Design Automation

Cadence: the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly Sometimes a customer survey seems like a spaghetti Western. By John Cooley

From a customer's point of view, the latest International Cadence Users Group (ICU) meeting in Boston, MA, from October 1-5, was a positive thing to see. I was surprised to find board designers happily mixing with IC designers, and I've never, ever, before seen a SysAdmin track at any user conference! ICU itself has grown at a maturing rate: a total of 419 people from 90 companies attended, up roughly 8 percent from the last time ICU met in Boston two years ago.

Under the diplomatic yet user-driven Chairmanship of IC designer Peter Stokes (founder of comp.cad.cadence), the past wars with Cadence Design Systems Inc. (San Jose, CA) for control of the meeting and its agenda seems to have been resolved in favor of the customers. The fact that many of Cadence's competitors--Analogy Inc., Simulation Technology, High Level Design Systems Inc., Design Acceleration Inc., and UniCAD Inc.--and even fierce rivals-- Synopsys .com/isdweb/&lf=isd-sendtolog"> Synopsys Inc., Cooper & Chyan Technology Inc., and Meta-Software Inc.--showed up is evidence of the change. Out of a 5-day conference, the Cadence marketing presentations were kept contained in a single 2-hour block. Additional evidence to the change is found in the official ICU proceedings, where only 7 out of the 47 papers were written by Cadence employees. The biggest indicator of change was that ICU invited a known EDA rabble-rouser, me, to give an unrestricted report card on Cadence as a keynote address! Here's what I saw.

A long time ago, I learned it was a complete waste of time trying to find out the truth about an EDA company or its products from their sales and marketing staff. Either they'd give me only the sunshine and happiness side of things or completely whitewash over any real problems I happened to discover on my own from other sources about their products and services. On the other hand, the Internet is much like a New England town meeting: those who speak up the most usually have some axe to grind, while those happy with the status quo tend not to even show up.

What follows are the results of a detailed survey I did with 98 self-selecting Cadence users on the Internet. Although by promising anonymity this is a great way to find where Cadence is messing up, please keep in mind that by its very nature, such surveys don't usually show a company's strengths. Because this is by no means an accurate, scientific survey--more like something that gives rough, first pass impressions--in most cases, I'm rounding all reported percentages to the nearest 5 percent or 10 percent.

on-line docs Most users seem quite displeased with past versions of Cadence's on-line browser, OpenBook, because searching with it is a nightmare. However, they saw it greatly improved with version 9502. Many described having to call their apps engineers (AEs) to find the bizarre keywords that would help them find what they were looking for when using OpenBook. One user said "it was awful until 9502. Finally, some Dracula commands, which have existed for the last 6 years, are actually documented." Also, in a weird sort of irony, mimicking the long-time Synopsys .com/isdweb/&lf=isd-sendtolog"> Synopsys /Cadence rivalry, two users noted "Cadence and Synopsys .com/isdweb/&lf=isd-sendtolog"> Synopsys both use Iview, but we still haven't been able to make them work together. Basically, we have to configure a window to run one or another, at this time." Overall, 65 percent gave positive, 20 percent gave mixed, and 15 percent gave bad reviews of on-line docs.

HotLine Instead of the usual "we'll-connect-you-with-someone-who-can-help-you-now" model, Cadence uses a "we'll-call-you-back-in-a-few-hours-with-someone-who-knows-this-product" model. One person who liked it said "my call is returned within 2 hours. Usually, the person calling can address the issues. When they can't, they can find someone who can." Those who hated it typically said "turnaround ranges from 2 days to 1 month. We even talked with Manny Correia about the sucko support, and he provided us with evidence that they are not even close to meeting their target response times." A few users commented that they preferred e-mailing "crc_cadence@cadence.com" over calling the hotline. An average user comment was "the initial and secondary callbacks have always been prompt. But if it's not a straight-forward question that can be answered by that second call, you will be in a long struggle that usually ends with 'that will be fixed in the next release.'" As expected, big customers with hundreds of licenses reported far better support than the small customers who bought just a handful of licenses. Overall, 35 percent gave negative, 30 percent gave positive, and 15 percent gave mixed reviews of the hotline. An additional 20 percent said they didn't use the hotline for various, usually negative, reasons.

Local support When asked if they like their local support, 30 percent of the customers who responded favorably said they "loved" their local support: "yes, the guys in Minneapolis are great"; or "local apps engineers are seasoned; I use them in preference to the hotline." The 30 percent who disliked their local support commented, "the sales guys are pretending to be support people"; or "we see them when we have a huge problem and they want to apologize, or they think we have money in the budget for new tools, or if they want to sell consulting. Other than that, local support doesn't exist."

The 20 percent who gave mixed reviews said stuff like "some AEs are great. Others couldn't fix a hole in a paper bag with both hands full of Scotch tape. There is no in-between"; or "the local support comes and goes. Recently, it's been great because our AE is very proactive about solving our problems. However, it's likely to change; the turn-over at the local office is tremendous. In the past, we've had trouble with the support disappearing after we've made the purchase." The remaining 20 percent reported they never used local support, or "I am my own local support."

SourceLink, WWW, & comp.cad.cadence Although the Internet may be big news, 50 percent of the Cadence customers reported that they hadn't seen either SourceLink--the Cadence on-line bug database with a search engine--or the sometimes maligned Cadence marketing WWW page, which one user described as "one of the many homes of EDA marketing puffery on the Web." Of those who have seen SourceLink, everyone liked it in its WWW form: "SourceLink was difficult to use. WWW page is useful, better than old SourceLink." One person said, it was "very useful. I've downloaded a lot of good info from it." The news group comp.cad.cadence gets mixed reviews with 60 percent liking it and 40 percent disliking it. One person said "the news group is pretty random--not useful for short-term problem solving." Another person said "comp.cad.cadence is helpful. I discovered at least one bug with their Hspice netlister, and it was good to have a place to discuss it." The two users who commented on TalkVerilog, which I didn't explicitly ask about in my survey, liked it.

Cadence Spectrum Services Cadence's Spectrum Services Division has been very aggressive about trying to take over its customers entire internal CAD and design functions. Understandably, I, along with most other users, haven't been too pleased with this idea. 85 percent of the users didn't like this "service" from Cadence (the phrase "conflict of interest" came up a lot), with 70 percent saying things like "Rectum Services is bad news for Cadence's customers. It causes a basic conflict of interest between customers and Cadence. There is no motivation for Cadence to provide good support for customers on maintenance"; "I do not approve. I don't believe it helps your company keep the edge." The other 15 percent took the financial view, saying it is "too expensive," and "it is really overpriced!!!"

Personal bias aside, I must report another 15 percent argued that "given the complexity and instability of [Cadence's] tools, they almost have to provide such a service." Another person argued, "it always takes more effort than anticipated when using a new tool for the first time, and having extra people who have used the tool before would be a good thing." Ah hell, I can't help but rebut: Isn't this called "training?"

Cadence training Of those who sat through Cadence training videos, there was almost 100 percent agreement the videos were mostly too long, out-of-date, and too simple. "We do have all the video classes. By far and away, the best class is the one covering SKILL. They probably could have thrown the rest away after that one, especially with the incredibly redundant X and Unix training. Alas, as far as I can tell, the video courses have not been updated for several years."

Concerning direct training, those (40 percent) taking Verilog, SKILL, Cell3, and Artist mostly liked them if they were completely new to the topic. Add VHDL, Allegro, Synergy, or Verilog for synthesis, and you get another 25 percent of users saying instruction varies wildly depending on the instructor, and the remaining 35 percent voicing dissatisfaction. One anecdotal horror story was "we sent someone to the East Coast at a sizable expense for an official training class. When he got there, Cadence parked him in a room by himself with a videotape. What a waste." One repeated happy comment was about an instructor who liked to bake chocolate chip cookies for her class.

Figure 1. Customer response when asked, "going from 'great' to 'horrible,' please rank the Cadence sales force as equal to one of the above."

Cadence sales This being my first comprehensive customer survey, I was surprised to see how many users ranked Cadence sales in either a neutral or a positive light. I just did not expect this after hearing years of notoriously mercenary stories about sales people from all sorts of EDA companies! Of course, I received many negative responses: "so many of Cadence products seem to be 'press release ware'"; "we've paid for things that didn't exist"; "our maintenance costs are sky-high"; "they can't figure out what licenses we have"; "our contract expired and they treated us like dirt"; "they never call anymore--we only call them if there's an emergency"; or "they'll help, but only while you have a budget." And I even laughed when I read "the old sales guy in my area used to sell used cars to Dick Nixon"; and "if my daughter married a Cadence salesman, I'd disown her and have him killed by the Mafia."

However, mixed in with these predictable user views, I found unexpected stories: "I usually get a call when my salesman needs to make a sale. On the other hand, my salesman did help me through a tough problem." Another user related a story where a Cadence salesman actually directed him to not use a specific Cadence product because its EDIF-in wasn't so hot and, instead, recommended a third-party tool/service! Whoa!

There was even a bit of sympathy expressed on some user's part: "I never got the feeling that our salesdroids were trying to intentionally con us. They just never seemed to understand our requirements or their own products"; "they mean well, but aren't very technical. They aren't always aware of all the products offered, or what they do"; "our salesman will return phone calls, which is more than I can say about our current Mentor salesman"; and "we don't expect much from sales people, so we are usually not too disappointed in them."

"Joe-Costello-for-a-day" To get more open responses, I asked users what would they do if they were "Joe-Costello-For-A-Day," and what their most positive and most negative experiences had been with Cadence.

On the positive side, lots of users were very excited about Verilog-XL and how bug-free it is. A lot of people also greatly loved SKILL. Other things users said were "the folks there treat me like a first-class customer, though I know I'm a second-class opportunity for them"; "in a 3-year time frame, we pushed over 100 designs through our system here with very few pitfalls"; "their software usually works and is a standard"; "their basic core technologies (schematic capture, place & route, verification) are pretty good"; "SourceLink is excellent, even better than [ Synopsys .com/isdweb/&lf=isd-sendtolog"> Synopsys ' ] SolvIt-On-The-Web"; "our salesman and all but one of our AEs did a good job on interactive IC verification (DIVA inside Virtuoso), which is the only reason we picked Cadence over Mentor "; "I called once with a problem in Dracula and got a solution and a patch before I got off the phone. I'd give that AE whatever it took to keep her!"; "their installation software works 98 percent, even across multiple platforms and AFS, minus one or two little things, which are fairly easy to work around"; "they gave us our money back (credits) when something we bought didn't pan out"; and "LeapFrog is great!"

On the negative side, users complained about the painful Cadence/Valid merger, the fact that the Opus database constantly changes and is not in an ASCII format, and the need to "fix all the damn little bugs that have existed forever!!!" Additional comments included "LeapFrog sucks!"; and "cwaves sux."

Of course, there were a few jokers: "personally, the day we bought ViewDraw [a ViewLogic product] was the best Cadence experience I have had." More than a few people complimented Cadence's cafeteria, also!

As "Joe-For-A-Day," they would "Nuke Vampire"; "ensure all sales were contingent on customer success"; "be more in sync with their software"; "would stop shipping 'release-quality' software that is really alpha-test-quality"; "commit more to keeping their current customers happy, rather than chasing the next sale"; and "dump this dead-end obsession with Spectrum Consulting to focus on developing new tools." Additional comments included "I would take steps to push towards truly integrated toolsets that work with Cadence and non-Cadence tools"; and "if I were Joe-for-a-day, I'd pay off the house and buy a sports car."

One consultant said "[Cadence's] sales and marketing people threatened that if I didn't do what they wanted, they'd tell my customer to go to my competitor." A few ex-Cadence employees reported being badmouthed by Cadence at their current jobs/contracts.

Best & worst tools About 45 percent of users said something extremely positive about Verilog, followed by another 15 percent ranting about SKILL. The remaining 40 percent was equally divided among Composer, Leapfrog, Virtuoso, Edge, Cell3, CellEnsemble, Artist, Spectre, Allegro, Library Browser, gr_waves, and Concept. One user cited Verilog's debug environment and another, Synergy's informative error messages as the best. "SKILL makes me almost able to forgive some errors. At least if something is broken, I can fix it, unlike with Compass."

The "worst" category was closely grouped around ten products. Composer and Dracula each drew about 20 percent of the bad remarks: "the worst is Dracula"; "features [in Dracula] appear in one release and disappear in the next. It is poorly documented and very user-hostile." "Anything with a GUI," Cwaves, Synergy, and Opus each drew another 15 percent. The remaining handful of complaints were about cdsSpice, OpenBook, and the VHDL netlister.

Overall rating About 15 percent of users ranked Cadence above average. "They seem to have an almost bug-free product with Verilog. Better than I can say about the other guys." The bulk (55 percent) saw Cadence as average "much like Hertz rent-a-car, AT&T phone service, etc."; or "I've dealt with companies that had better support but less useful tools." The remaining 30 percent of users condemned Cadence as below average with "the only supplier's name to have become a swear word in our company is 'Cadence'"; and "definitely worst. I told a friend of mine, who is a Cadence Apps guy, that I would rather deal with the IRS."

Having experience with a lot of EDA companies and what their users think about them, I'd say Cadence was doing "fairly well" to "average." They rubbed their customers the wrong way with Spectrum Services, the Cadence/Valid merger, Opus, OpenBook, training videos, and variable service, but they get major Brownie points for Verilog's incredible robustness, SourceLink on the Web, SKILL, their user-driven user group, good installs, and good documentation. Overall, I'd say Cadence has improved over the last few years from the customer's viewpoint but suffers from the same big company problems that its competitors Synopsys .com/isdweb/&lf=isd-sendtolog"> Synopsys , Mentor , and ViewLogic continually grapple with.

From his sheep farm John Cooley runs the grassroots E-mail Synopsys .com/isdweb/&lf=isd-sendtolog"> Synopsys Users Group (ESNUG). He is also president of the Users Society of Electronic Design Automation (USE/DA). John makes his living as a contract ASIC/FPGA designer and loves receiving e-mail from fellow engineers at "jcooley@world.std.com" or (508) 429-4357.

To voice an opinion on this or any Integrated System Design article, please e-mail your message to michael@asic.com.

integrated system design  July 1996