1 / 5
Télécharger la présentation

John M. Kowalski Sharp Labs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Postmodern Critique of the Comparison CriteriaorWe’re in Deep Trouble if We Don’t Change Our Ways John M. Kowalski Sharp Labs John M Kowalski, Sharp Labs

  2. The Problem • There may be some misunderstanding about what the CC really are, and how we will really use them eventually. • Hence this presentation. • Full Disclosure: My axes to grind: • While I’m here as an individual, of course, as an individual, I support my company’s business interests in 802.11. That means: • Early time to market • No heavy IPR encumbrances • Useful for a wide variety of consumer markets. John M Kowalski, Sharp Labs

  3. Some Facts about 802.11 and Deconstructing the CC • Historically, the solution that works well enough – NOT the perfect one- will win. This probably has to do with many individuals having somewhat similar interests to mine. • There are unstated “comparison criteria” for many individuals that won’t make its way into the CC, but WILL influence or determine their selection of a proposal: • Is it good for my company? • Will it waste millions of dollars/euros/yen we’ve already invested? • Can I get this from my vendors/Can I sell this early? • Does this affect agreements my company already has in place? • Will accepting this proposal speed up or delay the standard? John M Kowalski, Sharp Labs

  4. More Facts about 802.11 and Deconstructing the CC • Naturally, these are not objective criteria but, in the end these are probably MUCH more important than anything we’re going to put into the document. • The CC, at the end of the day only deal with specific technical items in the proposal- BUT these only have a MARGINAL effect on the REAL selection. The business aspects of the technical solution are what is PRIVILGED here. • Even technical “objective” results can always be disputed, deconstructed, critiqued, and ignored. • The CC do not force any voter to vote any way at all. No matter what’s in them. • The standardization process is not a research project. It’s for people to create standards so companies can make money. John M Kowalski, Sharp Labs

  5. Suggestions (as in “I suggest you use a parachute if you jump out a plane.”) • CC should ONLY be present if they can be expected to exhibit a particular, important behavior between 2 or more proposals that IS NOT covered elsewhere. If it can be inferred – even roughly – elsewhere it’s not needed. • We still need to cut out particular criteria. • When in doubt, throw it out. • If we don’t do this we WILL create another religious war. John M Kowalski, Sharp Labs

More Related