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
May 19, 2019
https://youtu.be/cTEPUNpqcRg Made at Samsung HQ (camera Sean) Monday: Bob Smith on ESD Alliance, ES Design West...with Wine Tuesday: After Meltdown and Spectre Wednesday: Vision Q7 DSP: Real-Time... [[ Click on the title to access the full blog on the Cadence Community site....
May 17, 2019
The Design Automation Conference (DAC) is the premier conference for automated electronics design and verification technology. For 2019, DAC returns to sunny Las Vegas, Nevada at the Las Vegas Convention Center from June 2-5, 2019. We'€™ve packed each day full of exciting ...
May 17, 2019
In the days of old we looked into the “green” for guidance on how much further down into the world of miniaturization we could go. What is the green you ask? I am talking about the substrate that has served us all well for many years; the PCB. We are at a crossroa...
Jan 25, 2019
Let'€™s face it: We'€™re addicted to SRAM. It'€™s big, it'€™s power-hungry, but it'€™s fast. And no matter how much we complain about it, we still use it. Because we don'€™t have anything better in the mainstream yet. We'€™ve looked at attempts to improve conven...