Vivado vs Quartus for FPGA Design: Pros, Cons, and ARM Support Comparison

Hello, I have the option of choosing between Intel FPGAs or Xilinx FPGAs on my next hardware design. I've been using Quartus for a long time and am thinking about trying Vivado. I would like to ask for comments on the pros and cons of Vivado. I like Quartus but the Platform Designer is stinky but I can live with it. My next design does not require any embedded ARM processors, pure FPGA. But, maybe embedded ARMs is the future and in that case maybe Vivado would be best to learn if the rumor is true that Vivado is better than Quartus for ARM development.

Anyone heard of any major new improvements to Quartus on the horizon?

I'm interested in your comments.

Joe,
Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with using an embedded ARM on either Xilinx or Intel FPGAs so I can't tell you which tool is better for that. Where I work, most of the FPGA and  firmware development is done using command line tools and scripts so the Quartus or Vivado user interface is less important. This is a good thing because we use parts from both vendors.

My brief experience with Quartus and Vivado is that there is a steep initial learning curve for both.

Elizabeth