Quartus II 6.0: System clock has been set back

Welcome to the club...

I had the same problem some months ago, I googled around and found a solution somewhere.

When I remember right, the problem was that some files in a system directory were newer than the current data. -> Use the Windows search function and search for files newer than today (do not forget the check the "look for hidden files" or something like this). Once you have identfied the files that are too new, bring them back to the current date. If this doesn't help, google yourself... (sorry, can't really remember more precise.)

Thomas

"Michael Kraemer" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news: snipped-for-privacy@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...

Great, I found a directory in my temp folder, which I created this morning, but its date was four days later than today. I don't know why. Perhaps the date on our company network was wrong and the PCs retrieve the date from there. After I changed the date back to today, Quartus works again. Thank you for your support.

Actually I cannot understand why Altera is so generous to give away this software for free, which I appreciate a lot, and then attach such restrictions. Anyway, this is perhaps the wrong question if one gets something for free.

Thanks again,

Michael

Same here, I used an old version of the Time Stamp Modifier from Jonesoft, you might still find it on the web although

Hans

Well, it's not entirely Altera's fault. The FlexLM license software they _link_ (i.e. they don't have the source code) in has a function that queries the validity of a certain feature name based on the feature name, the current date, software version etc. The linked-in FlexLM bit then refuses to validate _ANY_ feature if the system clock has been set back, and there you go.

On the other hand, many customer calling me with this problem tend to find some bug in their overall system (network, application, whatever), so from a sysadmin standpoint it could actually be positive that this check is there (ducks and runs).

In the past I have questioned Altera Tools Marketing's decision to have a license check in the Free Edition at all, but I do understand their reasons for it - they want to know which sites are active and which ones are not.

Best regards,

Ben

I believe the reason is that you can convert the "free" edition into the "full" edition by buying a license with no need to do a full reinstall. However, I understand there are some problems with that approach.

Yep - for one thing, the device map files for all but the smalles Stratix I and II will be missing, as well as the netlist viewers, floorplanner and other stuff.

A full Quartus install now runs around 1GB, while the Web Edition is around

Best regards,

Ben

Personally, I don't see why they have a licensing system at all, even on the full package, or why they charge for the full package. It would be much easier for users if the FPGAs cost very slightly more (to be fair, the increase should be on larger FPGAs, and only when bought in small quantities), and the software should be free. I fully understand why Altera would like it to be registered in some way, and to track who is using it, but letting users use it freely would remove all the hassles associated with licensing, node locks, battles with "FlexLM", moving computers, and so on. In recent times I've had a couple of customers battle with licensing issues (not with any FPGA-related software) - the wasted time and effort has cost far more than the software licenses in the first place.

Maybe because there are companies like Synplicity and Mentor Graphics that sell tools that are not vendor specific and do not sell parts. When Microsoft bundles things in and 'gives things away' people rant about how they drive the independent software vendors out of business....a similar argument would likely apply here.

Altera, Xilinx, Synplicity, Mentor Graphics et al pay out hard cash to provide software tools and all expect some return on that investment in some form (either directly from the tool or indirectly through parts or both). If one (or more) of the parts guys gives the tools away it can probably be construed by the legal eagles in Washington as a tactic to drive a competitor out of business thus deserving of some close and unprofitable scrutiny. Obviously they can get away with giving limited versions of the tool away; I'm sure Synp and Ment would prefer to make money off of those as well but apparently the perceived loss in revenue is not considered to be worth trying to recoup via the legal system, anti-trust laws, that sort of approach.

Just my speculation.

KJ

I believe it is a bit more strategic than that. Consider that Microsoft practically gives away Windows and Office to universities, with the expectation that most of those new grads will have used the software during their studies.

Now, consider those same college students when they get to the point where buying decisions are made. Will they go with Microsoft products, or something else?

No, I think Altera and Xilinx give away the low-end stuff so that students and hobbiests will get exposure to their products. After all, if the price of entry is > $3k, how many college's, much less students, will be able to provide a reasonable number of seats to do FPGA designs? Also, the best students are going to want to do some work at home, and most are certainly NOT going to be able to afford the full Quartus or ISE package. With both Xilinx and Altera giving away low-end versions of the software, those students can now choose either, or both, to try out at home. The cost of development boards becomes the next issue. (Xilinx is still winning this one)

Thus, the free software is almost a promotional expense for the FPGA vendors. It gives people a taste of what's available, and (hopefully) gives the users a good impression.

Perhaps it's better that they have the same licensing restrictions in a sense. It prevents perception problems later, when you have a real license, and can't move it between PC's.

Also, when the Quartus web edition is "free," my license file is only good for 6 months and must renew it afterwards. I guess Altera can pull the plug any time if they decide to do so.

S. C.

Also, when the Quartus web edition is "free," my license file is only good for 6 months and must renew it afterwards. I guess Altera can pull the plug any time if they decide to do so.

S. C.

I have no doubt that it's in Altera and Xilinx and all other FPGA/CPLD vendors to supply free design software as a mechanism to hook potential and future customers. My point was that if you're Mentor Graphics or Synplicity your flagship product is now competing against the free stuff. Giving stuff away for 'free' causes companies to wave the 'anti-trust' flag when they see their business going down the tubes or rally the 'anti-dumping' troops when it comes from a foreign owned company. Their are of course other responses as well but if you're running the business you might want to limit your exposure to that sort of thing.

For yet another reason for a nominal charge.....

Obviously one business strategy for the Mentors and Synplicitys of the world to try to compete in that environment is to wangle their way in and make the FPGA/CPLD vendors pay a license in exchange they will supply the hobbled version of their software.....which is why practically every FPGA vendor has some 'free' form of Modelsim for anyone who wants it basically.

Now if the license fee that say Altera (or whoever) pays to Mentor Graphics is based on the number of Modelsim seats that they give away then Altera has an economic incentive to keep track of just how many of these 'freebies' they've given away. Charging even a nominal fee to get that license is generally enough to thwart the spam attacks that might otherwise cause them to pony up a big chunk of cash to pay for all those freebies that were simply someone hatching an e-assault on them. The FPGA vendors that choose to not charge even a nominal fee are potentially opening themselves up to a big cash payout if the fee they must pay is tied to how many seats they give away and someone decides to hit them up with a cyber attack.

I'm not saying what they're doing is right, wrong or indifferent or that I even have a clue about how the agreements between the companies are worded just that I see a very plausible reason for some modest amount money to change hands, not as a profit making measure (since it isn't) or for future business (which it might), or for goodwill (which it is) but simply to limit their exposure to a license fee.

KJ

While this is true, I do not think that this is some we have to be afraid of, because the users have the option to "pull the plug", too.

Thomas

some

as

I don't think a fee would work well, because they are very likely not only treating the eval/hobby licenses as a promotional item, but fighting software piracy as well. Remember, the "free" stuff is very limited - really only good for hobby and student work. These seats would probably have gone to pirated software, were it not for the free licenses. Seriously, how many students or hobbyists are going to be able to cough up $2.5k/year for a Quartus subscription? If they do, would they have any money left over for devices or boards?

By giving away the limited licenses, they remove (most of) the desire to pirate the software, while simultaneously getting positive exposure, feedback, and useful marketing information from the users. By requiring talkback for advanced features, they even get a free beta test dept as well. Lastly, as an added bonus, those users who choose to develop with Altera or Xilinx at home will likely suggest using their favorite device at work. So, what would have likely been a loss becomes a potential gain. Believe me, they make a buck off of those free licenses.

It's a win for the users as well. Rather than going through the hassle of finding a pirated copy, figuring out how to hack it, and then getting no support on a very complex product, end users get the real (if limited) deal and access to limited technical support.

I can definitely say for myself that I appreciate the freebie licenses, as I fall into the category of people who couldn't otherwise afford to do serious FPGA work at home.

Now, the Modelsim situation is a bit different. There could potentially be other EDA companies that would look askance at Xilinx and Altera giving away free Modelsim software, instead of their EDA software - especially since Mentor Graphics is the 800 lb gorilla / Microsoft in the EDA market. However, the "free" Modelsim software is virtually useless for much more than homework problems. I'm actually a little surprised at how many features, like code coverage, are excluded given the product is virtually a live demo. I actually wouldn't be surprised if the freebie Modelsim licenses get yanked because of a lawsuit from another EDA tool vendor. This actually does smack of the kind of illegal bundling that Microsoft has been accused of.

As for Synplicity, they don't compete with the free versions anyway. At over $20k/seat, only serious users are going to be buying Synplify licenses, and those are the folks who weren't satisfied with the built-in synthesis tools already. It would be like Ferrari getting upset that Ford is giving away Escorts.