A problem with “database integrateion for part management” is that KiCad is an Opens Source project, and has a very limited budget.
For example, some time ago KiCost worked with a backend to Octopart to crawl data and prices for parts. Octopart keeps track of the amount of data crawled, and over some limit it blocks automated tools and you need a (paid?) subscription to get the info. KiCad does not have a budget for such things. Altium which gets millions of dollars from it’s users each year does have a budget for that.
From what I understand lots the big part stores also have special tools which continuously change small things in how their website works, and do this in such a way that the site looks the same to humans, but break automated scripts. They do this on purpose to frustrate the competition.
It’s a result of proprieatery narrow thinking in the commercial world.
It’s also the reason I only use Open Source Software, even when functionality is less.
My brother bought a mehcanical CAD package last year. 1 month later a newer version came out, to get that he almost had to double the amount of money for the update… With KiCad I can donate whenever I feel like it, or for example have used it in a (commercial) project, and at the same time can be ensured I can always update to the latest version for free as soon as it becomes available. Now try that with Altium!
When we bought Protel 3 in 1997 (what was very expensive for us - as I can remember we never bought any tool being more expensive) no one told us even a word that in few months there will be a new version with push and shove manual routing. When we said the distributor that he is not fair he offered us to buy a new version with 10% discount !
For points 21 to 23, these sort of outputs are easily produced by some simple Python scripting - there are lots of scripts available to achieve various combinations of exactly these sort of outputs but they might need a modest amount of editing to get exactly your required combinations of files but it is easily achievable.
A flexible solution might be something like this project (untested). looks like it should be easily configurable for your particular requirements. This, in turn references a number of other projects that you might find of interest.
Not only via stitching is available for KiCAD (as @maui shows below), but also via fencing, trace rounding, tear drops, and many other RF tools. Coming from Altium, OrCRAP, or other closed-source software takes a change in mentality more than anything else. KiCAD is open source, so a lot of third parties write plugins for it. Same with the mechanical software FreeCAD, which has been “married” to KiCAD. Thank’s to @maui’s work on StepUP and manipulator, painless push-pull between KiCAD and FreeCAD eases the workflow quite a bit, but this is not well-known because it is neither “official” KiCAD nor “official” FreeCAD. Take a look here to get an idea of what is available for KiCAD in addition to what @John_Pateman mentions above. FreeCAD uses well-known finite-element engines, so people have imported 3D pcb models from KiCAD into FreeCAD and run thermal analyses on them! (There are youtube videos about this, but I have not done it personally.) I know there are efforts under way to ease collaboration between KiCAD/FreeCAD and the open-source full 3D electromagnetic simulator openEMS.
Since KiCAD is open-source, technical support comes from/in forums rather than calling up Altium, Cadence, or a reseller. It takes a change of mentality. Altium agrees with this, where it mendatiously bashes KiCAD on its web site. Read that carefully. Altium lies on its web site! First, KiCAD is not free software, it’s open-source. Free is not necessarily open-source! Somebody can distribute a binary for free; that’s not open-source. Furthermore, open-source has the legal teeth to enforce quality standards on any code it accepts. Second, KiCAD is maintained by CERN and not by bored, lonely developers who work on it only sporadically. A look at the nightly builds shows how quickly KiCAD is developed! How long does it take for Altium to fix their bugs without screwing up something else? I have never used Altium, but I have used OrCRAP and I know how long it takes Cadence to fix bugs…
First, KiCad is Free Software. And it’s also free. That page by Altium is of course vague about the finer points, but they don’t lie about that specific point.
Second, KiCad isn’t maintained by CERN. They just help developing KiCad.
Also:
Octopart used to work with KiCost.
Octopart was bought by Altium.
Altium has no intention to play nice with KiCad:
Gosh, they probably used the KiCad code or file format documentation to make their import feature. Is such info even available from Altium, or is the Altium to Kicad converter based on reverse engineering? (Have not checked).
I also do not know what a single Atlium license costs (Without limitation of course, just as with KiCad) but I’ve heard something like several thousands of USD, you can get a lot of personal support and even implementing new features important to you is a serious option
You also do not have to pay upfront, and can negociate on what you can get for your money.
With Altium you’ve got 2 weeks before you have to pay and after that you’re just one of their many customers.
There is 2D collision detection in DRC (Design Rule Check) on CrtYd (courtyard) layer’s closed contours only. If you draw accurate courtyards when creating footprints, it can be used as low-quality collision detection.
Yes, it is and I never claimed otherwise. But KiCAD is also open source, which the Altium page conveniently omits. It is exactly the open-source nature of KiCAD that facilitates the so many plugins we’ve been discussing.
Second, KiCad isn’t maintained by CERN. They just help developing KiCad.
I don’t disagree, but in either case KiCAD is not developed by bored developers who have nothing else better to do and work on it whenever they feel like it. Altium is outright lying here.
To keep this thread useful, further discussion about Altium’s attidude and article should be taken to a new thread.
Altium’s attitude is mendacious and deceitful. Because Altium is spreading disinformation about KiCAD, it should be confronted!
There’s no collision detection in KiCad’s 3D viewer except your eyes.
Yes, but KiCADStepUP in FreeCAD has extensive collision detection capabilities. As we’ve been discussing, there is a whole ecosystem of plugins around KiCAD, thank’s to KiCAD’s open-source nature.
This is 100% generic text full of advertisment, which can be changed to every other EDA in < 1 minute. To my knowledge, there is no KiCad -> Altium importer.
Altium doesn’t give two shits about convincing KiCAD users. If you’re a hobbyist, you can go ■■■■ yourself, and if you work for a company they’ll just sell to your boss with FUD like the link you posted.
I just dropped Altium after about 5 years and switched to KiCad. I’ve done 3 PCBs, including a fairly dense 4-layer board with fine pitch parts. I found KiCad was easy to learn, in all 4 of the major aspects: schematic entry, symbol creation, PCB layout, and footprint creation. I also really like the OSHPark connection, just wish I could get hot air leveled 37/63 PCBs. Minor issue there.
I kept a list of the only things I missed:
Can’t control via tenting.
Can just “Place a Pad” in the PCB editor. Note that if you could control via tenting, this would solve this problem.
Can’t copy-paste schematics pieces between projects. I know you can make small files and include them, but often I start with something and make a number of small modifications.
Manual routing is a bit more tedious than with Altium. It’s very “Protel 98” like. So you spend some extra time fighting that last little connect to a pad. “Intuitive” is another way of saying a lot of software that does what you want not what you mouse.
Can’t have a cut-out in a component pad library.
Am learning more every day. Of course there is the “usual” changing software issues like “What is the short cut for xxxx here”. But it was no worse than when I tried PADS and some other software. I found my “muscle memory” formed fairly fast. I sort of miss the two character short cuts (like “va” to view a rectangular area you then draw with the mouse). But I’ve learned to “zoom and spin the mouse wheel” to get where I want.
I will also note I had the luxury of being at a point in my work where I could basically “orphan” previous boards. There is nothing worse that being trapped in some software system because your data is stored in their “Hotel California” internal form.
My thanks to the people who have spend so many years making this a great piece of software!
Copypaste between schematics has already been implemented in the developent version. If you want to use an old design as a base for a new one, Save As (for project) is also there in the development version. I use it often for v5.1 projects (open with 5.99, Save As, close).
If you can describe accurately what you would expect in a certain situation, you could file an issue for it. I have done it for several smaller or larger details which I have found clumsy, unintuitive or difficult.
You kind-of can, but it is an all or nothing deal. When exporting to gerber you can choose to tent or not tent ALL vias:
I’m not convinced that either of those two links in @eelik’s reply will do anything for via tenting, unless the mask layer is included in the future pad stack editor. (I don’t see any explicit mention of the mask layer mentioned when quickly looking the links over.)
If by “component pad library” you mean what KiCAD calls a “footprint”, yes that is a known issue. I think it is being worked on, but I don’t know the specific gitlab issue number(s). Hopefully because the head librarian also wants this it will float up near the top of features to add before v6 is released.
I’m not familiar with Altium, (and I never will be) but I’m curious how familiar you are with the interactive router in KiCad. I find that with the right settings it just pushes traces and via’s aside to make just a little more room to squeeze in those last few tracks. I’ve made a denser board with it then I would have dared otherwise because of a too big risk of having to move QFP components on a nearly finished design.
