Page tree

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

We live in an increasingly automated world with complex interactions between the inventions we depend on, as well as those we merely enjoy using. The interactions (or interoperability) between these among devices depend largely on standardization efforts. However, to achieve interoperability between complex collections of machines such as cars, computers, appliances or even cities and homes deeper levels of agreed standards are needed. In the office setting, this has largely been resolved thanks to the widespread implementation of mostly the same common software across most companies, such as Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. These products represent an implementation of a closed architectural design that works with itself smoothly. Apple has a similar approach where design, testing, and support all comes from a single source. However, even in this environment issues have appeared when one company or department uses one product and another company or department uses the other. 

One example can be seen when using contact information and calendar reminders. At one time each both Microsoft and Apple devised their own methods to store and share these small bits of information needed to synchronize between users in the enterprise. This allows people working in different countries and time zones to all see the dates in their own format and timezone, yet it is stored in a standard format for exchange. Enterprises Enterprise users with mostly Microsoft Office, but a few people using Apple Macs, left the minority users in the cold until a standard agreed upon format was defined, developed, tested and implemented in the otherwise closed systems. The data format and API for this is now called vCard and vCal. Through its implementation, the enterprise users have the choice of device, operating system, and application. Now that tablets, phones, and even Linux PCs have been added to the enterprise, all they need to do is implement the standard. The result was born as Thus BYOD or Bring Your Own Device , was enabled and is now an enterprise IT expectation along with the implications of incorporating personal preferences by users to maximize productivity.

Recently the open source software model (OSS) has caught momentum as a way for hundreds of different companies to participate in the development of software design and code creation. This model not only includes a licensing philosophy that tries to remove costly barriers to participation but encourages the use of a common base of code with each software provider adding their unique value and licensing only these differences. Beginning in 2006 or so, automotive software development began to use this method to help manage the millions of lines of code needed to create a modern vehicle. The total number of cars heading to production is divided by at least ten automakers, often with hundreds of combinations of makes, model years and trim levels resulting in relatively small numbers of validation resources for each variation. This issue is driving car development and bugs to record levels, resulting in higher prices and costly recalls after the cars are on the road. Add in the concept of self-driving cars and safety automation features and the costs can be measured in both currency and lives. The collaborative model helps with this but still requires standardization to be useful.

...