Look and feel at the Mac platform

Let me first declare: I'm a mac user since 1985 but not a nerd, only enthusiast.

I have used and tested lot's of pcb cad softwares, Mentor, Pads, Cadence, Altium, RUN, and many many more and also EAGLE.

Altium looks really fresh and tasty. Mentor and Cadence feel a bit vintage and Eagle is a but less vintage but still it could need some face lift. Using EAGLE at a mac looks really ugly compared to how a normal mac software looks like. My suggestion is that Cadsoft hire some clever icon master.

http://iconfactory.com this is a good place.

Despite this small remark I'm glad that it's possible to run a decent pcb software natively on Mac OSX.

0 WestfW over 15 years ago

As a dissenting opinion, I'm very happy to have the Mac version of EAGLE look "just like" the widows and linux versions, and I'd rather have that compatibility than fancier icos or a more mac-like GUI. I've been a little worried about the future of the Mac version of EAGLE (mere existence-wise) since the acquisition, and I'd really like to minimize the "extra effort" that continuing to provide the Mac version might entail. In fact, I thought the previous implementation, which required running under the Mac's X-windows implementation, was a pretty brilliant compromise and a fine example of how (unix) SW vendors OUGHT to support Mac. (prior to that, my "Mac-based" solution involved a headless linux box, accessed via X on the Mac...)
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Richard_H over 15 years ago in reply to WestfW

In my opinion it is a big advantage of EAGLE to have it running on different platforms (Mac, Linux, Windows) and that all EAGLE files are interchangeable. I see no reason at all to drop on of the supported platforms.

Richard
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 WestfW over 15 years ago in reply to Richard_H

I think it is pretty clear that the original CADSOFT team felt that way (and: thank you very much!), but I'm a little worried about Farnell... It wouldn't be anywhere near the first time that a multi-platform product got trimmed down as the end result of an acquisition. (most obvious example: CodeWarrior used to work on Macs, back when Macs were MUCH different than PCs. It was one of the best respected of the PPC C compilers back in the early days of PPC Macs.)
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Richard_H over 15 years ago in reply to WestfW

Bill,

sure we don't know what will happen in future. But currently i don't see plans to drop platforms.
And you can raise your voice, for example here! KEEP THE MAC VERSION !!

Regards,
Richard
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Former Member over 15 years ago

EAGLE for Linux, Mac and Windows are here to stay. CadSoft has supported EAGLE for 20+ years succesfully, no reason to change it.
In the past we have dropped OS/2 and DOS versions of EAGLE, but only because they are OS's that are no longer around.
Best Regards,
Ed
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 peranders over 15 years ago in reply to WestfW

My point of view is that EAGLE looks fair in the competition but an upgrade of the GUI could be a good thing if this would improve the user experience.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 awinning over 15 years ago in reply to WestfW

Hi Bill,

Just to confirm what Edwin has said. I talked to the CadSoft management team today and the reply was, "Premier Farnell do not intend to discontinue EAGLE MAC versions"

I'll also pass on user's wishes for an upgrade to the GUI
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Former Member over 15 years ago

Hi,
In keeping with the current EAGLE price structure, its either change the GUI or ad tools to EAGLE. I consider the current GUI format to work quite well, and I rather see more tools added.
Best Regards,
Ed
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 peranders over 14 years ago in reply to Former Member

I'll agree that cool features is better than a good looking GUI but polish up the GUI isn't that hard. Right now I'm working with PADS which is not so nice looking but.... some functions or tasks are really awkward, not particularly intuitive.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel