I feel strange about this policy. What is more about their consideration? Especially when they set a target to work with Chinese company, I wonder finally the price will be bloody that force Freescale to run away.
Selinz, your points are well taken. That was my initial reaction when I heard Freescale CEO talked of this. But further interviews with others prove that Freescale may be onto something, considering that there is a lot more to a so-called "white box" segment -- a non-branded consumer product market.
More on this topic, please follow www.eetimesconfidential.com.
Consumers are going gaga over projected capacitive GUIs. Apple raised the bar for more than just smart phones. Freescale is well positioned to support them in the high end white goods that Asians see as a status symbol and are anxious to buy because of the "cool" factor. It's much safer than skipping across a patent minefield.
Perhaps Freescale sees that the USA tablet market is a total quagmire of patent threats and lawsuits, and that the real money is to be made selling chips that will go into generic tablets for the rest of the world. How much of the $500 price of a typical tablet in the USA is paying for lawsuits or Danegeld (tribute) to prevent them?
Is not most consumer goods market hyper-price-competitive like that of tablets? It may not be prudent to run away or keep away from crowded market. If you do so, other vendors will make you target and always follow you for your market share.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.