SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Wind River going up, up, up! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Allen Benn who wrote (8559)9/28/2000 10:55:48 AM
From: Ramsey Su  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10309
 
Is this the real Allen Benn or some shameless cheerleader? <ggggg>

When are we going to take those lily pads to the market and exchange them for some real money?

Ramsey



To: Allen Benn who wrote (8559)9/29/2000 9:54:46 AM
From: Knight  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 10309
 
Allen,

The the article link Daniel Willert posted last night started me thinking some more about the whole Linux/"open source" issue. A few months back I seem to recall your mentioning the Linux open source issue WRT WIND and then saying something like "I'll be providing some more detail on that later." I (and I'm sure others on the thread) would really value your focused analysis/feedback in this area. (If you've already posted such an analysis and I missed it, please forgive me.)

Would also appreciate any feedback you (or others on the thread) could provide on my "stream of consciousness" musings on this topic below.

My musings:

A major flaw I see in the "open source" argument is the alleged "vendor independence" it provides. In order to have true vendor independence, customers need to have not only an open source OS, but also open source tools and layered applications. Once customers become dependent on a single Linux vendor's tools and layered applications (or particular integration thereof), it seems to me that they're still "locked in" to that vendor--regardless of the fact that the OS is "open source." Of course, a customer could conceivably remain completely vendor-independent if they insisted on building their products only on "open source" tools. But then the questions that arise are: (1) Which open source tools/layered apps should I use?; (2) Which open source tools/layered apps will "win" and which will end up languishing without support? (3) How do I ensure that the tools I selected work together? The answer (according to Linux vendors) is "let us handle that." But then, that just leads to an additional question: Which Linux vendor should I choose? The answer to that question is (of course): "the one that's going to win in the marketplace and, therefore, won't go away in a few years leaving me with no support (or only informal support through the open source community)". But isn't this the same question that customers are also asking about the other (non-Linux) embedded OS vendors? If so, then what's the real benefit of going with on "open source" OS? The main "benefit" I see is that the customer does still own the source code and can still leverage the benefits that the open source community contributes. However, I would argue that that benefit is not as great as it seems because of the following unknowns for the customer: (1) Will the open source community continue to support all the components I've chosen for my product even after (in Steven Stolper's words) "the programmer graduates from college"? (2) Even though I have the source code, will I really want to use my precious resources to do anything with it?

All the above leads to what I think are perhaps the two most important questions for embedded OS customers: Which of these company has the best business model to support a stable, long-term business? Among the non-Linux embedded players, WIND is emerging as the clear winner. Among the Linux embedded players, the jury is still out on a market leader. So the choice really is between:

1) A market-leading proprietary OS vendor with a rapidly expanding value chain, high barriers to entry, and a revenue stream based on both royalties and services.

2) One of "a basket full" of Linux players whose R&D is performed largely by an informal "open source" community, but with low barriers to entry and a services-only based revenue stream (unless they put in proprietary value-add, thus violating the "open source" ethos which they so fervently tout).



To: Allen Benn who wrote (8559)10/1/2000 1:16:07 PM
From: Mkilloran  Respond to of 10309
 
Wind River embedded software in settop boxes for digital tv
broadcast, etc should do very well in the field over the next several years.

55.1% of US homes to have digital by 2003

New Report Sees Subscriptions to Cable Broadband Internet Access Increasing Five-Fold by 2003,

Predicts Digital Cable Video Penetration Will More Than Triple
During Same Period

Total High-Speed Access by 2003: 36.1% of all U.S. households

Myers Reports' Cable Digital & Broadband Report Examines
Future of Cable Industry Technology

NEW YORK, Sept. 27 /PRNewswire/ -- A report issued today by a leading
media industry forecaster predicts that cable broadband Internet penetration
will grow to 16.9% of U.S. households by 2003, a more than five-fold increase
over 2000 levels (3.1%). The report says that digital cable video penetration
will stand at 33.2% of U.S. households in 2003, up from 9.5% in 2000.
Forecasts in The Cable Digital Broadband Report, compiled by Myers
Reports, Inc., are based on a survey conducted in June and July among cable
system executives, as well as other available data. The report provides
information on the current status of cable system technology and which
technologies and services cable operators will deploy in the future.
The report forecasts that cable broadband Internet penetration will reach
18 million households by 2003. Myers' year-by-year projections for cable
broadband show steady growth over the next three years:

Cable Broadband Households/% of U.S. HH

2000 3.2 million/3.1%
2001 6.2 million/5.9%
2002 12.6 million/12.0%
2003 18 million/16.9%

Factoring in high-speed access offered by providers other than cable, the
report predicts that 36.1% of all U.S. households will have high-speed access
by 2003.

Similarly, the Myers' forecast says that Digital Cable Video Penetration
will experience rapid growth through 2003:

Digital Cable Video Households/% of U.S. HH

2000 9.8 million/9.5%
2001 18 million/17.3%
2002 26.4 million/25.0%
2003 35.4 million/33.2%

The report goes on to say that, when factoring in satellite distributors,
total digital video penetration will reach 55.1% of all U.S. households by
2003.
''This forecast underscores the point that there is a large digital
platform being created for programmers, advertisers, e-commerce retailers,
interactive services, telephony and other applications,'' said Jack Myers,
chief economist, Myers Reports, Inc. ''However, cable operators must step up
their commitments to broadband, digital and interactive distribution or be
faced with aggressive competition from satellite distributors. Today, cable
operators have a distinct marketplace advantage, which will quickly erode if
they do not fulfill their mandate to provide consumers with access to new
technologies.''

Survey Results
According to Myers' Technology Survey of Cable Operators, cable operator
respondents revealed that 90% of passed homes will have access to digital
services by the end of this year. By 2003, operators expect 95% of passed
cable households to have digital access.
Operators said that approximately 17% of cable households will have
digital set-top boxes by the end of 2000. By 2003, operators expect this
figure to increase to 48% (The Myers' projections, as percentages of the cable
hh universe, are 14.5% for 2000 and 49.6% for 2003).
When asked about cable modem availability, operators said that 27% of
cable households would have access to cable modems by the end of 2000. By
2003, this figure is expected to rise to 93%. Actual cable modem usage will
stand at 7% of total cable households by the end of this year, increasing to
29% by 2003, according to the cable operators (Myers: 4.7% actual cable modem
penetration of cable hh for 2000; 25.2% for 2003).
More than half of respondents (56%) said they work at cable systems with
plant/system capacity of 750MHz of higher, a level that is regarded as
providing adequate bandwidth of advanced cable services. More than half (53%)
are currently upgrading their plant, while 30% report their plant is fully
built and 15% plan to upgrade within the next two years.
The survey was conducted online and by mail in June and July among a
nationwide sample of cable operators with a technology orientation.

About Myers Reports, Inc.
Since 1981, Myers Reports, Inc. has been an influential market resource,
respected for its market research, accurate industry forecasts, advocacy
positions on major media issues, and leadership in identifying business
trends. Myers Reports, Inc. publishes economic research reports for
investment decisions related to the media industry. The Myers Report daily
newsletter and Myers MediaEnomics Reports are developed through extensive
primary and secondary research, and serve a constituency of media company
executives, investors, advertising agencies and marketers.

SOURCE Myers Reports, Inc.