[Embedlets-developer] Wiring Tool, Legos, PLCs, PICs, etc.
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
tkosan
|
From: Ted K. <tk...@ya...> - 2003-02-01 10:45:55
|
Assertion 1: Without graphic assembly capabilities, Embedlets *don't* have a market. Assertion 2: With graphic assembly capabilities, Embedlets have access to a significant number of huge markets. I can amply support both of these assertions. The premise that Embedlets alone (without state-of-the-art graphic assembly capabilities) have a reasonable chance for success, can easily be proven to be *false*. Here are the reasons for this. Reason 1) The only market that Embedlets *without* graphic wiring capabilities can be targeted toward is *Embedded* Java programmers. So how many of us are there? Lets check the numbers on the Embedded Java lists: JStamp list - 333 members. JStik list - 64 members. TStamp_TStik list - 100 members. TINI list - estimated < 2000 members. Extrapolating from these numbers one can (very generously) estimate that there are probably <10,000 Embedded Java programmers in the whole world at this point in time. In addition to the existing number of Embedded Java programmers being very small ,the rate of new programmers entering the Embedded Java group is equally small (see #3). After looking at these extremely small numbers, one must ask how do Embedlets enable this very small and slowly growing group to attain success with Embedded Java that they could not do with just regular Embedded Java? And the ruthless answer is Not very much. TINIs have been around since 1999. If Embedded Java was going to succeed in the marketplace using conventional marketing techniques, then TINI would have been a commercial success by now. To date it has not been a commercial success. The primary reason for this is that Enterprise Java developers have no where near the background needed to successfully deal with the Embedded Space and they never will. 2) Trying to market Embedlets as a programming technology to primarily enterprise developers (including enterprise Java developers) is a flawed strategy that will fail. What capabilities do Embedlets offer an Enterprise Java developer that normal Embedded Java does not offer them? Answer: Not much. Again, TINIs have been around for over 3 years now and they are very easy to attach to enterprise systems. If Enterprise Java developers were going to take an interest in Embedded Java they would have already done so already with TINIs. Embedlets without Graphic Wiring capabilities do not bring anything significant to the table that normal Embedded Java does not already offer. Every piece of my input into the brainstorming process has centered around the goal of finding markets for embedded Java through allowing *non-programmers* (this is where 90% of the market is) to construct useful embedded system solutions using graphic embedded component assembly techniques. I have consistently stated that my most likely *initial* target market for graphically wired Embedlets were the legion of non-programmer IT support personnel who are present in all medium and large size companies. The enterprise Java programmers were primarily a back door strategy for marketing graphically wired embedded systems to these IT personnel. To say that Embedlets are only *for* solving problems in the enterprise space is just as suspect as Sun stating that Java was only *for* solving problems in the Embedded Space in the early 1990s. Thinking about a technology in terms of what it is *for* is an extremely dangerous and limiting mindset to have. A much better way to think about any given technology is in terms of what it can *do*. Show any given group what a technology can *do* and they will figure out all by themselves what to use it *for* in their respective domains. The best chance that Embedlets have of succeeding is for us to show as many diverse groups as possible what Embedlets can *do* and let them take it from there. (shirky.com). 3) The size of the Embedded Java programmer group is very small, it is growing at a snails pace and so it is going to be small for a very long time. This I can attest to from direct experience. When TINI cam out in 1999 I put together a free online Java/1-Wire/TINI class for it which lasted 12 weeks. Over 400 people took this course and I followed it up with a free online Java/iTV course which had 600 people sign up for it (javadevices.org/dtcourse). I am currently in the process of putting together a free Java/TINI/TStik course for the new Systronix TStik and a free Java/uVM course for the new PIC based muvium (muvium.com). Beyond this I gave a Java/TINI BOF session at JavaOne last year and I put together a compelling proposal to OReilly for an Embedded Java Beginner's book (which they utterly rejected on the grounds that Embedded Java was a non-existent market). I was also part of a team that was a finalist in last year's Visa Blue SmartCard programming contest and after this I submitted a proposal to teach a free Java/SmartCard class to Gemplus users. So, after working extremely hard for years to increase the size of the Embedded Java developer pool I can confidently state that it is going to happen *very* slowly and it is going to be an uphill battle every centimeter of the way. I now know the reasons for this but we do not need to go into them here. To summarize, Servlets, EJBs, JavaBeans... these technologies are wildly successful because the pool of developers that use them is in the *millions*. Embedlets without graphic wiring capabilities are going to *fail without question* due to the simple fact that the Embedded Java developer pool is estimated to be < 10,000 and it is growing very slowly. Almost anything marketed to a target market that is this small will very likely fail. Refute this conclusion if you can but you better have evidence to back up your position. ARE THERE MARKETS FOR EMBEDDED JAVA? Yes! Lots of them and they are huge! But the only way Embedded Java is going to gain access to these markets is by not requiring them to learn how to program in Embedded Java. At this point in time the best way we have to realize this is by giving Embedlets state-of-the-art graphic wiring capabilities. To me, the most important thing I have learned from all the brainstorming we have done on the Embedlets idea is that *Embedded Java's primary strength is that it is the best technology in the world for the task of protocol neutralization* (which was Gregg's insight). Embedlets represent the best technology we could think of to capitalize on this strength. So, Embedlets are - A Camelot 'round table' that allows diverse technologies and communities to be brought together for a common purpose. - An airport terminal that allows data from multiple sources to be routed to multiple destinations. - A United Nations which allows different languages using diverse protocols to work together to solve mutual problems. - A benevolent Borg which accommodates and assimilates wildly diverse technologies into a collective that can leverage the laws of synergy. The best chance that Embedlets have to fulfill this roll is by providing a way for extremely diverse market segments to be able to easily use them for solving their domain specific problems. Currently, the most promising technology we have for enabling this is graphic assembly of software components (Embedlets). Here are some low hanging fruit markets that graphic assembly Embedlets has access to: - PIC programmers (huge group of non-Java developers). - 8051 programmers (huge group non-Java developers). - AVR programmers (huge group of non-Java developers). - PLC programmers (huge group of non-Java developers). - Non-Programmer IT personnel (millions of members). - Lego Mindstorms programmers (huge group of non-Java programmers). - etc. The only way I can see that the small number of Embedded Java programmers can possibly support such an enormous combined market is by developing reusable Embedlet components that this large group can use to graphically wire together their own solutions to their respective problems. There just simply are not enough of us to directly service this combined market by directly programming these solutions ourselves (again, anyone who thinks they can refute this claim will need to show their numbers). As for the assertion that graphic assembly of applications does not work, the large Lego Mindstorms user base easily refutes this claim. It obviously *does* work and is quite *successful* even when allowing for the fact that there is still much room for improvement in this area. In conclusion. I absolutely agree that a well architected Embedlet specification is extremely important to the Embedlets effort. I also maintain, however, that giving Embedlets state-of-the-art graphic wiring capabilities, and then marketing these capabilities to any and all markets that could potentially use them, is *equally* as important for Embedlets to succeed. I will take Bruce's following response to the idea of Embedlets having graphic wiring capabilities as an indication that I am not quite ready to be sent off to the 'funny farm' just yet: ;-) >Yes [...] yes [...] yes! [...] Yes [...] Yes [...] YES!!! Ted __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com |