Lutetium-
Hack Chat Transcript, Part 4
04/10/2019 at 20:08 • 0 comments![]()
What features am I missing out on?![]()
Would I need them?![]()
4 layer board, a few restrictions on board size.![]()
using the "real" software for years noone could ever like openSCAD or FreeCAD :)![]()
feratures? none![]()
I dont cripple features for free or paid.![]()
Right, so just workspace size, but all functionality is included![]()
amount of layers is kind of a feature though :)![]()
that was something I was pretty heavily against.![]()
yah, I suppose.![]()
@Josh Lloyd yes.![]()
So I wouldn't be left wanting by that drool real?![]()
i there any talk about working on the hobby PnP integration? Some people are starting to play with "low" cost PnP and it seems like software integration is a problem.![]()
Nice.![]()
so they used to have something like 30 SKUs for eagle when we acquired it...I reduced it to 3![]()
but yea, what is keeping Eagle from using the same Model as Fusion?![]()
again, do you look at other CAD packages regularly for features and good ideas?![]()
@Andrew Sowa so I have a couple of the neoden machines and I have both connecting to eagle.![]()
@Andrew Sowa where exactly would be the problem? You pretty much need a CSV and that's it![]()
Does Eagle or any other CAD program plan to add disability aid features for users with dexterity or vision issues?![]()
@Jan yep, though technically I worked in many of those companies and drove (some of) the product decisions![]()
Oh - its $100 a year. Hmm. Yeah I can see why if its an unlimited version ( of 4 layers )![]()
after all it would be quite stupid to not look at what the others do, right?![]()
@Jakob Wulfkind actually that's a good point, I would love to explore it more. I want to be sure that we make the SW accessible to as many folks as possible,![]()
Re: what @Andrew said about PNP - @technolomaniac - and Referencing what you said 35 minutes ago: "eventually build a tool that included the entire ecad, mcad, & mfg workflow." Fusion360 contains a number of workspaces, and the integrated CAM is probably a huge game changer for many in the mcad mfg space. If you look at ecad and e-mfg, not a lot has changed, at least fundamentally, recently. What do you think is next that might be a game changer in e-mfg?![]()
@Jan yeah, and truth be told, most of THOSE tools <names deleted> did this to get what they have...![]()
of course they did...![]()
@Rob Roberts good point...actually just the concept of nesting for sheet metal is super interesting when it comes to panelization of boards. there is a LOT of overlap there.![]()
oh, sheet metal is an awesome topic on its own....![]()
@Arsenijs I don't have much experience with it yet, but everyone I talk too complains about setup issues. There is also the option on going further into the toolchain and generating cam data in fusion.![]()
one of the things I like much better in Inventor than in SW :)![]()
@Andrew Sowa actually the machine shop is one of Fusion's strongest & most loyal user bases...the tech in there is actually one of the gold standards for machining (HSM) and the workflow is far easier than I'd found it in other tools![]()
@Andrew Sowa @Arsenijs there's more to it than just have the CSV![]()
I can totally see that, CAM in Fusion is amazing, especially for the price![]()
@technolomaniac The F360 <-> EAGLE workflow, is that available in the free version? I assume that too is included when you say you don't limit features.![]()
I can do setup, sim and post in under 15 mins for most jobs but I tend to do a lot of small, detailed machining wax models for silicon molds.![]()
I would really like to try that out![]()
it is available![]()
Nice! I love F360 and I'm pushing my wife to it from SolidWorks, but obviously KiCad's mCAD integration is very poor![]()
I agree the cam is easy to use for machining. I have done a few contoured wood projects and have some aluminum projects in the queue![]()
@Josh Lloyd don't get divorced over trying that pls![]()
@Josh Lloyd yes. and the nice thing is that the PCB is an item in the timeline with a sketch that defines it's shape...that will make things MUCH easier as a change in a feature (like if you project a face to produce an enclosure) will change the enclosure or likewise, you can cascade the change back to the board.![]()
@morgan such as? I work with a pick&place, and the only thing I need from KiCad is a .pos file, essentially a .csv with position info, references and values![]()
@technolomaniac That's excellent! I love the linked featured in F360.![]()
@Josh Lloyd this results in never having to rebuild joints and reinsert step models to make the enclosure again![]()
that sounds nice indeed![]()
@technolomaniac Last time I checked, when specifying constraints in Sketch mode, I cannot type a name of a parameter, or a math function, instead of just a number. This was a feature I expected. Am I using it wrong or is it not present?![]()
absolutely, the only reason why I'm still considering KiCad for non profit open source work is the limitations of Eagle to free users, doing anything in 4 layers immediately looks out everyone who doesn't have a license :(![]()
*locks![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle also, the Python API is a godsend when you want to do more advanced stuff![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle Its strange because, compared to a sallary, $100 a year isn't that much. But it does feel much, like, I haven't dived in yet and just paid for it and thought "Whew, no more KiCad". I guess because I'm not sure I'm going to be satisfied. I need to feel satisfied with the decision before I make it.![]()
@Josh Lloyd formulas work.![]()
One of the things I like to do for my clients is examine potential failure scenarios caused by heat or mechanical issues -- I find the components that would be most likely to fail due to proximity to a heat sink, height from the board, or proximity to a moving part, and then look and see how their failure would impact the schematic. Right now I do that just by making a copy of the schematic and layout files, deleting the components that could be effected, and then examining the remaining schematic; is there or will there be a way to streamline that in Eagle?![]()
if u struggle to get it working, lmk and I'll get you sorted out.![]()
@technolomaniac are there any plans to improve the current XREF label formatting?![]()
@Josh Lloyd in this case its not about the money, Eagle Premium could cost 1$ a month and it would still be the same issue![]()
@technolomaniac When copying things from datasheets that specify every dimension as a, b, c, D, E, f, etc. It would be nice to add a dimension constraint, and just type "a" or something, and that gets added to the editable parameters. I would also like to be able to do this for multiple constraints, giving them the same source parameter. So that I don't have to link them, instead they are linked by name.![]()
as long as there is a paywall it restricts who can use it![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle I don't think its about the money for me, but there is something.![]()
it is a long standing ask I think, there were mailing about it on the cadsoft ML,![]()
so thermal cooling / heating is actually in fusion and you can produce a board using Fusion Sync in eagle and use the built-in sim in Fusion to do thermal analysis. this will imporve over time as well. I think it would be a HUGE "miss" if we didnt enable a LOT more for thermal sim. we have all of the solvers after all.![]()
it was topic in the Farnell erea![]()
https://www.element14.com/community/thread/20798/l/formatting-xref-net-labels?displayFullThread=true
Formatting Xref net labels
Hi Normally I have used only the text-based net labels on line that goes from one sheet to another. My wish is to use the XREF option but I am not comfortable with the format options. My "big" problem is that the signal name for a given net label comes inside the flag.
![]()
and most of the ECAD tools (Mentor, Altium for sure) supports it![]()
I adore Fusions license model, its everything I'm looking for in a professional cad tool, its so open to everyone and as soon as I earn money with it a have to pay. Could not be fairer![]()
I dunno if Kicad does![]()
@technolomaniac I was designing an Miandered F-Antenna in F360 the other day, and linking all the dimensions together was a total PITA, not being able to just group them by name. But, I've only 50 hours in F360 so maybe its me.![]()
@Josh Lloyd I'm keen to walk thru that with you. I have a LOT of thoughts there and I know the guys. :)![]()
@technolomaniac That would be excellent.![]()
So we're getting near the one hour mark, and that may mean the Matt needs to get back to work. I'm going to call an official end to the chat, but everyone is welcome to stay on and continue the conversation. I'll just say thanks to Matt for coming along and giving us insights into where EAGLE and Fusion 360 are heading - interesting stuff!And don't forget that next week's Hack Chat will be all about the 2019 Hackaday Prize: https://hackaday.io/event/164375-hackaday-prize-2019-hack-chat
![]()
Thanks @Dan Maloney for hosting and thanks Matt @technolomaniac for joining us, its been exciting and informative.![]()
Thank you for all this info and insight @technolomaniac![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle Fusion 360 is only free to hobbyist for one year. After that, you have to pay, whether you're making money with it or not.![]()
Thanks @Dan Maloney , @technolomaniac and @Jorge Garcia!![]()
@Josh Lloyd you can use the parameter menu to setup named variables or reference other dimensions on one manually entered dimension with an arbitrary name (d123) Sketches will re-draw when you change variables in the parameter menu![]()
Thanks @technolomaniac , would love to see an updated inverted F demo spanning Fusion360 and Eagle too :-)![]()
thanks a lot for the chat @technolomaniac @Dan Maloney @Jorge Garcia![]()
yeah, interesting insights, thanks @technolomaniac![]()
And thank you @Prof. Fartsparkle for that excellent name! -
Hack Chat Transcript, Part 3
04/10/2019 at 20:07 • 0 comments![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle not yet. this is in the cards. personally I would throw the whole renderer out and start again and well...I make that call. so yes, we will do that.![]()
oh that makes me very happy![]()
@Rob Speed that's in the plan, for sure.![]()
@technolomaniac Awesome. It's the little things.![]()
can't wait for the day Eagle becomes "Fusion PCB"![]()
@Josh Lloyd so we are adding sharing of libs and sharing of 3d models in the next release...which is also why we did a server deployment yesterday.![]()
I have to work with mCAD people very closesly at work when I do PCBs, a better integration that we have right now would make the whole workflow so much easier![]()
*than![]()
I like Electron but that was only after people turned my down for my first choice of names.![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle I agree this process can suck![]()
heh![]()
I mean the current integration is already tremendously helpful but the constant syncing issues are a bit of a pain![]()
I want to get to a point that you can select a face and say 'build me a board from this' and maintain the associativity...we already do this but it's not as elegant as it could be.![]()
@technolomaniac Currently we check all of this stuff in to Git, its not the best place for large binary blobs but it does track versions. Is there a nice way to move from this workflow in to EAGLE and F360? Presumably we keep it all cloud synced and version it on the cloud?![]()
and me having to boot into a VM to check how it looks in Fusion....![]()
@technolomaniac How easy or hard is to crack EAGLE and run it for free, and what kind of protection are you using ?![]()
lol![]()
gret question![]()
:D![]()
@Aleksandar Bilanovic I'm laughing.![]()
I mean unless you make huge boards its free anyways..![]()
@technolomaniac what about being able to send a fusion sketch into eagle as a layer (ie outline or dimension) so drill holes and things on the pcb can be pulled from fusion rather than having to place them in eagle and tweak the fusion model around![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle or using more than 2 layers lol![]()
@Josh Lloyd well nothing eagle uses is binary...so that part is all pretty easy (its just XML). the fusion file is just a zip. rename it and unpack and you have all of the stuff inside. we dont hide that stuff much but when you connect to the cloud, you want compression or guys like Bilke's infrastructure will be way too slow.![]()
@stansanders I would prefer if all of the board outline definition was fusion sketch based.![]()
but that brings me to my other question @technolomaniac will you do a simplified license model for Eagle, similar to how Fusion 360 has done it now?Meaning, all features for free for non profit work and a medium prized license with all features for commercial work
![]()
@Aleksandar Bilanovic if you need to crack eagle, you need to consider another occupation,![]()
Got em.![]()
Zing![]()
I've never paid a penny for EAGLE, but I'm also making itty-bitty boards.![]()
@technolomaniac So the sharing of libs and sharing of models functionality, the new functionality. Is that intended for Cloud sync at your end?![]()
with less 2 layers max, right?![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle so I would say that the target for me is to really get the cost to where there's never a discussion about starting to use the tool and the decisions come when you start making money...at which point, we should plan to win.![]()
I think that's a thing which shouldn't be restricted so much. 4 layers should be free for everyone![]()
@Josh Lloyd yes. that is coming.![]()
totally, though currently open source work with Eagle is a bit hard because you are always constrained in what you do, to do more involved open source work I would have to turn to KiCad atm![]()
Does AUTOCAD LT have a free license for small 2D drawings?![]()
@Jan I agree. I do 4 layers on almost every board because I like my power and ground pours and the lower noise and better heat distribution that gives me.![]()
@technolomaniac Are there any plans to provide some more sophisticated automation method to the EAGLE other than the current ULPs?![]()
ULPs just PITA a lot of times![]()
I am thinking about doing something very imple![]()
@Jan I used to be against that but I'm warming up to the idea. It is really just a frustration that with a $100 licesne, people still have a hard time paying for a license and I want to try and understand why. I dont think that its because we have bad users but that we have to keep demontsrating value.![]()
@Miklos Marton I agree ULP can get better but I would look to something like python.![]()
like expose the command line interpreter via a TCP server![]()
Mmm, yes. Python can do anything.![]()
I dont think ULP is a long-term strategy however I have also considered just maintaining a shadow database (something like an SQLiite) with the design data and supporting binding to any language that could "speak sql"![]()
well![]()
if we take a look on the ULP concept![]()
@technolomaniac I would pay 50€ instead of the current 12€ a month for Eagle at work if it would have the exact same license model as Fusion![]()
there is an existing solution for python:![]()
Swoop: A Python Library for Eagle PCB Design Files - Swoop IR 0.3 documentation
Swoop is a library of Python objects for representing and manipulating Cadsoft Eagle board, schematic, and library files used in designing printed circuit boards (PCBs). It parses an input Eagle file, creates a internal representation data structure that represents the file's contents, provides accessors and mutators to query, read, and modify those contents, and generates valid Eagle files as output.
![]()
that would take some cleverness to enable things in a way that doesn't invalidate the data (command stomping) but it could be super cool![]()
yah, I saw this...this is pretty awesome!![]()
but![]()
the problem with this![]()
@technolomaniac I think for me, for hobby projects, I'd rather battle KiCad than pay the $100 for EAGLE. So perhaps its not the price that is the issue, its my understanding of why $100 for EAGLE is better than my free KiCad, perhaps because of how EAGLE saves me time? I know that with hobby projects, money is important but time is premium. $100 isn![]()
Oops![]()
@Miklos Marton Heh, somewhat outdated description.![]()
*$100 isn't much if I understand WHY Eagle is worth the price![]()
but I want to just expose the eagle command queue in python and a nice set of APIs![]()
well I would not stick to python![]()
@Josh Lloyd well and I think that's the crux of it...we have to communicate value. that is always a tricky thing to get across. as soon as you start talking about money, people shut down.![]()
just expose the command interpreter in some standard way![]()
and provide commands for accessing the ULPs builtin variables![]()
well it's actually all exposed thru the command line already![]()
okay![]()
but I mean its hard to communicate that if you got such a crazy tool like Fusion for free for hobbyists, you gotta pay for Eagle which I think does seem a lot less involved than Fusion to most users![]()
so you can build apps around eagle via commabnd line![]()
sure, but it would be much better if I could do it while the EAGLE is running![]()
I would have never learned and used Fusion if it wasnt completely free for my hobby projects![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle I'm still surprised that when I open F360 it doesn't ask me to renew my subscription. I think, shit - did I crack this? No no, its just that its free for me because I don't use it professionally.![]()
hmm, I did some commission work in the past, and I've been thinking of doing a commission in exchange for an Eagle and Autocad license (assuming I can find clients that are willing to respect the phrase "do not touch this for any reason without consulting me or another engineer first"). Have you seen a lot of that kind of quid-pro-quo around your paid prioducts?![]()
and now I got myself a licsense to use it at work![]()
I have actually and I used to ask for licenses whenever I used to contract...esp for any wireless work. bec asue the cost of those tools is so hi, I needed someone to subsidize them.![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle Isn't the "free for hobbyist" subscription for Fusion 360 only available for one year, after which time you have to purchase the Fusion subscription?![]()
there is no time limit on it, at least not the last time I looked. There is only a limit on how much money you make.![]()
I definitely like that model better, since I'm not using any of these tools for commercial work. :)![]()
@Mvrk2019 that's not correct...we just invalidate the license so you have to re-up![]()
and that's to prevent folks from drifting into commerical work using a free license.![]()
^ Good move![]()
hmm, since I regularly find the line between "pro bono" and "pro boned", I wonder if you can add money lost to that number?![]()
which is absolutey valid![]()
@technolomaniac Yeah, it's a sensible limitation. You could even do it monthly and it wouldn't bug me.![]()
the expecation there is that we want you to use it but just let us know that you're still a free user![]()
@technolomaniac Can you clarify that? Is the requirement to pay for a Fusion 360 subscription based solely on whether you're making money with it?![]()
so what keeps you from adopting this model for Eagle?![]()
![]()
![]()
did you guys check this out yet?![]()
this is just a little ecad-drool-reel![]()
that is coming.![]()
next release.![]()
oh lovely![]()
*drools*![]()
oooh neat!![]()
/me patiently waits for the image to load![]()
looks nice. please add to KiCAD 6 as well![]()
:)![]()
Hah![]()
LOL![]()
I just finished downloading KiCad 5, don't do another major update soon.![]()
it's already there, just python script it![]()
so the nice things there are patterning of vias, the ability to split around objects, etc.![]()
I program for a living, I want to not be coding in CAD.![]()
quiting programming worked for me![]()
yeah, with software I like it "working" as well![]()
@Josh Lloyd So no OpenSCAD for you, eh?![]()
@Rob Speed I've used it, I do not enjoy it.![]()
Hack Chat Transcript, Part 2
04/10/2019 at 20:05 • 0 comments![]()
@technolomaniac do you personally support the subscription model Autodesk forced onto Eagle?![]()
@technolomaniac being that F360 is said to run In The Clown, is there any future for a Linux client?![]()
i've taken to just modeling my model-less parts in fusion, but it's crazy time consuming to do every single time.![]()
in the clown :-)![]()
A Linux port would definitely be awesome![]()
the future is Clown Computing![]()
yah well, I would prefer to do a proper linux version. the issues are not fusion per se but some of the 3rd party libraries. anytime you use a 3rd party - just FWIW - pay attention to the platforms it runs on!![]()
Send in the clowns![]()
@technolomaniac One UX improvement I'd like to see in Fusion is better feedback about why I can't move an item in the timeline past a certain point. Usually it just won't budge without any clear indication of why.![]()
@Jan I actually do...but perhaps not for the reasons you think.![]()
I can't believe it took a full 13 minutes to get to the first Linux question![]()
me too but if Wine means I get Fusion for Linux sooner than later I would prefer that :)![]()
would be less development effort as well, quite a few companies are doing the official Linux builds with Wine actuallyTeamviewer being one of them
![]()
inLinux would be the icing on the cake - The fact the F360 runs on a MAC was the main reason I left Mastercam for my NC programming at work.![]()
the graphics APIs matured a lot since Valve poured some money into it![]()
If it's gonna run in Linux then it better run in FreeBSD, too! [only half-serious]![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle I think Skype was for a while, but the Linux version has been years behind for a long time![]()
I tend to like subscription because if you do it right, it drives good behavior on the developer / product side and is good for a company's stability and bottom line. yes, I know it feels like lock-in and I dont like that aspect (or that impression rather) but I DO like that I can predict how many developers I will be able to hire to attack a given problem and the investment in eagle wouldnt have happened without it.![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle I doubt that was the issue, considering that OpenGL in Linux was already better than MacOS.![]()
so are they any tangible plans for a Linux version or is that idea way back on the shelf?![]()
@Rob Speed fully agree. I have been stuck in fusion on a few things like that and I think we can probably elevate that to be closer to the mouse cursor rather than the message in the lower right![]()
That's interesting - we're so used to thinking that what's good for a company is bad for the customers, but it may not be so.![]()
@technolomaniac Those messages can also be a bit cryptic.![]()
@technolomaniac can you share a bit about the short/medium term of plans about the EAGLE development?![]()
just high level![]()
it's not something I have a team of guys working on but it's also something that really just needs someone to evaluate all of the 3rd party libs and confirm it would work. we already use cmake and build scripts that dont depend on the IDE (well technically they are very geared for VS or XCode)![]()
I see![]()
@Miklos Marton so I'l emphasize again, my aim is to build a single application that doesnt have any of this wonky back and forth B.S. thru translation layers to make things really sing![]()
would be great if you could share this topic with the team maybe: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-360-ideastation/official-linux-support-through-wine/idi-p/8676002I do think it could be a very realistic way if there are major obstacle with third party libraries
![]()
so we have done a lot of this work already and I would just stress, wait and see. I have a board now, in Fusion with fully extruded copper, *as a solid model* and if you reflect for a sec on what that means...![]()
- that means that all of fusion's cam workspace is avail![]()
- that means that all of fusion's thermal sim is avail![]()
ooooo![]()
oh wow![]()
- that means real material properties and real rendering![]()
like...very...freaking...real![]()
@technolomaniac I have another one: do you have a closer look at other CAD packages on a regular basis? do you take free software like KiCAD seriously?![]()
I did it with beaglebone.![]()
Not sure when the next recession in the economy will occur, but when it does, it will put a strain on the affordability of a Fusion 360 subscription for a lot of hobbyist users imo.![]()
and that is coming to all Eagel versions? o:![]()
and the rendering is now at 60fps![]()
@technolomaniac Managing part, footprint and symbol libraries has always been a pain point for me in most EDA I've used. While I don't have deep experience with EAGLE as professionally I use KiCad, how does or how can EAGLE improve managing per project, per client, and company shared part, footprint and symbol objects across teams? and does EAGLE offer any way to important that information from suppliers to decrease the amount of data entry that needs to happen? Sorry that the question isn't needle point specific.![]()
the product mix will require that this is ecad much *closer* to fusion.![]()
does that mean the 2D renderer for Eagle was also redone? :)I had major performance Issue since 9.x
![]()
@technolomaniac So… there's gonna be a PCB material in the default library? :D![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle not yet. this is in the cards. personally I would throw the whole renderer out and start again and well...I make that call. so yes, we will do that.![]()
oh that makes me very happy![]()
@Rob Speed that's in the plan, for sure.![]()
@technolomaniac Awesome. It's the little things.![]()
can't wait for the day Eagle becomes "Fusion PCB"![]()
@Josh Lloyd so we are adding sharing of libs and sharing of 3d models in the next release...which is also why we did a server deployment yesterday.![]()
I have to work with mCAD people very closesly at work when I do PCBs, a better integration that we have right now would make the whole workflow so much easier![]()
*than![]()
I like Electron but that was only after people turned my down for my first choice of names.![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle I agree this process can suck![]()
heh![]()
I mean the current integration is already tremendously helpful but the constant syncing issues are a bit of a pain![]()
I want to get to a point that you can select a face and say 'build me a board from this' and maintain the associativity...we already do this but it's not as elegant as it could be.![]()
@technolomaniac Currently we check all of this stuff in to Git, its not the best place for large binary blobs but it does track versions. Is there a nice way to move from this workflow in to EAGLE and F360? Presumably we keep it all cloud synced and version it on the cloud?![]()
and me having to boot into a VM to check how it looks in Fusion....![]()
@technolomaniac How easy or hard is to crack EAGLE and run it for free, and what kind of protection are you using ?![]()
lol![]()
gret question![]()
:D![]()
@Aleksandar Bilanovic I'm laughing.![]()
I mean unless you make huge boards its free anyways..![]()
@technolomaniac what about being able to send a fusion sketch into eagle as a layer (ie outline or dimension) so drill holes and things on the pcb can be pulled from fusion rather than having to place them in eagle and tweak the fusion model around![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle or using more than 2 layers lol![]()
@Josh Lloyd well nothing eagle uses is binary...so that part is all pretty easy (its just XML). the fusion file is just a zip. rename it and unpack and you have all of the stuff inside. we dont hide that stuff much but when you connect to the cloud, you want compression or guys like Bilke's infrastructure will be way too slow.![]()
@stansanders I would prefer if all of the board outline definition was fusion sketch based.![]()
but that brings me to my other question @technolomaniac will you do a simplified license model for Eagle, similar to how Fusion 360 has done it now?Meaning, all features for free for non profit work and a medium prized license with all features for commercial work
![]()
@Aleksandar Bilanovic if you need to crack eagle, you need to consider another occupation,![]()
Got em.![]()
Zing![]()
I've never paid a penny for EAGLE, but I'm also making itty-bitty boards.![]()
@technolomaniac So the sharing of libs and sharing of models functionality, the new functionality. Is that intended for Cloud sync at your end?![]()
with less 2 layers max, right?![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle so I would say that the target for me is to really get the cost to where there's never a discussion about starting to use the tool and the decisions come when you start making money...at which point, we should plan to win.![]()
I think that's a thing which shouldn't be restricted so much. 4 layers should be free for everyone![]()
@Josh Lloyd yes. that is coming.![]()
totally, though currently open source work with Eagle is a bit hard because you are always constrained in what you do, to do more involved open source work I would have to turn to KiCad atm![]()
Does AUTOCAD LT have a free license for small 2D drawings?![]()
@Jan I agree. I do 4 layers on almost every board because I like my power and ground pours and the lower noise and better heat distribution that gives me.![]()
@technolomaniac Are there any plans to provide some more sophisticated automation method to the EAGLE other than the current ULPs?![]()
ULPs just PITA a lot of times![]()
I am thinking about doing something very imple![]()
@Jan I used to be against that but I'm warming up to the idea. It is really just a frustration that with a $100 licesne, people still have a hard time paying for a license and I want to try and understand why. I dont think that its because we have bad users but that we have to keep demontsrating value.![]()
@Miklos Marton I agree ULP can get better but I would look to something like python.![]()
like expose the command line interpreter via a TCP server![]()
Mmm, yes. Python can do anything.![]()
I dont think ULP is a long-term strategy however I have also considered just maintaining a shadow database (something like an SQLiite) with the design data and supporting binding to any language that could "speak sql"![]()
well![]()
if we take a look on the ULP concept![]()
@technolomaniac I would pay 50€ instead of the current 12€ a month for Eagle at work if it would have the exact same license model as Fusion![]()
there is an existing solution for python:![]()
Swoop: A Python Library for Eagle PCB Design Files - Swoop IR 0.3 documentation
Swoop is a library of Python objects for representing and manipulating Cadsoft Eagle board, schematic, and library files used in designing printed circuit boards (PCBs). It parses an input Eagle file, creates a internal representation data structure that represents the file's contents, provides accessors and mutators to query, read, and modify those contents, and generates valid Eagle files as output.
![]()
that would take some cleverness to enable things in a way that doesn't invalidate the data (command stomping) but it could be super cool![]()
yah, I saw this...this is pretty awesome!![]()
but![]()
the problem with this![]()
@technolomaniac I think for me, for hobby projects, I'd rather battle KiCad than pay the $100 for EAGLE. So perhaps its not the price that is the issue, its my understanding of why $100 for EAGLE is better than my free KiCad, perhaps because of how EAGLE saves me time? I know that with hobby projects, money is important but time is premium. $100 isn![]()
Oops![]()
@Miklos Marton Heh, somewhat outdated description.![]()
Hack Chat Transcript, Part 1
04/10/2019 at 20:04 • 0 commentsoh, Fusion hack chat? let the CAD religion wars begin :)
![]()
Yeah, I think that's where we're headed. Plus the cries for native Linux support.![]()
yepp.![]()
to put fuel into that fire: I am SO happy we're working with SW at our company. it has some little features which makes working so much faster than Inventor. and I've been a hardcore IV fan for years![]()
Guess that's not what todays chat is about though, so I'll be out this time hehe![]()
Hi. There have been so many fascinating Hack Chats that I have missed, I feel like I've lost something crucial. So here I am turning over a new leaf.![]()
@Les Hall don't worry, transcripts are always available =) I too try to attend, but often it just isn't an option, we all have real life stuff =(![]()
Welcome! We've had quite a few great chats this year, glad you're here now!![]()
TY!![]()
very excited for this one, been an eagle and fusion 360 user for years![]()
I used Eagle for ages, then recently I downloaded it and it's all different.![]()
Hi Everyone, hope you are all well!![]()
Hi back atcha.![]()
Hello @Jorge Garcia![]()
Hey Les, yeah I know EAGLE's changed a lot if you haven't used it in a while its going to seem very different. The bones are the same, EAGLE's just put on more muscle mass :)![]()
Hi @skitchin![]()
Hi guys!![]()
Hi Miklos!![]()
Hey everyone. Where are we posting questions? (besides that one)![]()
That's good to know @Jorge Garcia. More powerful is good to hear.![]()
Hi Audi, once Matt jumps on you post them here and he'll answer. I can take care of some technical EAGLE questions in the meantime.![]()
Thanks @Jorge Garcia![]()
@Audi McAvoy - Matt Berggren from Autodesk hasn't logged on yet. We should be ready to start in around 5 minutes![]()
Here's a question: I recall Eagle's Gerber generation was always a pain. Has that been made easier?![]()
@Les Hall since the introduction of the one click manufacturing export![]()
Hi Les, considerably easier now. You have a one-click CAM option that analyzes your board stackup and uses the right template.![]()
which happened in the 9.x version I think![]()
I would say it cannot be made easier :D![]()
hey hey, happy siblings day![]()
Is this chat going to be constrained to Eagle? Or is general 2D CAD also on the table?![]()
up to you.![]()
You also get more visual feedback in the CAM processor so if you need to do something special it's easier to do.![]()
Eagle definitely changed for the better![]()
Hi Matt!![]()
I can riff about 2D cad in general![]()
I'm smiling a big grin at one click Gerbers!![]()
Hi!![]()
Hi![]()
Ahh yep, @Les Hall that needed to happen for ages!![]()
(except for the new icon order, which drives me nuts)![]()
Hi Matt., welcome aboard. We'll get started in a few![]()
hahahaha![]()
thanks Dan!![]()
Hey Matt!!![]()
no sweat...I heard when clint eastwood directs, he doesnt actually say action...he just sits down and waits for the actors to start.![]()
so we might slip into this without even knowing it started ;)![]()
Does Autodesk see an opportunity to pick up light 2D CAD users with the recent Draftsight policy change?![]()
Welcome everyone, looks like we can get started. I'd like to welcome Matt Berggren from Autodesk to the Hack Chat today to talk about Fusion 360 and anything else that comes up. Matt goes by @technolomaniac on the chat, BTW![]()
I just started using Fusion 360 a few weeks ago and I'm loving it. I was previously trying to use Blender for 3D printed components and… it did not work well.![]()
Hi Matt and Jorge![]()
@technolomaniac - Can you give us a little bit about yourself?![]()
probably too soon to tell but of course we want to build the tools that people come to for the right reasons -- ie we built better tools. :) @Audi McAvoy![]()
sure sure...![]()
Oh, and @Jorge Garcia too - forgot to mention you![]()
Hi Prof.![]()
Sorry![]()
so I started my career like a hundred years ago at Accel Technologies which made PCAD which was acquired by Protel (later changed to Altium)...![]()
@technolomaniac is there a plan to make documentation more consistent? seems like feature changes come faster than documentation changes. often find myself reading fusion docs that explain things in a way that no longer works![]()
I left Altium and move to Supplyframe (yay Frame!) and strted another comapny with the ex-Altium CEO![]()
if nothing else, at least deprecating stuff even if updated docs dont exist yet![]()
when EAGLE became avail, I riffed with a number of folks at Autodesk and elsewhere about an acq and I wasnt really interested in getting back into ecad. however the prospect of integrating ecad, mcad and mfg. was interesting and autodesk had the tools. so I joined with one simple premise in mind...eventually build a tool that included the entire ecad, mcad, & mfg workflow.![]()
disclaimer: not sure if that was the autodesk mission, but it's the only way I told myself I'd get back into ecad again...only way it'd be interesting after 15y in that industry...![]()
if we wanted to be coy about the strategy, I suppose Fusion wasnt the best choice in names.![]()
:)![]()
well it makes total sense, if Autodesk doesn't see that...![]()
Hadn't thought of that...![]()
so I run the Fusion Platform team, EAGLE & Tinkercad teams.![]()
but wrt to CAD, I've been around since Daisy was a company.![]()
so hit me with anything, I like talking about and thinking about all of these things :)![]()
@technolomaniac Do you see a lot of users transitioning from Tinkercad to Fusion?![]()
FYI: Dasiy was a company that built purpose-built computers for ECAD. Khosla's venture form before SunMicro.![]()
actually more than I thought...it's actually quite interesting and we've added now an export to Fusion![]()
the way that it works is by storing the recipe for how a model is built, which means we can transition from mesh models (tinkercad is mesh) to solid models by just "replaying" what it takes to get there.![]()
thats cool![]()
also is there a reason appearance and physical material aren't one and the same? it's oddly tricky to do stuff like using the LED material because it's buried in appearance and the editing of that kind of texture is not in an obvious place![]()
I'm actually coming to Fusion via Sketchup. Is that a common route too?![]()
that Mesh to BREP conversion was always a sticking point, as the boundary representation (solid model) is so much easier when it comes to grabbing edges, adding fillets, etc.![]()
Hey Matt: is Autodesk transitioning away from products for Makers?![]()
(can we just ask away or is there some sort of question sheet like in earlier hackchats?)![]()
@technolomaniac I don't know how realistic this is, but it would be kinda cool if Tinkercad became sort of a "lite" version of Fusion that's totally web-based, but sharing the same cloud backend.![]()
I remember you saying at one of those workshops at SupplyFrame (about designing and building pcbs for production) a couple of years ago that nobody makes a really good CAD program and that you just had to pick the one you hated least. Does this mean you have made a choice? I think we were using EAGLE at that workshop.![]()
@stansanders there is more work there to make that consistent and it's on my radar...I dont like how that works and moreover, in the future you'll be able to use a full F3D component in a board (whcih can include things like emissive properties for LEDs in a material deifnition)![]()
@deshipu That pybadge is cute!![]()
this will crush it because STEP has no knowledge of materials![]()
@deshipu The screen and that chip are connected via the 40 lane parallel bus![]()
@Prof. Fartsparkle (lmao) We're just blurting them out for this chart.![]()
@Duncan I dont think Autodesk is moving away form Makers, I think makers are becoming more sophisticated...and I think we need to connect with them where they're at. 10 years ago things were very different than the hacks are today and we need to enable bridging that divide.![]()
@deshipu ESP32 -> EVE2 -> ILI6480BQ -> Display![]()
@techno![]()
I purchased the EAGLE "professional" license some years ago (and must be one of the few people who actually like it) and can't seem to upgrade anymore without paying additional fees, so I am stuck at version 7.6. Is this just a business decision on the part of AutoCAD?![]()
@Audi McAvoy - That's the way it goes sometimes, sorta freeform. If you need to ask a question again, feel free![]()
@technolomaniac i think the absolute worst offender is eagle's 3d models, basically every tutorial online (including autodesk's own) is totally incorrect for current versions, it's damn difficult to just add a 3d model to an existing component![]()
but STEP is always the thing everyone can handle, especially in the "real" working environment. it's the 3D of DXF to say. we provide all customers with STEP because they're all using this or that CAD![]()
@Lane Copley yah, I also said at a workshop that "if only they gave me eagle, I'd make that thing awesome.." :) careful what I wish for I suppose. lo and behold I have control now and I'm driving a LOT of new stuff, but oh man, I wasnt expecting to ever have to actually DO it![]()
@technolomaniac A good point - e.g. RF designs seems to be table stakes nowadays![]()
it'd be such an amazing workflow if fusion-eagle sync embedded each part as a component, and you could dive in and model that component in fusion, and have that model sync back into the part library for eagle![]()
Is the CAM(Manufacturing) side of Fusion 360 as capable as FeatureCAM(another autodesk product) ?![]()
@stansanders in the next rtelease youy can add models directly at the board level![]()
so you will no longer have to bounce back to the library to assign a 3D model.![]()
You have my pity. It could be worse: you might have to do the documentation.![]()
the relationships will be much more loosely coupled.![]()
@technolomaniac beautiful, how soon?![]()
that was part of the reason we had a server deployment yesterday :)![]()
soon.![]()
cool then I'll just get on with my most important question, @technolomaniac given that Eagle is a full cross platform product and will grow closer with Fusion 360. Will you make a Linux version for Fusion 360?I made a topic in the idea station. tldr; Wine is like 90% of the way there for Fusion and it would be very awesome if you could speak with Codeweavers about doing a porting effort assement.
https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-360-ideastation/official-linux-support-through-wine/idi-p/8676002
![]()
sick![]()
