Getting expertise for an ad hoc system is more obscure than getting service from an established vendor.
So who are likely users? Obviously organizations that can devote software engineering resources towards building a system to monitor ad hoc sensor systems.
So the first cost has to have a cost advantage for building over buying. And the lifetime costs of in house application maintenance have to be better than vendor service.
To put it another way, when is it low hanging fruit for software engineering resources? Including developer moral (thinking of what developers might rather be doing) and the clout of a physical plant managers to redirect engineering resources.
My comment is social and economic not technical. It is about the C-suite’s problems.
I'm still not sure I've fully understood you, but I think you're probably making some assumptions about the business model around this and how it would be deployed, whereas the blog post was just about the technical architecture.
I agree that it's easier for businesses to buy in a solution than try to develop something in-house. The intention is certainly not that commercial users of this operating system would need to write their own code. It is just one part of a wider commercial solution.
Perhaps that's my fault for sharing this outside of the context of the problems it is intended to solve and the wider business model around it.
Regardless, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
So who are likely users? Obviously organizations that can devote software engineering resources towards building a system to monitor ad hoc sensor systems.
So the first cost has to have a cost advantage for building over buying. And the lifetime costs of in house application maintenance have to be better than vendor service.
To put it another way, when is it low hanging fruit for software engineering resources? Including developer moral (thinking of what developers might rather be doing) and the clout of a physical plant managers to redirect engineering resources.
My comment is social and economic not technical. It is about the C-suite’s problems.
But I could be wrong.