A negative note from Cullen Langford...on SP100 and who should pay.

Oct. 9, 2006
Subject: Paying for Testing - I don't see why the ISA should be asked to pay even half of the cost of testing commercial products. This cost should be assumed by the equipment makers and vendors who csn profit from sales of these products. As it is ISA carries considerable cost burden already in supporting standards development. Note that much of this cost is actually supported by the individual members. If we are searching for new support, lets follow the cash path and let the instrument mag...
Subject: Paying for Testing - I don't see why the ISA should be asked to pay even half of the cost of testing commercial products. This cost should be assumed by the equipment makers and vendors who csn profit from sales of these products. As it is ISA carries considerable cost burden already in supporting standards development. Note that much of this cost is actually supported by the individual members. If we are searching for new support, lets follow the cash path and let the instrument magazines carry some of the cost, their business thrives on reporting the news generated by standards work. Regards, cullen langford Doing a little quick estimating, Cullen, I figure I've put out something like $50,000 worth of free publicity for SP100 so far in its existence. I think that is a pretty fair contribution from a magazine...and if you think I've been paid back in advertising revenue, you should have listened in on some of the discussions I've had with major vendors about my very strong stands in favor of a user-based standard for industrial wireless. Why should ISA help to pay? Well, because ISA could well be the beneficiary of the standard. Emerson and Honeywell have both specifically said that they will donate their proprietary intellectual property to the standard...and back along, when the HART Foundation and the Fieldbus Foundation were established, they were established in large part because ISA didn't want to do it. Times have changed, and ISA is already participating in the formation of a third party foundation, under the auspices of the Automation Federation that we organizers hope will be the testing and qualification arm of SP99. It stands to reason that ISA might be the direct beneficiary of that intellectual property. Yes, ISA already pays for a lot of the work behind the standard. And I would be fine if the vendors all decided to pony up. But if it is the difference between testing and no testing, somebody has to pay, and ISA has a LOT more money in the bank than Mr. Cappelletti's magazine does. Note that I didn't suggest that ISA should bear the entire burden...and I don't believe they should.

Sponsored Recommendations

2024 Industry Trends | Oil & Gas

We sit down with our Industry Marketing Manager, Mark Thomas to find out what is trending in Oil & Gas in 2024. Not only that, but we discuss how Endress+Hau...

Level Measurement in Water and Waste Water Lift Stations

Condensation, build up, obstructions and silt can cause difficulties in making reliable level measurements in lift station wet wells. New trends in low cost radar units solve ...

Temperature Transmitters | The Perfect Fit for Your Measuring Point

Our video introduces you to the three most important selection criteria to help you choose the right temperature transmitter for your application. We also ta...

2024 Industry Trends | Gas & LNG

We sit down with our Industry Marketing Manager, Cesar Martinez, to find out what is trending in Gas & LNG in 2024. Not only that, but we discuss how Endress...