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
Nov 15, 2019
As we seek to go faster and faster in our systems, heat grows as does the noise from the cooling fans. It is because of this heat and noise, many companies are investigating or switching to submersible cooling (liquid immersion cooling) options. Over the last few years, subme...
Nov 15, 2019
Electronic design is ever-changing to adapt with demand. The industry is currently shifting to incorporate more rigid-flex circuits as the preferred interconnect technology for items that would otherwise be off-board, or require a smaller form factor. Industries like IoT, wea...
Nov 15, 2019
"Ey up" is a cheery multi-purpose greeting that basically means "Hello" and "Hi there" and "How are you?" and "How's things?" all rolled into one....
Nov 15, 2019
[From the last episode: we looked at how intellectual property helps designers reuse circuits.] Last week we saw that, instead of creating a new CPU, most chip designers will buy a CPU design '€“ like a blueprint of the CPU '€“ and then use that in a chip that they'€™re...
Nov 15, 2019
Last week , I visited the Cadathlon@ICCAD event at the 2019 International Conference on Computer Aided Design . It was my first CADathlon and I was quite intrigued , since the organizers webpage... [[ Click on the title to access the full blog on the Cadence Community site. ...