[Embedlets-developer] Lego, markets, disruption, trade shows 2003, etc

[Bruce B. <bb...@sy...>]

At 02:46 AM 2/1/2003 -0800, 
emb...@li... wrote:
Ted and Bruce chat:

> > >I suppose that if the graphical wiring aspect of Embedlets were done right
> > >(which is an extremely high priority item on my personal goals list) then
> > >it is
> > >conceivable that Embedlets might prove to be a good candidate for the next
> > >generation of Lego Mindstorms programming technology.
> >
> > Yes yes yes!
>
>Since our target was business usage, I am a bit hesitant about tackling Lego
>Mindstorms activities with the Embedlets project.  It might damage our
>credibility for "real world" applications, which we first set out to address.

That's OK, I wasn't suggesting that embedlets change direction. We're 
addressing the "advanced" Lego market for a a variety of business and 
technical reasons which don't have to share much - or anything - with your 
reasons for embedlets.


>I think that while the Lego system has ties to the toy industry which may be
>viewed as less than industrial strength by some  the Mindstorm platform
>seems to be a pretty good, low cost platform to prototype and demonstrate
>new ideas, especially in wireless, location aware devices, robotics and
>educational areas.

Bingo! Chris has got it.

>AND
>
>Lego could be a substantial supporter/sponsor of the Embedlet standard if it
>was proven to be easy enough to deploy at the entry level.

Don't hold your breath for this one. Lego is *huge* and JCX/Systronix is 
not even on their radar screen. We're smaller than a speck on their 
windshield. I don''t mean this pejoratively at all. The Lego folks probably 
get letters every day from well-intentioned people who think they have the 
greatest idea since sliced bread. Lego is very focused and exceptionally 
good at what they do, and they can't get too sidetracked from that.

It's more likely that the eduational arm of Lego, Pitsco-Legodacta (what 
does that name mean?) http://www.pitsco-legodacta.com/ might be interested 
in some of this, but only when it's demonstrable. Great ideas are about $1 
per 1000.

>Come to think of it I wouldn't mind sitting at my desktop using a browser to
>monitor a lego robot as it looks for the cat...

This summer if all goes well, you will be able to do just that.

>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).

I would recommend the book "The Innovator's Dilemma"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0875845851/qid=1044159725/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_2/102-9445003-7535349?v=glance&s=books

Summary: you can't reasonably view a new, 'disruptive' technology from the 
perspective of the status quo. Well, you can, but 90% of the time you will 
come to the wrong conclusions. That's the premise of this book, based on 
case studies of new technologies with which we are all familiar.

After talking to several hundred developers at trade shows the last four 
years, thousands of emails, etc, and being one of the "status quo" 
developers (C, assy, traditional 8- to 32- bit embedded micros) I have 
changed my ideas about marketing embedded Java. I could (a) be completely 
wrong, and (b) I'd rather discuss this over drinks, and (c) I don't want to 
share my theories with the world -- so I won't say more here.

>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.

Here's where Ted and I are going different directions (but still working 
together on some of the same goals). I just don't have a clue at the moment 
how to market to this group of folks, but I think it's good that Ted and 
others are thinking about them.

>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.

"All" it would take to break through this inertia is some very compelling 
applications. There are some we are aiming at and should have shipping by 
summer 2003. Will they be the killer app we are seeking? Dunno.

>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.

But what about the success of tools like Ant that *do* require people to 
think and program in new ways? The secret here, I think, is that Ant meets 
a need which is not addressed by any other solution. In other words, it's 
very compelling.

>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.

Dinner sometime is the best place to get me to discuss this.  I don't share 
the same perspective. But I could be wrong.

I'll go back to lurking now, for a while, at least. One parting thought:

Get something working ASAP and get it into the hands of users. Almost every 
time we have done so, the users have led us in an unexpected direction. You 
just can't get very far theorizing, you have to implement and then listen 
to what people say, and interpret that into what they mean, then try to 
deliver that. Then keep iterating until you get there. See this book: 
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471292524/qid=1044161150/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9445003-7535349?v=glance&s=books

Or put another way "the difference between theory and practice, while small 
in theory, is large in practice".

There are a number of high profile embedded companies I've been more or 
less following who have each burned through upwards of $50 million in 
venture funding and still have no clear market or customer base. They've 
had several detailed roadmaps in the last five years. Tons of PR and glitzy 
marketing. Problem was, no one wanted to go where they were leading. It's 
interesting and potentially educational to try to understand where they 
failed and why.

On the other hand look at Rational and TogetherSoft. Why have they 
succeeded so well and been able to cash out very profitably even in a down 
economy?

(More dinner topics).

So one really, final, parting shot. The big tradeshows for us are ESC West 
in SFO April 23-25:
http://cmp.iconvention.com/sf/v33/index.cvn?id=10008&stab=2

and JavaOne also in SFO, June 10-13:
http://servlet.java.sun.com/javaone/sf2003/home/index.en.jsp

We have booths reserved at both the above.

We might also do the embedded east show in BOS Sep 15-18
http://esconline.com/boston/

So I'd encourage you all to try to have something to show at each of these. 
We can discuss providing some space in our booth when the time gets closer 
and the product gets "realer".

Let me know if there is anything reasonable Systronix can do to help. For 
now, we'll provide some of the hardware blocks for you to wrap code around.

Bruce