That's exactly right. OCP is an important effort because it encourages all of these things. (And that it has been more encouraging of software in the last few

That's exactly right. OCP is an important effort because it encourages all of these things. (And that it has been more encouraging of software in the last few years is a step in the right direction -- but it is still broadly disappointing on the open firmware front.) Another concrete example to add to the ones you listed: we are using the presence of the OCP DC-SCM connector[0] in next-gen AMD dev boards to be able to have our service processor[1] be able to control many aspects of the SoC before we have our own boards taped out. All of that said: it remains true that going ODM-direct really isn't possible for all but the largest buyers -- and even then, it is a big upfront investment in terms of both capital and engineering time. (And one remains entirely on one's own for software!) So while we are appreciative and supportive of OCP, we also very much believe that there's room for the kind of turnkey solution that Oxide offers. [0] https://www.opencompute.org/documents/ocp-dc-scm-spec-rev-1-0-pdf https://www.opencompute.org/documents/ocp-dc-scm-spec-rev-1-... [1] https://oxide.computer/blog/hubris-and-humility https://oxide.computer/blog/hubris-and-humility