Several weeks ago, Mentor Graphics announced its I/O Designer package for concurrent chip-to-board design of FPGAs and PCBs. Henry Potts, Vice President and General Manager of the Systems Design Division at Mentor Graphics, was quoted in the press release: "As the only EDA tool provider in the industry with expertise in both PCB and FPGA design, Mentor Graphics is the first to offer solutions for integrating these once separate design processes. I/O Designer allows PCB designers more control early in the design process, ensuring maximum productivity for the entire systems design team. Integrating FPGA and PCB design processes is no longer just an important way to improve efficiency - it has become imperative to ensure system performance and lower product costs."

As interesting as that news was to some of us, the folks at Altium really took notice. So much so, they issued a press release in early August to respond to Mentor’s July press release. The Altium press release didn’t counter Mentor’s press release, nor did it announce a partnering with Mentor. Instead, the Altium press release said that Mentor had the right idea, but by the way - what Mentor says it now knows, Altium has known all along - that it’s important to think in terms of concurrent PCB and FPGA design.

I had a chance to chat with the folks from Altium on August 2nd, a conversation that expanded on their agreeing to agree and disagree, simultaneously, with Mentor. It was 5 PM California time - almost time for dinner here - and 9 AM Australia time - almost time for breakfast there. The people on the phone call included Bruce Edwards, Executive Director of Altium, Rob Irwin, Manager of Brand Strategy, and Jessica Maxwell, Corporate Communications. At the outset of the phone call, the Altium folks told me that the weather where they were sitting in Sydney was lovely - sunny, breezy and 88 degrees.

Bruce opened: "We know that you’ve noted Mentor’s announcement of support for board-to-chip concurrent design that they made recently. In their press release, Mentor made an interesting claim. They said they’re the first and only company to offer that kind of support. We want to say that we fully agree with their claim that concurrent FPGA /PCB design and support is vital when the design implemented in the PCB. After all, consider the fact that 60 percent of all board turns have FPGAs on them today. But we also want to emphasize by way of this phone call that there are two companies that support concurrent design - Altium and Mentor. We’re one of the two tool suppliers that provide real synchronization."

"So, we’re not arguing with Mentor. There’s far more for us to gain by agreeing with them than by trying to shout down giant Mentor. [If we indulged] in that kind of market puffery, it’s certainly something that the market is capable of filtering. But, we do feel that we want credit for providing concurrency between FPGA and PCB design. People should know that we support that level of concurrent design in our packages - even those aimed at the mainstream market. Mentor only provides that type of support for their larger customers."

"What is a mainstream customer? What we would call mainstream is easily defined if you look at it. The I/O designer bridge between Mentor’s FPGA and PCB tool sells for the same price as our entire suite that includes the bridging [feature] in it. It’s all one price from Altium. Of course, it depends on which particular Mentor product you’re talking about, but their tools can go from $10,000 to tens of thousands of dollars. We’re taking a very different position and offering a very different approach to the market. Given the differentiation between Altium and Mentor, the customer can figure out where each of us falls [with respect to their needs]. The Mentor tools are sold much more into [what are] key accounts for them, while our tools are shrink wrapped."

"Mentor’s looking at the issue of the integration between FPGA design and PCB design. But, what they might regard as integration is ignoring what we’re providing. Their claim that they’re the first and only company to do this, ignores what we’ve been doing for some time now. Mentor is trying to offer a split [to distinguish] between themselves and their competitors."

"For instance, layout is not a trivial problem - the way FPGA pins can be allotted across the design flow. It’s true that only Mentor and Altium offer synchronization between FPGA and board design, which is what they’re highlighting in their I/O design product. Nonetheless, if Mentor is good at the public relations [to build awareness of these things], we want to support and embrace what they’re saying and feel that their distinctions [they are drawing] work very well for us. But, we are concerned perhaps that our ability is obscured behind other things that we do."

"What is the primary difference between Mentor’s customers and Altium’s customers? Well, we actually have some customers in common - our customers range from sole proprietors to multi-nationals. [But what distinguishes between our various customers is] the way the tools are used in their [particular] environment. Traditionally, you’ll find Altium’s products in the prototyping area, not so much in [end-use market]. However, that’s changing over time."

"Really, it’s all about a sales and support [business] model that compares between dealing with a Mentor versus dealing with an Altium. It’s not about re-tooling the entire engineering organization versus just buying a $10,000 shrink-wrap design product. We’re really not head-on competitors with Mentor - except of course that Mentor and Cadence have acquired companies that we have competed with. Mentor has PADS, which used to be independent, and the Cadence [acquisition] goes even further back to when they acquired OrCad’s desktop tools. Altium is kind of competing with their entry level tools."

"[From a sales standpoint], Cadence sells OrCad strictly through a VARS network, while Mentor has set up a separate PCB website to support the PADS product. Altium does has some re-sellers in some markets, but we’re doing direct sales in most major markets - Tokyo, Shanghai, Sydney, two support teams in Germany and Switzerland, obviously in the U.S., and many other smaller markets in Asia and Europe."

"My point is, given the importance of supporting FPGA design and board layout - both Altium and Mentor provide comprehensive support here. [But I’m arguing that] Mentor left us out of the conversation about concurrent design for obvious reasons. Rather than attack us, they’re just claiming that they’re the only ones [playing in this market]. We agree with the importance of their stance and, importantly, we demonstrate that support with a product that we can deliver right now. It’s something that we’re doing right now."

"Would we consider linking up with one of the FPGA corporations? What we’ve pursued is contrary to the FPGA market because we feel that Xilinx and Altera are competing with one another. We think it’s in the best interest of the designers to be able to re-target designs to various devices, even ultimately back to discrete components if that’s what meets their delivery needs. Even silicon, if that’s what they want to do."

"Altium is about tool integration that supports the entire flow. FPGA companies focus on what happens within the pins. On the business side, it’s about moving quantities of FPGAs for them. The FPGA companies have tended to use their tools to lock people into their solutions. They work hard to provide proprietary environments that can’t be ported from one architecture to another, even from one FPGA to the next level product from the same vendor. However, Altium wants to provide independent platforms for retargeting designs."

Rob closed: "In terms of our partnering with FPGA vendors, we do talk with all of the FPGA companies. We use their P&R tools, which our customers can pull from within our systems. So, we do partner at that level. And, we’re certainly not antagonistic towards them. We work quite closely with them."

"But we’ve worked at the board level of the market for our entire history. We don’t really know the chip design world. With what’s happening right now, the complexity of chip design is descending down into the board design realm. The engineering issues are getting much more complex as the density and complexity of the designs increase. The rapid rise of the FPGA market, thanks to Xilinx and Altera, the Cyclones, the Spartans, lots of FPGA gates and pins - all of this offers interesting challenges."

"There are hundreds and hundreds of pins now in very dense packages, and those pin assignments can change dynamically in the design process. That’s exactly why Mentor has jumped on this. Designers are coping with silicon complexity at the board layout stage and that going to start driving board design into a new realm. The ability to do this in synchrony with, with concurrent design between the FPGA flow and the board flow, as well as the additional complexity of embedded systems, and embedded processors - that ability to deal with all of this complexity is only offered by two companies. Mentor and Altium."

***************

Our phone call ended and I reviewed my notes to confirm what I sensed to be the message in the conversation. Altium agrees with Mentor and Altium disagrees with Mentor, simultaneously.

Interestingly enough, some days after the phone call I received an additional message from the folks at Altium that seemed to confirm my conclusion: "Both Mentor and Altium are providing FPGA vendor independent solutions, as well as being the only companies that are providing real automatic process flow integration between FPGA-based design and PCB-Design. We certainly think this is noteworthy."

I think that’s noteworthy, too. Here you’ve got two companies who are kind of competing, and kind of not competing for customers. Two companies who are kind of agreeing, and kind of not agreeing. It’s a very gentle battle for hearts and minds, in my opinion.

Looking at the situation closely, however, I’m putting my money on the idea that the real contention here is between the category of company that both Mentor and Altium fall into versus their partners and/or competitors - the FPGA vendors. I would propose that it’s Mentor and Altium together who agree - and disagree - with the FPGA vendors, simultaneously. That’s the true ‘gentle’ battle going on here, and it’s a battle that I believe promises to be very noteworthy in the years ahead.

***************

August 13, 2004

Peggy Aycinena owns and operates EDA Confidential. She can be reached at peggy@aycinena.com

Copyright (c) 2004, Peggy Aycinena. All rights reserved.