Open side-bar Menu
 What's PR got to do with it?

Posts Tagged ‘Design Automation Conference’

Atrenta’s unified platform

Tuesday, May 15th, 2012

Maybe Atrenta is saying goodbye to the thought-bubble guy…..

Atrenta’s SpyGlass has always been the dominant name in the company’s brand portfolio,and for good reason. It’s the dominant product in RTL design analysis, verification and optimization.

Now, Atrenta is reconfiguring its product lineup to formalize this state of affairs. SpyGlass now becomes the unifying platform for all Atrenta products.  Sort of the mother ship that all Atrenta products are based on.

So what’s a unified platform? All the tools now share a common set up and debugging methodology and tighter GUI. And what can users verify and optimize from this new unified platform? Syntax, power, testability, clock synchronization, timing and routing congestion. All at the RTL stage, well before detailed implementation begins.

(more…)

Predictions 2012 – Standards and Social Media

Thursday, January 12th, 2012

This year, we’ll see an old standards battle get resolved. Now that all the players are participating in the IEEE Standard 1801 project (IEEE Standard for Design and Verification of Low Power Integrated Circuits), we can finally put the UPF-CPF debate to rest. Let’s hope that peace will reign and the temptation to fight one more time about a single low power standard will be overcome.

Social media will become less of a curiosity or a perceived waste of time for engineers. We’ll see more EDA customers helping answer each other’s questions and sharing more information (nothing proprietary, of course). LinkedIn discussions will have more depth, not simply people posting “read my blog”.

Facebook will remain more of a social vehicle, and for many engineers of our generation, a misunderstood channel. YouTube videos that provide good content – “how-to” and learning opportunities – will become popular. Twitter will remain a mystery for most, while a minority will find it of much value (include me in the minority). Marketers who spam social media channels with marketing-speak will be shunned. And, we’ll have some great guests on Conversation Central radio.

Karen Bartleson
Sr. Director, Community Marketing
Synopsys, Inc.
@karenbartleson
www.synopsys.com/blogs/thestandardsgame
President-Elect, IEEE Standards Association

 

Mike Gianfagna on EDA360

Monday, June 7th, 2010

mike-gianfagna534c2x3x3003Mike Gianfagna, well known and long time EDA executive, has quite a bit to say about the EDA360 manifesto that’s electrified the EDA world. As vice president of marketing at Atrenta, Inc, Mike has been an astute, articulate participant in the EDA value discussion. I was able to grab a few minutes with Mike to ask how EDA360 helped define the 2010 and beyond definition of EDA value and how it might alter the industry’s direction.

ED: EDA360 has caused quite a buzz. Why?

MIKE: Simply put, it’s one of the first times a major EDA vendor has focused on growing the industry and not just winning the next deal.

ED: It’s curious that EDA people have embraced it so vigorously. After all, it’s not a “how to” but more of a “here’s the vision, the dream.”  What’s the impact of EDA360 on the EDA industry? The EDA user community? The EDA media?

MIKE: Let’s face it, the EDA industry has been stuck at roughly the same size for a long time. This lack of growth, in my opinion, has a lot to do with the predatory practices most suppliers pursue. That is, “I win the current budget and you lose.” Growing the business takes a broader view, and a good dose of vision to see beyond today’s budget and determine how EDA can serve new customers tomorrow. EDA360 articulates such a vision.

I’d like to think all this will have a positive impact on our industry overall. As for the EDA media, I am honestly not sure who that is anymore, so it’s hard to comment.

ED: This is a Cadence-generated document. How effective can it be if there’s a significant “other” camp?

MIKE: This point is what I find most interesting (and refreshing) about the concepts of EDA360. It’s not a Cadence document per se. It’s a blueprint of where EDA can go to find new customers and add new value. The piece articulates this in terms of current industry trends. It aims to exploit adjacencies in order to grow the market. And it clearly states that everybody needs to start thinking differently if it’s going to work.

ED: Rightfully, some people could view EDA360 as a Cadence effort to regain some of its industry momentum and influence that it has NOT had for years. Why should the rest of EDA buy into a company initiative?

MIKE: As I mentioned, I don’t see this as a company initiative. I see it as a call to action for our industry. We can all keep chasing the same budget, or find new customers and new budgets. A “dog food dish” image is spinning around in my head right now, but I’ll leave that discussion to the class historians among us.

ED: How will EDA360 affect the big 6: Atrenta, Cadence, Magma, Mentor, Springsoft and Synopsys?

MIKE: Wow, thanks for the flattering reference. It’s not every day that Atrenta gets mentioned in the same sentence with Cadence, Synopsys and Mentor. The reference is correct, however. Atrenta is now at a size, and a popularity level  that gives us the opportunity to make a real difference, if you believe the DeepChip readership.

How can we make a difference? First of all, a consistent focus on serving the new and emerging user base referenced in the EDA360 vision will help. That is, the software development community that requires advanced silicon to get its job done. The changes implied by EDA360 will take time – all design paradigm shifts do and they usually take longer than you like.

If a group of forward-looking companies can work together toward the vision, the time required to get there can be reduced. And that spells opportunity for everyone.

ED: How will EDA360 affect the medium sized EDA companies?

MIKE: I think the effect here will be similar, except many mid-size EDA companies may necessarily be slower to respond. Pursuing new markets and new customers takes discretionary resources, and many mid-size companies don’t have a lot of that.

ED: How will EDA360 affect the slew of small and startup EDA companies?

MIKE: For the current crop of startups, I don’t believe the effects will be that noticeable. Some will figure out how to re-invent themselves in new, emerging markets but most will continue on the path they are currently on.

The interesting part for venture-funded startups is what happens next. Will the venture community start writing checks for new business models that address the application software developer’s needs? If this happens, we’ll have another proof point that EDA360 is more than a nicely done White Paper.

– end –

What about DAC has to change?

Friday, September 25th, 2009

(Sean Murphy, Liz Massingill and I finish up our discussion about DAC¹09 acknowledging that the role of social media in EDA, not technology, was the story this year. All of us see DAC needing to change. First of three parts.)

Ed: So let me throw this question on the table, since we all seem to be saying that DAC has to change with the times, as heralded by this year¹s social media debut: What has to change?

Sean: I think it’s a question of adapting changing circumstances and returning to some of the practices that allowed the industry to negotiate earlier transitions.

Liz: And I think that DAC’s press room has to change with the times.

Ed: Sean, you have the broadest perspective, being able to speak from the customer, attendee AND marketing perspectives. Liz, you go next since
you¹re not burdened with a long DAC history.

Sean: As I said previously, I think the show needs to abandon a number of things that have made them historically successful but are no longer appropriate.

Liz: Like what?

Sean: People want history and context. Lots of content has been lost
over the years. At DAAC¹09, Doug Fairbairn’s historic talk has been lost. A ton of content from the pavilion panels that¹s been lost.

Liz: So you¹re saying that there should be archival recordings at DAC?

Sean: yes, and not only recordings, but accessible archives. After all, what good are these recordings if no one or only a select few people can get to them? DAC papers were captured, in the form of the proceedings. But most of actual conversation about the papers’ topics migrated out of the formal conference and into the hallways.

What we have right now with DAC feels more like EDA during 1988 through1994, when synthesis became established and new platforms were established and many new companies were formed.

Liz: But how do you capture that hallway discussion?

Sean: well, a lot of these technical papers might easily work as well as webinars. Then you can do get the premise of hallway conversations captured in the webinar discourse. In the end, DAC has to foster more small group conversation. There has to be a vibrant community of practice. An unconference model, if you will.

Liz: What¹s that?

Sean: Five minute lightning talks. Open space where people who are interested in a particular topic come to an open room. Many sessions running on parallel tracks. At the beginning of the day, people post topics. Then DAC posts a schedule, and people show up and talk about that topic.

I also worry that my recommendation is ultimately too grandiose.

Ed: Sean, grandiose is fine. Did you see Warren Savage¹s suggestions for DAC? It’s easy for all of us to suggest change. But it’s up to the DAC Committee and MP Associates to decide what to change and then how to implement. That’s their problem and their mandate! One way not to do it
is to hire that consultant who¹s pissed off everyone he’s talked to.

Liz: If we could capture the excitement of CC somehow. Location is key. CC was so, central. The press room was off by itself. I think scheduled activities/ discussions bring people in and then engage them.

And variety is good. CC went from an interactive class to lecture to discussion to free form.

Sean: In prior years the press room was excited and exciting, or at least buzzing with activity. I remember going in 1995 and doing a round of interviews.

Liz: Was it always off by itself? I think that’s a major problem for the press room.

Sean: It seems to me that CC and the press room serve different functions.

Liz: I think they might need to combine forces.

Ed: That’s a good point, Liz. The press room WAS isolated, as they wanted it to be. Historically, it was a sanctuary for press, to keep from getting hounded. Inadvertently, it walled them off from the action.

Sean: The press room preserved the press as a gatekeeper to the larger audience of conference non-attendees and assumed that communication would not unfold in real time (now events at DAC are twittered/blogged/ videoed, podcasted within minutes to hours.

Liz: I think they need to change the press room with the changing times, though.

DownStream: Solutions for Post Processing PCB Designs
TrueCircuits: IoTPLL



Internet Business Systems © 2017 Internet Business Systems, Inc.
25 North 14th Steet, Suite 710, San Jose, CA 95112
+1 (408) 882-6554 — Contact Us, or visit our other sites:
TechJobsCafe - Technical Jobs and Resumes EDACafe - Electronic Design Automation GISCafe - Geographical Information Services  MCADCafe - Mechanical Design and Engineering ShareCG - Share Computer Graphic (CG) Animation, 3D Art and 3D Models
  Privacy PolicyAdvertise