The vendors absolutely need to differentiate their products with “value-add.” The issue in my mind is how they differentiate. I would rather they differentiate on features that really are a value-add rather than simply proprietary lock-in that provides little to no value except for the fact that all the vendors’ products are compatible with each other. I would argue that standards provide consumers leverage by giving us the ability to switch vendors more easily. This compels the vendors to be even more innovative and more price competitive to retain customers than if they are relying upon high switching costs.
And while I agree that standards often involve frustrating political posturing by vendors, and often take too long, many useful standards have evolved out of this process that have served us quite well. I’m sure we could all name a couple of dozen pretty easily. The more consumers demand standards, make noise, delay purchases or switch vendors until there is true compatibility, the more likely it is that vendors will respond and provide more than simply lip service and political posturing. Pete Morrissey From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mark Duling Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 11:49 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Trying to get the Wi-Fi Alliance's Attention My thoughts too. I'm not sure how much we an complain about vendors seeking ways to differentiate their products with a unique "value-add". Because a vendor's value-add is nothing other than their reason for being. If there is nothing they bring to the table that everyone else doesn't, then they should find something else to do. I think it was Donald Knuth that once said the great thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. Expecting vendor interoperability beyond a certain basic level seems to me to be a form of idealism. Not actually desirable in the real world as we know it, and only so in our minds. We wouldn't like it even if we got it. Isn't there an old joke about looking for a woman with intelligence, beauty, and money? On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Bruce Boardman <board...@syr.edu<mailto:board...@syr.edu>> wrote: This is no different from any interoperable standard (SNMP is 20 years old and still doesn't manage much). It's always the lowest common denominator, leaving the vendors 'value-add' out. When an advanced feature gets added, it's advanced only in age. Vendors participation in standards bodies is for the marketing check box, not Kumbaya and World Peace. But don’t fret, that sort of SOP is job security man! Bruce Boardman Networking Syracuse University 315 412-4156<tel:315%20412-4156> -----Original Message----- From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>] On Behalf Of Julian Y Koh Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 4:45 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Trying to get the Wi-Fi Alliance's Attention On Thu Jan 22 2015 13:47:18 CST, Lee H Badman <lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu>> wrote: > > I know self-promotion is in poor taste, but wanted to share this > > http://www.networkcomputing.com/wireless-infrastructure/the-case-for-wlan-interoperability/a/d-id/1318718? > I think you’ve earned the right for a little self-promotion, Lee. :) Although you also deserve a bit of mocking for the use of “Class C subnet.” :):):) -- Julian Y. Koh Acting Associate Director, Telecommunications and Network Services Northwestern University Information Technology (NUIT) 2001 Sheridan Road #G-166 Evanston, IL 60208 847-467-5780<tel:847-467-5780> NUIT Web Site: <http://www.it.northwestern.edu/> PGP Public Key:<http://bt.ittns.northwestern.edu/julian/pgppubkey.html> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
