editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Sensor Fusion: DIY or Turnkey?

Sensor fusion was the name of the game this year at Sensors Expo (especially the MIG pre-conference event). But at least two of the visible players in this space are going about it two different ways.

We’ve seen Movea moving in a direction of giving control to system designers through tools. The idea here is that a system integrator will pull sensors together and assemble custom fusion algorithms from building blocks. Key to the success of this model is the assumption that system integrators want to do this work themselves.

By contrast, Sensor Platforms has a business model that reflects a different view: system houses don’t really want to be bothered with sensor fusion and would rather a company steeped in the technology do it for them. So rather than delivering DIY tools, Sensor Platforms delivers turnkey custom fusion that is then used as is. Which is partly why you might not see as much of their marketing; it’s less of a product push per se.

Which raises a very interesting question: Is one of these guys completely wrong? Or, perhaps, is this a market thing? And if it’s a market thing, how does it play? On the one hand, you might see big OEMs doing the turnkey approach. After all, a company that can deliver turnkey algorithms is going to be enticed by the promise of big companies, and, if it’s a small company, it may not have the resources to go after the little guys. (Or it may simply spurn the little guys as unworthy of their time… Not saying this specifically about Sensor Platforms, but I’ve seen it in other companies from the inside.) That would leave the DIY approach for the smaller folks.

On the other hand, small companies are less likely to have resources to be monkeying with sensor fusion algorithms, and they might feel their time would be better spent if someone else did that (assuming that those algorithms didn’t constitute core defensible value). Big companies, on the other hand, have oodles of top-level algorithm guys with not enough to do. [Ducks as the shoes come flying.] Realistically, if any company could do it themselves, it would be the big ones.

So this is a question for you: which is it?

–          DIY is the only worthy approach?

–          Turnkey is the only worthy approach?

–          They both have a place? If this, then how does it split

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Feb 20, 2024
Graphics processing units (GPUs) have significantly transcended their original purpose, now at the heart of myriad high-performance computing applications. GPUs accelerate processes in fields ranging from artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to video editing and ...
Feb 15, 2024
This artist can paint not just with both hands, but also with both feet, and all at the same time!...

featured video

Shape The Future Now with Synopsys ARC-V Processor IP

Sponsored by Synopsys

Synopsys ARC-V™ Processor IP delivers the optimal power-performance-efficiency and extensibility of ARC processors with broad software and tools support from Synopsys and the expanding RISC-V ecosystem. Built on the success of multiple generations of ARC processor IP covering a broad range of processor implementations, including functional safety (FS) versions, the ARC-V portfolio delivers what you need to optimize and differentiate your SoC.

Learn more about Synopsys ARC-V RISC-V Processor IP

featured paper

How to Deliver Rock-Solid Supply in a Complex and Ever-Changing World

Sponsored by Intel

A combination of careful planning, focused investment, accurate tracking, and commitment to product longevity delivers the resilient supply chain FPGA customers require.

Click here to read more

featured chalk talk

Datalogging in Automotive
Sponsored by Infineon
In this episode of Chalk Talk, Amelia Dalton and Harsha Medu from Infineon examine the value of data logging in automotive applications. They also explore the benefits of event data recorders and how these technologies will shape the future of automotive travel.
Jan 2, 2024
7,162 views