data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5ff45/5ff454bb173c2c39b26bd91e0ef4254ee4fec1dc" alt="Diptrace vs eagle caf"
It seems like such a minor thing, but, when every single program operates in one way, as standard, and then you have to use one that, for some unknown reason, does it a different way. I got to the point where i was laying out footprints for custom components and adding them to the library, so i did not give up instantly. I recall also using 3rd party scripts for exporting g-code for isolation milling and drilling, but it all just seemed like 3x as much effort as it should be. It seemed similar to using a mac when used to a pc, but worse - everything was just in the wrong place, and did not work as expected.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92458/9245842fb90f7f033e89e306364d382d48d7cd90" alt="diptrace vs eagle caf diptrace vs eagle caf"
Its entirely different, but i had a go on sketchup a few weeks back. I had never used it before, although i have a fair bit of time with 2d cad. After really not very long at all, i had a 3d scale model of what i was trying to do.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/306aa/306aad631d7d568a99d9e4f4fd9d55d1b00af8fe" alt="diptrace vs eagle caf diptrace vs eagle caf"
Ive invested so many multiple of that amount of time in eagle, but dont feel even 1/10th as 'fluid' in it. The thing is, i know some people use eagle all the time, so it cant be terrible, but i did not jell with it at all.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5ff45/5ff454bb173c2c39b26bd91e0ef4254ee4fec1dc" alt="Diptrace vs eagle caf"