Time-to-Market
Time is perhaps the most important factor in the make vs. buy decision since time-to-market is the ultimate measure of success. While an in-house component could take months or years to develop, most suppliers need only a modest amount of time to customize their products and meet the customers' requirements. Overall, this means a quicker turnaround from prototype through production, increasing productivity and shorter time-to-market. With standards-based technology and experienced support, the benefits continue through subsequent product generations.
Cost
Another strong argument for outsourcing is cost. Hardware manufacturers invest a significant amount of time and money to develop, implement, test, and support their products. If an OEM were to expend similar resources to specify, design, implement, test and maintain each hardware component, the price of the final application could be too expensive for its intended market.
In particularly difficult disciplines, such as DSP-board
development, make vs. buy generally proves more costly
and potentially riskier for advanced DSP implementations
requiring high throughput or intensive computations. Many
companies therefore no longer design the DSP function
in their applications but instead rely on DSP experts
for specification, implementation, and customization.
Non-proprietary technologies also provide end users with
a greater variety of options from a wide array of suppliers.
And third-party support from software and hardware vendors
enables designers to easily integrate multiple outsourced
components into their applications. Hardware manufacturers
also devote a significant portion of budget to ongoing
research and development. Expertise in their core products,
together with a sense of the direction in which a particular
technology is likely to evolve, put alert manufacturers
on the leading edge.
Because technology changes daily, keeping products state
of the art can mean maintaining an in-house support group
or redirecting key engineers away from their primary responsibilities
so they can redesign in-house hardware - a potentially
costly, defocusing, and time-consuming venture. Furthermore,
if the individual(s) responsible for all the programming
and integration leave unexpectedly, training new technical
people on in-house designs consumes additional productivity,
time, and money. On the other hand, manufacturers are
fully prepared, experienced, and motivated to provide
upgrades, enhancements, and on-going support to their
clients.



