Components kit and assembly service

[SiasJ]

Might be of value to mention the NeuroGig Open-Hardware Support service, where interested parties can purchase the complete parts kit for self-assembly, as well as have it assembled as a service

[amchagas]

Hi @SiasJ, thanks for reaching out!

I think the service provided by NeuroGig is highly appreciated, and it will be quite useful for the community in the long run. There are however a couple of things that I would like to point out, in order to make things even more interested for all parties involved:

(This points have been made by me on previous conversations we had, maybe they went unnoticed, but they are very important for open hardware development and specially for a company that is trying to be part of this community, and generate value from the things this community creates)

• Maybe you had this as a discussion with the main developers of Open Spritzer, and I am not aware of it. In any case, there is zero indication on NeuroGig's website about how the company supports OpenSpritzer and its developers (or any other open hardware developers for that matter). As this is Open Hardware, there is no mandatory rules for NeuroGig to do so, but simply taking a design, putting up for sale for a hefty mark up and than ask developers to do advertisement for you for free is terrible practice.

• I tried checking NeuroGig's version of the OpenSpritzer online. I was super curious to see what kind of changes were made and see if there was anything we could build off. However to my surprise, to get a simple bill of materials, I had to fill out a silly form and wait a couple of days to get a PDF with the parts list. This is again terrible practice for open source hardware. Why increase the difficulty in accessing a simple BOM? Plus you basically took an open source design and are now selling it as a closed source device. Why?

[SiasJ]

Thanks @amchagas - appreciated the helpful feedback aplenty!

With regards to bullet 1 - yes, I remember our discussion well. The jury's really still out on this one...I think this needs to be approached on a case-by-case basis. In principle, it's of course just fair for the creating party to benefit (in my view, with cash) from the roll-out of their invention. I really like this idea.

But most (if not all) of the labs I've spoken to so far value the potential roll-out of their tech with suitable references much more than an "material" incentive. And then also having someone they can refer any enquiries to - again, to have wider exposure and also to save them from the hassle of having to field questions. Will be good to have a chat about this, specifically wrt the OpenSpritzer, but also more generally.

On the 2nd point - yes - that's a pain. Will change that. The main reason behind getting people to complete a form is for the sake of lead generation, which is super-challenging in any business, but especially in our industry during lockdown...But so far, we've not had much joy with this strategy, so we'd rather open up the BOM download

[amchagas]

hey @SiasJ,
Thanks for the reply. Here are some more thoughts:

I do not think this should be done on a case by case basis. This should be built in in any company that is leveraging designs they did not create. It is the correct thing to do, plus it can only benefit the company:
1- you create a relationship with the developers,
2- give them incentives to keep producing and improving the product you end up selling
3-shows the community that there is good faith and foresight in the business (as opposed to just being another "reactive" business),
4-both the points above create a track record so that eventually people will start seeking out your company as a place to deploy new things.

When people say they don't need the material incentive, I can completely understand. People are not in academia to get rich. But this is also very short sighted. I am guessing these conversations were mostly with PIs and professors? Who have stable careers and a secure source of income? Ask someone who is not on that position if they would like to secure a little bit of extra income. Even if it is just a one time thing, Even in the case of the people who say they don't need it, what about again not being just reactive and proactively telling them: "Look we have secured this amount X of money because we are selling your design. We can wire it to you, or do whatever you want with it". I doubt that anyone would say: "meh. Just put it back in your company" Even if they do, the correct thing to do here would be to donate it somewhere and make a little press release out of it.

About the BOM download, and having to fill out a form to get it: One of the most annoying things from companies selling scientific instruments is the fact that they do not have prices online. Everything is a "fill this out to get a quote" which is a super annoying way to waste our time just to grab some emails....

Sorry for the honesty here, but I have been seeing this many times over, where companies think they can start into this new open source world without leaving old habits...