( ESNUG 438 Item 10 ) ------------------------------------------- [01/18/05]
Subject: 13 Users Think Cadence Will Give Specman "e" Crappy Support
> Cadence announced it's buying Verisity for $285 million in cash.
>
> As an EDA user, do you think this is good news or bad news? Why?
Bad news, the support of Verisity was excellent, Cadence support is
not so good. One of the most innovative companies in the verification
business is now not independent. We will see how it will work.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
We have been very happy with the level of support from Verisity, as
well as their responsiveness to make changes to the tool when they
see problems. This comes from a clear focus on their products and
customers.
I can't imagine that merging Verisity into a larger company can be
a good thing. It is likely that the focus will be less sharp, and
the bright Verisity people will leave.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
It's very hard to say right now how this news sounds. Specman was a
good tool with with very reactive support because it was Verisity
core business:
- I will have benefits if they better integrate Specman with
NC-SIM, ICT, SystemC, PSL, Palladium.
- I will have deficits if they integrate Specman development and
support teams with Cadence's.
Altogether this is probably a BAD news.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
I think it's bad news, because I don't think that Cadence supports
other EDA vendors like using Mentor Modelsim with Verisity.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As an EDA user, I think it will cause some problems for those people
using Verisity together with VCS. Our group is in that situation even
though it was not our choice to pick Verisity. I think Cadence will
put more integration into NC-Verilog instead of VCS. For NC-Verilog
users, it might be good news in the short term.
I don't know if Cadence can succeed in making Verisity language one of
the standards. Verisity seemed to be losing the battle to System
Verilog and that might be the reason they put themselves for sale.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As a user, I think this is bad news.
The buyout might have given Specman/e a more stable future financially,
but past experience tells me that the tool quality will start to
decline. Also if Cadence integrates it tightly into their verification
platform, current Specman customers using Modelsim/VCS will suffer.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As a previous Specman user I don't think this is a good thing. Specman
will become a small tick on a big dog and it might make it more
difficult to respond and resolve customer issues.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
We use both Cadence's simulation products and Verisity's Specman Elite.
I think the news could be taken both ways. The good thing that I
see with it would be tighter and better integration between Specman
Elite and Cadence's simulation products - something which isn't that
great right now (frankly, it's a bit kludgey at times and doesn't always
work right). Maybe with access to each other's source code, both will
be able to do a better job in the future.
One bad thing that I can see is that they may decide to drop support
for VCS which we also use. Another bad thing would be the support
department - Verisity's support has been decent and stays on top of
things whereas our experience with Cadence's support has been lacking
at times. I hope Verisity's support department doesn't go away as a
result of this merger.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As an EDA user (and current Specman user), I think this could be bad
news, based on what is happening with Vera after being acquired by
Synopsys. How much resources Cadence will devote on continuing to
enhance the current Verisity toolset is a concern of mine.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As a Specman w/ VCS user I have some worries about whether Specman as a
standalone product will survive. I also worry that the quick Verisity
support that we have recieved up to now will slow down to a more "big
company" level. Until I see their combined roadmap, I can't say any
more about product offerings.
On the business front, I have been wondering where Verisity would end
up, given an industry shift toward System Verilog in a few years. I
wasn't convinced that they could turn the Axis simulator into a world
class product, even though the Specman constructs should port to
System Verilog. In that case, this could be a good match -- Cadence
has the simulator, and Verisity can provide the base code constructs
to jumpstart a Cadence System Verilog solution.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
Bad news. Just as with Synopsys/Avanti, the Verisity support will
decline in quality, there will be Cadence support guys who don't
understand the Verisity products, and there will be attempts to
integrate Verisity's tools into the Cadance flow which will
compromise their products.
Quality of support, and reaction time to bug-fixing always gets worse
when a big corporate player buys a younger keener player.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
Bad news! I've had experience in dealing with both Verisity and
Cadence tech support and FAEs. In my experience Verisity excels in
these areas relative to other EDA companies... (we all know EDA tech
support sucks). Once they integrate with CDN, I fear that their
customer service will reach the lowest common denominator.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
Bad news.
I have been using Verisity's Specman Elite for several years. This is
an amazingly sophisticated product, which requires training and
significant hand-holding support before it can be used efficiently.
But when you have climbed the learning curve, Specman provides
efficient and unbeaten verification facilities. The key to Verisity's
success has to be its excellent support.
I have been using various Cadence products for many more years, but
specifically NC-SIM. Recent revisions to NC-SIM have caused havoc
because of the changes to the coverage. The documentation for coverage
is appalling, support is generally poor, and progress seems to happen
by accidentally contacting someone who really knows what to do.
My fear is that Cadence will not understand the tool and will not
support it properly. Worse, I fear the bright guys from Verisity will
find other homes and Specman will end up being unsupportable.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
NEXT->Item
|
|
