EDA vs. Windows 8

I have read a lot in recent months about Windows 8, Microsoft’s latest incarnation of its flagship Windows operating system. While there are many new features over and above its Windows 7 predecessor, one thing that makes me quite curious about Windows 8 is its optimization for touchscreen technology.

Note that I have yet to use Windows 8, but I have used several other touchscreen devices on the market (think tablets, phones, MP3 players, etc.). In general, I like the touchscreen interface for what these devices are fundamentally designed to do: consume information or data. Touchscreens are great for reading, playing games, listening to music, and browsing the Internet. But I think they are significantly less useful for generating information or data beyond writing a document, using a spreadsheet, or taking photographs. Microsoft’s Windows 8, however, has me thinking a bit more about the usability of touchscreen environments for one simple reason: the simulation and analysis tools I work with everyday only run on a Windows platform (currently WinXP or Win7).

My keyboard and mouse are indispensable for creating schematics, running simulations, and analyzing simulation data. Like most folks, I am pretty adept at using these mechanical devices to tell my computer what to do. But if operating system suppliers continue their focus on touchscreen technology (and I expect they will), it is only a matter of time before Electric Design Automation (EDA) vendors will have to revamp their tools for a touchscreen environment. What will that future look like from an EDA tool user’s perspective? Admittedly, my crystal ball is a bit cloudy on this topic. I can visualize touchscreen use for simple circuits, but as designs get more complex, I see touchscreen technology being more of a road block than a useful utility. Creating detailed system schematics, or routing compact PC boards, often requires precise onscreen graphics control – something my mouse gives me, but my extra-large hands and fingers are much less adept at without a significant touchscreen zoom factor. But maybe I am trying to view the future of EDA user interfaces through my limited “what I know now” lens. Perhaps it’s time to throw away what I know about user interface design and start with a fresh set of ideas.

Hollywood’s depiction of user interfaces (think of the Ironman or Batman movie franchises, for example) show futuristic screens that appear in front of users and are manipulated not by a mouse and keyboard, but by hand movements and gestures (okay, even my Wii and Xbox can already do some of this, though I don’t expect to use either for system design any time soon). This Hollywood vision is, by definition, even more optimistic than current touchscreen implementations. But maybe someday our interactions with technology will imitate the movies. I for one am very interested to see how EDA tools will adapt to user interface advances. What do you think the future of EDA tool interfaces looks like?

Post Author

Posted May 6th, 2013, by

Post Tags

Post Comments

2 Comments

About Mike Jensen's Blog

Views, insights, and commentary on mechatronic system design and analysis. Mike Jensen's Blog

Comments

2 comments on this post | ↓ Add Your Own

Commented on May 7, 2013 at 9:44 pm
By Yanfeng yu

I hope EDA tools can support a pen as an input device instead of a mouse and keyboard. In the early EDA days, we used a pen and tablet to draft schematics, write notes etc.

Commented on May 21, 2013 at 2:02 pm
By Mike Jensen

Good point Yanfeng. I remember the pen and tablet days. I know they are still used in some graphics applications today. Maybe it is time to reconsider them for EDA applications running in the Windows 8 class of operating systems.

Add Your Comment

Archives

October 2014
  • Reliability vs Robustness
  • June 2014
  • Wow Factor
  • May 2014
  • SystemVision 5.10.3
  • March 2014
  • IESF 2014: Military & Aerospace
  • Engineering Oops!
  • Big Engineering
  • January 2014
  • SystemVision Model Wizard
  • December 2013
  • SystemVision 5.10.2
  • Modeling: An Engineer’s Dilemma
  • October 2013
  • What is Your Legacy?
  • September 2013
  • Automotive IESF 2013
  • July 2013
  • Simple Design Solutions
  • June 2013
  • SystemVision 5.10
  • May 2013
  • Engineering Muscle Memory
  • EDA vs. Windows 8
  • March 2013
  • VHDL-AMS Stress Modeling – Part 3
  • January 2013
  • VHDL-AMS Stress Modeling – Part 2
  • VHDL-AMS Stress Modeling – Part 1
  • December 2012
  • Practice! Practice!
  • November 2012
  • Sharing Tool Expertise
  • October 2012
  • Preserving Expertise
  • Virtual Prototyping — Really?
  • Innovations in Motion Control Design
  • September 2012
  • Game Changers
  • Do We Overdesign?
  • August 2012
  • Tsunami Remnants
  • July 2012
  • A New Look at Device Modeling
  • SystemVision 5.9
  • June 2012
  • Veyron Physics
  • May 2012
  • Rooster Tail Engineering
  • April 2012
  • Automotive IESF 2012
  • Teaching and Learning CAN Bus
  • March 2012
  • Analog Modeling – Part 6
  • Analog Modeling – Part 5
  • Analog Modeling – Part 4
  • February 2012
  • Analog Modeling – Part 3
  • Analog Modeling – Part 2
  • January 2012
  • Analog Modeling – Part 1
  • Connecting Tools and Processes
  • December 2011
  • Turning-Off and Tuning-In
  • Use vs. Experience
  • Analyzing the Big Picture
  • November 2011
  • Simulating for Reliability
  • October 2011
  • SystemVision 5.8
  • VHDL-AMS Model Portability — Fact or Fiction?
  • September 2011
  • IESF 2011 Moves to Frankfurt
  • Simulation Troubleshooting
  • August 2011
  • Qualities of VHDL-AMS Quantities
  • Military & Aerospace IESF 2011
  • Touring Johnson Space Center
  • July 2011
  • Engineering versus Science
  • June 2011
  • System Reengineering
  • May 2011
  • Integrating Hardware and Software Design
  • Engine Remote Start
  • Integrated System Design
  • Simulation Experiments (Part 3)
  • April 2011
  • Automotive IESF 2011
  • Pushbutton Cars
  • System Simulation with FEA-Base Motor Models
  • March 2011
  • Simulation Experiments (Part 2)
  • Simulation Experiments (Part 1)
  • Japan: Patience and Grace Amid Disaster
  • Top Gear = Driving Fun
  • February 2011
  • Buoyancy
  • Ideas in Motion
  • January 2011
  • The Mechanical Half of Mechatronics
  • Detroit Auto Show
  • Signal-flow vs Conserved System Modeling
  • SystemVision 5.7…Ready, Set, Go!
  • December 2010
  • SystemVision and Windows 7
  • Friction Vacation
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 4)
  • November 2010
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 3)
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 2)
  • Simulation Beyond Volts and Amps (Part 1)
  • October 2010
  • SAE Convergence Recap (and an Unexpected Surprise)
  • VHDL-AMS Black Belt
  • Converging on SAE Convergence
  • System Design vs System Repair
  • September 2010
  • What’s the “AMS” in VHDL-AMS?
  • How Sensitive is Your System?
  • Do You Trust Your Simulator?
  • August 2010
  • What’s in a SPICE Model?
  • Cycling + Gravity = Pain
  • NI Week: Fun for Engineers
  • June 2010
  • Are You a Flexible Thinker?
  • VHDL-AMS and Switch Hysteresis
  • May 2010
  • VHDL-AMS Revisited
  • Segway to U3-X
  • Atomic Glue
  • March 2010
  • IESF Recap
  • February 2010
  • IESF is Coming…
  • System Level HDL-topia
  • January 2010
  • Mastering Design Abstraction
  • The Joy of Disassembly