5 ms·
Most deep tech and hardware projects can also benefit from a ship-and-iterate model. There are always pieces you can show to some customer, even if they're simu
by tlb 6y ago
Most deep tech and hardware projects can also benefit from a ship-and-iterate model. There are always pieces you can show to some customer, even if they're simulations or a tiny component of the whole thing. It creates some work and stress to deliver them, but the feedback you get means you're more likely to end up with something the customer wants at the end of the project.
- contingencies 6y agoI too embrace your perspective but it is unfortunately naive. If you want a tiny plastic enclosure around a simple circuit board, by all means iterate quickly. When producing larger hardware it is common to have parts which require multi-month production and testing cycles and 5-7 figures USD just for the tooling to enable the process (not including design, actual fabrication equipment, outsourced equipment time or stock material). You usually have multiple parts of this commitment level within a larger product. You don't rush out the door when you are dealing with those sorts of realities.
- nojs 6y agoWhat are you building?
- contingencies 6y agoThe consumer view is always available, meaningfully personalized food produced on demand from fresh ingredients as an autonomous urban utility, 10-20× faster than delivery services. Technically, we're building the robotics, R&D and manufacturing capacities to define and dominate that market with a network of just-in-time contactless kiosk-format microfactories. As a consequence of the challenging form factor we've set for ourselves, the regulatory requirements of food handling and so on, let's just say the complexity and BOM length is arguably greater than most vehicles.
- nl 6y agoAs someone who's had some ancillary involvement in a hardware product I have a lot of sympathy with the disconnect between doing hardware and the "ship fast SAAS product" mindset. However, in this case your comment: > As a consequence of the challenging form factor we've set for ourselves does seem to indicate that decisions you have made yourself are one of the factors causing you to slow down here. Something to consider...
- contingencies 6y agoWell, if you survey the space we are looking at you will find good commercial reasons for that form factor. Such as: size of available spaces under typical vending leases, fits through door, fits in lift, fits in corridor, fits in truck, etc.
- nl 6y agoI don't think anyone will ever argue that you know your market well! I think what people are trying to say is that there maybe ways to get a partial solution to a smaller part of your customer base much quicker and for less money.
- contingencies 6y agoYes. There may be. But there's no solution cheaper or faster than letting someone else prove the market on your behalf. In our case, we have seen enough proof in the last few years: last mile delivery commodification, 50% of every $1 spent in food retail is convenience-driven, etc. We do not need to prove humans want food or that frustrated demand exists. What we need to prove is that we can supply it, cost effectively, profitably, at scale, with technology we uniquely design, manufacture and operate with a defensible lead.
- sillysaurusx 6y agoI try not to appeal to authority, but the parent comment was from tlb, founder of anybots. They’ve been building and selling robots for... 12 years? Probably closer to 18. It sounds like they might be suggesting that a smaller prototype can be shown to customers. 3D printing in particular can help with that; I think Valve demo’d a new controller that was partly 3D printed several years ago.
- ummonk 6y agoThe GP was referring to "hardware companies not manufacturing consumer or IOT widgets". Anybots is obviously manufacturing consumer widgets. There are spaces where even a small prototype will easily run into the six figures in pricing.