increasing rate. Farnell purchased CadSoft Computer GmbH in September 2009 for the purpose of integrating the Farnell/element 14 component database into the CAD software. This was to drive sales of electronic components which were hit pretty hard after the 2008 GFC.

Farnell seems to have figured out that only supporting Cadsoft Eagle is not the future

Cadsoft has not performed well since 2010. Sales have been down & profits dipped this past year such that Farnell formed the opinion that it should no longer be their flagship CAD offering.

and they started to talk to other players in the market

Farnell were left with no choice. They have tried for 4 years now to push around the management of Cadsoft to get improvements in the EAGLE offering ............ with little success.

a handful coders who are heading towards their pensionists age.

You have hit the nail on the head. There has been no substantial new blood added to their coding team since the takeover in 2009. The existing coders at Cadsoft are in fact now all pretty close to retiring.

Cadsoft survival will depend on bringing Eagle into the 3D makerworld or not.

3D aside, it may already be too late.

Farnell's management are pretty unhappy with the lack of EAGLE development since they took over the reins. They have tried several initiatives to force Cadsoft to move into the 21st century, but unfortunately none of the movers & shakers on the board are coders, which means they can pretty easily have the wool pulled over their eyes.

In the end they were forced to look elsewhere for this expertise. They saw a glimmer of hope when Altium announced CircuitMaker .............. and put a proposal to Altium that Altium could hardly resist.

The result is Circuit Studio. Yes, it is rather green around the edges & has some compatibility problems with AD, but they have done a pretty good job in just 6 months.

Give it another 6 months & users will find that Circuit Studio will be improved substantially.

[Chipguy]

The problem I have with Circuit Studio is that the price seems to be around 2500 EUR/USD.

Even for a smaller company that is a lot of money.
For private use that's already too much. You need a price that has only 3 digits or maybe something starting with a "1" and having 4 digits.

It seems that Fartnell has now another problem: One is "Cheap but useless" (to many people), the other one "Useful but too expensive"
I got 2 Eagle versions, one for work and one for personal/private use and I am not able to just purchase Circuit Studio or Altium Designer (around 5600 EUR) for private use.

However I have not updated to Eagle 7.x, not in Work, nor private.
They really thought that prople are going to buy a new version when the only added feature was a much more restricted license system ?!? 
No wonder the sales go down.

After a huge storm of complains (including mine) they went back to the old license system in 7.1 but to me the damage to their reputation was already done. As a loyal customer and user since 25 years now I really felt treated like garbage.
The number of unlicensed Eagle installations must have plummeted since there are usable free tools out there like KiCAD, because one thing is clear: Open source software and free software projects have helped to decrease the illegal use of commecial software but also decreased the market share of the big players. Both to me are good things.

[djsb]

I keep getting emails off my local Altium reseller asking me do I want to buy a new license. Never again is the answer to that question. I was under the impression that Altium was about to bring out a low cost/free version of their software (CircuitMaker) but I'm still waiting for the invitation to download a beta version. I've had a quick look at a video on youtube done by Fedevel about CircuitStudio and I tried to find the price just out of curiosity. I'm afraid I'm going to stick with my perpetual License for AD release 10 and do the rest of my work on the ever improving KiCAD (new stable release in a couple of months).

[DerekG]

The problem I have with Circuit Studio is that the price seems to be around 2500 EUR/USD.

Almost US$3000 actually.
Some years ago, Altium substantially reduced the price of AD in the hope of selling lots more licences. This new methodology did not work out as expected & so Altium have increased their price of AD significantly over the past couple of years. Circuit Studio is now Altium's new attempt to attract this lower end market. I believe this will be much more successful than CircuitMaker, so much so that CircuitMaker will go nowhere. Time will tell of course.

Even for a smaller company that is a lot of money.
For private use that's already too much. You need a price that has only 3 digits or maybe something starting with a "1" and having 4 digits.

Take a look at DipTrace & Proteus. Both are much more powerful than KiCAD.

It seems that Farnell has now another problem: One is "Cheap but useless" (to many people), the other one "Useful but too expensive"

EAGLE is certainly not useless. It has many thousands of users. The problem for Cadsoft is that their users are like their coders. They are both getting older & closing in on retirement.

New board designers are now very well informed via the internet. They now compare & evaluate several pcb design programs & almost invariably they do not choose EAGLE. The end result is that EAGLE's user base is shrinking.

Once engineers become aware of this, the last thing they want to do is to jump aboard a sinking ship.

I got 2 Eagle versions, one for work and one for personal/private use and I am not able to just purchase Circuit Studio or Altium Designer (around 5600 EUR) for private use.
They really thought that people are going to buy a new version when the only added feature was a much more restricted license system ?!? 
No wonder the sales go down.
After a huge storm of complains (including mine) they went back to the old license system in 7.1 but to me the damage to their reputation was already done. As a loyal customer and user since 25 years now I really felt treated like garbage.

Don't think that Altium treats its customers any better. Protel 6.7 suffered a problem in ver 2.8 (released in 1996) with the RHS scroll when in full screen mode. Altium's sales department promised that is was fixed in AD 6.7 in 2006 (10 years later). It was not.

Then AD 6.9 suffered a serious problem with the renditioning of the layers. The only way to actually "see" what would be in your Gerbers was to check everything in single layer layer mode.

Whilst I believe that Protel/Altium led the field by a large margin (in the lower end price range) in the 1990's up to about 2005, I do not believe this is currently the case for new users who must pay for a full subscription price first up. There are now a number of great alternatives that have forced Altium to once again look at a lower cost offering (ie Circuit Studio).

[up8051]

The main problem for me is that the CircutCtudio  does not have  migration path from old Protel products :
Autotrax 1.61 (DOS version)
Protel for Windows
Protel Design Explorer 99Se

[DerekG]

The main problem for me is that the CircutCtudio  does not have  migration path from old Protel products :
Autotrax 1.61 (DOS version)
Protel for Windows
Protel Design Explorer 99Se

You can open Autotrax (DOS) files in PFW & Protel 99SE.
I think Protel 99SE will allow you use a PCAD ASCII export filter. I no longer have it loaded, so you will need to check this.
You can then read the PCAD file into EAGLE (download the free version). Convert the file to an EAGLE .brd file.
You can now open the .brd file in Circuit Studio.

........... or (I have it on good authority) you can wait another 6 months & several more import filters will be offered in Circuit Studio. Some of these will be for the previous Protel formats.

[DerekG]

I have just received (by email) the latest CircuitMaker Newsletter.

You can read it at this weblink:
http://go.altium.com/index.php/email/emailWebview?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRolv6nKce%2FhmjTEU5z17OktXKW3hIkz2EFye%2BLIHETpodcMScRrN7HYDBceEJhqyQJxPr3NLdcNydNqRhHlCQ%3D%3D

[Rigby]

The main problem for me is that the CircutCtudio  does not have  migration path from old Protel products :
Autotrax 1.61 (DOS version)
Protel for Windows
Protel Design Explorer 99Se

I'm pretty sure you can choose to install Protel importers when you install CircuitMaker.  I have a friend in the beta.

[fuubar67]

I was looking at CS, I have an opportunity to start with a new PCB system from ground up, but the budget is tight.
CS was an option, but I have to agree that it was gutted too much for 3K price point.

I have to thank you for pointing me to Proteus, I have wasted enough time on CS.

After talking to a local sales from Altium, the guys appear to have grown very arrogant and no longer care about supporting the mid range contractors. 

[DerekG]

CS was an option, but I have to agree that it was gutted too much for 3K price point.

I have to thank you for pointing me to Proteus, I have wasted enough time on CS.

I'm glad you're enjoying it. Yes, Proteus is great software at a good price. I use it regularly.

DipTrace is another good package too. I'm spending quite a bit of time with the developer's forum to improve it, particularly with shortcuts to narrow the advantage Altium has.

After talking to a local sales from Altium, the guys appear to have grown very arrogant and no longer care about supporting the mid range contractors. 

You have hit the nail on the head. Now you know why I have regularly written:

"I dislike Altium the software & I dislike Altium the Company even more."

I believe it is a culture that was nurtured by Nick Martin, the founder of Protel. He was arrogant when I met him at an Altium Seminar in Adelaide in ~2000. His arrogance has rubbed off onto others at Altium over the years.

Nick has now left the company but I see that his arrogance remains with those who are left.