On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:01:52 roger_irwin wrote: > --- In [email protected], [email protected] wrote: > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > > - Never use it, 14 votes, 37.84% > > - To initially throw the components across the surface roughly > > grouped on the basis of the netlist, 15 votes, 40.54% > > > - To try and find the exact optimal placement of individual > > compnents, 8 votes, 21.62% > > > - Other, 0 votes, 0.00% > > Now I get to reveal **why** I set this poll. When I tried using the > autoplace function, I found it to be very slow, but precise, as it > iterates througth each component trying to find an optimum placement. > > I would have preferred that it was much quicker rather than being so > precise, so I set the poll to see what other people thought. The > results are fairly clear, people wanting precise autoplace functions > are few, half that of the people who would like autoplace to throw > component roughly into position. > > BTW, It may be that some of the people who "never use it" may not use > it because they have never used a package that does a quick and rough > autoplace. > > However, as a conclusion, I would say that whilst there are users who > appreciate KiCAD's precise autoplacer, there would seem to be ample > demand for a quick placer algorithm as well.
Roger, In my case, I use it for rather high frequency designs with DDS chips and MMIC's etc. I stopped attempting to use autoplace and route many years ago. I can't use it for audio apps, not for RF apps and neither for embedded systems. I past years, you designed more of glue logics with low bus speeds so an optimising autoplace+route cad was very convenient to have. If that is what you need, the KiCad won't be optimal for you unfortunately. Most hobby apps tend to fall into the categories I described earlier as many homebrewers are Hams. ( I know, some are audio freaks too... ) //Dan -- Dan Andersson, M0DFI [EMAIL PROTECTED]
