Upverter - Hardware design tools for the web
upverter.com
upverter.com
So in perspective the product is interesting, a collaborative tool. The pricing model seems a bit broken from an actual use case standpoint. Perhaps they could go to a 'price per private design' kind of thing.
We based the pricing on our pilot users, and what they were willing to spend to be able to collaborate. We would love to chat if there is a different price you are willing to pay!
And for what its worth, we are working hard on PCB layout right now, and with any luck will be able to launch it in the next few months.
Something you might offer for 'free' would be something like Google's ChartServer API but 'schematic server' API. That is something I've been building in my spare time off and on. You are a lot closer than I am and I've yet to figure out if I want to use HTTP POST or a split URL syntax.
Can you imagine something like:
<img src="http://upverter.com?sch=dropbox.com/chuck/schematics/foo.sch" height=200 width=300>
A way to embed the shared schematic in web pages or blogs, or whatever. Feel free to contact me offline for ideas on ways to monetize this kind of stuff.We are actually working on a transcriber (https://github.com/upverter/schematic-file-converter), dropbox integration. And behind the scenes were doing "print" button style manufacturing for our more enterprise users (ie. click print and we get a one-off manufactured and mailed to you)
Every upverter schematic has an embed code and a ton of our traffic is driven from people importing their schematics and sharing them on their blogs.
Various "buy now" buttons could deliver complete BOMs, circuit boards with BOMs, or turnkey products. A future move into mechanical CAD and graphics design could see a boxed product landing on the customer's doorstep.
It strikes me that the difference between Upverter and any other EDA software is the collaborative/community aspect. Consequently Upverter's competitive advantage will arise from features that exploit the community aspect.
Also were working on the really simple things like just suggesting parts or implementations based other users designs.
Thanks for the ideas, I'd love to chat sometime!
I suspect you can innovate quite a bit on the HDL front and then doing everything server-side should really give you a cost advantage as well. I can also see the open source aspect of this taking off - a high quality of library of plug and play cores that can be seamlessly integrated into your designs might prove to be a significant competitive advantage.
My own application provides relatively high-level collaborative design functionality, and does not attempt to replicate the functionality of existing tools that are capable of very low-level simulation, analysis, and engineering. I imagine that it's a similar situation for hardware design, although probably with fewer tiers of software -- presumably Upverter users are working at a level that's much closer to the end result of the hardware-production process. Still, there must be existing (offline) design platforms with low-level functionality that you don't want to replicate in its entirety; these are presumably embedded in the workflows of existing hardware design houses in a way that will be difficult to supplant. Have you considered eventually producing plugins for these 3rd-party platforms, which would keep their designs in sync with the cloud-hosted model? This way, high-level design could be done in the browser, and low-level simulation etc. can be done in existing applications, while still taking advantage of Upverter's collaboration functionality.
This, of course, is my own long-range plan, although the web application is very much the initial focus. Just wondering if you've had similar thoughts, and if so, whether you've found such a strategy to have any particular merits or flaws that you'd care to discuss?
What support is there for hardware description languages? HDL is good for large projects and is more reusable than a schematic.
One suggestion is to have a component library that is shared among all users. Each person adds components as they need them, and the library grows, as a community resource over time. Maybe you have that already? If you do have it, what license covers the library? Is it covered by the same open source license as the schematics of the users that generated the library? In that case, is it free for any user to export and reuse in full? Such a feature would negate some of the "vampire" accusations leveled by the dangerousprototypes review.
What's the advantage over gEDA, gHDL or similar? Most people with the knowledge to design a circuit would also have the knowledge to set up a tool chain and repository. Who's the market?
Our HDL support is non-existant right now. We do have an open file format which can be created from or parsed to HDL. Do you work in HDL right now? I'd love to chat about this with you sometime - we come from the world of very large system design and there is almost no HDL usage at the system design level.
We do have a common library, all community entered and more than half edited by someone different than the creator. The library is free and public. We have a number of users of the library who havent yet adopted the rest of the upverter tool chain.
I think your answer is, "we're focused on design & community." But I wonder if you might reconsider yourselves the "Codecademy of hardware" instead?
(FPGA guy here - used to using VHDL/Verilog for digital logic simulation and synthesis, never considered it for board design)
(Note: I'm not in any way, shape or form related to Upverter)
Github generally have a pretty good standing in the open source community. The reason seems to be the early open sourcing of grit and then, as their popular blog post says, "(almost) everything".[1]
Also that github don't enforce any lockin on your data (neither does Upverter from what I can see.[2])
If Upverter manage to adopt & project this same attitude (open sourcing every useful but not-core-business piece of software), I think they could turn this piece of bad publicity around. I suspect this would be to their immense benefit if they can court the open hardware community. Having people like Dangerous Prototypes supportive or neutral, rather than openly attacking them, would definitely help.
Not to mention that software for electronics nearly universally sucks (at least at FOSS & cheap levels.) Crying out for some quality products.
[1] http://tom.preston-werner.com/2011/11/22/open-source-everyth...
[2] http://blog.upverter.com/import-and-export-upverter-open-jso...
The goal with Scheme-it to be an electrical engineering "Visio" type application.
one thing though - since you guys are after hobbyists and small design firms and it seems like it's a fairly small market with very little money to be made.
but it's very likely that you guys will be acquired by one of the larger CAD tool companies.
hardware design is not like software design because plenty of companies are already sell hardware building blocks that can be tweaked with software to develop an application. Very rarely you have to redesign hardware from scratch. These companies provide their customers (which include hobbyists/small design firms) with schematics. Their customers may tweak the schematics rather than designing everything from scratch, so collaboration may not be the highest pain point here.
I wonder though, does Upverter currently support low-level logic/CMOS circuit simulation? I know that's asking a lot out of a web app, but using Cadence for simulation is often overkill for most hobby projects, and I have yet to see a modern web app/startup that serves this niche.
p.s. I am one of the founder of Upverter