Am I the only one that gets continually frustrated with the content of the published libraries?

I am not sure what the intended audience is for this product. I can easily find $5000 Altera chips and $260 AMP connectors, but do you think they'd include single row in-line headers, DC power connectors, PCB mount phone and phono jacks, binding posts, terminal blocks and a host of other industry standard devices like PCB mount momentary switches, DIP switches, etc, etc, etc...

I find I spend more time building libraries and patterns than I do designing circuits.

Maybe this software was intended for Raytheon, Litton or General Dynamics for designing one-off multimillion dollar projects for NASA or the US military where they might need $5000 FPGAs and $260 connectors. However, it lacks some of the things I need to design projects for the hobbyist level.

Did you request the parts at [ http://www.diptrace.com/libraries_req.php ]? (I always include a link to a datasheet and a digikey orderlink to make it easy to add)

That process would be time consuming for such short turn-around products. It's quicker, if still frustrating, to do it ourselves. Most could just be generic parts and patterns and reside in a generic library like 'Connectors' or 'Switches' or 'Discrete'. We usually source parts based on availability. Remember, these are not Tomahawk guidance systems here, just hobbyist projects, so the name of the manufacturer is not key. Only the quality and functionality matters.

As an example, I don't particularly care if a part has Vishay on it or Phillips, as long as its a 1N914 diode, if you get my drift. Most companies outsource non-proprietary part manufacturing all over the orient, so in many cases the part with Vishay on it was made in the same factory as the one with Phillips on it. An entry in a generic library for a generic 1N914 would be perfect. The only 1N914s listed in the Fairchild library. I, and I bet 99.999% of DipTrace customers, could not give a hoot if my 1N914s are from Fairchild or not.

When I land a big defense contract, I'll get more particular about component manufacturers, but by the same token, I'd be buying direct due to liability concerns and not from Digikey ... not ever from Digikey, actually.

Today we designed our 92nd to 115th library components. All of them generic parts that are available from multiple sources, all been around for a long, long time and all still in common use today.

End rant.

Please think for a moment about my suggestion to request that the parts be added. Your reply only speaks about whether doing that is convenient for you, but you are missing a key point: if someone else had put in a request for those parts earlier, you would have found them. Likewise, your putting in requests benefits someone else who needs the part months later. It's about community and helping each other.

A related question with the same issues: After you built your library, did you share it at [ viewforum.php?f=19 ]?"

Whether you like Digikey is irrelevant. The point is that it only takes a couple of minutes to put the digikey part number and the Digikey PDF datasheet on your request for a part to be added. A moment of work on your part means many hours of time saved by future users -- including you. And, of course, when you put in the request you can specify that you want a generic part as you described above.

Whoa! Just a minute.

If I'm not mistaken, Novarm is a for profit company. So is my company. I'm all for community effort, but this is not a non-profit, mutual benefit community, is it? I'm sure I wouldn't mind parting with what is my intellectual property if I received some compensation for the time I and some of my people have spent. If Novarm are willing pay me for it, I have no issue. After all, sharing what I have already done will only benefit Novram and Novram's customers, not me. Indeed, I have to pay for my DipTrace licenses, don't I?

I was always under the impression that being in business meant you get paid for the value you bring. N'est-il pas?

We added a lot of ICs to standard libraries in the past but now we create some popular components (switches, transformers, connectors, etc.). I believe our libraries will be more comprehensive in future.

Good to hear. Thanks.

With all due respect, your business model is flawed. Unless you plan on getting into the business of selling the DipTrace components you create, there is zero profit in keeping them to yourself. Sharing them, on the other hand, does profit you. Other users who use them have their time freed up to create other components. when they share those components you get the benefit of a larger component library (which, BTW, was your original complaint). So basically you are throwing away money because of ideology.

It is ironic that you, who refuse to share your created component libraries unless someone pays you, are demanding that Diptrace create component libraries for free - you are not offering to pay them for doing so. If they followed your flawed business model, they would tell you that you willingly bought a product with X parts in the library and would charge you extra for additional parts.

I will pay for updates and upgrades as required. I do not expect them to keep improving the product and libraries without compensation.

Not sure where you got this idea.

How much did you offer to Pay DipTrace for creating the library part you requested?

It would also be nice if you addressed the main point of my reply.