What's the conceptual difference between a Cadence analysis view and a Synopsys scenario?

Mentor explanation

In Cadence-style flows, you explicitly build a constraint mode and a delay corner as separate objects, then combine them into an analysis view, then separately activate that view for setup and/or hold. In Synopsys-style flows, the more common mental model is mode plus corner producing a scenario directly, with tool-specific commands for creating and managing that scenario (and, in signoff flows, distributing scenarios across multiple processes). The concepts map onto each other cleanly — both are answering "what is the chip doing, under what condition" — but the object hierarchy, terminology, and exact command syntax genuinely differ between vendors and even between product versions. Never assume a command from one flow will work, or mean the same thing, in the other.