Why???

Element 14 User whined on Wed, 02 November 2011 16:43

3. In the Latout Editor, why can't I place parts on the bottom

layer????

Because you haven't read the manual, apparently.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Olin Lathrop wrote:

Element 14 User whined on Wed, 02 November 2011 16:43

>> 3. In the Latout Editor, why can't I place parts on the bottom

>> layer????

 

Because you haven't read the manual, apparently.

 

Wow, what a worthless comment.

I am really tired of comments that state that you should first memorize

the "manual" before asking questions.  Sadly, not everyone has the time

to search for hours through the poorly organized Eagle documentation.

Please offer constructive answers or don't waste the poster's or the

rest of our valuable time.

"Tilmann Reh" <usenet2007nospam@autometer.de> wrote in message

news:j90bu8$9m3$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

I would never use a PCB CAD that uses the object approach, forcing me to

select the object first and then apply a command. It's a really horrible

imagination to do parts placement or layout work that way.

The "apply command" you mention is not applied the Eagle way. You select an

object, then apply an action to it direct (not selecting a command). This

can be actions like moving, resizing, deleting, cloning, and there are near

de-facto standard gestures how to handle most graphical objects. Eagle can

do some of them now, like delete a polygon using the context menu (context

menu is the menu you get when you rightclick the mouse on an object) even if

you have a different action active. Eagle is for sure on the right track.

You might discuss about appearance details like icons and menus - but

not about the "command centric" approach. The "general UI standards"

simply make no sense for this kind of application.

The command centric approach does the job very well, but this discussion is

like comparing a "normal" calculator with a RPN (reverse polish notation)

one. They do the same job, but requires different thinking, and I guess both

has its advantages. The object based thinking has been adapted all the way

up to modern programming.

(And yes, a specialized and powerful software for a very particular

purpose needs some closer investigation and learning - just to repeat

that once more. Once that's learned, EAGLE is by far the most efficient

PCB CAD I know - at least within the affordable alternatives.)

All sw has their own specialities, but you can save a lot of stress,

headscratching and learning hours by adapting the adaptable pieces to the

crowds ways, and unfortunately Eagle is still a bit on its own side track

GUI wise. (Old school users won't mind of course)

Personally I think Eagle should keep the old cmd way of doing things, but

continue adding the modern object base GUI approach. A first step is to add

more actions to the context menu.

An example of GUI making it simple for the user:

An action earlier suggested is moving a polygon. This is so easy to to the

GUI way. When right clicking a polygon wire, present the context menu:

wire

-> (action list for wires)

wire end (if close)

-> (action list for wire ends)

polygon

-> (action list for polygons, inc move)

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Thu, 03 November 2011 19:35

Yes Olin has a point, but not a helpful one.

Which of course was precisely the point.  The OP came here to whine, not

get a problem solved.  He got what he deserved and actually literally what

he asked for.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Element 14 User wrote on Fri, 04 November 2011 05:13

For all those comenters who claim that it's only a matter of learning

something new: you don't get the point. All operating systems have GUI

rules

Sortof, but they also differ accross platforms.  You can't expect a

software vendor to customize the look and feel for each platform,

especially for the small percentage that are MAC users.

Quote:

Even the fact that there still is a command line inside the GUI

speaks miles!

Yes, this is one of the really powerful and great things about Eagle.  A

lot of very useful stuff follows from this, like that most everything can

be done on the command line.  Once you learn to use a command line well,

you'll find it's a lot faster than mouse movements except for those things

that are inherently graphical in nature.  Using a clickety-click interface

to enter non-graphical commands is slow, and a major frustration with many

programs aimed at the masses.  It may be kind of cute the first time you

use a program in that you don't have to know all it can do, but after you

do know it the dumbed down clickety-click mechanics just gets in the way.

You can think into the command line (the fingers just automatically type

somehow as a background process below the concious thought level), but that

doesn't work for something that requires eye-hand coordination and is

different every time you use it.

Quote:

but it would have been much easier if the general GUI rules would have

been respected.

But which GUI rules?  There is no one standard, and then the nature of what

some kinds of software does might require a different way of thinking about

the GUI.  In any case, the GUI is not something that matters much once you

get to use Eagle well.  Sometimes we seem to forget it's about entering

schematics and designing boards.  Eagle supports that very well.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

news:j90l8h$gbp$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Thu, 03 November 2011 19:35

>> Yes Olin has a point, but not a helpful one.

 

Which of course was precisely the point.  The OP came here to whine, not

get a problem solved.  He got what he deserved and actually literally what

he asked for.

Yes he did whine and he literally got what he asked for, but normal human

skills enables me (and most others) to see past the literacy. There is

frustration from a newbie. You can choose to "knock him down" or "put him on

your lap" and explain. Cadsoft wouldnt last long if they chose the "knock

them down" approach, you know that.

Please dont knock potential future users down like that. It was his first

post (and last). He may have already left this forum and Eagle sw.

Hi again,

First and foremost, some words to Olin (I don't know if he is a user or a member of the CadSoft team): with your approach you don't enlarge your customer base. Your claims about GUIs and CLIs show how far appart you are from the world outside. In case you don't know, the world evolved, just wake up! Claiming that there are no GUI guidelines shows utter ignorance. I can point you where the Apple OS X Human Interface Guidelines are: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/Intro/Intro.html and I suspect you can find similar guidelines on Microsoft's web site for Windows.

I am not against CLIs, but they don't belong in a graphical interface software; there are many ways to include one outside. In this respect, Eagle is unique, but I wouldn't agree that in a positive way.

While I can accept that CadSoft has not the necessary financial and talent ressources to properly implement GUIs for all the three patforms, at least a minimum of alignment to the recommended guidelines of Windows and Mac OS X would have been beneficial, especially in view of aquiring new customers. I am sure many potential new users are scared after evaluating the software and run away to the competition. On the other hand, I suspect that even if CadSoft would try to change things, the current user base would cry foul, as they are already used to the current interface (unfortunately). So this is a lose-lose situation...

Anyway, these are only my opinions, and of course your mileage may vary...

Lix

Element 14 User wrote on Fri, 04 November 2011 10:50

First and foremost, some words to Olin (I don't know if he is a user or

a member of the CadSoft team)

I have no relation to Farnell and Cadsoft other than being a Eagle

customer.

Quote:

Claiming that there are no GUI guidelines shows utter ignorance.

I didn't claim there weren't any, but in fact the opposite that there are

several.

Quote:

I can point you where the Apple OS X Human Interface Guidelines are

I really don't give a crap as I don't use Apples.

Quote:

I suspect you can find similar guidelines on Microsoft's web site for

Windows.

Exactly.  And that's just MAC and Windows.  There is no one standard.

Quote:

While I can accept that CadSoft has not the necessary financial and

talent ressources to properly implement GUIs or all the three patforms,

at least a minimum of alignment to the recommended guidelines of Windows

and Mac OS X

Mac is such a small part of the market, especially for engineering

software, that it would be the last to try to cater too.  Windows is

clearly number one, with Linux second and rising.  Everything else is a

distant third at best, and as such shouldn't have a lot of resources wasted

on it.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Olin, you should do some research before throwing baseless statements. Claiming that Linux is the "second and climbing" platform shows how clueless you are.

Lix

Am 04.11.2011 15:50, schrieb Lix Paulian:

I am not against CLIs, but they don't belong in a graphical interface software;

A lot of software cannot be made quicker to use with a command line,

that's correct. But CAD software generally does NOT fall into this

category, because a lot of things CAN be INCREDIBLY sped up with a

command line in CAD programs.

You seem to hold the opinion that a command line is old-fashioned and

should therefore be abandoned, but that is NOT the case: Who doesn't

like the command line just doesn't use it, but who sees the TREMENDOUS

time-saving involved with its use, really LIKES it. It's not a question

of old or new, but a matter of effectivity: New users don't know

commands by heart and can use the software more effectively with the

mouse, experienced users DO know some commands and use them in the

command line ONLY if they really save time (obviously, nobody wants to

place the elements on a board purely with the command line, except in

VERY rare cases).

there are many ways to include one outside.

No. A command line EXTERNAL to EAGLE would be VERY ineffective and ruin

the whole concept.

In this respect, Eagle is unique, but I wouldn't agree that in a positive way.

One of the reasons why I like EAGLE is that it HAS a command line. I

will never understand why people object to a command line. Who doesn't

like it can just ignore it, so why complain?

While I can accept that CadSoft has not the necessary financial and talent ressources to properly implement GUIs for all the three patforms,

EAGLE doesn't contain a command line because the CadSoft guys don't have

the resources, but because it's USEFUL. Even if that's not your own

opinion, please believe that there are a lot of people outside who like

the command line because of its USEFULNESS.

the current user base would cry foul, as they are already used to the current interface (unfortunately).

I have nothing against new interfaces if they are EFFECTIVE: With 'old'

Microsoft office, I could do lots of things VERY quickly, and used Word

for Windows through all quite considerable changes from version 1 to

2003. Some changes I liked, some not, but I stayed with the program,

because I could get things done with less effort than in other word

processors. With the new 'fluent' interface, I just CANNOT do lots of

things anymore that were rather easy in the old interface, and for

others I would now need more than SIX mouse clicks where previously only

ONE was involved. That is definitely NOT effective. I will not buy

Microsoft office anymore...

Not everything that was already available twenty years ago is

automatically bad, and not everything new is automatically good.

Anyway, these are only my opinions, and of course your mileage may vary...

EAGLE could of course profit from a change in user interface at certain

points, especially for new users, but these changes should not be made

by destroying functions that make it MUCH more effective than all other

tools on the market.

Andreas Weidner

PS: I seem to write the same sentences for the defence of the useful

command line too often recently...

Element 14 User wrote on Fri, 04 November 2011 12:06

Olin, you should do some research before throwing baseless statements.

Claiming that Linux is the "second and climbing" platform shows how

clueless you are.

Keep in mind we're talking about engineers, specifically electrical

engineers, not the unwashed masses.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Lix Paulian Inscribed thus:

Olin, you should do some research before throwing baseless statements.

Claiming that Linux is the "second and climbing" platform shows how

clueless you are.

 

Lix

All my clients use Linux or Windows !  I don't know anybody that uses a

Mac any more...

--

Best Regards:

                     Baron.

Lix Paulian Inscribed thus:

Olin, you should do some research before throwing baseless statements.

Claiming that Linux is the "second and climbing" platform shows how

clueless you are.

 

Lix

All my clients use Linux or Windows !  I don't know anybody that uses a

Mac any more...

--

Best Regards:

                     Baron.