QNX Sold!

[Evan_Hillas1]

Igor Kovalenko wrote:

While this deal is probably as good as it gets on this level, they could
have raised about as much in a well done IPO. Then remaining an independent
player they could have their dating game at a much higher level >

In a rush for growth it seems …
“Accepting a buyout offer was a means to build the necessary momentum
and acquire the financial resources to push its products into the market
against big players such as Microsoft Corp. faster than was possible by
going the route of a public offering, Mr. Dodge said.”

[Jutta_Steinhoff1]

Alec Saunders wrote:

“Jutta Steinhoff” <> j-steinhoff@web.de> > wrote in message
news:clrus1$su1$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …


BTW, I had a look to your homepage. I’ve never seen such an innovative
page for career opportunities, it’s a great idea !


Thanks. I can’t claim credit for the idea – I got it from a book. But it
seemed like such a good idea that we’ve adopted it for all our recruiting.

Anyway, it’s a very interessting idea to get reduced and more qualified
applications

Jutta

[Jutta_Steinhoff1]

ed1k wrote:

In article <cls1b1$1eb$> 1@inn.qnx.com> >, > alec@iotum.com > says…

“Jutta Steinhoff” <> j-steinhoff@web.de> > wrote in message
news:clrus1$su1$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …


BTW, I had a look to your homepage. I’ve never seen such an innovative
page for career opportunities, it’s a great idea !

Thanks. I can’t claim credit for the idea – I got it from a book. But it
seemed like such a good idea that we’ve adopted it for all our recruiting.



Hello Jutta, Alec:

Sorry for offtopic if this term’s applicable here, in cafe >

Where is that page (URL)?

Edik, have a look to Alec’s email address …
www.iotum.com

I’m just curious (don’t think there is any

windows programming stuff in my blood, I hate every OS I had worked
with, except QNX)

Cheers,
Eduard.

P.S. I think that deal is good for QSS but rather bad for QNX community
(things went from bad to worse > > )).

I don’t agree with you !!!

Regards,
Jutta

[Robert_Rutherford1]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:18:06 -0500, Igor Kovalenko wrote:

QNX might become just as vital for Harman,
but not for their competitors. Being locked into an independent OS vendor is
one thing, but being locked into an OS that belongs to some hardware
manufacturer is totally different story. This will rule out QNX for a lot of
people, unless they do something really smart with licensing policies.

I agree with Igor and really think this is the key point. I feel the
chances of QNX becoming “the de-facto standard” for automotive (or any
other industry segment in which Harman plays) are surely reduced by this
deal, not enhanced. Put yourself in the shoes of another manufacturer in
the automotive space. Why would you pick QNX when

• it puts money in the pocket of your competitor?
• it forces you to expose to your competitor, at least to some extent, your
  business and technical plans and forecasts?
• your competitor is going to have earlier and better access to new QNX
  technology and support, not to mention the ability to influence the
  direction of the OS?

It doesn’t matter how much QNX protests “independence”, this will be the
perception of large sections of the marketplace.

Good for Harman? Good for Dan/Gord? Good for QNX employees? All yes.

Good for the rest of us? Let’s wait and see.

Just my 2 Australian cents (so not worth much at all),

Rob Rutherford

[Armin_Steinhoff1]

Robert Rutherford wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:18:06 -0500, Igor Kovalenko wrote:


QNX might become just as vital for Harman,
but not for their competitors. Being locked into an independent OS vendor is
one thing, but being locked into an OS that belongs to some hardware
manufacturer is totally different story. This will rule out QNX for a lot of
people, unless they do something really smart with licensing policies.


I agree with Igor and really think this is the key point. I feel the
chances of QNX becoming “the de-facto standard” for automotive (or any
other industry segment in which Harman plays) are surely reduced by this
deal, not enhanced. Put yourself in the shoes of another manufacturer in
the automotive space. Why would you pick QNX when

• it puts money in the pocket of your competitor?

Have in mind that Harman operates in the product niche of audio and in
some extent video devices. Here are their competitors …

That means they will not compete with network, telematik or automation
companies and all vendors not delivering embedded devices to the
automotives. I beliefe that this ‘niche’ is much bigger than the
audio-video-automotive-niche

• it forces you to expose to your competitor, at least to some extent, your
  business and technical plans and forecasts?
• your competitor is going to have earlier and better access to new QNX
  technology and support, not to mention the ability to influence the
  direction of the OS?

True … but QSSL will offer here ‘advanced custome engineering’

It doesn’t matter how much QNX protests “independence”, this will be the
perception of large sections of the marketplace.

Good for Harman? Good for Dan/Gord? Good for QNX employees? All yes.

Good for the rest of us?

Good question … we will see how important will be revenues outsite of
the audio-video-automotive-niche for Harman/QSSL. Big questionmark …

Regards

Armin

[Alec_Saunders1]

Anyway, it’s a very interessting idea to get reduced and more qualified
applications >

Exactly – just one in five chooses to do the problem, and based on their
submission we know in advance the quality of work they do. It’s been very
effective.

A.

[Igor_Kovalenko2]

“Alec Saunders” <alec@iotum.com> wrote in message
news:clth0d$5n2$1@inn.qnx.com…

Anyway, it’s a very interessting idea to get reduced and more qualified
applications >

Exactly – just one in five chooses to do the problem, and based on their
submission we know in advance the quality of work they do. It’s been very
effective.

Lol. This game is known as ‘sea battle’ in Russia and is often played in
schools to kill time on boring lections
It is also played here, but i am not sure about the name. The problem is
trivial enough…

– igor

[ed1k2]

Jutta Steinhoff wrote:

Sorry for offtopic if this term\'s applicable here, in cafe >

Where is that page (URL)?

Edik, have a look to Alec\'s email address … >
www.iotum.com

Ah, thanks! I failed to recognize that is Alec\'s homepage. Now I
browsed the career section and found what you meant. IMO that\'s very
progressive idea and many ukrainian companies use that. At least, I had to
write some assembler code joining my last employer in Ukraine. I found it
funny, but from my experience, some (quite many) canadian graduates feel
offended by this hiring technique. Recently some companies practised that
simply tests at job fair in Waterloo region collecting resumes, almost all
local graduates prefered left their resumes to the other companies. BTW,
that kind of game is known as \“Sea Battle\” in xUSSR (was very
popular during school classes ). Sadly I have no experience with .NET
and probably solutions in plain C is not acceptable there ) Beside,
there is no dimension of grid (some kind of error could be \“outside of
grid\”) and it is unknown how some previous function placed the objects
on the grid (what is the method of storage that information). Returning
back to my story, I was given a schematic of real but very simple device
they manufactured (remote control pannel: MCU, 16-key keyboard and LED
display), so after looking through my code and satisfaction with
programming style, they compiled it and put into flash. They were looking
for 6 months to find someone whose code wasn\'t only elegant but
working, finally they found two persons in a day. They hired both Just
for reference, MCU was AVR 4414 and we worked with some DSP from TI,
barely touching the AVR code

P.S. I think that deal is good for QSS but rather bad for QNX community
(things went from bad to worse > > )).

I don\'t agree with you !!!

Yes, I know. Isn\'t it normal to have a different view? I don\'t think
they bought QSS jsut to save some money on licence fee and to have some
profit selling QNX RTOS. My completely guessing is that Harman has some
perspective projects which requires their expertise in their fields plus
some advanced and modern RTOS. Probably specific of projects require full
control over technology. I\'m analysing amounts of money put in that
deal mentioned elsewhere and… political situation in United States.
Putin already said who will be next president of Ukraine, and probably
there is already a very high odds who win election in USA. Therefore those
perspective projects looks more realistic then ever. Might be some risk
involved, but you can\'t buy something at reasonable price if everyone
knows you are rich and definetely need that. That means some next major
release of QNX would be far far away from people who use it now. This
isn\'t my beliefs, just some game of my insane fantasy
Eduard.

[Rennie_Allen2]

Robert Rutherford wrote:

I agree with Igor and really think this is the key point. I feel the
chances of QNX becoming “the de-facto standard” for automotive (or any
other industry segment in which Harman plays) are surely reduced by this
deal, not enhanced. Put yourself in the shoes of another manufacturer in
the automotive space. Why would you pick QNX when

• it puts money in the pocket of your competitor?
• it forces you to expose to your competitor, at least to some extent, your
  business and technical plans and forecasts?
• your competitor is going to have earlier and better access to new QNX
  technology and support, not to mention the ability to influence the
  direction of the OS?

Well that depends on whether Harman/QNX becomes one of the defacto platforms for automotive. The auto industry like to have 2 (maybe
3) large vendors to chose from. No one company will own the whole space, but one may own the larger share of the space (look at Moto
for instance, they supply the majority of auto silicon, but the auto mfgs keep a large enough market share for others to keep them
interested and moto honest). I can only assume that Dan and Gord feel that the Harman/QNX platform is going to be at least one of
these players if not the dominant player. This is a good solid base that provides the revenue and motivation to keep improving QNX.

It doesn’t matter how much QNX protests “independence”, this will be the
perception of large sections of the marketplace.

Well we are in the industrial automation space, and Harman has never competed with us and I see no reason they ever would. If
Harman/QNX dominates the automotive space it has little impact on us, other than potentially changing focus. Personally, I think the
auto space is going to be looking for high reliability with a reduced emphasis on featuritis, and that parallels well with the IA
space (and the medical space with which I am also familiar). If I didn’t see a single new feature in QNX for five years (only a
continuing increase in reliability and performance) I would be very happy.

Good for the rest of us? Let’s wait and see.

Well, I think for us the question is already answered, QNX will have more resources, and this can only be good.

Rennie

[Kris_Warkentin1]

Igor Kovalenko wrote:

Lol. This game is known as ‘sea battle’ in Russia and is often played in
schools to kill time on boring lections >
It is also played here, but i am not sure about the name. The problem is
trivial enough…

“Battleship”

cheers,

Kris

[Chris_Herborth1]

Igor Kovalenko wrote:

Lol. This game is known as ‘sea battle’ in Russia and is often played in
schools to kill time on boring lections >
It is also played here, but i am not sure about the name. The problem is
trivial enough…

It’s called “Battleship” in North America. I was going to whip
something up to solve it (hey, I’m a docs guy, I don’t get to do as much
programming as I’d like), but I’m too busy…

–
Chris Herborth (cherborth@qnx.com)
Never send a monster to do the work of an evil scientist.

[John_Nagle1]

This looks like the beginning of the end of QNX as
a usable real-time operating system.

Harman International does nothing but audio products.
“If it plays, records, or produces music, chances are it’s
a Harman product”. They don’t do industrial control systems.
They don’t do core automotive electronics. They don’t
do “it has to work” stuff. They’re expanding into car
video players and navigation systems, but those are
all basically accessory items.

This is key. If QNX had been sold to a company that
built core automotive systems, like braking, steering,
and engine control, that would be one thing. But Harman
only does non-core entertainment-type devices. If your
CD player crashes, it’s not a big deal. This implies
a huge change of focus.

QNX users involved in high-reliability systems that
control real hardware need to be looking for an
exit strategy. Big QNX users need to be talking about
code escrow and contractual protections. Hard real time
control is just too far from Harman’s core business areas.

It’s a sad ending for a great technology.

John Nagle

[Evan_Hillas1]

Don’t be so negative. Harman isn’t likely to stifle the development of
QNX, not after throwing so much money at it. And Dan is quoted as
saying the purpose of this is to accelerate things.

Harman’s direct interest will be “infotainment” both in and out of the
car. I don’t see why QNX can’t continue developing as an OS in parallel
with Harman’s other plans. Not to mention that QNX is already a solid
real-time OS but is more in need of other “featuritis”

[John_Nagle1]

I don’t like being that negative either. But realistically, one
has to expect a “redirection of the product” towards Harman’s
core business areas.

Look back at my posting a year from now and see if I was right.

John Nagle



Evan Hillas wrote:

Don’t be so negative. Harman isn’t likely to stifle the development of
QNX, not after throwing so much money at it. And Dan is quoted as
saying the purpose of this is to accelerate things.

Harman’s direct interest will be “infotainment” both in and out of the
car. I don’t see why QNX can’t continue developing as an OS in parallel
with Harman’s other plans. Not to mention that QNX is already a solid
real-time OS but is more in need of other “featuritis” >

[John_Halpenny1]

John Nagle wrote:

I don’t like being that negative either. But realistically, one
has to expect a “redirection of the product” towards Harman’s
core business areas.

Look back at my posting a year from now and see if I was right.

John Nagle

Evan Hillas wrote:
Don’t be so negative. Harman isn’t likely to stifle the development of
QNX, not after throwing so much money at it. And Dan is quoted as
saying the purpose of this is to accelerate things.

Harman’s direct interest will be “infotainment” both in and out of the
car. I don’t see why QNX can’t continue developing as an OS in parallel
with Harman’s other plans. Not to mention that QNX is already a solid
real-time OS but is more in need of other “featuritis” >

I found this interview with Sidney Harman that is a couple of years old,
but he sounds like an interesting guy.
http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=1034231

I too would have liked to see an independent Ottawa company, but if they
had to sell, this seems to be an excellent place to go.

John Halpenny


A cluttered desk is the sign of a cluttered mind.
I’m so glad my desk isn’t empty.

[Armin_Steinhoff1]

John Nagle wrote:

This looks like the beginning of the end of QNX as
a usable real-time operating system.

Harman International does nothing but audio products.
“If it plays, records, or produces music, chances are it’s
a Harman product”. They don’t do industrial control systems.
They don’t do core automotive electronics. They don’t
do “it has to work” stuff. They’re expanding into car
video players and navigation systems, but those are
all basically accessory items.

Hm … sound studios and broadcasting systems are accessory items??
No … these are complex systems! Your view is a little bit narrowed.

The analog technology for audio and video devices will be dead in few
years and will be replaced be intelligent digital devices for e.g.
digital radio and television systems.

This is key. If QNX had been sold to a company that
built core automotive systems, like braking, steering,
and engine control, that would be one thing.

I don’t believe that QNX is applicable for that low level
(still 16bit) microprocessor applications.

But Harman
only does non-core entertainment-type devices. If your
CD player crashes, it’s not a big deal. This implies
a huge change of focus.

Show me one low level motor control system working with QNX …

Software is more and more the CORE of complex audio/video systems.
An employee from Becker told me some years ago that their car audio
hardware could be considered as a ‘dongel’ for their embedded
software

That’s the reality and the reason why the control over this core
software technology is realy vital for Harman.

QNX users involved in high-reliability systems that
control real hardware need to be looking for an
exit strategy. Big QNX users need to be talking about
code escrow and contractual protections. Hard real time
control is just too far from Harman’s core business areas.

Digital broadcasting systems have STRONG requierements for hard
realtime! Just an example …

It’s a sad ending for a great technology.

No … I think it’s a great chance for QSSL.


Regards

Armin

John Nagle

[Chris_McKillop1]

Have in mind that Harman operates in the product niche of audio and in
some extent video devices. Here are their competitors …

That means they will not compete with network, telematik or automation
companies and all vendors not delivering embedded devices to the
automotives. I beliefe that this ‘niche’ is much bigger than the
audio-video-automotive-niche

Go take a look at who else Harman owns - specifically a company named
Becker (along with others such as Margi, WaveMakers, etc). They are one
of the top tier automotive hardware suppliers. Do not make the mistake
of ruling Harman to be a audio device maker.

chris

[Armin_Steinhoff1]

Chris McKillop wrote:

Have in mind that Harman operates in the product niche of audio and in
some extent video devices. Here are their competitors …

That means they will not compete with network, telematik or automation
companies and all vendors not delivering embedded devices to the
automotives. I beliefe that this ‘niche’ is much bigger than the
audio-video-automotive-niche


Go take a look at who else Harman owns - specifically a company named
Becker (along with others such as Margi, WaveMakers, etc). They are one
of the top tier automotive hardware suppliers. Do not make the mistake
of ruling Harman to be a audio device maker.

I was talking about Audio, Video and Automotive devices … as you can
read above.

Margi/Wavemakers is a single vendor producing presentation beamers ( a
kind of video application), which are using wireless connections. Do
they compete by these device with e.g. Cisco ??

Regards

Armin

chris

[Chris_McKillop1]

Armin Steinhoff wrote:

Chris McKillop wrote:



Have in mind that Harman operates in the product niche of audio and
in some extent video devices. Here are their competitors …

That means they will not compete with network, telematik or
automation companies and all vendors not delivering embedded devices
to the automotives. I beliefe that this ‘niche’ is much bigger than
the audio-video-automotive-niche


Go take a look at who else Harman owns - specifically a company named
Becker (along with others such as Margi, WaveMakers, etc). They are
one of the top tier automotive hardware suppliers. Do not make the
mistake of ruling Harman to be a audio device maker.


I was talking about Audio, Video and Automotive devices … as you can
read above.

I was just pointing out Telmatics - I totally agree about Automation and
Telecom (and Medical).

Margi/Wavemakers is a single vendor producing presentation beamers ( a
kind of video application), which are using wireless connections. Do
they compete by these device with e.g. Cisco ??

Margi used to make presentation things - that isn’t really what they do
anymore. Wavemakers does audio processing for things like hands-free
systems for in-car cellular systems. And no, neither would be going
after Cisco.

chris

[Mario_Charest1]

A customer I have (or had) following the announcement, decided to stopped
development of their QNX6 prototype and switch to another OS. I’m told
there were other factors as well but the selling of QSS seems to have
trigger the decision.

I guess QSS will loose some and win some, but maybe they need to be more
reasuring.

• Mario