On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 11:20:55PM -0400, Jack Carroll wrote: > On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 10:38:19PM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote: > > On 5/13/06, Jack Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Of course, I'm _not_ suggesting that anything should be done about > > >this now. The project has to stay on course and implement the decisions > > >already made, if it's to get anywhere. But this might be something to look > > >into down the road, maybe when setting goals for OGA2 or OGA3. > > > > If we have an open design that the military can fully verify, they > > might get spoiled and start requiring it, giving us a corner on that > > market. > > That could get us into DO-254 project discipline, which I understand > is pretty near impossible to implement after a design is done. There's also > the weighty matter of building parts that meet military environmental and > reliability specs. But one of the best ways of getting military contractors > to sit up and take notice is to find a way to commit to a production life of > 25 years. Heck, start of design to start of production alone takes 10 to 15 > times the typical production life of computer parts. And then there's the > B-52: first flew in 1953, planned to continue in service at least until > 2040.
Also think about medical equipment. I was thinking a while back that if one had a system that could be fully formally verified, from the hardware on up, that would be the perfect open-source business model. For the 1% of the market that cares about verification, you have a lock on the market. For the 99% that doesn't care about verification, you get all those people testing your stuff and giveing you new ideas and code you can work into the next verified release. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
