I do this all the time. I prefer to “shove” tracks rather than “rip up and redo” when editing. Adding a break and dragging a few points is far quicker in my opinion. Different strokes I guess.
You misunderstand my zone “problem”. I know about the options and what they do. Perhaps you should place a few components and then a filled zone to see what I mean. Do it in the “modern” toolset and then view again with the legacy toolset and you’ll see what I mean.
Below is one using the “legacy toolset”. Note how the filled zone is filled and the silkscreen is still visible.
Read the second half of my comment The one about the transparency.
The legacy renderer used some strange rendering tricks to show all layers at once. (Notice the colour change between silk where the zone is and where no copper is.)
The exact same can not be achieved easily with opengl rendering.
To get a similar behavior with the new toolset you need to enable transparency for the layers you want to be “see through”.
That’s not an accurate description about the state and development of KiCad. OpenGL isn’t there for good looks, it’s for practical reasons (speed for large boards etc.). And no sane person who actually have followed the development process some time (reading the dev mailing list etc.) would blame KiCad developers for “change for the sake of change”. I don’t doubt your sanity at all, but clearly you don’t know the background.
If I have understood correctly some functionality had to be changed to accommodate to the new backend. Some functionality has been and will always be a byproduct of the used technologies, that can’t be avoided, and people get used to the available workflows. I have had my frustration moments with changes in KiCad even though I never had time to get used to v4, I have used mostly nightly builds before and after 5.0.
As was already told the “Break track” problem is already gone in the nightly builds (and soon in 5.1), there’s no need to talk about that anymore.
I haven’t used more than 2 layers so I can’t comment further on your problem, but I can understand your feelings about changed functionality. It’s very frustrating when it happens, and even more frustrating when people tell you to change instead of thinking about how the software could actually be better. This kind of situation requires patience from all parties. You already have behaved better than many who have written here for the first time in the state of frustration, and you have already got positive feedback (e.g. Seth mentioned that the hotkey system may be changed in the future and could serve you better then). Let’s continue in the same way.
Unfortunately for you the legacy canvas/tools will go away at some point in the future, so you should try to learn to use the new workflow anyways. When you can think of a simple way to make things easier you can always write a bug report. The developers are open to suggestions even though not everything is possible or practical to implement.
I have the similar feeling when using 4.x - It like the designer know what I want / he actually a PCB designer himself. 5.x flow change, but not have a feeling of smooth flow yet, it often feel so many bump at difference phase in the design except the features got better. (may be this only apply to small number of people)
I noticed that people in general do not like change. So v5 modern canvas might feel worse for people coming from v4 legacy compared to somebody who is new to kicad in general. (But again: legacy is still here! At least for now.)
See it as learning a new tool and not as learning a new version of the same tool. This will give you the chance to rethink your workflow and maybe discover how to efficiently use the modern toolset. Oh and be prepared to invest time here! After all you learn a new tool.
I don’t mind change as long as it is for the better.
I took on the change when I started with Kicad because Eagle and Autotrax (became Altium; yes I’m THAT old) before that, wasn’t “doing it” for me. My design process hasn’t really changed that much over the years but Kicad helped me by providing useful features.
The workflow in 4.0.7 worked for me; in 5.x it does not.
Programs are supposed to support the workflow of the users; not dictate to everyone just because someone has an itch to scratch or they reckon their way is better.
When programs stop supporting the workflow of their users, those users will find alternatives (hence my progression over the years).
I will continue to use Kicad whilst “Legacy” is supported as it supports “this user’s” workflow.
Workflows are not fully dictated by the users alone.
They can (and are) influenced by the tool at hand.
I really fail to see the problems you have. (With the information you provided.)
As far as i can tell everything you want is supported.The new workflow might however require you to change the order of operation (Meaning first place the via and then select the new layer with +/- instead of working the other way round.)
I really fail to see how the issue discussed here truly impacts the workflow of users as long as they are prepared to retrain themselves on minor details.
But also, remember, it event harder to change a team of people. It got harder for a organization. So if KiCad been use in a company, it is a change for whole organization. So thing about that.
You may able to have a hand on the 5.x feature when 4.x shorted but still have your design file compatible with 4.x for the time been. I actual doing that for some of feature 4.x short on pcbnew. Check out:
Initially I was also not happy with the “philosophy changes” between Legacy and Modern toolkits. Working on 4.0.7, i started to more and more use Modern toolkit (even if I preferred the “Legacy” workflow) to the point when I only missed few behaviours on the Modern toolkit. The 5.0.2 fixed many of my issues, and brought new features I’ve been really looking for (like free Vias for stitching).
Then, KiCad goes towards dropping the Legacy toolbox at all in the future, so it’s best to start slowly getting used to the new workflow, and try to “force” yourself to use the Modern tools more and more (using “V” to place via is equally easy as the use of PgUp/PgDn for placing vias).
For what it is worth I really struggled at first with V5.0.1 after V4.0.7, but after laying a couple of boards and getting lots of help & advice from people on this site, I got comfortable with it (or mainly so).
Then along came V5.1.0 and what an improvement.
This has to be one of the easiest EDA packages to use now, and has come a long way since its inception.
It is free, well supported, even if the documentation is an issue behind.
Someone on this forum has usually been there / done that and freely offer help.
Yes there are some changes that make for frustration, but remember MS Office when that really did seem to change just for the sake of it at least on the surface.
The more one uses it the better the workflow - like any other design assisting program.
Well - I’m excited at first like any other try - then I hit too many bumper that lead me back to 4.0.7 so I can do my real work! 5.1 is great improvement but I cannot full use it effectively. Too many of my straight use cases been remove without a replacement, or fight with the tool.
The one about the transparency.
