In the market where this example happened one year is nothing. It took us between 2 and 3 to recover the development cost. In year 5 we made a bucket of money, but it took that long to get there.
You promiced you would explain how I would get rich from the idea not that I would get rich from some later idea. The specific invention is all you have to work with. Suggesting that there are later improvements takes us from the specific case the pure speculation.
BTW: I never made any improvements from that point on. The design was for all practical purposes perfect at that point. Once the "slew rate" problem was fixed, there were no more problems.
I don't presume that they can make them better of even cheaper. They can make them in large quantities and with their large and powerful marketing arm, they can fill the entire market in short order.
Its obvious that you still haven't googled on "instantaneous floating point converter" or the like. You haven't studied up on the real case and tried to come up with a valid argument for the specific case.
[...]
No, you said I would get rich from that one idea. Under the situation you suggest, the IFP certainly would not get me rich. Other ideas, knowledge and skill that I may have may not be brought into the argument. You've made the suggestion that given one idea, you would show how I would get rich under your proposed system. So far you have failed to do so.
[...]Linus didn't do a IFP. Go back to what you promiced. You promiced that given a specific case, you would show how I would get rich under your system. So far you have nothing to show.
Please explain exactly how you think this happens. All I've seen is a bunch a bobbing and weaving and vague suggestions that I would surely have other good ideas. You said I would get rich. So far you have nothing to show.
So far, its a question of is having $0.00 make me rich. You have in fact yet to show how the idea would gain me so much as $1.00 under your system. Please explain exactly how you think this would happen.
No, the goal was simply "rich".
This is a "free market" option. I am free to do as I like with my idea. I can sell it or I can keep it. Under your system, the IFP improvement would be taken from me by anyone (TI) would could mass produce it and I'd be left with nothing.
The US government is unlikely to have funded that idea. I've worked on other things that were funded by tax dollars. In fact, one of those helped, indirectly. to buy one of my houses.
The tax dollar funded projects were in fact DOD related. The extreme high returns in investments are the exception not the rule. Most of those sorts of things will make you a good return on investment but not something excessive. Whether the item being purchased is of any use to the guys in the field is another subject.