scorpio: If GVTPM is not a product, but a software architectural abstraction, that means one of a few things. Of those I've thought of below, which do you believe applies or will apply? Or what other explanation of Wave's role, if any, do you conjecture?
Could be:
1. Wave is providing IP and/or consulting/support, to the company or companies (Intel? Microsoft?) who are implementing the GVTPM Manager logic. (By the way, would the GVTPM logic be embedded in hardware or implemented in software?)
(My comment: This is not as good as getting paid for as in a licensing deal--see #2 below. But Wave would still be in a postion of selling software that can be used as services in this architecture, so it's not all bad.)
2. Wave has already architected the GVTPM logic as part of previous development work, e.g., for the EMBASSY 2100 chips. Now it's licensing it to whomever is implementing it (Intel?)
(My comment: This is probably the best scenario for Wave. We make money from licensing, ala Qualcomm for the mobile chip makers, and we can make more money by providing the aforementioned software services that utilize the technology.)
3. Wave knows what's being developed through the TCG and is in a position to leverage the technology, but had little if any role in the development of the GVTPM Manager logic.
(My comment: No up-front money but still Wave can achieve its goal of being a service-provider to the secure web.)
Whaddaya think, scorp? (We're buddies here, right?)
matt25
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
