Don’t let vendor lock-in obscure your vision

Aaron Blutstein 10 April 2025  

Remember the days (I’m talking early 2000s) when every smartphone brand had a unique charger? In their day, Nokia phones, Blackberries and Motorola Razrs were highly sought after, but changing phones would mean one day ending up with a drawer full of cables. Fast-forward a few years and universal charging standards have liberated consumers. Similarly, interoperability in machine vision can help manufacturers break free from vendor-specific proprietary systems, explains Stephen Hayes,  managing director of Beckhoff UK.

Machine vision combines advanced imaging hardware and intelligent algorithms, helping manufacturers perform tasks like inspection, quality control, assembly guidance and product identification — all with incredible speed and precision. As demands for higher productivity, tighter quality standards and more detailed traceability have grown, manufacturers are implementing the systems in their production facilities.

Impressive as this technology is, it comes with challenges. As machine vision technology becomes more complex and diverse, interoperability is essential. Many systems rely on proprietary software and hardware, creating a fragmented landscape where components from different vendors are incompatible. As well as limiting flexibility, this inconsistency increases costs and creates long-term dependency on specific suppliers and forces manufacturers to put all their eggs in one basket.

The problem with vendor lock-in

Vendor lock-in is a problem for manufacturers or anyone deploying industrial automation systems. It occurs when customers become dependent on a specific vendor’s products or services, making it hard or costly to switch to alternatives. With machine vision systems, this usually occurs when manufacturers purchase proprietary hardware and software that are incompatible with components from other vendors. For example, they may invest in a vision system that requires specific cameras, processing units or communication protocols — all tied to a single vendor.

Over time, manufacturers become trapped in a catch-22: they require these advanced systems to reap the quality, inspection and assembly benefits but can’t adapt, upgrade or introduce new technologies without relying on that OEM.

Vendor lock-in is more than an inconvenience, it comes with short- and long-term risks. First, it limits flexibility as manufacturers struggle to mix and match best-in-class components from different OEMs. This can lead to increased costs, as some vendors charge premium prices for upgrades or replacement parts, knowing the customer has no alternative.

Long-term, relying on one vendor can also stifle innovation, slowing down the customer’s ability to respond to industry advancements. There are plenty of examples. For instance, a food production line could be stuck with aging vision cameras because newer options are incompatible, or an electronics manufacturer might be forced to overhaul their entire system to adopt updated software.

The need for interoperability

Interoperability ensures that components from different vendors will work together seamlessly, and this can be achieved by adopting open standards and protocols, such as GigE Vision for camera interfaces and OPC Unified Architecture (UA) for industrial communication. By adhering to these standards, machine builders and manufacturers can be confident that their systems won’t be confined to a single vendor’s ecosystem, allowing for greater flexibility and adaptability.

Meanwhile, Interoperability simplifies integration, enabling machine builders and system integrators (SIs) to combine components from various suppliers without requiring complex custom solutions. This can help reduce costs, which, in turn, means a lower financial impact on the customer.

Interoperability means more than flexibility. It empowers manufacturers to choose the best tools and components for their machine vision needs. Systems designed for interoperability are more futureproof since they can easily accommodate upgrades and new technologies without costly overhauls. Collaboration across the supply chain also improves because open systems require seamless communication between the various machines and devices on site.

Avoiding the catch-22

Vendor lock-in can seem unavoidable, but, with the right approach, machine builders can keep their systems flexible and future-proof. The first step is choosing open standards when selecting components for machine vision systems. Open standards such as EtherCAT, OPC UA and GigE enable devices from different vendors to collaborate, avoiding the need for proprietary solutions that tie users to a single OEM.

Another option is designing systems around modularity. In such systems, components can be replaced or upgraded independently without overhauling the entire setup. For example, a modular machine vision system may include cameras, software and controllers that the manufacturer can swap out as technology evolves or production needs change. As well as reducing costs, this strategy can help minimise downtime — and the associated costs — during maintenance or upgrades.

A practical approach

Vendor lock-in can be challenging, but there are ways around it. For manufacturers, it’s important to select systems that prioritise open standards and interoperability. EtherCAT, a fieldbus technology and international IEC standard, can be a strong foundation for building machine vision systems that integrate seamlessly with components from multiple vendors.

Manufacturers can also benefit from PC-based control architectures that support modularity and future upgrades. These systems, such as those provided by Beckhoff, minimise reliance on proprietary hardware and simplify the integration of new technologies as production needs evolve.

Just like the old smartphones of yesteryear, machine vision technology can be limited when it relies on proprietary systems from different vendors. However, vendor lock-in doesn’t need to be inevitable and it can be overcome. For manufacturers, it is important to choose systems that prioritise open standards and interoperability, whether using EtherCAT to connect cameras or adhering to standards like GigE Vision or OPC UA.