3 ms·

From user perspective: the tools are shitty, version control isn’t existing. But I don’t have time to self host any open source tools. Nor my colleagues do. We

by lnsru 6y ago

From user perspective: the tools are shitty, version control isn’t existing. But I don’t have time to self host any open source tools. Nor my colleagues do. We must write code and design electronics around FPGAs. My manager will never pay for time spend with open source products. Big Corp I work for has a dedicated team with direct contact to Xilinx support if something goes badly. Next thing is legacy designs of the Big Corp. If it was Virtex-6, the next one will be Virtex-7. If it was Spartan-6, next one will be Spartan-7. Even if Altera/Intel or Lattice or some cool startup could offer similar chips for 60% the Xilinx’s price we would stay with Xilinx because of the codebase. And don’t forget supply chain, as Big Corp buys tons of chips from single vendor the price is unbeatable. Changing vendor and starting with clean account doesn’t make sense financially. And I am sure, that this single Big Corp makes more money for Xilinx than all the hobbyist worldwide. Honestly I can’t see a reason why Xilinx should open source anything.

UncleOxidant 6y ago
Sure, that's the vendor lock-in that Xilinx and Altera both bank on - A sort of Stockholm syndrome. But as newer players enter the FPGA field (a lot of the basic FPGA patents have expired over the last five years or so) open source is going to be the best bet for them to both get decent tools and win some market share. It's not like Xilinx/Altera will lose any significant market share anytime soon, but I can see a slow erosion on the lower end over the next 10 years or so. It'll probably look like the FPGA pie getting bigger with newer players (like Lattice) expanding into the smaller design niche. BigCorp has apparently been doing FPGA designs for many years now, but there are a lot of smaller companies that are just starting to consider jumping into doing FPGA designs.
- lnsru 6y ago
  I am not sure if there are any good areas for products with FPGAs for new players. I am working on one, but the single reason for that is that I am not good with Raspberry Pi. If I had cofounder with embedded Linux skills I would immediately ditch my FPGA design. 25$ price tag of Raspberry Pi compute module 4 is very attractive. I’ll end with ~100$ FPGA board making whole product more expensive.

by lnsru 6y ago

UncleOxidant 6y ago

Sure, that's the vendor lock-in that Xilinx and Altera both bank on - A sort of Stockholm syndrome. But as newer players enter the FPGA field (a lot of the basic FPGA patents have expired over the last five years or so) open source is going to be the best bet for them to both get decent tools and win some market share. It's not like Xilinx/Altera will lose any significant market share anytime soon, but I can see a slow erosion on the lower end over the next 10 years or so. It'll probably look like the FPGA pie getting bigger with newer players (like Lattice) expanding into the smaller design niche. BigCorp has apparently been doing FPGA designs for many years now, but there are a lot of smaller companies that are just starting to consider jumping into doing FPGA designs.

lnsru 6y ago
I am not sure if there are any good areas for products with FPGAs for new players. I am working on one, but the single reason for that is that I am not good with Raspberry Pi. If I had cofounder with embedded Linux skills I would immediately ditch my FPGA design. 25$ price tag of Raspberry Pi compute module 4 is very attractive. I’ll end with ~100$ FPGA board making whole product more expensive.