embedded devices and open source

[Jeffry Smith]

On 2/23/07, Thomas Charron <twaffle at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/23/07, Jeffry Smith <jsmith at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > >  Then there's trade secrets and patents and such that can prevent
> > > companies from following the FOSS route.  Some businesses create their
> > > own "intellectual property" and want to sell it to others.  Others
> > > want (or need) to license the "intellectual property" of others to do
> > > what they need.
> > And some don't understand what their product is.  Example:  hardware
> > devices in computers.  Companies talk about their valuable "IP" (a
> > misnomer) in their drivers and that they have to keep them closed.  Or
> > that no one could understand them and help out.  Ask the company how
> > many drivers they sell.  No hardware, just the drivers.  I'll lay you
> > odds it's zero.  The profit is in the hardware, not the drivers.  The
> > drivers are cost.  Reducing cost (like by getting help from the
> > community - even better if they write it) is good.  Copyrights,
> > patents - they still exist whether it's Open Source or proprietary.
>
>  There are value added things that can be implemented by hardware
> companies in software.  Bose is a perfect example.  They mostly use
> stock hardware in their Lifestyle units.  It's the code and what it's
> doing which makes the cash for them.  The initial '2x speed' 802.11g
> adapters did so by bursting, in software.
>
>  They don't sell the drivers, true.  But the capabilities present IN
> them often add value are incorporated into the overall 'product
> capabilities', selling more units.

In other words, they're in the software business (nee WinModem) :)

jeff