
Show HN: SnapEDA Plugins – Find parts inside your circuit board design software - natashabaker
http://www.snapeda.com/plugins
======
natashabaker
Dear HN community,

I posted last month about our startup SnapEDA which makes free symbols and
footprints available in multiple design formats when we released InstaPart:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12571200](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12571200).

We just built new plugins so that you can search SnapEDA right inside your
design tool and thought I'd post again to share it (hope that's ok with
everyone). These new plugins are for Altium and Eagle. The plugins allow you
to search models without having to leave your design environment.

This is a beta, so would love any feedback you might have. One thing on our
roadmap is to add cloud-syncing of the libraries and user authentication right
from the plugin. Would love to hear your thoughts on other features to add
next!

~~~
laveur
I want to personally thank you! This I feel will quickly become a very useful
tool for me when I design projects for Burning Man. The libraries for Eagle
can be very very lacking.

------
robert_foss
I feel like the KiCad support is lacking. As the community EDA of choice,
support for it is quite important.

What I would really like to so is a repository of 3D models. Footprints are a
dime a dozen and faster to churn out than 3D models. Also, most EDA suites
support creating footprints/symbols but few/none support 3D modeling.

Also I've had SnapEDA provide me with footprints of similar parts that in
actuality were not similar enough. A fair chunk of time was wasted on that.

~~~
spott
I have a question:

Why do you want 3D models? What is the use case? Are you doing a lot of really
space-constrained boards?

KiCad has spent a lot of effort on making it possible to view 3D models of
boards. Upverter has recently spent a whole bunch of time on making this
available (time that could be better spent on a _lot_ of other things). And I
don't get why. Outside of a small contingent of space-constrained parts, I
just don't see what the use of 3D parts is.

~~~
StavrosK
I've personally spotted many mistakes in the 3d view, mainly spacing ("oh, I
thought this would fit but it doesn't look like it would"). It's not my first
priority, but it would be nice to have.

~~~
robert_foss
Me too, the 3D viewer is developmental tool. I also use it for marketing.

It is especially nice with the ray traced 3D view of KiCad.

~~~
StavrosK
Raytraced view? How!?

------
blackguardx
My feedback as an EE with 10 years experience:

I think your InstaPart feature looks cool. Lots of big companies have CAD
teams that just make component libraries for designers. It is nice to get a
bit of that on the small side of the industry finally.

That being said, limiting it to 5/month is very constraining. Can you accrue
InstaParts? I think most designers typically need more than that per project,
but not necessarily each month.

~~~
natashabaker
Sure. The way it works is if a part is already in our library it's free and
you can download unlimited models. If not you can get it in 24h with
InstaPart, and then that model is included for everyone in the free library.

You are correct that we have heard from customers who subscribe that they want
more than 5 (right now they don't accrue because it's an add on to the other
features). We are considering making these special requests available via a
credit system. Would something like that work? Approximately how many do you
use per project and what is the complexity of the designs?

------
bsder
Sigh. I don't need _yet another_ plugin for my generic parts--that you're
going to try to monetize on me eventually if you achieve lock in.

Let me be blunt. I don't need _extensions or features_ to my PCB tools.
Certainly not "Yet Another Database Frontend(tm) You Can Rent".

I my tools to fscking _WORK_.

I need a tool that runs, fast, on Windows, Linux, and even OS X.

I need bug fixes for the features that they actually have.

I need a tool that lets me script things in a modern programming language.

I need an autorouter that doesn't suck. This will never happen because our
algorithms don't like to work with PCB limitations of small numbers of layers
and obstacles that penetrate multiple layers.

 _ALL_ the PCB software tools are buggy piles of garbage because the amount of
money in that industry is now fixed. Charitably: everybody is trying to
extract rent instead of innovate. Uncharitably: nobody actually in development
actually knows how the board designers use their tools anymore.

If you want to go chase a field, go chase Cadence, Mentor and Synopsys up into
the real EDA market where _algorithms_ matter. Creating $10000-level tools
that can do actual VLSI design to take advantage of the fact that transistors
are stupidly cheap in volume would kick off the custom silicon revolution
everybody has been promising.

~~~
dang
Please read the Show HN guidelines:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html).
They say: "Be respectful. Anyone sharing work is making a contribution,
however modest."

Your comment is a mixture of dismissiveness and helpful (though perhaps
tangential) information. It would be much better if you took out the
dismissiveness.

~~~
bsder
Sorry, you are correct. My post was far too dismissive. He accidentally
tripped over a hot button of mine and it was not his fault. Mea culpa.

As a power user and as an executive manager, I am extremely frustrated to see
yet another company creating a "part database" (we have more than enough of
these, thanks, and they don't actually solve a problem that a user actually
has) rather than tackling _ANY_ of the actual _technical_ problems in the
space.

However, your point is well taken. My apologies.

~~~
lifekaizen
Please don't assume the OP is male or not solving technical challenges. She's
a YC founder recently profiled in a technical magazine (PCB Design - see:
[http://www.iconnect007.com/index.php/article/100587/](http://www.iconnect007.com/index.php/article/100587/)).

~~~
bsder
> Please don't assume the OP is male or not solving technical challenges.
> She's a YC founder recently profiled in a technical magazine (PCB Design -
> see:
> [http://www.iconnect007.com/index.php/article/100587/](http://www.iconnect007.com/index.php/article/100587/)).

1) Press coverage does not automatically imply either vision or competency.
See: Theranos.

2) Do not assume that _I_ do not have the bonafides to critique properly just
because I am willing to have my rudeness pointed out. I've probably been
fighting with EDA tools longer than she has been _alive_. And I ran a group
which had a budget of more than $70 million for EDA tools.

I assure you I have very strong opinions about EDA tools that are _backed up_
by very hard won experience.

And one of the many of those opinions is that _not once_ did any engineer with
experience ever say "Gee, we really need somebody else to manage our parts or
footprints." _TO A PERSON_ they all said "We'll do it. Anybody else will screw
it up."

So, quite certainly, I have enough vision of the field to deem it "not a
technical challenge". You can feel free to disagree, but you're going to have
to bring some experience or data to convince me.

And, in case you think I'm being unfair, I can assure you that I ripped
several layers of upper managers at Altium a new one for buying Octopart
instead of _fixing their tool_.

