Verilog vs. VHDL
		
		
			                        by John Sanguinetti
		
		
			  
		
		From: John Sanguinetti 
		Newsgroups: comp.lang.verilog 
		Subject: Verilog vs. VHDL 
		Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 17:27:13 -0700 
		Organization: WebNexus Communications 
		NNTP-Posting-Host: du-00-24.webnexus.com 
		Mime-Version: 1.0 
		Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 
		Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
		X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
		 I have lots of war stories from the founding of Chronologic (June 
		1991). You wouldn't believe the number of "industry experts" who told 
		me that I was either wasting my time producing a Verilog simulator, or 
		that it might be an interesting short-term opportunity, but in 3 years 
		the world would be VHDL. It was literally everyone who makes a living 
		at prognosticating the EDA business. 
		Why is the design community more solidly Verilog-oriented than ever? 
		What happened (or didn't happen) to make these predictions wrong? 
		While people in this group generally look for technical differences 
		in the languages, if you look at the business situation (that is, 
		money), it is clear that there is one winner in this "war", and that 
		is Verilog. Companies developing new products go where the money is, 
		and the money is overwhelmingly in the Verilog part of the market. The 
		last numbers (from Dataquest, no less) have Verilog products 
		outselling VHDL products by more than 2-1 (in revenue, not licenses), 
		and the real difference is almost certainly higher. 
		My own opinion of the fundamental reason for Verilog's staying power 
		is that Verilog had a very large head start in number of engineers who 
		knew Verilog before VHDL really got out of the blocks, and Verilog is 
		easier to learn than VHDL. Thus, the established designers already 
		knew Verilog, and had no reason to learn VHDL, and the new designers 
		could pick it up easier than they could pick up VHDL. 
		You can argue all you want about the technical merits of the two 
		languages, and the "understandability" of each. I know that I 
		personally learned Verilog in a very short period of time. Later, when 
		I decided that I really should learn VHDL in order to be able to 
		market my product against it, I found that learning VHDL really was 
		harder. I'm sure I've spent more effort trying to learn VHDL than I 
		did in the early days of my Verilog use, and I'm only barely literate 
		in VHDL. (Admittedly, I'm a little handicapped in that I never learned 
		Ada, but C wasn't my first (or even second or third) language, 
		either.) 
		When you couple this lower barrier to using Verilog with the fact that 
		there is really no good reason to switch from Verilog to VHDL (and 
		until VITAL there were good reasons to switch from VHDL to Verilog), 
		it is easy to see why the market didn't move the direction the pundits 
		believed it would. 
		John Sanguinetti 
		jws@webnexus.com 
     |