Talk:Synopsys

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Oregon Portal This page is part of WikiProject Oregon, a WikiProject dedicated to articles related to the U.S. state of Oregon. To participate: join (or just read up) at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
PSU stuff & Applegate Trail are the current Collaborations of the week.
Start	This page is rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article is rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Three big in EDA industry, Synopsys, Cadence and Mentor, right? Magma will be the fourth big one though it's relatively small now. --philewar 13:31, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, the EDA market has always been in an oligopoly situation. Magma might be one of the top players in future, but I think that currently they are about one fourth of Mentor's size. jni 12:44, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I get the term "oligopoly" as a sad joke. The problem is that the whole EDA market (around $4B as of 2004 and no chance of significant growth of demand) simply cannot "feed" more big guns. Not to say that it is "brain-intensive". To write a good EDA tool takes much more guts than an internet cookie-cutter portal or yet another bean counter. In particular, the only real chance for Magma to grow is to "steal" a cut from the big troika, which will vigorously object, of course. Mikkalai 17:33, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

After the recent post-merger slide of Synopsys from an impressive market cap of 4.6B, the players stand as follows (10/08/2004)

CDN 3.53B (past year slid from $19/share to $14/share)

SNPS 2.45B (past year slid from $36/share to $15/share)

MENT 0.81B (past year slid from $18/share to $12/share)

LAVA 0.47B (past year slid from $28/share to $14/share)

For comparison, some other industries

MSFT: 306.B microsoft BA: 42.5B boeing WMT 224B Wal-mart UMC 11B United microelectronics SUNW 14B Sun micro INTC 133B Intel

You look more yourself. Revenue/profit comparisons are even more pitiful. So the "bigs" in EDA are dwarfs in USA. Mikkalai 17:33, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Avanti acquisition

The form of acquisition is merger. SEC fililng. June 6, 2002:

Item 5. Other Events.
On June 6, 2002, Synopsys, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Synopsys"), completed its acquisition of Avant! Corporation, a Delaware corporation ("Avant!"), through the merger (the "Merger") of Avant! with and into Maple Forest Acquisition L.L.C. ("Maple Forest"), a Delaware limited liability company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Synopsys, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of December 3, 2001, as amended, by and among Synopsys, Maple Forest and Avant! (the "Merger Agreement").
Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, former Avant! stockholders have the right to receive 0.371 of a Synopsys common share for each former Avant! common share (plus cash in lieu of fractional shares). As of June 6, 2002, former Avant! stockholders have the right to receive approximately 14.5 million shares of Synopsys. In addition, holders of former Avant! stock options are collectively entitled to receive up to approximately 2.3 million additional Synopsys common shares upon the exercise of such stock options from time to time in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof.
Further information about the Merger, including the full text of the Merger Agreement, is available in Synopsys' proxy statement/prospectus dated May 2, 2002.
Synopsys stockholders approved the issuance of the Synopsys common shares in the Merger at the annual meeting of Synopsys stockholders held on June 4, 2002.
A copy of the press release announcing the completion of the Merger is attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1 and is incorporated herein by reference.

[edit] Oregon

What's the Oregon connection for this article? It's not mentioned in the text and I'd like to put it in the proper category. Katr67 21:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

A significant portion of their engineering is at an office in the Silicon Forest. —EncMstr 15:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. That's not quite Category:Companies based in Oregon is it? Do we need a Silicon Forest category? Katr67 16:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The company is based elsewhere, and has sales offices all over the world, including here. A silicon forest category? I dunno. Should there be a Manicurists in Oregon category? According to a Reason article (circa 2002—couldn't find it online), nail stylists and manicurists have an economic impact many times greater than high technology. —EncMstr 18:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I can tell you that their office in Oregon is quite small compared to the one in CA or india for instance... Saying that "their engineering is at an office in the Silicon Forest" isn't true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 167.4.1.41 (talk) 14:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

Well, I have friends who spend more on their nails than on technology, but I digress...Yeah the proliferation of categories is troublesome, but looking at the Silicon Forest article, it appears that a related category could be heavily populated. Would such a thing be useful? I dunno. In any case, my concern is that this is in WPOR without an Oregon mention and without an Oregon cat. I see you're on top of adding the location info per the talk about that Intelitanic chip or whatever it is. These guys are in Hillsboro, correct? I can add the article to that cat. Katr67 18:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Upon further reflection, the category probably is useful. Synopsys is on Cornelius Pass road, so it should be within Hillsboro (though I'm unclear about its boundaries) but close to Beaverton. —EncMstr 19:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is in Hillsboro behind the WinCo along the MAX tracks, Beaverton does not begin until 185th at the earliest. Aboutmovies 19:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SynopsysLogo.GIF

Image:SynopsysLogo.GIF is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)