Loading...
Answers
MenuI am wondering if there is a technology that allows you to have one device ping another without using wifi, data, etc.? Like a paging system.
This question has no further details.
Answers
Great question - I have worked on several projects relating directly to what you are describing (based on my initial understanding) including providing software interfacing for mobile/PC/TV for large-scale hardware manufacturers as well as for mobile devices connecting to sensors and translating/reading data sent from equipment buried several feet under the ground to track eco changes for contractors. Assuming by device we are referencing mobile/smartphones (and possibly connectivity with hardware on two different platforms?), in which case I would imagine Bluetooth connectivity should be able to get the job done for you. There are really a lot of factors that could go into either how to utilize Bluetooth, or if an alternative path towards connectivity would be required (the device types you're connecting, their congruence/similarity, if there are prompts on the push/pull pinging, where the data from each activity is being housed once completed, geo-relevancy and latency requirements to name a few.) I'd be happy to set aside a few minutes to talk about the details of your project and provide any additional insight I can on how can you connect these devices and build out your system.
Hi — the question needs more context, to see what environment you are trying to have this run on. "Ping" will need some sort of transport network; although it doesn't have to use the Internet or wifi.
Let me know if you want to discuss it further.
I'm an engineer with very extensive experience in hardware prototyping, some of which has led to millions of dollars of investment.
Yes there are many many ways that two electronic devices could communicate with each other without using "wifi or data". Each of these alternatives would have different advantages depending on the situation in which you wish to use the devices (range, ambient light conditions, etc).
If you would like to discuss this give me a call.
Related Questions
-
What is the best method for presenting minimum viable products to potential customers?
Whoa, start by reading the Lean book again; you're questions suggest you are making a classical mistake made by too many entrepreneurs who live and breath Lean Startup. An MVP is not the least you can show someone to evaluate whether or not building it is a good idea; an MVP is, by it's very definition, the Minimum Viable Product - not less than that. What is the minimum viable version of a professional collaboration network in which users create a professional profile visible to others? A website on which users can register, have a profile, and in some way collaborate with others: via QA, chat, content, etc. No? A minimum viable product is used not to validate if something is a good idea but that you can make it work; that you can acquire users through the means you think viable, you can monetize the business, and that you can learn from the users' experience and optimize that experience by improving the MVP. Now, that doesn't mean you just go build your MVP. I get the point of your question, but we should distinguish where you're at in the business and if you're ready for an MVP or you need to have more conversations with potential users. Worth noting, MOST entrepreneurs are ready to go right to an MVP. It's a bit of a misleading convention to think that entrepreneurs don't have a clue about the industry in which they work and what customers want; that is to say, you shouldn't be an entrepreneur trying to create this professional collaboration network if you don't know the market, have done some homework, talked to peers and friends, have some experience, etc. and already know that people DO want such a thing. Presuming you've done that, what would you present to potential users BEFORE actually building the MVP? For what do you need nothing more than some slides? It's not a trick question, you should show potential users slides and validate that what you intend to build is the best it can be. I call it "coffee shop testing" - build a slide of the homepage and the main screen used by registered users; sit in a coffee shop, and buy coffee for anyone who will give you 15 minutes. Show them the two slides and listen; don't explain, ONLY ask.... - For what is this a website? - Would you sign up for it? Why? - Would you tell your friends? Why? - What would you pay for it? Don't explain ANYTHING. If you have to explain something, verbally, you aren't ready to build your MVP - potential customers don't get it. Keep working with that slide alone until you get enough people who say they will sign up and know, roughly, what people will pay. THEN build your MVP and introduce it first to friends, family, peers, etc. to get your earliest adopters. At some point you're going to explore investors. There is no "ready" as the reaction from investors will entirely depend on who you're talking to, why, how much you need, etc. If you want to talk to investors with only the slides as you need capital to build the MVP, your investors are going to be banks, grants, crowdfunding, incubators, and MAYBE angels (banks are investors?! of course they are, don't think that startups only get money from people with cash to give you for equity). Know that it's VERY hard to raise money at this stage; why would I invest in your idea when all you've done is validate that people probably want it - you haven't built anything. A bank will give you a loan to do that, not many investors will take the risk. Still, know not that your MVP is "ready" but that at THAT stage, you have certain sources of capital with which you could have a conversation. When you build the MVP, those choices change. Now that you have something, don't talk to a bank, but a grant might still be viable. Certainly: angels, crowdfunding, accelerators, and maybe even VCs become interested. The extent to which they are depends on the traction you have relative to THEIR expectations - VCs are likely to want some significant adoption or revenue whereas Angels should be excited for your early adoption and validation and interested in helping you scale.PO
-
What does it mean to 'grandfather you in' in the tech world?
It stands for allowing someone to continue doing or use something that is normally no longer permitted (due to changing regulations, internal rules etc.)OO
-
Should you split equity equally with a tech cofounder if you have an MVP, some traction but you know that you're going to need a CTO when it takes off
If you and this person, *know* they won't be the CTO, then absolutely not. If there's an understanding that the engineer you are working with is going to "cap out" soon beyond the MVP, why would you ruin your cap table? This *should* help you get a reasonable amount of equity. http://foundrs.com/ The most crucial question is where this current contributor is likely going to be out of their element. Are they only front-end and have no back-end ability? If so, you really should raise (from a friend or family member) or borrow the money necessary to pay this person a reasonable cash rate. If on the other hand, they can take a successful MVP and build a reasonable back-end but will cap out on scaling it past 100,000 users, or for example, you're an enterprise company and you know you'll require a technical person to be part of closing early sales, then it's ok to give up meaningful equity. But another key question is: Are you ok to let this person define your company's engineering culture? If this person isn't capable of or comfortable managing your tech team in the early-days, this person should have no more than 10% equity. Of course, your shares and theirs (whatever you decide) should be subject to a vesting agreement (minimum 3 years and preferably 4). It's easy to give away equity when it's worth very little but as I've said here before on Clarity, imagine your company today being worth $100,000,000. Can you imagine this person contributing $20,000,000 worth of value to achieve that outcome? $30m? $50m? Here's the thing though. If this person can grow into a CTO, and wants the chance, and there's no warning signs that it will be a tough slog for them to get there, and they're a passionate believer in what's been built to date, then it's entirely reasonable to bet (with equity) that they can get there. I know a lot of CTO's of great Series A and beyond companies with amazing traction that started off as lacking a lot of the criteria of a great CTO candidate. This is an area I've helped coach a lot of startup CEOs through and have experience in myself. Happy to talk through in a call to understand the specifics of your scenario and provide more detailed advice.TW
-
I've been working on an app concept for 6 months and built an MVP. Is it better to pay a development firm to build or hire a developer as a cofounder?
I have built two software companies by hiring out the development work. I sold one for a decent sum during the dot com era (circa 1999). I remain a shareholder in the other one. I currently work with amazing development company on behalf of one of my clients. Here are some things to consider. 1. Do you really want to give up equity? If not outsource. 2. How fast do you want to get to market? If sooner than later, outsource. 3. How capitalized are you? If undercapitalized, either outsource offshore (which runs about 20% of US rates), or bring on an equity development partner. I offer a free call to first time clients. Let's chat and I'll give you some great advice from three decades of experience. Just use this link to schedule the free call: https://clarity.fm/kevinmccarthy/FreeConsult Best regards, Kevin McCarthy Www.kevinmccarthy.comKM
-
What companies have successfully implemented both B2B and B2C products or services? Which should I start with for the non-profit sector?
I would suggest the first question to ask is "what problem do I solve?" And of those people I solve problems for "who do I create the most value for?" In the non-profit world you need to add "How does my business help the non-profit run better and/or help the group the non-profit focuses on?" For example, if you've created a platform that drives donations, your company "has created a platform that helps you reach fundraising goals faster." What you don't want to do is market and sell to B2B and B2C audiences simultaneously. They have different ways of buying - a B2B audience needs to have their benefits quantified (using your thing makes me x amount more) - and it's extremely hard for a startup to be able to do both well. Better to start with one, execute really well and move into the other. Feel free to give me a call and we can dig into who your most valuable audience is.AV
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.