( SNUG 10 Item 14 ) --------------------------------------------- [04/15/10]
Subject: What 238 users think of the Lynx framework
NOT BUYING IT: This is Year 4 where Synopsys has tried to trap its more
gullible customers into foolishly locking their entire EDA tool flow into
a framework that Synopsys, Inc. controls. Their first attempt was with
their "Pilot" tool back in 2006. It was a spectacular flop; Synopsys
couldn't find users dumb enough to buy into it back then.
And since this survey failed to find even *ONE* Lynx user now, it looks
like Pilot's history is going to repeat itself again. LOL!
With regards to the Synopsys Lynx framework, our group (choose):
1- We already use Synopsys Lynx, it's the best.
: 0%
2- We're considering Lynx right now.
: ### 7%
3- No, thanks. Only a complete idiot would lock their
design flow into a single EDA vendor's framework.
: ########################################## 93%
Comments?
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We are considering Lynx, but don't like the idea of paying for a tool
to hold all the tools from one vendor together. Shouldn't it always
work like that?
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We have our own flow that's better than Lynx & allows different vendors.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Lynx framework? That was just a marketing hype! We won't see
anything of that here.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We have our own "make" flow custom built for our purposes. We do not
need an additional overhead of Lynx Framework. It will probably
give us more maintenance headaches.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We looked at Lynx, but decided to keep using our current flow.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We maintain our own design flow framework to stay flexible and hook
our small scripts to a defined place. So it's easy to switch from one
tool to the other. We didn't look into Lynx yet.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We looked Lynx last month. The concepts are good. However, we do not
what Lynx can bring us if we can not really apply it in a real project.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We use Magma. Lynx doesn't support it.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
No Lynx. We're sticking in a DC - Magma flow.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Don't even know what Lynx is. We use Mentor tools to do full-custom
layout and for the digital macros we use Synopsys DC/PT.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We have been trying to base our (new) ICC environment on Synopsys
Reference Methodology. We soon noticed, however, that this doesn't
work out very well, a lot of company- and technology-specific
extensions and changes are required for Lynx. We rewrote things
from scratch by ourselves now.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
No, IC Compiler should not be required inside Lynx.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
????? Might be under evaluation
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We haven't tried SNPS Lynx framework yet
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Some groups looking at Lynx
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
We're using an internal Intel tool.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Evaluating Lynx
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
No. We developed an internal framework.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
Sign up for ESNUGs! Fun!
Index
Next->Item
|
|
