Haddington's arm is 5-axis, which is not enough to put a tool in an arbitrary position and orientation. To put a tool in an arbitrary position (3 DOF) and orientation (3 DOF), a 6-axis arm is needed. If their encoder technology is so good, why aren't they making a 6-axis arm and going right up against Universal Robotics?

I'm not certain about this, but I believe that their arm does not have a final rotary actuator on the end of the arm. If the arm is used to hold a drill, for example, that does not matter.

I don't know about the robotics community on hn, but I use the Universal Robotics robot arms for sensor testing. Sensor Testing requires 6 DOF. Current Universal Robotics arms go for ~50k, and for that you get a highly repeatable robot arm, which is also safe for operation near humans, and with a good UI.

What is so hard about the final joint, Haddington? If this is a product decision, to go with a 5 axis first to get to market first, I disagree. At this moment, 5-axis robots seem more useful to manufacturing than to roboticists and robotics hobbyists. However, I would expect manufacturing to have long acquisition cycles, and to be more willing to select an expensive, yet proven, robotics company, than to take a chance on a cheap upstart, whatever their technology.

However, if you can get a 6DOF arm to within the budget of a university robotics class or individual hobbyist, who will be willing to take a chance on an unproven robotics startup, then these people will build word of mouth about your design. Teaching the math of robotic manipulation requires a 6+ DOF robotic arm. Students who learned on a Haddington arm will go into industry knowing the Haddington interface. Furthermore, it's much more likely for a $3k arm to be within the discretionary budget of an engineering team than a $50k one.

6DOF or bust, I just don't get it.