Do you support plans for National tests of PCB layout program use-ability?

[Flyback]

I do not see that it is impossible to right a "simplified guide" that could allow any electronics worker to make the pcb of post#1 inside of a day, in whatever high-end package. I just do not think that is an unreasonable expectation. Its 2 components on a 2 by 2 board.
I do not see that just because high-end packages do the complicated stuff aswell that doing the easy pcb stuff should be complex...that's like saying you've got a computer that can do mega hard calculations, but you cant open an excel sheet in it and do 2+2.

 

[ronsimpson]

Please write a "simple guide" that will allow any fool to play foot ball in a day. Not back yard ball but world class foot ball.

If this was simple any one would do it and I would not have a job. There is a reason why people with 10000 hours of experiance do it well and those with 3 hours experiance complain.

Some things are just complicated. Some things are only hard because those that do it do not want the competition.

----------------------------
I do feel your pain. It took two engineers 8 hours to get a FPGA software loaded on my computer. I have done this before. It should not be that hard. Quartus should just come up and run. There should have been a notice that putting it on "D:" will be very hard. Just get a bigger hard drive and put it on "C:".
----------------
Life is hard. If this was not true there would be more people alive and that would make life hard.

 

[Flyback]

Life is hard but PCBs are simple, -fibreglass with copper on it. It can be made easier, and to the benefit of your country. No point in making jobs harder than they need to be just because some minority of people benefit from that.

 

[DerStrom8]

Flyback, you've had three people respond saying basically the same thing, and yet you're still insisting we're all wrong. If you think it's that great of an idea and won't listen to our advice, then what are you waiting for? Like John said, just go do it.

You're wasting your time.

 

[jpanhalt]

You're wasting your time.

And, as I have pointed out before to others, potential employers are increasingly reviewing applicants' posts on social media. You need to consider the impact of your posts here on your future employment opportunities. No employer wants an employee who questions every job assignment as if it were a matter of national security.

Step back from this.

John

 

[shortbus=]

Flyback, you've had three people respond saying basically the same thing, and yet you're still insisting we're all wrong.

Is it possible this was the reason for being sacked? Not the, "not being able to use the software."

 

[Flyback]

three people, then there are the thousands out there who cant use their high-end pcb software properly, and all the companies who cant get pcb staff who can use their high-end package, one of the problems is that no company will report it because improving these packages "getting started" guides would help their competitiors too. But generally, employers don't object to people who have ideas for improving tools and increasing productivity, even if it is unpopular due to making the labour supply bigger due to the greater number of people who will be able to use the tools properly.
Present company excepted, -people answering here are of high-end ability, and likely to have good contacts and be 'in the know. aswell.
If there were loads of people like yourselves around, this wouldn't be a problem.

 

[DerStrom8]

I get the sense that if there were loads of people like you around, everybody would want everything done for them and nobody would be willing to do what it takes to learn how to use the software. You have the attitude that everything revolves around you and that everything should be easy for your sake, and if it's not easy enough for you then it should be made easy for you. The reality is that you (and others in your position) are the one(s) that need to change to adapt to the current market/practices if you hope to succeed. They're not going to change their practices just to make things easy for a few people who aren't willing to take time to learn.

Now, let's suppose they're consciously choosing software that is more difficult (rather than choosing it based on its features) to test their employees' ability to learn and adapt? You've already failed that test, and you're proving you're not the right one for the job even more by continuing with this thread. You just want everything to be made easy for you instead of taking the time to learn how to use the tools commonly utilized in the trade.

EDIT: I'm taking a step back from this thread because I don't want to come across as rude or critical. I am sorry you lost your job. I am simply stating facts about how things work in the design world hoping that it will help you in the future (if you heed our advice).

 

[alec_t]

As for the question posed in the thread title, do you really want the Government telling us how software should be written and what features it should have? Once they had their teeth into CAD software, do you think they'd stop there? Setting National tests would involve passing new laws, employing an army of Inspectors/Assessors etc and cost the taxpayer £millions. We have an over-supply of governance already .

 

[Flyback]

thanks, but no, not like that, the gov't could help to improve the software. As you know, in UK, the economy is dependent on oil, we do not succeed in engineering like other countries do...our gov't injects money from north sea oil into our electronics co's in order to help them survive. The only big electronic co that can survive independently in uk is Dyson.
..but even Dyson has to manufacture in Malaysia to be in decent profitability

 

[alec_t]

the gov't could help to improve the software.

I doubt it. They don't have a good track record when it comes to organising/commissioning IT projects .

 

[Flyback]

In this case, all they have to do is conduct the test of post#1, then raise the (as yet unanswered) question "Why is a simple PCB easy to lay out in Eagle, but very difficult to lay out in a high-end PCB package?" ....applying to peoples who have never previously used PCB cad packages.
Then people will hear of it, and either better "getting started guides" will be made for the high-end packages existing, or a new package will come through.

 

[Flyback]

The point is also that Engineering Managers and such , do not have time to learn these high-end packages, but, they MUST be able to go into one and check for example the library parts etc…….i cant see any engineering manager being able to open up a high-end pcb package and be able to inspect it, -they would quickly get lost….they cannot ask the cad operator to do it for them, because the cad guy might hide the “bad bits”…the engineering manager needs to inspect by themselves.

 

[JimB]

Why don't you start an online petition to the UK Government:

https://petition.parliament.uk/

If the petition receives 10,000 signatures, you will get a reply.
If the petition receives 100,000 signatures, it will be discussed/debated.

JimB

 

[Flyback]

Thanks JimB, as you know, there's nowhere near 10,000 electronics companies in UK. And most people outside electronics, indeed even engineers who never tried to do layout, just wont understand....that's why the newspaper is interested in promoting it...i know you dont think so anyway, or anybody else here, but its nothing to do with me by the way..this is happening whether or not I go under a bus.

 

[jpanhalt]

In this case, all they have to do is conduct the test of post#1, then raise the (as yet unanswered) question "Why is a simple PCB easy to lay out in Eagle, but very difficult to lay out in a high-end PCB package?"

That so-called fact you present is not before this forum. While you may have had that problem, adept users of that software may not. Maybe members here who use "high-end" software can comment on that.

I don't have experience with high-priced CAD for electronics, but I do have experience with SolidWorks 2007 (and before) software and mechanical drawings. Once you learn SolidWorks, doing a simple drawing with it was no more difficult than doing the same level of drawing with DrawingBoard -- an introductory program at about $100. Albeit, the less able program was easier for me to learn, but comparing apples to apples, there was very little difference.

John

 

[Flyback]

OK but my quote had the following proviso...

....applying to peoples who have never previously used PCB cad packages.

I agree that once an individual has learned a high-end pcb package, it is indeed quicker than eagle.
My complaint is that UK (and other countrys) industry is suffering because of a shortage of people who can use the high-end pcb package.
I have discussed earlier just why any engineer who has ended up learning a high-end package would definitely be against any efforts to make them easier to learn to newcomers......that is not in debate here, I am sure all would agree.

 

[shortbus=]

Doesn't it seem strange that of all the people in the UK and around the world that do this for a living, your the first and only one to suggest this"test"? Just asking.

 

[large_ghostman]

I cant use eagle, I tried many times. Easiest for me is proteus but I hate it. Altium is what I use at school and its great!! Took around 2 days watching vids on you tube to get upto speed on most features.
Were you aware that many employers use google to look at stuff about you online? Our careers guy told us they look on face book etc, just maybe yours had a peek at ETO? JUST SAYING THATS ALL

 

[Flyback]

Once someone has learned a high end PCB package, they then defend it to the hilt regardless of whether its good or bad..after all, once you’ve learned it and are using it, it’s a nice little earner to say the least…and due to the ridiculous difficulty of learning these high-end PCB packages, you can be guaranteed that you’ll never suffer much competition in the labour market, so yes , I can quite see why someone who has ended up learning it would say it’s the be all and end all.
Also, an engineering company that’s struggling like mad to get high-end pcb package layout staff will not be overly bothered if their competitors are also struggling…which they are, because the shortage of high-end pcb layout operators is everywhere. No company will complain about a problem to the authorities if they think the solution of that problem will also help their competitors..unfortunately.
A large number of hardware engineers, believe it or not, have never really been asked to ever use a high-end pcb layout package, so they don’t know about them and how badly explained they are.
Another point, is that Engineers never like to admit to having difficulty with anything…..because its their job to find solutions. An engineer wont say theyre having difficulty with something like a pcb layout package, because they understand that the ridiculous difficulty of the layout package, though at first beinga problem, when, eventually they have learned it, there will be small chances of having many competitiors in the workplace, because of the ridiculous difficulty of learning these high-end packages, which means that many potential competitors, will fall away and fail. This is to their benefit, btu not to the benefit of the country or company.
If it wasn’t for the big shortage of people who can competently use these high-end packages then I wouldn’t be saying a word.

Were you aware that many employers use google to look at stuff about you online? Our careers guy told us they look on face book etc, just maybe yours had a peek at ETO?

yes thankyou, and employers (company owners) are interested in things which will make their tools easier to use, and make them more profitable. Also, more competent staff available to use high-end pcb layout tools = less need to pay exorbitant wages. Employers like that.
Many people of course, don't want to learn eagle , because anybody can do it, and you don't get payed much anywhere for using eagle.....you do get payed much for being a highly competent altium engineer though. In UK, you can be talking £4000 for a weeks work in altium....that was how much my old place payed an altium guy to do a 10w led driver pcb.
Wages in excess of £40 per hour are not unusual for a top notch altium (plus other similar packages) person.
I'm not sure that schoolwork is rigorous enough to give someone a good test of ability in Altium...I could be wrong here?