in one of my chats today, people were discussing a health tech wearable. unlike the usual rings or bracelets, this one is quite personal - a small box on an elastic band that monitors erections. as a hardware enthusiast who loves everything from radar systems to kitchen mixers (especially kitchen mixers), i find this device fascinating, but not for the reasons you might think.
let's look at what we're dealing with: a 3d-printed device priced at $185, shipping not included. in the sex toy market, a product with such build quality wouldn't even make it to release - there's no clear power indicator, the elastic band looks questionable, and it's still using micro-usb in 2024. their ios app, with a 2.3 rating in the appstore, looks like it time-traveled straight from 2012, and you'll wait nearly two months for them to even ship your order. but it's endorsed by bryan johnson (guy who's really into measuring things) and somehow got medical certification in the UK (i guess british healthcare standards are flexible).
what strikes me most is how this reflects a bigger trend. these days, companies seem comfortable shipping what are essentially prototypes. a decade ago, you wouldn't dare show such an early version even to your first investors. but here's the interesting part - is this actually bad?
the upside is clear: quick market testing and real customer feedback. it beats spending years perfecting something nobody wants. however, when you're selling a medical device (which is how they're marketing it), this raises some concerns. should we be charging premium prices for what's basically a beta product?
maybe this is just how markets evolve - speed becoming more important than perfection. or perhaps it's a symptom of recent startup culture, where "move fast and break things" applies to hardware too.
i'm curious about your thoughts: am i too skeptical on early-stage products? or have we gone too far in accepting unfinished devices as complete products?