Posts Tagged ‘semiconductors’
Wednesday, May 27th, 2015
Sage CEO Coby Zelnik recently talked with us about how design rules need a formal methodology to account for all the permutations of each rule for today’s and the next generation’s chip designs.
What I found alarming was that he noted how design rules are being built today. An engineer writes the rule based on…well, based on…um…gut feel? The point is that the design rule creation process currently has no specification to govern the creation of the design rule.
Sunday, May 3rd, 2015
Several months ago, I was talking to several partners of an Asian incubator. They were focusing on “new technology,” various apps, other IoT-related areas, “not old ones, like semiconductors.” Ugh!
I felt like I was part of the US steel industry and living in the rust belt. 😉
So it was quite a pleasant surprise to get the invitation to Silicon Sunrise, a coming out event put on by a new, months-old organization, Silicon Catalyst. And I was curious, as I bet the other invitees and attendees were. It looked like Silicon Catalyst was a new investment organization that possibly focused on silicon.
Thursday, October 16th, 2014
This article by Atrenta’s CTO Bernard Murphy and investor Jim Hogan has attracted a lot of interest.
Murphy and Hogan say that we can draw inspiration from biology on how to design the IoT fortress: specifically, how the human body wards off attacks from bacteria, viruses, other bad and harmful stuff.
And they describe in detail the concept on how electronic engineers can plan to do so.
It’s an intriguing piece that gives electronic designers a first huge step on how to secure the IoT and keep those of us who are IoT-interconnected – Borg Collective like – protected from the inevitable cyber attacks.
Biology, Deceit & Security in the Internet of Things
What do you think?
Friday, August 1st, 2014
Simon Bloch of Samsung, speaks out from the audience on the IoT, posing some interesting questions for all.
Bloch: I don’t think that there’s a one-size-fits-all IoT. There’s going to be segmentation. And if we end up in technology segmentation it’s going to be in low power, low latency and high bandwidths. They are going to be applicable to different areas. But it appears to me that technology segmentation is going to be driven by software, and not necessarily by hardware.
Perhaps one of the better examples is what Apple did just this week (editor’s note: week of June 2, 2014) by connecting two IoT devices – two operating systems talking to each other.
So there might be multiple technologies or different IOSs for different IoTs. There might be an opportunity in connecting them to a management layer that talks to one another, like in the areas of apps.
So, is there an opportunity for EDA companies? What is that activity and what is the opportunity to complement the classical EDA?
Wednesday, July 30th, 2014
More on our coverage of the panel on the IoT……Audience member, Gabe Moretti, had quite a bit to say about the IoT and the automobile. And Jim Hogan shares a story.
Moretti: Let me talk to you about the very latest model car….The first thing it does when I get in the car is ask me for my cell phone. It connects to my cell phone, and only some of the functions are available to me if I have the cell phone with me…and the cell phone is off. What’s the problem I have with all of us engineers talking about what a great opportunity IoT is? We’re forgetting that supply is only successful if there is a demand.
Monday, July 28th, 2014
In our continuing series on the IoT, Frank Schirrmeister of Cadence explains what three components of the IoT are important to him.
Schirrmeister: There are three components of importance. Fitbit. ARM’s going very big in that area, with their silicon partners. That’s not the IoT in its completeness. That’s an important component, but the analog mixed-signal components are certainly fun and challenging in this domain.
Then there are two more pieces to the Internet of Things that make me very happy, from a system design perspective: The first one is the hub of my data from the Fitbit. I have at least four hubs that I’m concerned about. My cell phone when I’m mobile. My computer at home. My living room; apparently my TV knows about my habits.
And there is my car. So that’s a hub – a very important piece. And from a system design perspective, there’s system development, emulation, FPGA, virtualization. There is a huge interesting market for us.
Then the third piece is this whole cloud space. That’s where the Intel, ARM, PC battle is waging. And that’s also a very important component of the Internet of Things where all the data crunching has happened and the health data that the health monitor needs to pick up. It is a very attractive market for EDA and will be very important to drive requirements, as well, for us.
Thursday, July 24th, 2014
Bernard Murphy, CTO of Atrenta, talks about the challenges to security that the IoT will bring in our continuing coverage of the IoT panel at DAC…and sees the IoT as a lot like a biological system!!!!
Murphy: The IoT represents a new level of challenge for security – not just because you have to worry about automotive, medical and so on. But also, if you believe the numbers, then the number of potential edge nodes in an IoT is on the order of a trillion or more. That’s two to three orders of magnitude bigger than any existing network you can imagine. It’s about the number of cells you find in a new born baby.
So a trillion edge nodes looks like a biological system. Why is that relevant? Because our approach to security today is very atomic….It’s not a system level approach. You think in terms of system level and you look at analogies with biological systems, then you think in terms of different things.
Of course, you need all the antibodies and antiviruses. But you also want to think about things like signaling – help I’m under attack. It’s not the same thing as defending yourself. You still want to defend. But you also want to signal to your nearest neighbors or an organization around you that you’re under attack. It can isolate you or send in defenses.
Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014
In today’s snippet from the IoT panel, Randy Smith, VP of Marketing at Sonics, gives his views on how the IoT will affect the EDA and IP industries.
Smith: Time to Market will be more important. The need for software-hardware co-design and speed will equal new applications and solutions for EDA.
A lot of it will be in consumer, which is why there is a lot of hype, because when we think consumer, we think high volumes, perhaps a trillion devices out there. But what’s different in that market as compared to some other markets is that time to market is so much more critical.
So for IoT, you’re going to need the equivalent of agile software development and hardware. You’re going to need to respin that design in three months. It would not be a tremendous surprise if you see some previous ASIC practices like gate arrays start to get more traction again.
Monday, July 21st, 2014
As we had previously announced, venture capitalist Jim Hogan moderated a panel at DAC regarding the IoT.
It was an eye opener about all things IoT……or maybe we should call it the IoE (The Internet of Everything), or as one prominent editor noted, the IoW (The Internet of Whatever). Our panelists included: Gary Smith, Market Analyst, GSEDA; Frank Schirrmeister, Group Director, System Development Suite, Cadence; Bernard Murphy, CTO, Atrenta; and Randy Smith, VP of Marketing, Sonics.
Very lively discussion among panelists, but also from the floor! Most notably editor Gabe Moretti of Chip Design and Simon Bloch of Samsung. Bloch, Sr. Director of R&D in mobile consumer wireless devices, posed questions and stimulated discussion to the point where he might be called the unannounced 6th panelist.
Over the next few blogposts, we’ll share snippets of that discussion. Gary Smith will start us off…..