Prev: ADC problem on spartan3E
Next: International Journal of Electronics, Information and Systems (IJEIS) Call for Paper
From: salman on 30 Dec 2009 15:36
>On May 15, 4:00=A0pm, John McCaskill <jhmccask...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Xilinx has switched to using FlexLM for licensing as of ISE 11.1. =A0I
>> have been using multiple other software packages that use FlexLM for
>> years, so I have some experience with the issues that it can cause.
>> FlexLM is more restrictive than just giving you an activation ID, and
>> I expect that they will be getting a lot of calls from customers about
>> this. =A0However, after evaluating how Xilinx has used FlexLM, I think
>> that some of your issues above have been addressed in a reasonable
>> fashion, and I think that some of their licensing terms have been made
>> more favorable for the customer.
>
>I've dealt with FlexLm in the past, and I've learned to curse its very
>existence when the license server, typically in an inaccessible
>location, goes down. This always happened on a weekend with a looming
>Monday-morning deadline.
>
>But all that aside, after all these years, Xilinx still doesn't get
>it. We use their software to develop applications FOR THEIR CHIPS.
>There is no other use for it. Locking it down and otherwise making it
>difficult to install and use is at cross purposes with Xilinx'
>objectives: selling chips.
>
>Now I understand that there is a real cost for technical support. What
>Xilinx needs to do is to uncouple tech support from the cost of the
>tools. To wit:
>
>a) If you are a hobbyist and you want to play with a starter kit or
>whatever, use the tools and use the various WWW resources for support.
>You don't get a tech-support account and Xilinx won't answer your
>phone calls.
>
>b) The professional user should be able to choose between per-incident
>and blanket yearly tech-support options. Perhaps two tiers of support
>should be available -- initial WebCase, and direct-to-smart-people
>telephone support. The point is that if we are paying directly for the
>support, we expect REAL results and not the usual web-case runarounds.
>
>c) In either case, any user (from the hobbyist to the pro) should be
>able to report bugs and get updates on their resolutions. Xilinx
>should not cut off a source of bug reports simply because the users
>aren't paying for support.
>
>As it is now, users who buy ISE/EDK etc spend a lot of money and don't
>get any real support, and this latest licensing nonsense is a kick in
>the teeth.
>
>-a
>

Amen to that. We use Xilinx at NASA and I am having so many problems using
the new software 11.1 with the floating license. I am going to downgrade to
10.1. I liked Xilinx over Altera even more because of the node-locked
licensing and the fact that they make money from their chips. Now, they are
following the same route as Altera. Sell h/w...give s/w free. Support
pay..bug fixes free.

Salman


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: ADC problem on spartan3E
Next: International Journal of Electronics, Information and Systems (IJEIS) Call for Paper