WinQCad vs. EagleCAD

[Ken Rolf]

I have used EagleCAD for PCB design and find it a bit quirky.

Has anyone out there tried WinQCad? How does it compare in terms of
ease-of-use and capability?

I also have access to Portel and OrCad at work. In a nutshell, for
what kind of jobs would it be worth the additional time required to
master either of these more complex applications.

Ken Rolff

 

[Joerg]

I have used EagleCAD for PCB design and find it a bit quirky.

Has anyone out there tried WinQCad? How does it compare in terms of
ease-of-use and capability?

I use Eagle and I am quite happy with it except for one major
shortcoming explained below. A client uses WinQCad and their engineer is
happy as well.

I also have access to Portel and OrCad at work. In a nutshell, for
what kind of jobs would it be worth the additional time required to
master either of these more complex applications.

Eagle has IMHO one major flaw: No hierarchy structure is available for
schematics. That makes designs with more than just a few pages almost
unmanageable for anyone but the original designer. Even the original
designer might get lost in such a flat sheet structure when re-visiting
the schematic a few years down the road.

OrCad does offer hierarchy and, AFAIK, so does WinQCad. If Cadsoft
doesn't fix this soon I'll probably switch away from them.

 

[Joerg]

There is no product called EagleCAD.
The product called Cadsoft EAGLE is infected with DRM.
If you give it the opportunity,
it will lock you out of your work product.
http://tinyurl.com/TheEAGLE-Virus

If some of the participants worked with cracked copies. Otherwise it
does not.

 

[Baron]

There is no product called EagleCAD.
The product called Cadsoft EAGLE is infected with DRM.
If you give it the opportunity,
it will lock you out of your work product.
http://tinyurl.com/TheEAGLE-Virus

Total bull ! Spoken like a plagiarist.

 

[Joerg]

Your statement shows you to be a fool of few words
and of fewer actual ideas.
I suggest a reading comprehension course.

Markus described the whole sad tale.

Quote "... just because I once copied a voltage regulator (I think it
was) out of a design which aparently was made by some third party with a
cracked version."

A few sentences later, quote "This evil schema part creaped into quite
some of my designs with which the only option I have now is to recapture
their schemas from scratch!"

My impression is that he's more of a commercial user, corroborated by
the fact that he uses a licensed version like I do. This begs the
question where this "innocent piece of design" came from. Copied off the
web is something I don't believe he could have done. That would raise
some flags WRT to copyrights. One cannot simply copy a chunk out of
someone else's schematic and use it, unless it's hobby maybe. I never do
that because that would be breaking the law. So I really don't believe
he did that either, he comes across as an honest guy.

If he got it from someone for money then the seller broke the law. In
that case it's similar to receiving a fake $50 bill. The bank or sheriff
will confiscate that bill and you do not get compensated for your loss.

In contrast to just about any other CAD company I know Cadsoft trusts
their users. You are given a license code and they trust that you won't
leak that to others. So no dongles, MAC-locks and other such nonsense.
On top of that they allow you to spool another copy onto your laptop for
road use, at least that's what my license says. I find that a very fair
policy. I challenge you to name any competitor that's this generous.

[...]

 

[Joerg]

That's nice as far as it goes--right up to the DRM.
Cadsoft's style of distrust simply takes another form.
It's still distrust.
Their treatment of Markus speaks volumes.

As I said in the part you snipped he has used clandestinely generated
work. Probably a perfectly honest mistake but IMHO Cadsoft cannot be
blamed for that.

The very same thing would happen if you unknowingly bought a used car
where some hacker had tampered with the ECU. When the smog check guys
find out they will take away your rights to drive that car.

 

[Joerg]

True hackers know how to switch back to "factory" settings during
inspection ;-)

Yeah, but the not so honest guys make an engine "run good", take your
check, high-tail it and then the NOX is way over the limit or something.
Which you won't find out until a year later when smog is due, and then
the guy is long gone.

It's particularly easy to pass smog tests now that the bureaucrats
simply plug into an ECU port... dummies ;-)

Out here they still hang a probe into the tail pipe.

 

[Joerg]

Arizona only does that with really old stuff, like carbureted w/o ECU,
and heavy trucks.

So how do they think they can avoid fraud? Or to say it more bluntly,
were they even thinking?

 

[Joerg]

Well, *you* use library parts generated by others.

Nope. I don't. As I understood it he used part of a schematic on several
of his designs, not just a library part.

What I see is you looking down your nose at those who do likewise.

Huh?


Markus was a paid-up customer of Cadsoft.
It would have been trivial for them to get him out of his bind.
As always, it's the LEGIT users who get screwed by DRM.

Yep, they probably could have been a bit more cordial in this case. OTOH
if word gets around suddenly dozens of others want the same service and
that's where it becomes dicey.

That Cadsoft doesn't recognize this about DRM
makes them yet another for the DO NOT PURCHASE list.

Everybody has his own list. I would instantly upgrade to Eagle V5 if
they hadn't screwed up the hierarchy again. Because other than for the
lack of a hierachy it's perfect.

Screwing your customers is a STUPID business model.
I don't know what the solution to piracy is
but I do know that DRM AIN'T IT.

Well, while we are at it, what do you propose then?

He didn't go to the smog check guys.
He went to the factory guys WHO HE HAD PAID.
NO ONE TOLD HIM ABOUT THIS SHIT AHEAD OF TIME.

How come I knew of this before I bought Eagle? For some reason the same
must be true for most others. Else there'd be lots of flak about it on
the rather busy Eagle newsgroups, and there isn't.

If **the Ford factory guys** came in the middle of the night
and crippled my car because I had tinkered with it,
I'd be plenty pissed.
If they did that after I had let a trusted mechanic work on it
and he had been denied the don't-ever-do list by the factory
my level of anger would be off the chart.


Exactly. DRM doesn't affect *real* pirates.
Only LEGIT customers get screwed by DRM.

Well, do not accept or copy schematic sections from unknown sources and
you'll be just fine. In the same way that I assume you do not simply
click "download" on any sort of program from the web that you find
interesting.

Clueless companies don't deserve to have any more customers
and only clueless companies use this stupid fad in their products.
Frankly, dongles are more honest.

I will never buy a product with a dongle, and many others won't either.
Never have.

 

[Joerg]

Jim Thompson wrote:

[...]

Out here they still hang a probe into the tail pipe.

The car, or the driver?

Depending on your driving style to the place possibly both. Sometimes
the driver doesn't pass and then gets a ride in the sheriff's car.

 

[Nico Coesel]

Quote "... just because I once copied a voltage regulator (I think it
was) out of a design which aparently was made by some third party with a
cracked version."

A few sentences later, quote "This evil schema part creaped into quite
some of my designs with which the only option I have now is to recapture
their schemas from scratch!"

If this is true, then Cadsoft should be avoided. A piece of software
should not throw away or cripple files under any circumstance. If it
does, it is useless. Period.

 

[Joerg]

If this is true, then Cadsoft should be avoided. A piece of software
should not throw away or cripple files under any circumstance. If it
does, it is useless. Period.

When it comes to importing stuff that was made with illegal hackware I
see that differently. This case was unfortunate in that the guy who
imported it obviously did not know that the designer had used an illegal
copy. But as I said, in the same way if you receive a fake 100-Euro bill
the same thing can happen in that the cashier at the Hema store refuses
it and you have no rights other than sue the guy who gave it to you.

CAD companies must pay their employees, pay into their health plan, pay
rent, heating, taxes and, oh, preferably turn a little profit. Cadsoft's
way of protection is, for me, definitely superior to other alternatives
such as MAC-lock or those dreaded dongles.

 

[John Devereux]

Joerg <[email protected]> wrote:

[...]
[...]

When it comes to importing stuff that was made with illegal hackware I
see that differently. This case was unfortunate in that the guy who
imported it obviously did not know that the designer had used an
illegal copy. But as I said, in the same way if you receive a fake
100-Euro bill the same thing can happen in that the cashier at the
Hema store refuses it and you have no rights other than sue the guy
who gave it to you.

From the above it sounds more like they won't accept the fake bill *and
then they confiscate all your genuine money too*.

If it just rejected the part with a warning "part MC68HC11 created with
illegal copy", and allowed you to delete it, that would be more
reasonable. Why deliberatly infect the designs of honest customers?

CAD companies must pay their employees, pay into their health plan,
pay rent, heating, taxes and, oh, preferably turn a little
profit. Cadsoft's way of protection is, for me, definitely superior to
other alternatives such as MAC-lock or those dreaded dongles.

I agree it is better, but that does not make it acceptable.

IMO one of the great advantages of using a product like Eagle with good
community support would have been the ability to share libraries with
other users. But this is unthinkable given the above.

 

[Nico Coesel]

When it comes to importing stuff that was made with illegal hackware I
see that differently. This case was unfortunate in that the guy who
imported it obviously did not know that the designer had used an illegal

That is why Cadsoft's behaviour is illegal under Dutch law. If you buy
something in Holland which appears to be stolen you'll still be the
rightful owner UNLESS you could have suspected you bought stolen goods
(ridiculous low price, weird circumstances, etc). Markus got the
schematic symbol in good faith and had no reason to doubt it. So
Markus is not part of the crime.

Cadsoft really should get to the root of the problem (for example by
disabling illegal copies) instead of incriminating their paying
customers. Besides I wonder how much time Cadsoft put in their copy
protection scheme. It might be more time than it would have taken to
fix some long standing issues.

 

[Joerg]

Joerg <[email protected]> wrote:

[...]

A few sentences later, quote "This evil schema part creaped into
quite some of my designs with which the only option I have now is
to recapture their schemas from scratch!"

[...]

When it comes to importing stuff that was made with illegal hackware I
see that differently. This case was unfortunate in that the guy who
imported it obviously did not know that the designer had used an
illegal copy. But as I said, in the same way if you receive a fake
100-Euro bill the same thing can happen in that the cashier at the
Hema store refuses it and you have no rights other than sue the guy
who gave it to you.

From the above it sounds more like they won't accept the fake bill *and
then they confiscate all your genuine money too*.

If it just rejected the part with a warning "part MC68HC11 created with
illegal copy", and allowed you to delete it, that would be more
reasonable. Why deliberatly infect the designs of honest customers?

We don't know whether it was just a model. Sounds more like part of a
schematic.

I agree it is better, but that does not make it acceptable.

IMO one of the great advantages of using a product like Eagle with good
community support would have been the ability to share libraries with
other users. But this is unthinkable given the above.

Do we know it was actually a library part alone that caused this?

 

[Joerg]

That is why Cadsoft's behaviour is illegal under Dutch law. If you buy
something in Holland which appears to be stolen you'll still be the
rightful owner UNLESS you could have suspected you bought stolen goods
(ridiculous low price, weird circumstances, etc). ...

Well, Dutch law seems to be, ahem, strange. AFAIK in pretty much any
other Western country you'd be required to hand over the stolen goods.

So if someone steals your car and sells it, can the new "owner" really
keep it when the Rijkspolitie stops him and finds out?

... Markus got the
schematic symbol in good faith and had no reason to doubt it. So
Markus is not part of the crime.

No, he is the victim of a criminal act committed by someone else.

Cadsoft really should get to the root of the problem (for example by
disabling illegal copies) instead of incriminating their paying
customers. ...

If you find the silver bullet in how to disable illegal copies I am sure
they would offer you a lucrative job instantly. But then you'd have to
move and learn Bavarian

... Besides I wonder how much time Cadsoft put in their copy
protection scheme. It might be more time than it would have taken to
fix some long standing issues.

Agree, but only if they really have invested much time into that. I
believe that if they had sunk some energy into more important stuff like
hierarchical sheet structures they could have clocked tons of extra
sales. At least with some of my clients.

 

[Baron]

Your statement shows you to be a fool of few words
and of fewer actual ideas.
I suggest a reading comprehension course.

There is no DRM in Eagle. Period !

Markus described the whole sad tale.
Though he was a paid-up user,
Cadsoft treated him like something to be scraped off their shoe.

I suggest you learn what a word means before you use it.
http://google.com/search?q=define:plagiarist

I'm well aware of what the word means.
The guy copied something from someone else's work to use in his own.
So he was trying to save himself some work. I've no problem with that.
But to try and assign blame on Eagle for his own actions...

 

[Joerg]

Joerg wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote: [...]

It's particularly easy to pass smog tests now that the bureaucrats
simply plug into an ECU port... dummies ;-)

Out here they still hang a probe into the tail pipe.

The car, or the driver?

Depending on your driving style to the place possibly both. Sometimes
the driver doesn't pass and then gets a ride in the sheriff's car.

Another good reason to live in Florida. No state income tax, and
very few insane state laws.

How's the weather there this time of year? Have to go on a biz trip,
West Palm Beach. On the news it looked like parts of FL were flooding
but don't remember where. Do I have to bring waders and rain gear?

 

[Joerg]

Baron wrote:
[...]

The guy copied something from someone else's work
to use in his own.
So he was trying to save himself some work.
I've no problem with that.

I have always assumed he was given full permission
to reuse anything in the document he received.

In that case the person giving him such permission has acted criminally,
by creating this work with an illegal copy of software. Very simple, IMHO.

[...]

 

[John Devereux]

Nico Coesel wrote:
[...]

A few sentences later, quote "This evil schema part creaped into
quite some of my designs with which the only option I have now is
to recapture their schemas from scratch!"
[...]

When it comes to importing stuff that was made with illegal hackware I
see that differently. This case was unfortunate in that the guy who
imported it obviously did not know that the designer had used an
illegal copy. But as I said, in the same way if you receive a fake
100-Euro bill the same thing can happen in that the cashier at the
Hema store refuses it and you have no rights other than sue the guy
who gave it to you.

From the above it sounds more like they won't accept the fake bill *and
then they confiscate all your genuine money too*.

If it just rejected the part with a warning "part MC68HC11 created with
illegal copy", and allowed you to delete it, that would be more
reasonable. Why deliberatly infect the designs of honest customers?

We don't know whether it was just a model. Sounds more like part of a
schematic.

I think this is the original thread:

Do we know it was actually a library part alone that caused this?

It was a voltage regulator, apparantly. I am not familiar with Eagle so
don't know whether this would normally be a "library part" or a circuit
fragment.