This is almost exactly what a lot of clone makers did in the past when
they wanted to make IBM PC clones. IBM would not let anyone have their
BIOS, which was very necessary to the production of a PC clone, so they
would hire some coder to reverse engineer the BIOS and document it's
API. That guy would hand the clone maker the api document and then be
removed from the rest of the process, so the clone maker then had a "clean"
documented API, which they then hired some other coder to implement.
Finally they had thier own BIOS they could slap in their clone machine and
everyone was happy except IBM. As time went on, there were companies that
just did this and thats how we just have a few BIOS makers and no one makes
their own BIOS anymore.
I beleive it would be quite impossible to forbid anyone from coding their
own API to interface with I2O. If it were, IBM would have crushed the PC
clone makers under a ton of litigation, since at that time, they certainly
would have had the resources to do so (still do I might add). Of course
that was a time before everyone got sue-happy.
I do think that I2O will probably become a standard, simply because M$ has
too much influence on the hardware industry. After all, if M$ went under,
what would keep people from buying cheap PC hardware if the glitziest OS ran
on say a DEC alpha? Clone makers have a vested interest in keeping M$ going
after all. How else can you explain the 2 or 3 wasted keys on your new M$
compatible keyboard? It's also no accident that M$ stuff needs more and
more resources as time goes on. The automakers called it planned
obsolecense, and it worked pretty damn well for them too.
- Steve
-----
Of course there's always industrial spying to fall back on.
.------------------------------------------------. # * # # # # # #
| Steve Baker | Barely Working | # ## # # # # #
| ice@mama.indstate.edu | System Administrator | # # # # # # # #
| Red-Hat Rulz! | Will work for hardware | # # # ## # # # #
`-- SYS-ADMIN FOR HIRE, HAVE UNIX, WILL TRAVEL --' #### # # # ## # #