[HN Gopher] Intel issues end-of-life notice for RealSense Lidar
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Intel issues end-of-life notice for RealSense Lidar
        
       Author : thesausageking
       Score  : 83 points
       Date   : 2021-09-13 16:15 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.therobotreport.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.therobotreport.com)
        
       | spockz wrote:
       | So what is this? In this thread and previous threads I read many
       | comments about people being hit by intel dropping the shoe on
       | products that are actually great. Why don't they capitalise on
       | these great products and actually diversify?
        
         | randomluck040 wrote:
         | In our area I think where I work we're the only ones that have
         | a bunch of those sensors. It's niche, HN in general is niche so
         | I think they're not selling millions of their LIDAR sensors.
         | Still for those that rely on them it's sad.
        
         | RC_ITR wrote:
         | Because of course every one of (the very few) users is going to
         | complain on HN about a product they use being EOL'ed.
         | 
         | An to put it in perspective, Intel's IOT group, which is (lol)
         | mostly Point of Sale and MRI machines, does $3bn of revenue a
         | year.
         | 
         | Intel is a big ship, and outside of new platforms (like
         | smartphones were), there are few meaningful ways to diversify.
         | 
         | Hell, even if they bought NXP (one of the actual leaders in
         | IOT), that would still only constitute 10% of their revenue.
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | Because the 'great products' aren't selling in large enough
         | volumes to cover the division's wage bill.
         | 
         | And presumably they don't think selling far fewer at a much
         | higher price would do so either.
        
       | Causality1 wrote:
       | What's the point of winding down departments like this? Spin them
       | off into their own company to sink or swim.
        
       | dagmx wrote:
       | Not surprised. I had one of their devices, and it was just a
       | mess.
       | 
       | The resolution and reliability was not as good as comparable
       | devices in the price range like Microsoft's Azure Kinect DK.
       | 
       | Their software didn't work as well as what Microsoft cooked up,
       | and it always felt like they put out this product and then just
       | forgot about it.
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | Eh, it doesn't matter how low the price is for the Azure Kinect
         | if you can't buy them at the price.
         | 
         | And you're still stuck with USB C on Kinect, so it's not like
         | it lets you escape the consumer-grade reliability.
         | 
         | If there are other devices with the same performance as the
         | realsense lidar at a lower price, we'd all love to hear about
         | them!
        
           | dheera wrote:
           | "Consumer-grade" reliability really should be the _highest-
           | grade_ reliability. Cables get cantilevered by standing
           | desks, rolled over by office chairs, bitten by dogs, chewed
           | by babies, shoved in pockets and skiied with, and sat on.
           | 
           | The people who designed USB-C were probably lazy people
           | sitting in office chairs all day and never got out enough to
           | see what real consumers do.
           | 
           | I break about a USB-C cable a week. Never happened with
           | headphone jacks, barrel connectors, IEC power connectors, and
           | the like -- those are real consumer grade stuff, especially
           | IEC.
        
             | sudosysgen wrote:
             | Get a good quality cable. I break USB-C cables maybe once
             | every year and a half, less often than I broke headphones
             | or microUSB.
        
               | dheera wrote:
               | I break Anker PowerLine+ cables all the time, not sure
               | what's better.
               | 
               | The connector design itself is shit, and the rubberized
               | housing of the connector isn't mechanically supported as
               | any self-respecting consumer-grade cable should be, all
               | torque transfers to the PCB and that's horrible design.
        
             | klodolph wrote:
             | Definitely shouldn't be anywhere near highest reliability.
             | Professional equipment has to stand up to a lot more use--
             | like a camera you use every day, made with more metal and
             | with thick rubberized grips. If I have a personal camera,
             | I'll take care not to drop it. If I'm a professional
             | photographer, the question is how often it gets dropped. If
             | we're talking cables, "professional" grade (to me) means
             | the connectors are going to get hundreds of cycles per
             | year, and the cables might have to snake across the floor
             | and get tread on five days a week. In general, "pro" grade
             | stuff can be bigger, bulkier, more expensive.
             | 
             | Then there's stuff built for public spaces. ATMs, books in
             | the public library, turnstyles at the metro, etc. All
             | designed to be in close contact with people who either just
             | don't care or are actively trying to damage it.
             | 
             | TBH I don't know what the grade _below_ consumer-grade
             | would be.
        
               | derefr wrote:
               | I would say that the grade below consumer grade is
               | "functional prop" grade.
               | 
               | There's a type of consumer electronics available on
               | Wish/AliExpress/etc., which is designed for people who
               | want to _appear at a glance to be using_ a certain
               | expensive device, for status-signalling reasons. The
               | devices only have to be real enough to allow you to
               | pretend to be using them without drawing suspicion, and
               | only have to be rugged enough to last until the device
               | being mimicked isn't fashionable to have any more (at
               | which point you get a new knock-off aping the new cool
               | thing.)
               | 
               | Surprisingly, these devices do _work!_ They wouldn 't be
               | convincing otherwise. (How can you seem to be using the
               | best new phone if you have to pull out a different phone
               | to check your text messages? How can you seem to be
               | playing a Switch or a PS4 if it doesn't turn on and show
               | pictures and sound on the screen/a TV?) It's just that
               | they work as terribly as you can imagine, given that
               | costs are optimized to meet the minimum needs of someone
               | playing pretend and no more.
        
               | robotresearcher wrote:
               | Mil-spec?
        
               | dheera wrote:
               | Military people just sit in canopies and hit buttons
               | these days.
               | 
               | Consumers are the ones that will actually have cables
               | _bitten_ , _chewed_ , _stomped_ , sat on by unfit, heavy
               | civilian asses, jammed into wheels of office chairs,
               | rammed into by strangers' hips in coffee shops when your
               | connector hangs off the edge, dunked in cereal,
               | splattered by kitchen grease, smashed into rocks at
               | Yosemite, and shoved into bags while plugged in after a
               | slow TSA checkpoint and needing to sprint as fast as
               | possible to a departure gate.
               | 
               | Very different set of ruggedness requirements. Most
               | cables of the 80s and 90s were completely fine in these
               | civilian environments.
        
               | InfiniteRand wrote:
               | Jerk grade reliability, this stuff will explode if
               | stepped on
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | snovv_crash wrote:
       | Honestly, I have no idea what Intel was doing playing with
       | sensors and robots. I think the previous CEO was trying to
       | diversify, seeing his failures in the CPU business, and rather
       | than playing to company's strengths he looked at whatever hot
       | tech was out there.
        
         | Traster wrote:
         | Yeah the previous CEO bascially announced a number of big bets
         | - AI, 5G, VR, Autonomous Driving and one or two others (can't
         | remember off the top of my head), they were all associated with
         | a number of big acquisitions most of which ended pretty
         | embarassingly (Altera for 5G, MobilEye for Autonomous driving,
         | Nervana for AI etc)
         | 
         | It followed the same familiar pattern, screw up the company
         | over a long protracted acquisition, try to gain market share
         | through bundling, all whilst driving the core talent ouf of the
         | business by completely failing to invest. This is a big reason
         | where Intel's problems came from. They looked to diversify
         | rather than deliver.
        
           | jsight wrote:
           | How is mobileye embarrassing? They seem to be overwhelmingly
           | the most common choice among automotive OEMs, and their
           | growth rate is really solid already.
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | RealSense camera technology was used in laptops for Windows
         | Hello the same way as Intel NICs and Intel GPUs and Intel audio
         | controllers and Intel SSDs were used by their traditional
         | segment.
         | 
         | It'd be a bit silly for Intel to be successful in all of those
         | spaces and not ask "and what would it look like to sell this
         | part without bundling our CPU".
        
         | worrycue wrote:
         | This isn't the first time Intel has flirted with things outside
         | their core competence. They dabbled with SSDs, mobile phone
         | modems, ... etc. It's just something Intel does. Why? Don't
         | know.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | All companies need to flirt with things that might be good.
           | Some of those things will turn out so great that you leave
           | your orignial company behind, while others will be duds that
           | you drop, and still others will be small side businesses that
           | make you a bit of money in down times but otherwise are just
           | barely worth doing. Intel used to be a memory company that
           | flirted with making CPUs. I don't recall when they left the
           | memory business (I think in the 1980s)
        
             | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
             | Intel used to be a RAM company that sold microprocessors as
             | a side business.
        
           | thrashh wrote:
           | I mean we've had Bell Labs et. al. and now we have
           | transistors, Unix, CCDs to allow digital cameras, etc...
           | 
           | They can keep on trucking with R&D
        
           | yann2 wrote:
           | They are big enough to take the loss. No harm in trying.
        
             | joezydeco wrote:
             | Unless you actually get duped into using XScale, Zephyr,
             | Edison, etc....
        
           | snovv_crash wrote:
           | I get SSDs and modems, this allows them to leverage their
           | fabs. Maybe even CCDs. But 3D computational geometry, camera
           | lenses and LIDAR? And drones? This seems a bit out-of-line to
           | me.
        
           | morcheeba wrote:
           | The sad thing is that Intel had a real advantage in
           | RealSense... they had good processors in there (especially
           | with the Movidius chips) that were well integrated (e.g. they
           | didn't have to support a fancy SDK for all users - just the
           | internal Realsense group). Doing the same 3d processing with
           | ARM or Intel is 1/10th the frame rate at much more power.
        
             | reasonabl_human wrote:
             | Can you elaborate on the benefits of what intel built here
             | as opposed to doing the processing on host machines? My
             | company uses these in some products but I never
             | investigated the market or trade space for this type of
             | device
        
               | morcheeba wrote:
               | Yeah! There is a lot of processing to do the disparity
               | calculation... it's basically doing lots of correlations
               | with a different amount of x shift and finding the
               | delta-x that has the highest correlation. This delta-x
               | disparity gets calculated in to a z distance.
               | 
               | So, intel made a custom processor for this that's really
               | good at the correlations. The original one was the D4,
               | and later they used their movidius chip. Both have lots
               | of multiplier-accumulate silicon, so it can do the
               | computations in parallel. Their architectures are also
               | set up for convolution (which re-uses a lot of data)
               | rather than random-processing (like a CPU does), so they
               | could feed these math engines without a lot of data
               | transfer -- this makes it more power efficient. You could
               | do something similar in an FPGA, but dedicated silicon is
               | going to be faster, cheaper, and use less power.
        
           | sseagull wrote:
           | Tech companies don't know what to do with all their money
           | (although Intel perhaps a bit less so).
           | 
           | Google's core is search & advertising. But they are also in
           | email, video streaming, messaging & video chat, cloud
           | computing, mobile phones, gaming (Stadia), self-driving cars,
           | drone delivery, quantum computing, and probably many other
           | things that I can't think of.
           | 
           | Edit: Yes I know it's technically Alphabet, but in practical
           | terms, it's Google
        
             | rualca wrote:
             | > Tech companies don't know what to do with all their money
             | (although Intel perhaps a bit less so).
             | 
             | Lidar has high computational needs, which directly
             | influences accuracy, and both spacial and time resolution.
             | 
             | Post-processing steps also have high computational needs,
             | such as infering structure, do coregistration, handle point
             | density, etc.
             | 
             | Also, practical applications often demand and depend on
             | meeting constraints such as low power requirements and
             | size.
             | 
             | If a company such as Intel managed to leverage their know-
             | how to provide Lidar hardware that was competitive in both
             | performance and price then they could as well develop a
             | machine that prints money.
        
       | kypro wrote:
       | I tested one of their preproduction LIDAR cameras just before it
       | was released and it was great. Their SR305 was also really good
       | for close-range, high precision applications, but they scraped
       | that model earlier this year.
       | 
       | For us it was the SR305 we were interested in as it had the specs
       | we needed at the right price point. We had a meeting with the
       | RealSense team about a year and a half ago and they strongly
       | hinted at the SR305 being EOL soon which made it very hard for us
       | to commit to RealSense for the project we were working on.
       | 
       | I'm quite surprised about this news though. Back then they
       | suggested that LIDAR and stereo cameras would be their focus
       | going forward. I can only assume this must be a recent move given
       | what we were told back then and that the L515 is relatively new.
       | 
       | Huge shame about their facial auth products too. My understanding
       | is that these are used in quite a few products, but they also use
       | structed light tech so I assume that's why that decision was
       | made.
       | 
       | It's worth noting that the L515 isn't replaceable by the D455 in
       | many use cases. The D455 is good, but doesn't have the same kind
       | of range and precision the L515 has. It's depth data is also far
       | nosier, as is often the case with stereo depth cameras.
        
       | rcv wrote:
       | This is a real shame - I just finished lobbying to use these at
       | work after some very successful initial prototypes.
       | 
       | Does anyone have any experience with the TI mmWave sensors[1] for
       | AMR collision avoidance?
       | 
       | [1] https://www.ti.com/sensors/mmwave-radar/overview.html
        
         | drno123 wrote:
         | My company built several successfull products using TI's mmWave
         | sensors. If you'd like more info, send me your contact to
         | mmwave@mailinator.com, I will be checking that mailbox today
         | and tomorrow.
        
           | madars wrote:
           | You probably don't want to use mailinator.com address for
           | this: anyone can read messages sent to it.
        
       | scrowe1 wrote:
       | Wonder when the same will ultimately happen to the stereo depth
       | cameras. what are some good alternatives here?
        
         | corndoge wrote:
         | I heard the whole division is shutting down so probably won't
         | be long now.
        
         | zwieback wrote:
         | I thought that already happened? I think they are just selling
         | what they have now but stopped development. Keyence, Flir and a
         | few other established machine vision companies have stereo
         | systems but nothing like RealSense, which was trying to make
         | stereo more of a mainstream application.
        
           | rcv wrote:
           | They aren't officially EOLing the stereo cameras yet, but
           | their assurances about how long they'll remain in production
           | have been very hand-wavey.
           | 
           | Does FLIR actually have a stereo solution? Back when they
           | were Point Grey they sold the Bumblebee, but all of the
           | stereo processing was done on the host machine.
        
             | zwieback wrote:
             | Yeah, I guess that's obsolete too. My experience with
             | stereo is that there's so much work in calibration and
             | ensuring you get reliable correlation results between
             | regions from the two cameras that plug-and-play solutions
             | are very hard.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-09-13 23:00 UTC)