In ISE 11.1 the license model has changed.

1.The restricted license model is in conflict with a long time
availability.
2.It is a problem for users using reconfiguration.
3.FPGAS are like hardware. Now with limited access.

This license model makes no sence for XILINX and
   makes it more complicate and uncertain for there users.

1.The restricted license model is in conflict with a long time
availability.

Until this ISE software was easy to install on different computers.
There was no admin account nessesary.
Run more than one installation on different computers was no problem.
After 15 years you could quite shure this works.

Now when you change your computer you need a new license.
I need design's which need ISE 4.
In 10 years I will have design which need ISE 11. And then?

2.
This is hard for reconfiguration users.
They have systems that need design software, all the time of the
project livetime.
May be you must make a design modifikation(or new design) every week.
These hardcore user lost:
 The possibility to run more than one instance on different computers.
   This helps in more than one way.
       1. Finding out bitstream patterns for partioal reconfiguration.
       2. Find a good routing solution very quick.

3.FPGAS are like hardware. Now with limited access.
 The users trust on FPGA.
 But a strict license model makes the access to design software
uncertain.

On May 15, 6:15=A0am, r.frido...@gmx.de wrote:
> In ISE 11.1 the license model has changed.
>
> 1.The restricted license model is in conflict with a long time
> availability.
> 2.It is a problem for users using reconfiguration.
> 3.FPGAS are like hardware. Now with limited access.
>
> This license model makes no sence for XILINX and
> =A0 =A0makes it more complicate and uncertain for there users.
>
> 1.The restricted license model is in conflict with a long time
> availability.
>
> Until this ISE software was easy to install on different computers.
> There was no admin account nessesary.
> Run more than one installation on different computers was no problem.
> After 15 years you could quite shure this works.
>
> Now when you change your computer you need a new license.
> I need design's which need ISE 4.
> In 10 years I will have design which need ISE 11. And then?
>
> 2.
> This is hard for reconfiguration users.
> They have systems that need design software, all the time of the
> project livetime.
> May be you must make a design modifikation(or new design) every week.
> These hardcore user lost:
> =A0The possibility to run more than one instance on different computers.
> =A0 =A0This helps in more than one way.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A01. Finding out bitstream patterns for partioal reconfigura=
tion.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A02. Find a good routing solution very quick.
>
> 3.FPGAS are like hardware. Now with limited access.
> =A0The users trust on FPGA.
> =A0But a strict license model makes the access to design software
> uncertain.

Xilinx (top management, marketing..) expects you

1) use only the leading family IC (those that are not yet available
from the distributors)
2) do not think there is any commercial use for partial
reconfiguration
3) of course expects you to pay EACH YEAR for the licenses, also for
your products in long maintenance

so see, the problem does not exist for them.

I bet the flexLM will not at all work or be available in 10 years from
now, so chances using 11.1 in that time are nil


Antti

A...@googlemail.com wrote:
> I bet the flexLM will not at all work or be available in 10 years from
> now, so chances using 11.1 in that time are nil

Usually the EDA firms have been quite good in supplying even really old
licenses if needed, sometimes installation media is the bigger problem.
I think flexlm is already 20 years old, so it is not a new thing ;)

One big problem is also to find the HW/SW platform to run those 15+ year
old software packages. How many for example has working HP Apollo or
HP9000 machines available ;) Sun sparc software is little easier,
because Solaris can run old SunOS software. Maybe we still use x86 15+
years on, but maybe not. Virtualization of course helps in
maintaining old environments.

At least the designs are in digital form now, dusty 5cm thick piles
of schematics from old chips are not fun to read, or transfer to
electronic form ;)

--Kim

On May 14, 10:15=A0pm, r.frido...@gmx.de wrote:
> In ISE 11.1 the license model has changed.
>
> 1.The restricted license model is in conflict with a long time
> availability.
> 2.It is a problem for users using reconfiguration.
> 3.FPGAS are like hardware. Now with limited access.
>
> This license model makes no sence for XILINX and
> =A0 =A0makes it more complicate and uncertain for there users.
>
> 1.The restricted license model is in conflict with a long time
> availability.
>
> Until this ISE software was easy to install on different computers.
> There was no admin account nessesary.
> Run more than one installation on different computers was no problem.
> After 15 years you could quite shure this works.
>
> Now when you change your computer you need a new license.
> I need design's which need ISE 4.
> In 10 years I will have design which need ISE 11. And then?
>
> 2.
> This is hard for reconfiguration users.
> They have systems that need design software, all the time of the
> project livetime.
> May be you must make a design modifikation(or new design) every week.
> These hardcore user lost:
> =A0The possibility to run more than one instance on different computers.
> =A0 =A0This helps in more than one way.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A01. Finding out bitstream patterns for partioal reconfigura=
tion.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A02. Find a good routing solution very quick.
>
> 3.FPGAS are like hardware. Now with limited access.
> =A0The users trust on FPGA.
> =A0But a strict license model makes the access to design software
> uncertain.


Xilinx has switched to using FlexLM for licensing as of ISE 11.1.  I
have been using multiple other software packages that use FlexLM for
years, so I have some experience with the issues that it can cause.
FlexLM is more restrictive than just giving you an activation ID, and
I expect that they will be getting a lot of calls from customers about
this.  However, after evaluating how Xilinx has used FlexLM, I think
that some of your issues above have been addressed in a reasonable
fashion, and I think that some of their licensing terms have been made
more favorable for the customer.

First, the FlexLM license files that I have received for Xilinx
software do not expire with respect to your right to use the software.
They give you one year of updates, but the license file allows you to
use the software released up to that point forever.  Here are a few
lines from one of my node locked license files:

#  This license is valid for permanent ( 0 days ) from Sun May 10
15:48:08 GMT+00:00 2009
INCREMENT System_Edition xilinxd 2010.04 permanent uncounted \

The 2010.04 means that I can run any version of ISE System_Edition
that is release up to (through?) April of 2010. The permanent means
that I can continue to use that forever. The uncounted means that I
can run as many instances as it can handle on the machine that it is
node locked to.

FlexLM license files for IP cores may expire depending on the core.
If they do expire, the permanent from above would be replaced with the
expiration date.


You also expressed concern about not being able to move the license to
a new machine.  I have had to do this several times in the past, and
it was always a pain. If I was upgrading because the computer or the
dongle failed, it also meant that I could not use the software for
several days.  In the past, I had to call the software vendor and
explain why I wanted or needed to get a new license.  If I was
replacing a dongle, they would send me a new dongle with a temporary
license file. When they received my old dongle back, I would get a new
license file.

Xilinx has set up their license web site so that the customer can
regenerate new license files to rehost their software on a new machine
themselves.   You can do this at least three times before you need to
talk to support by clicking on an online affidavit stating that you
are generating the new license file to replace the old file, and that
you will destroy the old license file. You can also choose what to
lock the license to: a Macrovision dongle, an Ethernet MAC ID, or a
hard drive serial number. I like to lock to Ethernet MAC IDs because
of the ease of moving Ethernet to a new computer. While Xilinx states
that they do not support it, I currently have USB Ethernet adapters
that I use as dongles with other FlexLM licensed software.


I think that you also are concerned that you lose the ability to run
more than one installation on different computers at the same time for
those tough place and route jobs.  This is one of the areas that I
believe that Xilinx has made the license more permissive.  Under
certain circumstances, it only takes one license to run multiple
iterations of a job on multiple machines.  I think that MPPR and
ExploreAhead both allow this for Linux. I don't remember if the
Windows version does, and it is Friday afternoon so I am not going to
look it up now.  I think that this used to require a license per
machine.

Node locked licenses will allow you to run as many iterations on a
machine as it can handle, so if you have a multiprocessor computer
with lots of memory, you are free to run multiple iterations at the
same time.


And finally, while I am a Xilinx Alliance Partner, and a Xilinx
Authorized Training Provider, I do not speak for them. This is just my
understanding of these issues.

Regards,

John McCaskill
www.FasterTechnology.com

On May 15, 4:00=A0pm, John McCaskill
<jhmccask...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Xilinx has switched to using FlexLM for licensing as of ISE 11.1. =A0I
> have been using multiple other software packages that use FlexLM for
> years, so I have some experience with the issues that it can cause.
> FlexLM is more restrictive than just giving you an activation ID, and
> I expect that they will be getting a lot of calls from customers about
> this. =A0However, after evaluating how Xilinx has used FlexLM, I think
> that some of your issues above have been addressed in a reasonable
> fashion, and I think that some of their licensing terms have been made
> more favorable for the customer.

I've dealt with FlexLm in the past, and I've learned to curse its very
existence when the license server, typically in an inaccessible
location, goes down. This always happened on a weekend with a looming
Monday-morning deadline.

But all that aside, after all these years, Xilinx still doesn't get
it. We use their software to develop applications FOR THEIR CHIPS.
There is no other use for it. Locking it down and otherwise making it
difficult to install and use is at cross purposes with Xilinx'
objectives: selling chips.

Now I understand that there is a real cost for technical support. What
Xilinx needs to do is to uncouple tech support from the cost of the
tools. To wit:

a) If you are a hobbyist and you want to play with a starter kit or
whatever, use the tools and use the various WWW resources for support.
You don't get a tech-support account and Xilinx won't answer your
phone calls.

b) The professional user should be able to choose between per-incident
and blanket yearly tech-support options. Perhaps two tiers of support
should be available -- initial WebCase, and direct-to-smart-people
telephone support. The point is that if we are paying directly for the
support, we expect REAL results and not the usual web-case runarounds.

c) In either case, any user (from the hobbyist to the pro) should be
able to report bugs and get updates on their resolutions. Xilinx
should not cut off a source of bug reports simply because the users
aren't paying for support.

As it is now, users who buy ISE/EDK etc spend a lot of money and don't
get any real support, and this latest licensing nonsense is a kick in
the teeth.

-a

On May 18, 8:36=A0pm, Andy Peters
<goo...@latke.net> wrote:
> On May 15, 4:00=A0pm, John McCaskill <jhmccask...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Xilinx has switched to using FlexLM for licensing as of ISE 11.1. =A0I
> > have been using multiple other software packages that use FlexLM for
> > years, so I have some experience with the issues that it can cause.
> > FlexLM is more restrictive than just giving you an activation ID, and
> > I expect that they will be getting a lot of calls from customers about
> > this. =A0However, after evaluating how Xilinx has used FlexLM, I think
> > that some of your issues above have been addressed in a reasonable
> > fashion, and I think that some of their licensing terms have been made
> > more favorable for the customer.
>
> I've dealt with FlexLm in the past, and I've learned to curse its very
> existence when the license server, typically in an inaccessible
> location, goes down. This always happened on a weekend with a looming
> Monday-morning deadline.
>
> But all that aside, after all these years, Xilinx still doesn't get
> it. We use their software to develop applications FOR THEIR CHIPS.
> There is no other use for it. Locking it down and otherwise making it
> difficult to install and use is at cross purposes with Xilinx'
> objectives: selling chips.
>
> Now I understand that there is a real cost for technical support. What
> Xilinx needs to do is to uncouple tech support from the cost of the
> tools. To wit:
>
> a) If you are a hobbyist and you want to play with a starter kit or
> whatever, use the tools and use the various WWW resources for support.
> You don't get a tech-support account and Xilinx won't answer your
> phone calls.
>
> b) The professional user should be able to choose between per-incident
> and blanket yearly tech-support options. Perhaps two tiers of support
> should be available -- initial WebCase, and direct-to-smart-people
> telephone support. The point is that if we are paying directly for the
> support, we expect REAL results and not the usual web-case runarounds.
>
> c) In either case, any user (from the hobbyist to the pro) should be
> able to report bugs and get updates on their resolutions. Xilinx
> should not cut off a source of bug reports simply because the users
> aren't paying for support.
>
> As it is now, users who buy ISE/EDK etc spend a lot of money and don't
> get any real support, and this latest licensing nonsense is a kick in
> the teeth.
>
> -a

super yes!
bravo for bringing out the IT, from the Xilinx latest move (a real
bady move..)

I have suggested the DROP BUG hotline email address before

sometime people find bugs that ar not important for them
but could be for Xilinx and others, but the webcase ist too much
trouble in such cases
and there is no way to submit without it

Antti

On May 15, 4:42=A0pm,
"Antti.Luk...@googlemail.com"
<Antti.Luk...@googlemail.com> wrote:
#
# I bet the flexLM will not at all work or be available in 10 years
from
# now, so chances using 11.1 in that time are nil

Some vendors are able to run in Eval, or some restricted modes, in
"FlexLM License no found" instances,  so it would be relatively EASY
for Xilinx to allow this.

ie for product maintenance, allow the system to load and run, without
the license.

If they must, it could run at a deliberately slow speed (because in 10
years time, your new PC will be faster anyway...), or they could
simply flip to Maintenance mode, after the useful life (perhaps 5
years for FPGA tools ? )

Annoyed customers do no one any good.

-jg

Andy Peters <g...@latke.net> wrote:
 
< I've dealt with FlexLm in the past, and I've learned to curse its very
< existence when the license server, typically in an inaccessible
< location, goes down. This always happened on a weekend with a looming
< Monday-morning deadline.

The one I remember occurs when the program or machine crash with
a licence outstanding.  There is no release of the license, and it
continues to count against the number available.  That was some years
ago, so maybe it has been fixed by now.  
 
< But all that aside, after all these years, Xilinx still doesn't get
< it. We use their software to develop applications FOR THEIR CHIPS.
< There is no other use for it. Locking it down and otherwise making it
< difficult to install and use is at cross purposes with Xilinx'
< objectives: selling chips.

Well, I for one appreciate the Xilinx (and other vendors) free
versions of the tools.  You don't get everything, but enough
for a large fraction of the actual cases.  I am not so sure which
ones will run in the free mode when a license is not available.

-- glen

glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> The one I remember occurs when the program or machine crash with
> a licence outstanding.  There is no release of the license, and it
> continues to count against the number available.  That was some years
> ago, so maybe it has been fixed by now.  

This can be fixed with "lmutil lmremove" command, google for the
command or read the lmutil help text.

--Kim

On May 18, 10:47 pm, Kim Enkovaara
<kim.enkova...@iki.fi> wrote:
> glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> > The one I remember occurs when the program or machine crash with
> > a licence outstanding.  There is no release of the license, and it
> > continues to count against the number available.  That was some years
> > ago, so maybe it has been fixed by now.
>
> This can be fixed with "lmutil lmremove" command, google for the
> command or read the lmutil help text.
>
> --Kim

That command works only if you have administrative access on the
license server.

The situation Glen remembers still exists.

AL