wp-plugin-hostgator
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114ol-scrapes
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114Source:https:\/\/techcrunch.com\/2023\/04\/18\/how-to-avoid-hardware-pitfalls\/<\/a><\/br> You\u2019ve likely heard<\/span> that \u201chardware is hard\u201d; mostly because hardware startups have to deal with things that software companies don\u2019t really have to worry about. That includes pesky details such as \u201cphysics\u201d and \u201cbattery management\u201d and \u201cgeneral wear and tear.\u201d<\/p>\n Hardware development is complex and challenging. Physical parts have tolerances, both in size and material properties, and components get hot and their characteristics change when they do. Once you\u2019ve designed a product, the manufacturing process itself poses significant challenges. Ensuring that components are produced with the required precision and quality demands careful planning and rigorous testing throughout the process. Hardware manufacturers often work with multiple suppliers and manage supply chain logistics, which can be resource intensive and time-consuming.<\/p>\n Hardware development is inherently a lot more costly than cranking out software. Developing a physical product requires substantial investment in materials, tooling, manufacturing and logistics. These expenses, combined with the need for multiple iterations of prototypes, can make the process financially risky, particularly for resource-constrained startups.<\/p>\n There are plenty of pitfalls, and as a hardware nerd myself (I founded a hardware startup, which I then spectacularly ran into the ground<\/a> at high velocity, making mistakes that most experienced hardware folks would laugh at these days), I am always curious to learn how hardware entrepreneurs can avoid some of the common mistakes.<\/p>\n Sera Evcimen knows a thing or two about the challenges for hardware startups. She\u2019s a mechanical engineer and worked at four startups, including satellite design<\/a>, consumer electronics<\/a>, doing systems integration in\u00a0an R&D department for a fusion startup<\/a>\u00a0and working on ion thrusters<\/a>. These days, she\u2019s a technical program manager for a large company she can\u2019t name, where she\u2019s working on soft robotics for human interaction, and she\u2019s an all-star mentor for the Techstars startup accelerator. She even runs her own consultancy to boot<\/a>. She\u2019s working on a podcast called The Builder Circle<\/a>, where she breaks down the challenges and risks of building hardware companies. Like I said, she knows her stuff, and we chatted about things to avoid when building hardware.<\/p>\n As a startup, you are an organization designed for learning, and learning is sensationally exciting. But it has its downsides: As you continue to learn, it\u2019s tempting to try to chase every great opportunity that comes along.<\/p>\n The mistake is to fall for the temptation and lose focus.<\/p>\n \u201cOftentimes, this sneaks up on people because people have completely different systems that they\u2019re trying to push forward,\u201d Evcimen told me. \u201cThey\u2019re saying, \u2018Oh, this could work in this application, and this application and this application.\u2019 Alternatively, a company may say, \u2018Oh, it\u2019s just the same thing, but bigger,\u2019 or \u2018It\u2019s just the same thing, but smaller.\u2019 I think it\u2019s really important to know that each variation of a product is just an additional product line. Similarity doesn\u2019t mean anything. Even if that is true, you still have to have individual designs; you still need to manage your supply chain. And \u2026 you even need to develop multiple supply chains.\u201d<\/p>\n A smaller module might mean different chips. A different casing could mean different molds and tooling. Each small change can affect the whole product development timeline. Even something as simple as launching exactly the same product in a different color can create significant bottlenecks.<\/p>\n \u201cWorking on more than one version takes away from early learning because you\u2019re trying to do too much at once. You\u2019re already a small team, trying to operate with cost constraints and time constraints,\u201d she said. \u201cIt also dilutes the understanding of the market: If you do your proper due diligence and your user studies and market research, you\u2019ll start to get a sense of which one is going to be potentially the most lucrative, or which variant you can use to learn quicker. By giving up focus, you are going to start learning slowly on all of them. That means you need to bet on one, rather than pursuing one that has the most potential.\u201d<\/p>\n And that can be a killer: Startups raise money, then make a bunch of products, trying to push them all forward at once. If something happens in the production process, they\u2019re stuck with a bunch of half-baked products, sucking up funding along the way. It\u2019s a spiral, and it\u2019s not pointed in the right direction.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n <\/br><\/br><\/br><\/p>\n
\n7 common pitfalls for hardware startups and how to avoid them<\/br>
\n2023-04-18 22:04:08<\/br><\/p>\nLack of focus<\/h2>\n