On 17/09/2014 11:26, d wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:23:04 +0100
Eric wrote:
On 2014-09-16, d
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:39:24 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 16/09/2014 12:37, d wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 08:27:52 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
Starts today, and featured on BBC TV local news.

I'd be interested to know how much all this cost when there are somewhat
more pressing issues to sort out on the tube.

"The roll-out has cost a total of ?66m, and TfL expects to more than
recover the ?11m cost of software development by licensing it to other
transport operators around the world." according to
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/u...w/contactless-
payment-arrives-in-london.html

Yeah, right - because its their technology developed in house. Not. The most
technical thing TfL can manage without outside help is a bit of train and
track maintenance.

If companies didn't contract stuff out, where would you be? And if the
contract isn't clear about ownership of what you create they are crazy.

So TfL owns the right to the MiFare system, smart card readers and contactless
bank cards does it? Umm , no. So what is left - the gates and the backend
software? They're probably little use other than the overall design to any other
metro system. TfL pretending its going to license this is like McDonalds saying
their going to license burger flipping.

The systems and solutions for daily/weekly capping, fraud detection and
amelioration, reconciliation of data related to gripping, dealing with
comms loss, data reporting and mining etc etc.

Taking your McDonalds analogy, it's more like them licensing their
logistics, stock tracking and market development data - something that
I'm sure their competitors would be very interested in licensing at the
right price.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:54:28 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 17/09/2014 11:26, d wrote:
So TfL owns the right to the MiFare system, smart card readers and
contactless
bank cards does it? Umm , no. So what is left - the gates and the backend
software? They're probably little use other than the overall design to any
other
metro system. TfL pretending its going to license this is like McDonalds
saying
their going to license burger flipping.

The systems and solutions for daily/weekly capping, fraud detection and
amelioration, reconciliation of data related to gripping, dealing with
comms loss, data reporting and mining etc etc.

This isn't exactly cutting edge tech. While any system can be complex in
its details and implementation they are usually specific to the organisation
and arn't really transferable. Also the fundemantal principals - which might
be worth something - are rarely new.

Taking your McDonalds analogy, it's more like them licensing their
logistics, stock tracking and market development data - something that
I'm sure their competitors would be very interested in licensing at the
right price.

All their competitors would already have their own systems up and running
else they wouldn't still be in business.

--
Spud

On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:11:42 AM UTC-4, wrote:

All their competitors would already have their own systems up and running
else they wouldn't still be in business.

Well here in Noo Yawk we're still on dumb paper tickets for commuter rail and magstripe tickets for buses and subway. The MTA have made noises about moving straight to CPC acceptance and not going for an Oyster-a-like so they might well be in the market to buy TfL's solution.

Although given American bureaucracy's "not-invented-here" syndrome I shouldn't be at all surprised if they insist on inventing a wheel all of their own.

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
Roy wrote:
Although given American bureaucracy's "not-invented-here" syndrome I should=
n't be at all surprised if they insist on inventing a wheel all of their ow=
n.

Believe me - that syndrome isn't restricted to just the USA!

--
Spud