News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:YC for Hardware by pcmonk on Thursday February 05, 2015 @01:07PM (#9004749)
I'm a bit out of the loop on hardware startups, but has YC funded many successful hardware startups? The only one I've heard of is Pebble.

Lowering the barrier to hardware startups is an awesome thing, of course. Hardware has a greater potential to directly impact lives at this point than software. There's tremendous software power locked up in the small, awkward-to-use computing devices we call phones, tablets, laptops, desktops, and servers.

Re:YC for Hardware by beambot on Thursday February 05, 2015 @01:34PM (#9004939)
Pebble, Boosted, Cruise, Double Robotics, Pantelligent, Thalmic, UPower, Helion, Terravion, SoundFocus, SwapBox, Amulyte, Coin, IxiPlay, TrueLink, Estimote, Senic, ... <there are more>
Re:YC for Hardware by apendleton on Thursday February 05, 2015 @01:44PM (#9005015)
Not to nitpick, but at least some of these arguably haven't gotten far enough along yet that they can reasonably claim to be "successful." Thalmic is just getting early products to market, Helion hasn't yet built a commercial fusion reactor, etc.
Re:YC for Hardware by acgourley on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:13PM (#9005211)
I'll just point out that going into the 3rd or 4th year of YC's existence, everyone was asking this about the software companies they were funding.
Re:YC for Hardware by redthrowaway on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:23PM (#9005295)
It doesn't follow from YC's success with software companies that the model will be similarly successful for hardware companies. It's still very much an experiment at this point, and "it was once an unknown for software companies" doesn't imply that hardware companies will achieve similar success with the YC model.
Re:YC for Hardware by jeorgun on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:41PM (#9005431)
Sure, but it does mean that "few successful companies so far" shouldn't be taken as a death knell for YC's forays into hardware. By fairly direct analogy, the majority of startups not making a profit in their first month will fail, but the majority of successful startups weren't making a profit in their first month.
Re:YC for Hardware by redthrowaway on Thursday February 05, 2015 @07:22PM (#9007085)
Sure, that's a fair statement. I'm not saying that the lack of success so far is a knock against YC for hardware startups. Rather, the similar lack of success for software startups in YC at the same stage of development, and the subsequent success they did enjoy, is not a point in favour of YC's suitability for hardware startups.

Hardware and Software startups are sufficiently different in their needs and life cycles that it would be specious to use the success of a particular program for the one as indicative of its suitability for the other. Similarly, the sorts of b2c startups that YC typically funds are sufficiently different from b2g startups like Palantir that I don't think you could claim Palantir would have benefitted from YC based solely on the experiences of b2c startups.

Re:YC for Hardware by bootload on Thursday February 05, 2015 @05:20PM (#9006541)
"... It doesn't follow from YC's success with software companies that the model will be similarly successful for hardware companies. ..."

That is true. A better way to think of it, might be as an experiment. Do you remember when YC was started funding startups? The tech group-thought at the time: a toy, a joke, nothing serious, never to gain traction.

Re:YC for Hardware by jusben1369 on Friday February 06, 2015 @09:22AM (#9009053)
And not to be overly negative but this announcement would appear to be recognition that HW startups in YC are struggling with a range of issues that required these steps to be taken thus making it even more challenging to assume success in SW will equate to success in HW.
Re:YC for Hardware by tjculbertson on Friday February 06, 2015 @12:02PM (#9009940)
I think you're right. YC was lacking all of the resources that other HW accelerators provide (it's highly specialized). But looks like they now know what HW startups need, so look for YC to be a force in HW.
Re:YC for Hardware by w1ntermute on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:22PM (#9005282)
And I'll just point out that blind extrapolation from one vertical to a completely different one is usually a poor predictive strategy.
Re:YC for Hardware by paul on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:27PM (#9006243)
Hundreds of millions of dollars in sales doesn't count as success? Which non-yc hardware companies started in the last several years would you count as successful?
Re:YC for Hardware by bravo22 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:55PM (#9006407)
Thalmic has hundred of millions in sales!? or were you referring to another one from the list?
Re:YC for Hardware by larrys on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:58PM (#9006427)
It might. But profitability is important as well. Not a comment on any particular company but the idea that a company that has millions in revenue but no profits (and is floated by investors) is successful is not absolute.
Re:YC for Hardware by lbearl on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:18PM (#9006175)
>> Helion hasn't yet built a commercial fusion reactor I agree with your point, but at the same time it is somewhat amazing that we live in a world where a company can get VC funding to even make an attempt on something as ambitious as fusion.
Re:YC for Hardware by frozenport on Friday February 06, 2015 @02:17AM (#9008023)
Or perhaps it will be remembered as wasteful during the next bust.
Re:YC for Hardware by meowface on Thursday February 05, 2015 @08:47PM (#9007341)
>at least

>some

>arguably

>far enough along

>yet

I don't mean to insult you or criticize your post in any way, partly because I agree with you, but that is a lot of qualifiers for one short sentence. Diplomatic tones require them though, I suppose.

Re:YC for Hardware by chrisBob on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:28PM (#9005334)
I thought the goal of a startup was funding. Who needs commercial products?
Re:YC for Hardware by jasondc on Thursday February 05, 2015 @01:22PM (#9004861)
Boosted Boards is another one: http://boostedboards.com/
Re:YC for Hardware by spike021 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @03:31PM (#9005815)
I believe FiveStars is another hardware one, if you count NFC cards (or whichever tech they're using) as hardware.
Re:YC for Hardware by edmack on Thursday February 05, 2015 @07:25PM (#9007090)
Bellabeat
Re:YC for Hardware by fudged71 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:32PM (#9005356)
BufferBox
Re:YC for Hardware by bravo22 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:47PM (#9005477)
In all fairness they weren't really a hardware company. Their "hardware" was off the shelf. They sold the service, not the hardware.
Re:YC for Hardware by paul on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:10PM (#9006127)
Actually, no, they were building their own boxes.
Re:YC for Hardware by bravo22 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:16PM (#9006163)
I did not know that. I assumed they got them from an OEM, considering they are so cheap and readily available.

Even if they were building their own sheet metal lockers, I still don't think they were a "hardware" company. They had a great service and that's what they were selling.

Re:YC for Hardware by paul on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:24PM (#9006220)
They had to integrate the electronics as well. The most successful hardware companies (e.g. Apple) are building integrated systems including software and services.
Re:YC for Hardware by bravo22 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @04:35PM (#9006285)
I don't disagree with assertion about Apple and similar companies but they end up selling you a physical hardware product.

Bufferbox offered a service and didn't sell you a product therefore I don't think they were "hardware" company. The hardware was means to an end.

I don't think it lessens what they did. It was a good service.

Walmart has a large IT infrastructure, with sys admins and in-house developers. They also manage a lot of buildings, and warehouses. I wouldn't consider them an IT company, a property management company, or a logistics company.

Re:YC for Hardware by pj_mukh on Thursday February 05, 2015 @07:53PM (#9007190)
This is a tough call but Walmart's IT services is a core technology they own but its not customer facing at all. Bufferbox on the other hand had this customer facing hardware. In fact that hardware was a core component of their user experience. They could royally muck it up. They didn't. Kudos to them.
Re:YC for Hardware by bravo22 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @08:25PM (#9007283)
Maybe not their IT service, but their logistics and building operations certainly are.

I agree with your points regarding BufferBox, but I wouldn't say they are a hardware company producing a hardware product that you can sell to a customer. They were in an entirely different space, with very different set of challenges.

The YC post concerned companies that sell hardware to end users. Further, the initial post in this chain was someone asking if YC has had other hardware companies beyond Pebble. I don't think BufferBox is in that category.

Re:YC for Hardware by pj_mukh on Thursday February 05, 2015 @08:35PM (#9007309)
Hmmmm. The difference between hardware a user buys and takes home versus hardware a user uses to engage a service seems very slight no?
Re:YC for Hardware by bravo22 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @09:00PM (#9007373)
I think there is a large difference. It requires a different skillset to manufacture 1000 of something that consumers will buy vs manufacturing customer touch points that are owned, and serviced by the company.

Your manufacturing pipeline, volumes, service issues are all very different. So as great as BufferBox was I don't think they were a hardware company and certainly not for the purposes of this thread. I am not discounting their abilities or what they made but based on my experience they are apples and oranges.

Most of the problems kickstarter companies run into are unique supply chain, and manufacturing issues that BufferBox wouldn't have had to deal with.

Additionally, a big part of what BufferBox offered would have been in their app, and website. A locker that you can remotely lock and unlock is not difficult from an electronics point of view and had been around before.

Re:YC for Hardware by tjculbertson on Friday February 06, 2015 @12:19PM (#9010063)
So would you consider SpaceX to be a service company and not hardware? They build rockets to deliver stuff for customers. I think defining whether a company is a HW company is too narrow. If you need to build HW to build a business of serving customers, or need to build HW to sell to customers, you need to build hardware in either case.
Re:YC for Hardware by throwaway49873 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @05:44PM (#9006644)
I wasn't like it was a novel technology either. I've seen similar systems in Europe for at least a decade.
Re:YC for Hardware by Gurkenmaster on Friday February 06, 2015 @07:30AM (#9008666)
Yes. DHL the leading logistics company has scattered these: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Packstati... throughout germany.