Where are FPGA heading?

Do you really believe that? Do you really have any evidence to back up this claim?

I would imagine that if Ford or GM or Chrysler tells Motorola (or whomever) that they will need however-many-million microcontrollers/microprocessors each year for the next five, six, ten years, Motorola will continue to make them. Why wouldn't they? Guaranteed orders, especially since the parts are often customer-specific.

Maybe the imaginary Froto Company tells a major customer, "sorry, we're not interested."

Anyways, one would imagine that replacements for existing chips would be upgrades--more memory, more features, faster, whatever--that are code-compatible. Why throw away the investment in software development?

-a

Andy,

The only proof is in the orders, and the shipments, and what I was told.

That you, and others do not believe me is just fine. I didn't need your approval to ship the parts.

Does anyone honestly think I am making this up? I have no time for fantasies: I have real work to do. The announcement was made (and the part briefly shown at the press conference) for 65 nm. Busy doesn't really describe my shop right now. 'Frantic' is more accurate.

A very happy, and pleasing kind of frantic.

Austin

Austin, it is hard to believe that no one at Xilinx has ever reigned you in. Often your posts are useful and technically sound. But concepts of customer interaction and company representation seem to be lost on you. I was not even involved in this thread and I find your post to be insulting as well as totally inappropriate. Your "ad hominem" attacks seem to occur anytime someone makes a technical argument that might be hard to dispute.

To be honest, my impression of Xilinx has changed a lot over the last few years, partly due to your postings here. Initially I did not pay a lot of attention to your comments to me or others until I realized that you are actually fairly influential in the company. Now I realize that Xilinx as a whole is not a lot different than the image you present and it bothers me. It bothers me enough that I now have a strong preference for any other FPGA manufacturer.

I think the fact that no one at Xilinx seems to have a problem with your posts like this one says a lot about the company.

Rick,

If I have offended you, I apologize. In fact, if I have offended anyone, I apologize. I intended to poke fun (gently) at Metal's posting.

I am an engineer, and I am not in marketing. If that means I am not politically correct: I never pretended to be anything other than honest.

Again, I apologize if you found my posting objectionable. I do realize that there are some (not implying you) that have absolutely no sense of humor whatsoever, and for them, all I can say is: don't waste your time reading my posts, you won't like them (as I do have a sense of humor, and I do enjoy life and its challenges).

Austin

rickman wrote:

Of course, there are many reasons to use a FPGA on the lower volume/less price sensistive vehicles. - but the maker will _still_ have to stock physically/electrically compatible modules. - and change FPGA families very carefully...

Austin's second set of claims are much closer to reality than his first, which I have put in the 'Austinism' box... :)

-jg

rickman wrote: Now I realize that

Rickman, Austin is not alone in posting outspoken comments. You are no slouch yourself ! Luckily, Xilinx is not a monolithic dictatorship, and the company trusts its senior employees to post in this newsgroup without censorship and without reprimands.

Austin and I give fast response, to the best of our knowledge (which is quite extensive), but we are not always politically correct, and both of us have a temper that can indeed be provoked by certain stupidities repeatedly voiced on this newsgroup. We handle complex and sometimes controversial subjects with engagement and also some humor. We are not the official "Voice of Xilinx". You get that from Marketing and in press releases.

I would be amazed if any smart engineer would base his component choice on Austin's typing style. We would, however, appreciate if you base it on the technical information you get in this newsgoup. Peter Alfke, Xilinx Applications

Their web site is also non functional. Sounds interesting tho, something like what i wanted to do. Multiple FPGA's on a 'pc' like board. One for the cpu(s), one for video, another to handle all the ports and drive communications.

Wont be any speed demon, but might be fun.

Lets hope you are a bit wrong, would hate to see FPGA companies start to fold.. There really arent many to start with.

But i do agree with you, except for use in development of ASIC's is there really a *true* market?

And is that market enough to keep things afloat for us hobbiests?

Wallstreet consensus is that the programmable (i.e. FPGA+CPLD) market will grow faster than the aggregate semiconductor or IC market (expressed in percentage revenue growth per year). Yes, only two vigorouly competing giants plus a small group of also-runs. But the same can be said of many other maturing markets. Peter Alfke

No, I do not think you make it up. I think the FPGA could perhaps be used in the dashboard displays. IIRC for example Toyota used one big LCD display, for all instuments :-) In such a case you need many many IO (to drive each segment), and using FPGA could also make it possible to do speed / tacho conversion, temp sensor linearization, basically any sensor processing, either digital or analog, all in one chip on the back of that big LCD panel. Now with mega cell FPGA, add the radio, GPS, and what not. So, yes, and a couple of million cars sold. But this is not for the reason you mentioned, but simply for the one I just stated. Does GM do something like that these days? Ford? They will have to perhaps.

Posted from planet P

AMEN! A little humor, some sarcasim, and even a little pretention (ambitious is a better word) can all make for interesting diaglogue.

Take care, Rob

Now an ad hominem from Peter... how exactly do my posts relate to Austin's? If I commit a crime does that mean it is ok for Austin to do the same?

When I post I don't represent a company. If I make a comment, it does not reflect on my employer and I don't claim to be offering anything but my opinion. I think it is interesting that you fail to see the difference and that failure is part of what concerns me about Xilinx.

All companies are monolithic dictatorships to one degree or another. I think if upper management saw all of the posts that Austin makes they would likely not be pleased by the way the company is presented. Or maybe they wouldn't have a problem, I can't say. I do know that the apperence is that Xilinx is a rather arrogant company, not unlike Intel in the early days.

Having knowledge is not the only criterion for a good FAE or company representative. I thnk you both know that. I also think that you two have had a lot of leeway in these groups that you would not normally have in typical business forums.

Typing style... I like the way you trivialize the issue. That is the other part of my problem with the way that Xilinx is represented in the newsgroups. Even when a problem is pointed out to you and Austin, it is often trivialized rather than dealt with.

That includes both customer interface issues as well as technical issues. I have been reading here for some years now and I have seen many, many times Xilinx claim that a given techical issue is not a problem only to deal with the problem in their next chip family and do a "1984" type reversal to brag about solving the problem as if they had never said the issue was not a problem. Other FPGA vendors add block memory and Xilinx claims that is not a good idea, then the Virtex parts come out with block memory. The power on surge currents are not a problem and can be dealt with easily with by a few extra parts on the board and the next Spartan generation is designed for no heavy power on surge current. The latest Xilinx families require three power supply voltages and I fully expect Xilinx to deal with this in following families by returning to just two supply voltages.

So the problem is not just "typing style" and it is not just Austin.

When someone from Xilinx trivializes an issue that is pointed out to them, I assume that means, like a teenager ignoring their parents, they just aren't ready to deal with it.

Rick,

I have apologized to you.

As for Xilinx management, I am often called before my boss, my boss' boss, and so on, and occasionally talk to Wim.

For any number of reasons.

I have been advised, admonished, counselled, re-trained, instructed, and so on.

I have also been congratulated, celebrated, awarded, and recognized by others for my help and advice.

I have no issues or problems with my management, and I value their opinions, and advice. We have vey open communications at Xilinx.

As Peter said, Xilinx is not a dictatorship.

If you feel I am doing something wrong, then email my boss and make him aware of your concerns.

The newsgroup is read by many internally, and I post knowing full well that Wim may be reading it. Fortunate for me, he also has a sense of humor.

There are unpardonable sins (for which you are dismissed), and it is very clear what those are. And those all relate to issues that are either ones where you break the law, or are giving away Xilinx IP and secrets. As a member of Xilinx' patent committee (I read every single disclosure) I am extremely sensitive to those issues, and help police our IP.

There are also guidelines, and one of my favorites is the customer is number one, top of the list. I created the Xilinx fast action response team procedures for acting on unsolved customer issues, and was the first "Fire Chief."

I have been in rooms with CEOs, CTOs, CFOs, and so on.

I don't take any disrespect, and I tell the truth.

So, just because the customer is number one, doesn't mean I accept disrespect, or abuse. When that occurs, I am not afraid to stop the discussion right there, call "foul", and attempt to get things back on track.

And, I do have my own personality, my own sense of humor, and my own way of communicating (and writing). I accept that it may drive some nuts.

Again, my apologies.

Austin

I am not the one that you attacked. When I initially said I find your post insulting, I didn't mean it insulted me. I meant that it appeared to be insulting the person you were responding to. What you call gentle poking was really a way of demeaning his comments and attacking him on a personal level without offering a single factual response to his statements.

Do you not see what I mean?

I could care less about your managment of internal affairs. I probably should not have bothered to post since it seems to be falling on deaf ears. I thought you might be interested in how your posts are perceived. But then it is easy to rationalize my complaint as being out of the mainstream as long as you only consider your internal company perspective as mainstream.

You may not take disrespect, but you are quick to dish it out. Go back to the post from Metal and your reply and tell me how you expect someone reading it to consider that a respectful post. No, I said that poorly. I don't want to hear from you about it. If you really care about what I am saying, read the post and consider it until you can see why I have posted about it. But you don't need to respond to me here or directly. I am over this and you won't hear from me on this further.

I don't see how you calling "foul" has anything to do with your reply to Metal and how it appeared disrespectful. You weren't calling foul, you were dismissing his statements as being unimportant enough to even deserve a real reply as well as appearing to insult him on a more personal level.

Just look at all the rambling, irrelevant statements you have made in this reply. I think it is clear that you consider your own opinions far more valuable than anyone's comments on how you are perceived.

No need to apologize to me. You are just being yourself, right?

Enough said. Take my comments or leave them. I don't think I can add anything further that might be useful.

Rick,

-snip-

OK. I understand. You were (attempting) to point out that I may be out of line.

Thanks. Feel free to email me directly with such comments. I appreciate them (really). Posts to the group such as yours can be interpreted differently (wrongly in this case by me).

I meant that it appeared

Most certainly.

-snip again-

I do not disagree with you: the gentle poking is sometime angry prodding. It is also open to interpretation. The story of getting the donkey's attention comes to mind. Where one draws a line is subjective.

As I said, if you feel the need to alert me, go ahead directly. People do. I am certainly not perfect. I can always improve.

-snip some more-

I will chalk this up to your feeling that I am missing the intent of your orginal post. I've explained why I missed it, and I have told you how others let me know their personnal opinions of my posts. That I used a 2X4 to get the donkey's attention (getting back to the analogy above) may seem extreme to you. Perhaps it was.

A posting to me directly with constructive criticism is completely different than one to a newsgroup which can (and does) appear to be a public attack.

In fact, any posting in public forum with a negative tone is potentially looked at as a direct attack. Think about that for a moment.

I have taken them. And, I see now your point now. It was useful. It can be even more useful in the future. Thanks for taking the time to try to get through to me. In future, just email me directly: when that happens, I know the intent is not to publicly achieve some unknown goal, but to tell me directly what you think (there are more donkey's than you think out there in need of 2X4's).

You may notice that sometimes I will retract, or apologize, seemingly out of the blue. These are times I have either reconsidered the post I made myself, or received comments from others.

Again, if I can't admit I am sometimes wrong, then I am a real fool, not someone who is just one occasionally.

Austin

I totally agree and already reported both Austin and Peter to Xilinx marketing as well as corporate management sometime ago via email. It seemed to do no good whatsoever, so maybe Xilinx doesn't care. ...Or maybe they just need more complaints, preferably via US postal mail on company letterhead rather than email. Austin sure spews a lot of marketing hype for an engineer who is ostensibly not in marketing.

-- Ron

Resurrecting an old thread while so many people are off to vacation?

This forum would have significantly less traffic and the general quality of information and help exchanged on this board would suffer if those two Xilinx employees were told to stop posting here.

Austin can be as annoying at times when he's gung-ho about communicating the things *he* believes in; they may seem like total marketing rubbage but it seems to me he just has strong feelings on the matters. His interaction can be caustic at times as well. But taking the good with the bad his presence here has been invaluable, in my humble opinion.

Why you have issues with Peter Alfke is beyong me. Not only is he professional, resourceful, and extremely helpful but he presents himself here calmly and conservatively even in the face of dire flames and worse. If more people could present his professionalism and the strong desire to help that both these men contribute to this forum, I would be a happier engineer.

I'm glad that I only have one person in my kill file considering how long I've been interacting with the newsgroup. Feel free to add Ausitn, Peter, even myself to your own kill file.

Many thanks to all the others who help make this a constructive place to advance FPGA design.

- John Handwork

Gee,

Thanks. (Austin for Austin)

Peter is on vacation, so I will say thanks for him as well:

Danke,

Austin (for Peter)

Exactly!

~Dave~