C
Camille Kokozaki
Guest
View attachment 3331
“And yet it moves (Italian: Eppur si muove; [epˈpur si ˈmwɔːve]) is a phrase said to have been uttered before the Inquisition by the Italian mathematician, physicist and philosopher Galileo Galilei in 1633 after being forced to recant his belief that the earth moves around the sun.”(1)
As I was driving from Monterey last week after attending the Electronic Design Process Symposium (EDPS), this sentence kept popping in my head when I was mentally re-arranging the various arguments in support of or against EDA in the cloud. I am identifying with Galileo lately while feeling his pain. I have been evangelizing the merits of the EDA in the cloud for a while now, and yet the clamor about the death of an approach towards EDA transacting is rising when it has not even had a chance to be properly deployed. So I decided to list all the various objections and dismissals of CloudEDA and attempt to rationalize, debunk and yes speculate since this seems to be one of the currencies in vogue these days. To keep things on the lighter side of this serious topic, I will sprinkle as many clichés or sayings that I can think of (for or against, with or without mangling mind you) and we will together keep track of them until the clouds come home [1].
- It is the (lack of) security, stupid [2]. One of the most recurring theme, loaded with FUD. There is security, trust us. Fortresses are better than huts, no matter how valiant the warrior. Encryption, protected access, the foundry already has your jewels, if you are IP paranoid, get your own fortress, but pay as you go for what you need. Do not let the exception drown the rule. Next question.
- Been there done that [3] Some have said that they tried this years ago and even recently and customers would not belly up to the bar and lawyers would not let go of IP and finance would not budge and the dog ate my homework [extra credit earned here for humor]. The simple answer is ‘it depends’ on the deal, the terms, the past is not the future or even the self-fulfilled reality. Try, try again, because there is real money behind them servers you never have to buy, maintain or upgrade. Are you listening EDA? The pricing is getting lower when you look at costs and the revenue is getting higher when you look at ‘useful use for what you need’ not ‘inefficient use for what you have to eat’ by customers who are happier because they are getting their work done faster and thus will come back for more. Big companies have budgets and few have unlimited resources. It is elementary ‘efficient markets’ economics my dear.
- ‘Show me the money’ and its cousin ‘Follow the (lack of) money’ or ‘Cost too much money’ or ‘What happened to my money’ [4]. The last one refers to impact to short term financials if TBLs are redone. True enough but the pot is at the end of the rainbow in that your patience will be rewarded later, and you can always phase this thing in by staging pilot engagements, playing with the transaction options and experimenting.
- When it pours, it will therefore rain [5] In other words, let Mikey try it first. If it works, I will join in. I only have momentum to lose. Right.
- Where is the beef? [6] See [4]. Where is the research? It does not exist because the market is in its early stages, nor is research needed if you think about it. No $5B capital is required before you start. Try it. With passion, not skepticism. It could be good.
- If you build it they will come [7] Now you are talking.But you never said that unfortunately.
-Yes, No, Maybe, I don’t know, Can you repeat the question? [8] I am confused. Can I hedge? How is that different? If you have to ask, never mind then.
- This is rocket science, not an app [9]
View attachment 3330
(Henry Blodget CEO Business Insider, March 21, 2012)
Yep. Let us make it an App. Moving to the cloud and doing everything in the cloud is just like doing work today and no code rewrite is needed. You are hosting there, not here. So it is neither here, nor there and is getting us nowhere. I am oversimplifying here in terms of code rewrite. We really should disaggregate the tools into features as apps. I used to buy a commercial application for $300. I buy it now from the same vendor at $10 but I buy 40 more apps. So I am spending $100 more, I do more with apps I actually need, not less with ones I pay for but never use in ‘all-you-eat’ scenarios. Some apps are rocket science by the way but I digress.
- There are not enough users, the long tail is short and we are chasing our tail [10]. It is not worth it they say. There are indeed a few thousand designers. I think the constraint is a result of million dollar tools forcing limited grand priests to manipulate precious resources. That is our opportunity to grow the user base. More power to more people trying to design for less power. Streamline the flows, layer on the methodologies, and interoperate. Lots of development opportunities exist for better design experience.
- Self-inflicted irrelevance [11] Often mentioned by cloud advocates.VCs do not like semis and EDA anymore. Let us give them a reason to get excited again by being more creative and aggressive in business models.
- Do not rock the boat while I create yet another unneeded tool duplication no-one wants [12] This is the reason why the excitement is gone. I can see you nodding or shaking your head. Discuss.
- Why ask why [13] That is how things have been and likely to stay. In reality the singularity is not near but is occurring already and it appears more likely end-games could occur with foundries becoming more likely to incorporate the tools as part of their overall offerings, facilitating further process and tool interdependencies. This has been talked about for a while, but the murmurs are becoming drumbeats. All it takes now is a motivated 3rd party to encourage this path.
- It is a jungle so I will bear hug only gorilla customers, the rest are toast [14] There are only large customers left and they do not want common cloud. Yet that 3rd party in the above paragraph is a gorilla customer realizing design enablement also could include one stop shop. That same gorilla customer may actually insist on maintaining multiple foundry options, but with EDA baked in in each option. Creating an alternate enablement through the cloud could address everyone’s wants and needs since the foundries model will be one of the incarnations of this use case and not just the one incarnation.
There are always 10 reasons not to do anything but only one is needed when it is the most important reason. That reason is: we need a change in attitude, altitude and fortitude (that is 3 for you who are counting, but who is counting?) Feed the cloud, starve the fear.
Eppur Si Muove. Ipso facto. Non sequitur. Alea Jacta Est.
- Note: Mixing metaphors here while putting down my foot where my mouth is, I am thinking of helping organize a seminar-panel combo session during the upcoming DAC where we can discuss this topic. I am thinking a 3 hour long one with EDA, foundry, cloud provider, FPGA, IDM, VC, startup, server and analyst, academic and IEEE luminaries. We would invite the public and public comment to help shape the agenda with a soft or downloadable copy of contributed content provided at the end of the seminar along with some giveaways. With visions of John Belushi running out of the Animal House frat house trying to energize his peers, yet finding himself by himself, I am asking here for feedback on whether this would be a good idea. If you like this and happen to be a willing sponsor, do let me know. Otherwise, this may end up a pub discussion where paper napkins become the presentation sketches. Of course if something similar is already occurring, can you let me and the readers know? Thank you in advance.
“And yet it moves (Italian: Eppur si muove; [epˈpur si ˈmwɔːve]) is a phrase said to have been uttered before the Inquisition by the Italian mathematician, physicist and philosopher Galileo Galilei in 1633 after being forced to recant his belief that the earth moves around the sun.”(1)
As I was driving from Monterey last week after attending the Electronic Design Process Symposium (EDPS), this sentence kept popping in my head when I was mentally re-arranging the various arguments in support of or against EDA in the cloud. I am identifying with Galileo lately while feeling his pain. I have been evangelizing the merits of the EDA in the cloud for a while now, and yet the clamor about the death of an approach towards EDA transacting is rising when it has not even had a chance to be properly deployed. So I decided to list all the various objections and dismissals of CloudEDA and attempt to rationalize, debunk and yes speculate since this seems to be one of the currencies in vogue these days. To keep things on the lighter side of this serious topic, I will sprinkle as many clichés or sayings that I can think of (for or against, with or without mangling mind you) and we will together keep track of them until the clouds come home [1].
- It is the (lack of) security, stupid [2]. One of the most recurring theme, loaded with FUD. There is security, trust us. Fortresses are better than huts, no matter how valiant the warrior. Encryption, protected access, the foundry already has your jewels, if you are IP paranoid, get your own fortress, but pay as you go for what you need. Do not let the exception drown the rule. Next question.
- Been there done that [3] Some have said that they tried this years ago and even recently and customers would not belly up to the bar and lawyers would not let go of IP and finance would not budge and the dog ate my homework [extra credit earned here for humor]. The simple answer is ‘it depends’ on the deal, the terms, the past is not the future or even the self-fulfilled reality. Try, try again, because there is real money behind them servers you never have to buy, maintain or upgrade. Are you listening EDA? The pricing is getting lower when you look at costs and the revenue is getting higher when you look at ‘useful use for what you need’ not ‘inefficient use for what you have to eat’ by customers who are happier because they are getting their work done faster and thus will come back for more. Big companies have budgets and few have unlimited resources. It is elementary ‘efficient markets’ economics my dear.
- ‘Show me the money’ and its cousin ‘Follow the (lack of) money’ or ‘Cost too much money’ or ‘What happened to my money’ [4]. The last one refers to impact to short term financials if TBLs are redone. True enough but the pot is at the end of the rainbow in that your patience will be rewarded later, and you can always phase this thing in by staging pilot engagements, playing with the transaction options and experimenting.
- When it pours, it will therefore rain [5] In other words, let Mikey try it first. If it works, I will join in. I only have momentum to lose. Right.
- Where is the beef? [6] See [4]. Where is the research? It does not exist because the market is in its early stages, nor is research needed if you think about it. No $5B capital is required before you start. Try it. With passion, not skepticism. It could be good.
- If you build it they will come [7] Now you are talking.But you never said that unfortunately.
-Yes, No, Maybe, I don’t know, Can you repeat the question? [8] I am confused. Can I hedge? How is that different? If you have to ask, never mind then.
- This is rocket science, not an app [9]
View attachment 3330
(Henry Blodget CEO Business Insider, March 21, 2012)
Yep. Let us make it an App. Moving to the cloud and doing everything in the cloud is just like doing work today and no code rewrite is needed. You are hosting there, not here. So it is neither here, nor there and is getting us nowhere. I am oversimplifying here in terms of code rewrite. We really should disaggregate the tools into features as apps. I used to buy a commercial application for $300. I buy it now from the same vendor at $10 but I buy 40 more apps. So I am spending $100 more, I do more with apps I actually need, not less with ones I pay for but never use in ‘all-you-eat’ scenarios. Some apps are rocket science by the way but I digress.
- There are not enough users, the long tail is short and we are chasing our tail [10]. It is not worth it they say. There are indeed a few thousand designers. I think the constraint is a result of million dollar tools forcing limited grand priests to manipulate precious resources. That is our opportunity to grow the user base. More power to more people trying to design for less power. Streamline the flows, layer on the methodologies, and interoperate. Lots of development opportunities exist for better design experience.
- Self-inflicted irrelevance [11] Often mentioned by cloud advocates.VCs do not like semis and EDA anymore. Let us give them a reason to get excited again by being more creative and aggressive in business models.
- Do not rock the boat while I create yet another unneeded tool duplication no-one wants [12] This is the reason why the excitement is gone. I can see you nodding or shaking your head. Discuss.
- Why ask why [13] That is how things have been and likely to stay. In reality the singularity is not near but is occurring already and it appears more likely end-games could occur with foundries becoming more likely to incorporate the tools as part of their overall offerings, facilitating further process and tool interdependencies. This has been talked about for a while, but the murmurs are becoming drumbeats. All it takes now is a motivated 3rd party to encourage this path.
- It is a jungle so I will bear hug only gorilla customers, the rest are toast [14] There are only large customers left and they do not want common cloud. Yet that 3rd party in the above paragraph is a gorilla customer realizing design enablement also could include one stop shop. That same gorilla customer may actually insist on maintaining multiple foundry options, but with EDA baked in in each option. Creating an alternate enablement through the cloud could address everyone’s wants and needs since the foundries model will be one of the incarnations of this use case and not just the one incarnation.
There are always 10 reasons not to do anything but only one is needed when it is the most important reason. That reason is: we need a change in attitude, altitude and fortitude (that is 3 for you who are counting, but who is counting?) Feed the cloud, starve the fear.
Eppur Si Muove. Ipso facto. Non sequitur. Alea Jacta Est.
- Note: Mixing metaphors here while putting down my foot where my mouth is, I am thinking of helping organize a seminar-panel combo session during the upcoming DAC where we can discuss this topic. I am thinking a 3 hour long one with EDA, foundry, cloud provider, FPGA, IDM, VC, startup, server and analyst, academic and IEEE luminaries. We would invite the public and public comment to help shape the agenda with a soft or downloadable copy of contributed content provided at the end of the seminar along with some giveaways. With visions of John Belushi running out of the Animal House frat house trying to energize his peers, yet finding himself by himself, I am asking here for feedback on whether this would be a good idea. If you like this and happen to be a willing sponsor, do let me know. Otherwise, this may end up a pub discussion where paper napkins become the presentation sketches. Of course if something similar is already occurring, can you let me and the readers know? Thank you in advance.
Last edited by a moderator: