Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:50:11 -0700 From: John Oram <norami@unlimited.net> To: dreamwvr@dreamwvr.com Cc: Jeff LeBlanc <Jeff.Leblanc@central.sun.com>, chad@DCFinc.com, freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: i-opener shipping Message-ID: <38F65D33.605397C6@unlimited.net> References: <libSDtMail.200004130801.27905.leblancj@bast> <0004131027260U.00722@loki.dyn.ez-ip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Below are comments from a friend who works for a Siicon Valley computer manufacturer. They may be useful when thinking about selling inexpensive open source hardware and remainig in business because your making a profit. John Oram ----------------------------------------------------------------- John: i-Opener is an interesting business model for sure. They clearly wanted to set up a business case (create a market) that provided low cost hardware to promote an on going service. The money would be made on the monthly service fees and not the hardware purchase. A low upfront cost (entry point) that was not very complicated to use, easy to setup and maintain. All the features and extras would be in the service for the most part. Like DVD without the MPEG Board - Soft MPEG. Looks like what happened is they developed interest in low cost hardware and a service no one really wants at the current price offering. A VT920 Smart Term that can be programmed. Looks like they can sell the hardware and not sell the service at the current price. The question is margin? If the hardware has any margin in it, they may have to switch sides and look at making some money off the hardware and give up (or lower the cost) on the service. If they did this they would control the market and keep out the competition. They could license and distribute the product alone. ONLY if a margin does exist. If the hardware is a loss leader (at this price point) it will get more sticky and ugly. Also it is not an open source system with respect to the BIOS. And the BIOS is all your really getting. You would take the BIOS (and BOOT ROM) and remove the existing turnkey application. It than becomes a modified (and turns it to your) Open source application. The real draw here is the $99 complete turnkey computer system hardware package. For the price of a good sound card you get a fully developed and integrated hardware package with installed OS. You have the ability (to some extent) to use many of the off the shelf Adonis because of the standard buss (I'm using this term very loosely) or hardware interface. Truth of the matter is; If you change out the IDE hard disk for one that is not supported by the BIOS and your in the dumper. BOOTP on ROM has a very limited space for the boot strap loader. Lookup tables take up a lot of space that is not available. We do four hard disks in the ST line and we only have 11 bytes left in the Flash for the current BIOS. If they do not publish the vector tables for this system it is not open source on the BIOS. Everything being standard and generic means all the added value will be in the software you provide after the existing application has been removed. That is unless you just intend to sell the hardware with no added value. If you add value and expect to add some expense to the core product; What will it be revalued at? If you start getting close to a $300 cost to the end user you will be competing with e-systems. The e-system will be the better value. How much margin do you figure is in the $99? Tom ----------------------------------------------------------------- dreamwvr wrote: > > hi, > thanks Jeff! it seems that a co that would change the > hardware to deter development with the exception of their own os. as a > planned move to prevent innovation by others should expect people to find > more acceptable route. since a traceroute of the from co in taiwan would > allow many to access the hardware without monopoly occuring this is > very acceptable IMHO. my co would love to distribute but the amount > of volume required 'most likely' will deter this.. Seems like this is a very > good solution for all open source oses. From experience in Linux since i > am fascinated with picoBSD but have yet get it to usable quality > for my co use. admittedly i am new to pico so this is no surprise .. > but do use OpenBSD so not entirely lost. oh well my plan was to > evaluate in the co lab. but until i can get a reliable open sourceable > supply am hooped. really do not consider the co that originally sold > this with their services a open co since their move. apparently they are > reconsidering so you never know but still if it is done once it could > just as easily occur again. Solution? go direct to the manufacturer > and buy enough units to make it worthwhile for them. then it remains > open as their is a business case for them. > Best Regards, > dreamwvr@dreamwvr.com > On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Jeff LeBlanc wrote: > > sounds like good thinking to me. ...and i thought the mention of this quite > > appropriate for posting on the list. i just wanted to express my support. > > > > have a good day, guys. > > > > -J > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?38F65D33.605397C6>