https://www.ni.com/nl-nl/shop/product/multisim.html

^^^^^

The above worthless trash known as “multisim”, used for simulating circuits costs 905 EUR and

  1. Doesn’t have a linux version
  2. Is missing 90% of new commercially available parts
  3. Doesn’t have a method of easily adding those parts (except manually, 1 by 1) (as far as I know)
  4. Has garbage UI (you can only undo 4 times) (adding or removing a single component can easily use up more than 4 moves)
  5. Inconsistent simulations (making the sims work feels like trying to appease a capricious God to not curse you with famine)

The free open source software (qucs-studio) seems to have none of these problems, though I have barely used it.

  • Owl [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    20·
    12 days ago

    The stagnation in all forms of professional software is mind-boggling. We have the same basic categories of applications as we did in the early 2000s, sometimes with more bells and whistles. These applications are highly profitable, yet there’s still a bizarre gap in investment in new ones. A bias inflicted by a system where investment is directed not by tool-users, but by people who own things for a living.

    It makes me wonder whether other tools I’m less close to, like construction equipment, have such stagnation as well.

    • sodium_nitride [she/her, any]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      9·
      12 days ago

      It’s even more frustrating that there is so much stagnation for professional software. Like, consumer applications have so much UI design that it’s treating you like you are its little baby child. Then you have professional software which treats you as if you were the parent and the software is the child throwing a tantrum.

      A bias inflicted by a system where investment is directed not by tool-users, but by people who own things for a living.

      There is not a chance in hell that the designers of multisim casually use multisim.