3 ms·

It's not quite that simple. Saleae wrote desktop software, which is an important part of the product. By reusing the USB VID/PID I'm guessing (I've not looked a

by jdswain 11y ago

It's not quite that simple. Saleae wrote desktop software, which is an important part of the product. By reusing the USB VID/PID I'm guessing (I've not looked at a knockoffs) that the knockoffs allow you to use Saleae's software, so you're basically stealing the software to use with your cheap hardware device. The price difference does seem at the extreme end, but it's a lot easier to copy than to create. Saleae are doing a lot more work on product design, software development, marketing, advertising, SolidWorks licenses and all the other things that the knockoffs don't need to do. In the end if Saleae can't make a profit competing against the knockoffs then there'll be nothing to copy and no software to steal and then the knockoffs will cease to exist too. Plus they seem to be really good guys, who have worked on this for years and really do a good job.

sneak 11y ago
> It's not quite that simple. Saleae wrote desktop software, which is an important part of the product. By reusing the USB VID/PID I'm guessing (I've not looked at a knockoffs) that the knockoffs allow you to use Saleae's software, so you're basically stealing the software to use with your cheap hardware device. Except that one can't steal software, and the copying of bytes does not harm Saleae in any way. It harms their expectation of revenue based on software development, but it's not stealing as it obviously doesn't deprive them of their own use of the software. I guess what I'm saying is that anyone can copy iOS too, but Apple's one-two punch of a) best-in-class hardware (and hardware value) and b) use of DRM prevents it. Maybe Saleae should have used DRM (but again maybe not, as it could just be cracked). Really though, the software argument is a red herring, because it's impossible to "steal" software. Making the software is a basic prerequisite for their own hardware being salable. It's a sunk cost. The fact that other organizations can sell compatible hardware at much, much lower prices means that perhaps the value proposition of their hardware is just sort of crap to begin with. It's lame that the competitor is using their trademark, but I say again: if all it takes is some dude with a label printer to eat your lunch, maybe your business model sucked in the first place.

by jdswain 11y ago

sneak 11y ago

> It's not quite that simple. Saleae wrote desktop software, which is an important part of the product. By reusing the USB VID/PID I'm guessing (I've not looked at a knockoffs) that the knockoffs allow you to use Saleae's software, so you're basically stealing the software to use with your cheap hardware device. Except that one can't steal software, and the copying of bytes does not harm Saleae in any way. It harms their expectation of revenue based on software development, but it's not stealing as it obviously doesn't deprive them of their own use of the software. I guess what I'm saying is that anyone can copy iOS too, but Apple's one-two punch of a) best-in-class hardware (and hardware value) and b) use of DRM prevents it. Maybe Saleae should have used DRM (but again maybe not, as it could just be cracked). Really though, the software argument is a red herring, because it's impossible to "steal" software. Making the software is a basic prerequisite for their own hardware being salable. It's a sunk cost. The fact that other organizations can sell compatible hardware at much, much lower prices means that perhaps the value proposition of their hardware is just sort of crap to begin with. It's lame that the competitor is using their trademark, but I say again: if all it takes is some dude with a label printer to eat your lunch, maybe your business model sucked in the first place.