Barge,
OK, I'll rise to the bait. I don't understand what it is you're trying to say with your incessant posts about interoperability vs. go-kite's revenue models. I suggest you carefully reread his very clear and to the point post # 24493. Having done that, I would like to know what it is you don't agree with in that post. Specifically, I would like to know how you expect EMBASSY firmware to generate revenues in other forms than that that GKS references in that very succinct and clear post. I personally (FWIW) think that EMBASSY firmware is very much a part of a strategic Wave goal, but I'm not sure it will generate a majority of the revenues Wave may enjoy. Lark Allen has repeatedly defined a major part of the Wave mission as the "care and feeding of trusted computing". I believe he is referring, among other things, to Wave's role as the Privacy Certifying Authority (i.e. providing Utility Services) when he says this. What we don't know is how NDA's and applied-for patents may protect Wave's position in this role. If there is considerable protection, and if Wave is able to perform satisfactorily, and if people like David Grawrock who predict 200 million TPM units deployed by the end of 2005 are correct, the revenues from utility services alone would make Wave a 10 billion $ company. One thing is certain, trusted computing is not a stationary target. There will be many changes and a bet on Wave must be a bet on management's ability to respond to and take advantage of these changes. I don't believe anything is preordained in this drama.
JMHO,
Svenm
