Xilinx sends lawyers after online educators.

[filssavi]

Great !   I guess I will just have to design out any Xilinx (TM) parts now for future products.

Well the alternative is intel (lattice and microseemi are not even competing with the big two), a company with proven track record of anticompetitive and anti-consumer behaviour that does anything in it’s power (including illegal stuff) to run competition into the ground as soon as it remotely close to threatening its monopolistic dominance

Are you sure this is a better option?

And beside the only way to design out Xilinx parts is to change employer and go to someone working with intel parts since the impact  of the preferences of design engineers on which FPGA vendors to use is as close to 0 as you can get, as the decision is typically company wide and a switch from one vendor to the next is quite costly

[boB]

I don't use FPGAs except for very small and inexpensive Silego (Dialog now) 30 cent parts.

the Xilinx part that is used now is just a CPLD.

Would love to use more FPGAs but they are just too expensive still except for these really small Silegos.

I tried Lattice briefly but the licensing and security issues just to be able to program their parts got in my way.

Micros do most the work except for some glue logic in my case.

[janoc]

I don't use FPGAs except for very small and inexpensive Silego (Dialog now) 30 cent parts.

the Xilinx part that is used now is just a CPLD.

Would love to use more FPGAs but they are just too expensive still except for these really small Silegos.

I tried Lattice briefly but the licensing and security issues just to be able to program their parts got in my way.

Micros do most the work except for some glue logic in my case.

Actually, if you can make do with the ice40 series from Lattice, the open source IceStorm toolchain works quite well for them.

That is not a solution for everyone, obviously, but it is an option. I was playing with it yesterday and it is surprisingly easy to use (and I had it compiled and installed from scratch faster than the 11+GB behemoth of ISE Webpack that I have been using for the Spartan 3 & 6 series before would even download).

[kiaas]

not quite as cheap as the silego ones, but faster and bigger with an open source toolchain (just as some of the silego greenpak's), there's Lattice ice40's on mouser in single-quantity for around 1.50 USD. main drawback to me is they're not 5V tolerant, but there's not much that is these days.

[Berni]

Yes for small FPGAs and CPLDs Lattice is a nice cheap alternative.

But as soon as you need a big powerful FPGA it is hard to avoid Altera or Xilinx. And you also pay for it appropriately.

[filssavi]

I don't use FPGAs except for very small and inexpensive Silego (Dialog now) 30 cent parts.

the Xilinx part that is used now is just a CPLD.

Would love to use more FPGAs but they are just too expensive still except for these really small Silegos.

I tried Lattice briefly but the licensing and security issues just to be able to program their parts got in my way.

Micros do most the work except for some glue logic in my case.

It seems to me that you need to design out Xilinx and intel parts, not because of the company behaviours,  simply because those fpga's are just too big

lattice/microsemi and Intel/Xilinx products are not interchangable/equivalent, they don't compete against each other, the choice between one or the other should be purely done depending on the application

It is almost like choosing between a STM32 microcontroller and a intel Xeon 16 core CPU, sure you can write C software for both of them.

there is a bit of overlap in the sense that the biggest lattice fpga's can be comared to the smaller xilinx's ones but that's about it

[FrankBuss]

I wonder what happens when you develop for example a devboard with a Xilinx FPGA and want to write documentation for it. Do you have to ask them before publishing it and can they forbid to use their name and logo? This would be a show stopper.

But the Cyclone 5 in the DE10 Nano looks very nice, too. I could implement a fast multichannel ADC with it with 1 GB sample memory without too much work. Last time I tried to use the DDR RAM of a Xilinx devboard, I couldn't get it to work. But this was some years ago, maybe it is easier nowadays with Vivado. Last time I used Xilinx ISE, it was worse than Quartus.

[Berni]

Yeah you can get some nice FPGAs on dev boards that include many useful things like memory, ports and LEDs. Never underestimate the usefulness of a bunch of LEDs on a FPGA board.

But when it gets to things like DDR memory things get complicated with licensing again. Unless you are using a chip with a hardware DDR3 controller(Not many have it) then you will need to use there soft DDR controller IP and that stuff is not free. It usually gives you a evaluation version of the IP with encrypted source files and a death timer that kills it after an hour of running. To get the full version that you are allowed fully simulate and will run on hardware forever you need to pay a few grand for a license to the DDR3 controller IP or pay a few more grand to buy the full version of the IDE that includes all of that IP...for 1 year before the license expires and you need to pay a few grand again to renew it.

[rhb]

Do people not actually *read* books now?  I chose this example for the simple reason I am reading it at the moment. 

Read the text at the bottom of the page.  That's *all* you have to do to keep everyone happy.  I could easily choose any other device specific book in my library.  It would have a similar section on  trademarks somewhere.  Publishing houses know they need this.  YouTubers don't, so they get scary letters from lawyers.

I am not a lawyer.  I planned becoming one when I started university, but by the time I got ready for law school it was clear that the legal profession was not what it was in my grandfather's day.  So I became a scientist instead.

[filssavi]

I wonder what happens when you develop for example a devboard with a Xilinx FPGA and want to write documentation for it. Do you have to ask them before publishing it and can they forbid to use their name and logo? This would be a show stopper.

Probably yes for multiple reasons

what companies want to avoid (and I think it is perfectly reasonable) is for anyone to mistake a third party product with a Xilinx one so if you put a xilinx logo on the silkscreen of the pcb (as to imply Xilinx designed the pcb) you can bet your bottom they will sue you to oblivion, same thing if you put a Xilinx logo or use too similar a design  in your documentation, basically if you sell a clone/knockoff Xilinx dev board yes they will come after you

Another reason is that both Xilinx and altera have partner programs with third party companies that sell dev boards, system on module, IP’s and so on these products are all tested and certified to meet the producer standards for quality, availability and so on of the producer, by using the logo you are implying that yours is an officially sanctioned product when it really is not

Also when doing a dev board you are selling a product, and so it is commercial, not fair use so trademark laws apply in that case and The producer might be even mandated to sue you

Does this mean you can’t sell a dev board without Xilinx approval, of course not, you can do whatever you want, you can obviously tell customers that the FPGA is Xilinx and include screenshots from vivado or the Xilinx website in your documentation, as long as you don’t use any logos, or if you want to do so you obtain Xilinx permission

[Mr. Scram]

It seems lawyers hired by Xylinx wrote a ton of bullshit not having any legal standing in the law.

https://youtu.be/64WGwD6VIhI

https://nofilmschool.com/2013/08/answers-to-legal-questions-films-entertainment-law

the simple answer is yes, it's legal to film a recognizable place, brand, or logo as long as the following criteria are met:

i) the place or product shot is portrayed in the manner it is commonly portrayed; and (ii) the audience is not led to believe that the brand or store is sponsoring or associated with your film.

Exactly. People don't have a clue how trademarks work, which seems to be what these people are banking on to exert power they don't have. Imagine not being able to discuss or display brand names for fear of trademark cases filed against you. They'd be able to suppress any unfavourable reviews or webshops selling gear at a too competitive price.

That being said, if someone with deep pockets comes after you you're in for a world of hurt. Even if they don't have a case in the slightest.

[Mr. Scram]

Do people not actually *read* books now?  I chose this example for the simple reason I am reading it at the moment. 

Read the text at the bottom of the page.  That's *all* you have to do to keep everyone happy.  I could easily choose any other device specific book in my library.  It would have a similar section on  trademarks somewhere.  Publishing houses know they need this.  YouTubers don't, so they get scary letters from lawyers.

I am not a lawyer.  I planned becoming one when I started university, but by the time I got ready for law school it was clear that the legal profession was not what it was in my grandfather's day.  So I became a scientist instead.

That's not a requirement. It's one of the ways you can emphasise you're not affiliated with the manufacturer, but it's far from a hard requirement. We haven't seen the actual video, but it sounds like non affiliation should be abundantly clear without that disclaimer.

[boB]

I also don't use, or like to use newer FPGAs because they don't run at 3.3V or 5V and I have to add extra voltage regulators...

I use CPLDs or the Silego Greenpaks because they interface to my 3.3V processor I/O easily and can do 3.3V to 5V level translation as well.

There may be a day when I need to use a real FPGA but hopefully that won't be for quite a while OR I will maybe be retired by that time.

[MT]

sue sue sue!

[rstofer]

Without a link to the video about which Xilinx is complaining, how can we even form an opinion?  I'm pretty sure if I use their logo while simultaneously calling their product junk, I might expect a letter.  But Dave does this all the time and AFAIK has never received a letter.  Hm...  There must be more to the story.

No, I'm not going to boycott Xilinx, their's are the only FPGAs I use and I certainly don't plan to change that.

[Mr. Scram]

 

Without a link to the video about which Xilinx is complaining, how can we even form an opinion?  I'm pretty sure if I use their logo while simultaneously calling their product junk, I might expect a letter.  But Dave does this all the time and AFAIK has never received a letter.  Hm...  There must be more to the story.

No, I'm not going to boycott Xilinx, their's are the only FPGAs I use and I certainly don't plan to change that.

Note that it also depends on the exact country or even state, but reviews are generally one of the explicitly mentioned fair use scenarios. They can send letters all day long, but no sane lawmaker is going to allow companies to suppress bad reviews through copyright.

[FrankBuss]

Read the text at the bottom of the page.  That's *all* you have to do to keep everyone happy.  I could easily choose any other device specific book in my library.  It would have a similar section on  trademarks somewhere.  Publishing houses know they need this.  YouTubers don't, so they get scary letters from lawyers.

Thanks, this makes sense. So I probably would get in trouble, if I sell a "Xilinx Zynq devboard" and print a nice Xilinx logo, without permission from Xilinx, but if I sell a "Frank Buss devboard with a Xilinx chip" and print "U1" for the FPGA on the board, and then add the trademark disclaimer, I can do what I want, except maybe cursing too much about the bloated size and speed of Vivado

[Mr. Scram]

Thanks, this makes sense. So I probably would get in trouble, if I sell a "Xilinx Zynq devboard" and print a nice Xilinx logo, without permission from Xilinx, but if I sell a "Frank Buss devboard with a Xilinx chip" and print "U1" for the FPGA on the board, and then add the trademark disclaimer, I can do what I want, except maybe cursing too much about the bloated size and speed of Vivado

It depends on the country you're in and selling to, but generally you have to make clear or not suggest you're not affiliated with the company in question. The book disclaimer is one way of doing that, but don't take that as gospel. There are various ways to skin that cat.

[mickmake]

This is just unacceptable. I understand attacking people for slander or copyright infringement, but attacking online free and paid educators just seems extremely petty.
Video is from motherboard designer and youtube educator Robert Feranec.

The whole FPGA world is so used to IP protection, I'm not surprised at this reaction.

However, FPGA companies need to start realizing that their business model is fast changing. If they don't adapt to Makers wanting to hack around with FPGAs and produce fully open source/hardware designs, then the Makers will just go off and find a company that does support them.

That's how things are done. That's how many businesses become so cocky that they fail to see the writing on the wall - EG: IBM, HP, Microsoft, Apple have all seen the proverbial carpet ripped out from underneath them because they haven't paid attention to the market.

So, we just move over to Altera, Lattice, or even Microsemi. I'm lead to believe that Lattice are a LOT more Maker friendly.
1-bitsquared & Luke Valenty can attest to this.

[radioactive]

I'm lead to believe that Lattice are a LOT more Maker friendly.

I would just say that the Lattice parts are *much* more attractive to everyone were they can be used due to cost,current consumption, and mostly because of these awe-inspiring people who have made these parts so nice to work with via a simple makefile:

Clifford Wolf
Cotton Seed
And all the others who contribute to Project Icestorm. 

[mikeselectricstuff]

From what I gather, none of the FPGA manufacturers have co-operated with the open-source FPGA toolchain effort.
If one were to, it would be a big publicity boost - Microchip (Who now own Microsemi) would be an obvious contender, as they are generally Maker-friendly, understand the long-term value of low-volume users and are pretty low-profile in the FPGA world.
 

[janoc]

This is just unacceptable. I understand attacking people for slander or copyright infringement, but attacking online free and paid educators just seems extremely petty.
Video is from motherboard designer and youtube educator Robert Feranec.

The whole FPGA world is so used to IP protection, I'm not surprised at this reaction.

However, FPGA companies need to start realizing that their business model is fast changing. If they don't adapt to Makers wanting to hack around with FPGAs and produce fully open source/hardware designs, then the Makers will just go off and find a company that does support them.

That's how things are done. That's how many businesses become so cocky that they fail to see the writing on the wall - EG: IBM, HP, Microsoft, Apple have all seen the proverbial carpet ripped out from underneath them because they haven't paid attention to the market.

So, we just move over to Altera, Lattice, or even Microsemi. I'm lead to believe that Lattice are a LOT more Maker friendly.
1-bitsquared & Luke Valenty can attest to this.

Um, I would love if this was true, but seriously - if you think there is enough of a "Maker" market to justify the expense (and effort) for opening their high level tools and chips (not $0.50 CPLDs) then you need to put off the Coolaid, I am afraid. The more serious stuff costs in hudreds of USD per chip and it is a very niche market. This isn't Arduino where a clone can be had for $2 delivered and everyone is sticking one into every blinky LED project because it is so simple and cheap to use.

For an average "Maker" an FPGA is pretty much completely pointless and irrelevant because their projects don't need them. The devboards and tools have been accessible for a long time (at least for the low end parts) and it is still very rare to see projects using these things. Both because today's microcontrollers tend to be able to do most of what one could ever need and also because the knowledge required to use an FPGA effectively tends to be far beyond what an average hobbyist hacker has. So where is your market?

You can't compare this to Microsoft or Apple where it is about software which is primarily a commodity these days and the barrier of entry is fairly low thanks to the free tools, hardware you can buy at every mall and even a monkey being able to write/copy & paste few lines of code. In contrast, you can have as many free tools as you want but a "Maker" is not going to put together an FPGA in their kitchen lab (unlike a PC or Raspberry Pi).

And Lattice is "Maker friendly" only because one of their low end FPGA architectures has been reverse engineered by a concerted effort of researchers, not because they have contributed anything to it. In fact, their licenses are equally (if not more) restrictive than e.g. Xilinx's or Altera's.

[FrankBuss]

For an average "Maker" an FPGA is pretty much completely pointless and irrelevant because their projects don't need them.

Arduino disagrees. They have a board with a SAMD21 and Cyclone 10 now:

https://www.arduino.cc/en/Guide/MKRVidor4000

and for a start, you don't need to know anything about FPGA programming. You can just select one of the pre-compiled libraries for it, even powerful things like a HDMI video output. It's like you have all shields (at least the digital ones) available now (or soon) without buying any special shield.

But I think they have a simple web interface as well, and some samples, which allows even hobbyists without the time or knowledge for the big programs, to write simple FPGA configurations. EUR 49.90 is a bit pricey, the academic version of a DE0 Nano isn't much more expensive but much more powerful, but if the software is as easy to use as used from Arduino, then it might be a very interesting product for advanced hobbyists.

[janoc]

For an average "Maker" an FPGA is pretty much completely pointless and irrelevant because their projects don't need them.

Arduino disagrees. They have a board with a SAMD21 and Cyclone 10 now:

https://www.arduino.cc/en/Guide/MKRVidor4000
...

Yes, and there has been a Papillio before, Pipistrello, XuLa and what not (good list is here: https://joelw.id.au/FPGA/CheapFPGADevelopmentBoards ).

That only means that companies are jumping on the bandwagon, not that someone is actually buying and using this stuff. Vendors were also betting on things like 3D TVs before - and nobody was buying them. A quick search for projects using e.g. this Vidor Arduino shows none, except for the demos provided by Arduino itself and a lot of advertising/reviews - despite the board being around for over 6 months now.

I am certainly glad that this is available because it makes learning FPGAs easier for people who are interested in it (e.g. me) but lets be real about the market size (and its value) here. In addition, these are all low end parts, often lacking any sort of high speed interfaces (one of the major reasons why one would need an FPGA for something) and even when the part has the requisite hw inside, the boards are not fitted with suitable connectors but nonsense such as 0.1" pin headers, PMODs and similar.

All major vendors have free (as in beer) versions of their tools available for these low end parts already and would gain exactly nothing by opening them even further. Free "Maker" publicity is not going to bring them e.g. military contracts or high end test equipment market where they are making their money from.

Re Vidor programming - if you want to go beyond the 3 or so pre-made libraries that are used from the ARM code, then you need to download Quartus from Intel/Altera and use HDL. There is no other toolchain available that could synthesize the bitstream for it.

[Bassman59]

For an average "Maker" an FPGA is pretty much completely pointless and irrelevant because their projects don't need them.

Arduino disagrees. They have a board with a SAMD21 and Cyclone 10 now:

https://www.arduino.cc/en/Guide/MKRVidor4000
...

Yes, and there has been a Papillio before, Pipistrello, XuLa and what not (good list is here: https://joelw.id.au/FPGA/CheapFPGADevelopmentBoards ).

That only means that companies are jumping on the bandwagon, not that someone is actually buying and using this stuff. Vendors were also betting on things like 3D TVs before - and nobody was buying them. A quick search for projects using e.g. this Vidor Arduino shows none, except for the demos provided by Arduino itself and a lot of advertising/reviews - despite the board being around for over 6 months now.

I am certainly glad that this is available because it makes learning FPGAs easier for people who are interested in it (e.g. me) but lets be real about the market size (and its value) here. In addition, these are all low end parts, often lacking any sort of high speed interfaces (one of the major reasons why one would need an FPGA for something) and even when the part has the requisite hw inside, the boards are not fitted with suitable connectors but nonsense such as 0.1" pin headers, PMODs and similar.

All major vendors have free (as in beer) versions of their tools available for these low end parts already and would gain exactly nothing by opening them even further. Free "Maker" publicity is not going to bring them e.g. military contracts or high end test equipment market where they are making their money from.

Re Vidor programming - if you want to go beyond the 3 or so pre-made libraries that are used from the ARM code, then you need to download Quartus from Intel/Altera and use HDL. There is no other toolchain available that could synthesize the bitstream for it.

My hunch, based on years of doing FPGA designs using all four (Altera/Intel, Xilinx, Microsemi and Lattice) major FPGA vendors' products (and their software and their support), is that none of the four give a shit about Makers and hobbyists and anyone that's not spending big coin buying trays of parts. Makers and hobbyists should be thankful that free versions of the toolsets exist and that Xilinx and Altera maintain popular user forums.

There's that old saw that goes, "If the young hobbyist learns Brand [$BRAND]'s devices and software, when s/he gets on the job s/he can push the organization towards that brand's parts." And that's bullshit. Any company that already does FPGAs already has a preferred vendor which won't change unless there's a Damn Good Reason to do so.

(That's not to say we, as professional engineers, should always stick with just one vendor or one family. We should always be looking for alternatives, and as our stature in our work organizations grows, we can and should use other parts. But the freshout engineer won't get that option.)

---------------------------------------------------------

I think it's great that hobbyists and kids and other non-professionals want to learn how to design with FPGAs. (I also think it's great that hobbyists and kids and others want to learn how to program microcontrollers and do all sorts of fun stuff, which is why I encourage kids to get an Arduino kit.) But what is missing in the discussion is that FPGAs are a means to an end. They are an implementation, conceptually the same as a board or box full of TTL devices, or discrete-transistor logic, or hell, tubes. The topic for discussion is really, "I want to learn to do synchronous digital logic circuit design."

And learning how to design with FPGAs is a lot easier if you come at it with a strong background in digital logic.

So for those who are interested in learning -- there are several good textbooks on digital logic design, start there. Perhaps there are online courses in the subject (I haven't looked). Maybe you can audit a course at the local university. A lot of colleges are teaching logic-design courses and are using FPGAs as the implementation.

And for those who are less interested in learning the subject, but rather they have an idea or a project in mind, sure, get an FPGA board from one of the many purveyors of such things. But don't be surprised to discover that the learning curve is long and shallow and there are a lot of things you have to learn before you can actually do the one thing you want to do.