by Gary Mintchell | Aug 31, 2016 | News
James Truchard, “Dr. T”, co-founder and CEO of National Instruments has announced his retirement effective January 1, 2017. This is no surprise. The company has transitioned from a small, hungry, engineering-driven company to a large corporation during the past 5–7 years. It appeared during NI Week 2015 that a transition was imminent. Also no surprise is his replacement, and the person I perceive as the architect of the new NI, Alex Davern, who has been COO/CFO.
Dr. Truchard will remain as Chairman of the Board. The Board of Directors plans to appoint Mr. Davern to the Board by the end of January 2017. This transition is being undertaken as part of the Board’s succession planning process.
“It has always been my goal for NI to be a company built to last,” said Truchard. “Over the last decade, in the face of a weak industrial economy I have focused my efforts on helping to ensure that we were making the long-term strategic investments necessary to set NI up for future growth. I believe these major platform investments, in key areas like PXI modular instrumentation, RF measurements, CompactRIO, and our entire software platform, will continue providing NI with disruptive platform capabilities needed to expand our long-term market opportunity. Given our significant progress, much of which was showcased at NIWeek earlier this month, I believe NI is well-positioned for the coming decade.”
Truchard continues, “It is the right time for me to retire as CEO. I have worked with Alex Davern for more than 20 years. He is an exceptional leader and business strategist, with a demonstrated track record of success. I have complete confidence in Alex and the rest of the senior leadership team at NI to continue delivering on our consistent track record of innovation, growth and profitability.”
“As a company built to last, Dr. Truchard has built an extremely capable senior leadership team over the years, and I am honored and excited to lead NI into its next phase of growth and profitability,” said Davern. “Our differentiated platform and ecosystem coupled with our strong business model, give us the opportunity to be the preeminent company in test, measurement and control.” Davern has served as Chief Operating Officer of NI since 2010, and Chief Financial Officer since 1997. Davern, and the rest of the senior management team, including Jeff Kodosky, co-founder, Fellow, and Board member of NI; Eric Starkloff, Executive VP of Global Sales and Marketing; Scott Rust, Senior VP of R&D; and Duncan Hudson, Chief Platform Officer, have over 100 years of experience at NI, working closely with Dr. Truchard.
“Countless entrepreneurs have great ideas and start companies, but very few have accomplished what Jim has – from moonlighting out of our garage and kitchen in 1976, to self-funding the business, to a successful IPO in 1995, to the $1B+ revenue company we are today with over 7,000 employees around the globe,” said Jeff Kodosky, NI co-founder, Fellow and Board member. “But more than just financial success for the company, what truly stands out is the impact that Jim and NI have had on engineering and science over these last four decades. The innovation he has enabled across so many industries inspires me to this day. I look forward to his ongoing contributions as Chairman.”
In light of Mr. Davern’s promotion, the company will start the process of considering candidates to serve as Chief Financial Officer and expects to complete the process by the end of 2016.
I had the pleasure of chatting with Dr. T a little every year at NI Week. He impressed me with his immense curiosity and humbleness. He’s a fantastic leader. I feel a sense of loss at the way NI used to be, but it is positioned to survive long term as an engineering leader. I missed this year’s NI Week. Judging from the announcements, the company’s direction and mine have diverged. But it is still a company to watch.
And all the best to Dr. T in his retirement.
by Gary Mintchell | Aug 26, 2016 | Interoperability, Standards
This snippet from the conversation shows some of the urgency:
The first is that the kinds of technologies that have access controls for copyrighted works have gone from these narrow slices (consoles and DVD players) to everything (the car in your driveway). If it has an operating system or a networking stack, it has a copyrighted work in it. Software is copyrightable, and everything has software. Therefore, manufacturers can invoke the DMCA to defend anything they’ve stuck a thin scrim of DRM around, and that defense includes the ability to prevent people from making parts. All they need to do is add a little integrity check, like the ones that have been in printers for forever, that asks, “Is this part an original manufacturer’s part, or is it a third-party part?” Original manufacturer’s parts get used; third-party parts get refused. Because that check restricts access to a copyrighted work, bypassing it is potentially a felony. Car manufacturers use it to lock you into buying original parts.
This is a live issue in a lot of domains. It’s in insulin pumps, it’s in voting machines, it’s in tractors. John Deere locks up the farm data that you generate when you drive your tractor around. If you want to use that data to find out about your soil density and automate your seed broadcasting, you have to buy that data back from John Deere in a bundle with seed from big agribusiness consortia like Monsanto, who license the data from Deere. This metastatic growth is another big change. It’s become really urgent to act now because, in addition to this consumer rights dimension, your ability to add things to your device, take it for independent service, add features, and reconfigure it are all subject to approval from manufacturers.
We are all familiar with lock in. Heck, I’ve been in some product development meetings where some of these things came up. “How can we keep customers with us and away from the competition?” they ask.
Meanwhile the customer says, “I’m pretty happy with your product now. But what if you start acting like Mylan and its EpiPen? I find myself locked in, and now I am susceptible to frequent price increases. Or what if your quality begins to dip? Not to mention, what is your incentive to innovate any longer?
And so, the inevitable dance continues.
I’m not opposed to big companies with comprehensive product offerings. Sometimes there is a lot of innovation. It takes a lot of money to invest in developing some of these products. Customers appreciate this. They welcome partners. They just want to see competition and alternatives. But sometimes the customer voice gets lost.
Sometimes I look at the situation as an independent analyst/writer not beholden to anyone and decide someone has to speak up for the customer.
by Gary Mintchell | Aug 25, 2016 | Internet of Things, Interoperability, Podcast
Interoperability enables growth of an industry, innovation, and great benefits for users. We see it broadly in the Web and more specifically in industry with OPC. It is topic to which I return frequently. We can talk about all the components of the “Industrial Internet of Things” whether it be devices, databases, big data analytics, visualization, but without interoperability the IoT will be severely hampered.
Dave Winer developed outlining applications to help writers of prose and code organize their thoughts. He also developed RSS and knows something about interoperability and the politics of standards.
In this podcast, Winer talks with Allen Wirfs-Brock about how JSON came to be and the back story about how Tim Bray (a developer of XML) came to be interested in its evolution. “Along the way we get a lot of interesting tidbits about how JavaScript and JSON evolved,” says Winer.
Data is like air
This all reminded me of some previous blog posts about data wants to be free. Moira Gunn, host of TechNation, an NPR show and also a podcast, discussed this topic in her opening “Take Five” essay in that podcast. She said, “Like air, data just flows. The power of data lies in its being replicated over and over.” She was thinking about Google and the attempt to have your past eradicated. But the concept also works for us.
Interoperability
I was thinking about my thoughts voiced yesterday about the use of open technology. Arlen Nipper, co-developer of MQTT, likes to tout that his middleware powers the Internet of Things. He says this because MQTT is the backbone of Facebook Messenger.
Ah, there is my point about the use of open technologies. Messenger is a closed silo. Try to move your data. Try to use your data in another application. Try to text someone from another app to an address in Messenger. Nope. Can’t do anything. Facebook wants you captured completely within its silo.
What’s that old phrase? Buyer Beware?
by Gary Mintchell | Aug 24, 2016 | Automation, Podcast
New podcast. Following up on my popular podcast on “Why Big Companies Hate OPC UA Embedded”, I review recent writing on OPC UA, REST, MQTT and Sparkplug relative to needed interoperability. I focus on watching how companies implement REST and MQTT–whether they are using an open transport to move proprietary data types, or whether they are truly embracing what end users want-true interoperability.
by Gary Mintchell | Aug 22, 2016 | Automation, Operations Management, Software, Technology
Industry 4.0 provokes much discussion with little understanding. It began as a German government initiative ostensibly to support the German machine building industry. The idea was picked up in a variety of forms by other governments.
Exploring Industry 4.0 leads me to Tim Sowell’s latest blog post. Tim is a Schneider Electric Fellow and VP of System Strategy at Schneider Electric in the Common Architecture team in R&D. He is also the last remaining (that I can find) true blogger in the space. The company blogs have pivoted from blog format offering information and opinion to more of a press release format—where they use the Webpage to get out a company message directly to readers rather than going through the unreliable filter of the trade press. Sowell offers thoughtful discourse on important topics of the day.
If I thought I could meet with Tim and Stan DeVries at the upcoming Wonderware user conference, I’d make plans to get down there. As it is, the trip would lead to about five weeks of travel in a row. That is more expense and time away from home than a one-person entrepreneur can afford.
Sowell lists this set of viewpoints which are discussed in the white paper:
- Industry 4.0 is about the transformation from controlling focusing on process to “controlling the product/ order” and the “product/ order being self aware”.
- Industry 4.0 is about operations transformation, not about technology.
- Industry 4.0 provides a practical strategic framework for “lean” and “agile” industrial operations.
- Industry 4.0 addresses the needs of discrete and batch manufacturing, but it needs some adaptation for the heavy process and infrastructure industries.
He adds, “Cloud computing and IT/OT convergence are often linked to implementing Industry 4.0, but these need some adaptation to address “trustworthiness” of the architectures. One emerging topic is Fog computing.”
He argues that automation and operation management technologies are more relevant than ever before. Also important are information standards such as “IEC 61850/ISO9506, ISA-95/ISO62264, PRODML etc.”
You need to go back and read his entire paper. He discusses benefits of adopting this way of thinking about manufacturing (discrete and process). He looks at use cases. And the foundation of Industry 4.0—it requires better information, not just more data.
