( ESNUG 438 Item 14 ) ------------------------------------------- [01/18/05]
Subject: 7 Users Concerned about Weak Cadence SystemC & PSL/SVA 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?
Probably good news. Anything to hasten the decline of Specman & 'e'
would be a Good Thing. On the other hand, I'm concerned this could
pose a risk to Cadence's promotion and support of SystemC for
modeling and verification.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
If Cadence has a plan to kill "e" and migrate it to PSL (or SVA),
sounds good. Otherwise, too much expensive purchase, I think.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As an EDA user this is great news -- perhaps e/Specman will finally go
away!!! Having one less proprietary language is always a good thing!!!
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As an EDA user I think this is bad news, because it makes me question
Cadence's commitment to their other verification tools, most
importantly (to me) SystemC TestBuilder.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
I'd like to know what it means for Cadence backing SystemC for
verification (SCV). While they are not the only ones supporting this
methodology, Cadence has been the driving force behind it. I suspect
that this purchase represents a vote of "no confidence" in the
SystemC part of the verification methodology that they have been
backing. Of course, no one will say that at Cadence, but as far as
I am concerned, they have already said it with cash.
Here's a possible rationale for the purchase:
System Verilog (and PSL) will supplant Specman/e. It will take a while
(and may never be 100%), but it will happen. There are a lot of Specman
customers today. By owning this customer relationship, Cadence has a
much better chance of getting current Specman customers to transition to
Cadence's simulation products when the time comes, instead of going to
Mentor or Synopsys.
Now, the key to making this work is not to alienate the current Specman
customers. If they do, then people will switch to Mentor or Synopsys
out of spite when they transition away from Specman. Specman users
tend to be zealots, and they will want to hurt Cadence if they are seen
as the one's who "fucked up Specman" like they have done to some other
products in the past.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
Bad news. Of course Cadence fills a hole in its offerings, but we
do not know how the Cadence simulation frontend will take direct
advantage of having Specman. Will "e" survive as an assertion
language, given that Cadence has always sponsored PSL? What about
the overlap of simulator and acceleration options between the former
two companies?
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
As an EDA user,I think it'a bad news. Cadence will not focus on
SystemC as an verification language.
- [ An Anon EDA User ]
NEXT->Item
|
|
