Bob, that's a brave attempt at an alternative explanation. Here are the problems with it:
"I believe that NRI produced [HA-API] just to get a standard out there to get biometrics rolling."
You mean, they invested their time and limited resources just to help the biometrics industry as a whole? That makes them altruists, and from the press releases that followed HA-API's introduction, I didn't get the impression NRID was promoting this approach for other companies. No -- what was in it for NRID? That's the only relevant question.
"You see, some companies wanted to use biometrics, but did not want to be 'locked in' to the hardware provider. With an API language underneath, companies could buy any hardware they wanted and not have to worry about compatibility issues."
That is true. OEMs want commodity suppliers and therefore favor API development. Of course, the problem with your theory is that the OEMs (Compaq, IBM) put together the BioAPI alliance. It doesn't seem like NRID was acting as the agent for OEMs when the OEMs themselves compete with NRID's API. Further, you overlook the DoD commissioning role in HA-API's development. HA-API emphasizes coordinating different types of biometrics in individual applications, which is just the kind of deal that a high security clientele would want to see, but almost certainly overkill for commercial applications. So, I would conclude that HA-API was helpful to DoD, but wasn't what OEMs had in mind.
"As to why it took so long; negotiations." There's no reason why these particular negotiations were complex enough to justify the delay in reaching an agreement. Here's the final deal: BioAPI absorbs HA-API without leaving hardware suppliers with a legacy problem, and removes various classes of participants. You'd think that willing parties could get there in a day of negotiations. I think NRID held out for its proprietary solution, for the reasons I've previously posted. Otherwise, you have to believe this simple deal took a year to get done.
Finally, we do agree that NRID can now compete in the wider markets. Just like, say, Brown University can compete and hope to win the college basketball NCAA tournament next year. As a famous sportswriter once wrote, the race is not always to the swift, nor the fight to the strongest -- but that's the way to bet. |
