|
|
Applications -
Automation Business -
Communications -
Engineering Practices -
HMI -
Information Resources -
LinuxPLC Project -
Motion Control -
Open Control -
PCs in Automation -
Plant Networking -
PLCs -
Programming Languages -
Process Control -
Sensors -
Software
Re: Why is the Automation market declining?
Sep 19, 2000 1:14 pm, by Ken Crater
Text :
Jim said:
>Farming, which once employed a major segment
>of the population, now employs less than 2% in
>the US; there are few rich and innovative American
>farmers.
Hmm, I think that the *percentage* of U.S. farmers who are rich and/or innovative is at its highest point ever. As a *result* of this, we need far fewer of them. This, folks, is what *success* looks like, not failure. Think of all those former farmers who have now been freed up to build computers and surf the web .
The automation market is a bit of a different case. I think it is becoming highly segmented and specialized, hence the proliferation of companies, products and technologies. To a major supplier, this looks like stagnation (and, to them, indeed it is). It also looks like stagnation to analysts, for whom only the major suppliers are visible.
But, in aggregate, it is anything but market stagnation. It more closely resembles the chaos described by Thomas Kuhn in his "Structure of Scientific Revolutions", in the period between when an old theory/technology is exhibiting its limits and when a new theory/technology becomes accepted. People cast about for new ideas, many different approaches are tried, and ultimately one or more of these new ideas come to the fore.
I wonder what the automation market will look like 20 years from now?
Regards to all,
Ken Crater, President
Control.com Inc.
ken@control.com
Reply
-
Re: Why is the Automation market declining?
Sep 22, 2000 7:57 am, by Jim Pinto
Ken Crater mentions :
>I think that the *percentage* of U.S. farmers who are rich and/or
>innovative is at its highest point ever. As a *result* of this, we need
far
>fewer of them. This, folks, is what *success* looks like, not failure.
Jim Pinto responds :
Yes, indeed !
Fewer farmers feed the country, with a surplus!
Ken :
>Think of all those former farmers who have now been freed up to build
>computers and surf the web .
Jim :
This is happening in a big way in most countries.
The sons of the scions of farming are the owners of successful technology companies!
Ken :
>The automation market is a bit of a different case. I think it is
becoming
>highly segmented and specialized, hence the proliferation of companies,
>products and technologies. To a major supplier, this looks like
stagnation
>(and, to them, indeed it is). It also looks like stagnation to analysts,
>for whom only the major suppliers are visible.
Jim :
Ken makes a key point. When the dinosaurs stagnate, the little companies innovate and prosper.
Ken :
>I wonder what the automation market will look like 20 years from now?
Jim :
Totally different ! And the prospect is indeed exciting! Reflect on the change in the computer business in the past 20 years - from domination by IBM main-frames, to CISCO and SUN.
Cheers:
jim
----------/
Jim Pinto
email : jim@jimpinto.com
web: www.JimPinto.com
San Diego, CA., USA
----------/
Reply
-
Re: Why is the Automation market declining?
Sep 20, 2000 3:32 pm, by Seib, Larry
On 15 Sep 00, at 18:34, Ken Crater wrote:
> Jim said:
> >Farming, which once employed a major segment
> >of the population, now employs less than 2% in
> >the US; there are few rich and innovative American
> >farmers.
>
> Hmm, I think that the *percentage* of U.S. farmers who are rich and/or
> innovative is at its highest point ever. As a *result* of this, we need far
> fewer of them. This, folks, is what *success* looks like, not failure.
> Think of all those former farmers who have now been freed up to build
> computers and surf the web .
Productivity has certainly increased. The U.S. has been able to grow much more than its population needs for many decades now. However most nations have a great fear of becomeing dependant on others for food, and thus they heavily subsidize their farmers. Such was the case here in the U.S.for many years, but recently it has been dramatically reduced. Many farms are now corporate, and there are still many
struggling to survive. It is difficult to sell grain to a country when your competition is heavily subsidized, while you are not.
Larry Seib, lseib@kuh8b.cc.ukans.edu
Lawrence Seib
Director
X-ray Laboratory
The University of Kansas
Malott Hall
Lawrence Kansas 66045
Phone (785) 864-4347
LSeib@kuhub.cc.ukansas.edu
Reply
-
Re: Why is the Automation market declining?
Sep 20, 2000 2:11 pm, by Walt Boyes
An astute observation, Ken.
This is not the first time this has happened in the automation industry either. It seems to go in about 30-35 year cycles. First there is
consolidation of big companies, accompanied by stagnation. Then some little startups come up with a biig idea, like, oh, a really good differential pressure transmitter, for example (Rosemount) and they start out in somebody's garage, but they grow. We are in the third such wave of ferment in the automation industry.
Walt Boyes
Reply
-
Re: Why is the Automation market declining?
Sep 21, 2000 5:04 pm, by Matthew da Silva
Good points, both.
Walt boyes said:
Then some little startups come up with a biig idea, like, oh, a really good differential
pressure transmitter, for example (Rosemount) and they start out in somebody's garage, but they grow.
And, don't forget that those guys who started Rosemount were former Honeywell employees who took off to recycle their intellectual property in
an environment more conducive to experimentation. Same thing happened in Australia Honeywell where the Plantscape system was designed. It would have
been tough to try developing such a system in the U.S. due to corporate internal tensions; but it could happen in an affiliate remote from the
center. This leads nicely into Ken Crater's quoting of Tom Kuhn's seminal work, a stunning essay describing the mechanisms surrounding advances in science. He points out that change is the exception rather than the rule. The 'rule' is for existing paradigms to be exercised to the maximum of their capacity. In the systematic elucidation of any theory, eventually weaknesses are made clear. New techniques for measuring these weaknesses emerge and become technologies (that are applicable elsewhere also). Eventually, somebody stumbles onto a new idea, which is tested for robustness in a sort of 'hazing' and is not accepted until it has been
repeatedly resolved to identical or very similar outputs, in multiple independent experiments. A paradigm shift occurs where enough of these
discoveries force larger, monolithic beliefs to be adapted in order to fit the new data.
I don't agree in the decline theory ;) but I do think that the manufacturers should be looking at improving their market research techniques and also in communicating their advantages.
> But, in aggregate, it is anything but market stagnation. It more closely
> resembles the chaos described by Thomas Kuhn in his "Structure of
> Scientific Revolutions", in the period between when an old
theory/technology is
> exhibiting its limits and when a new theory/technology becomes accepted.
> People cast about for new ideas, many different approaches are tried, and
> ultimately one or more of these new ideas come to the fore.
Reply
|
