It seems like the root of their problem is that they didn't spend enough time/effort/experience on creating the test system.
Using things like cap-sense buttons would be very much frowned upon by most contract manufacturers, you can't use cap-sense buttons with dirty hands, gloved hands, and there's no tactile feedback to show that you actually pushed the button. This is OK for a consumer end-user mode of operation, especially if you can have haptic feedback or the screen light up or something, but in manufacturing seconds count and the operator will be doing this same motion thousands of times, making it very clear that they pushed a button is critical.
That the unit would overheat if left in the test jig for too long is a huge oversight. The functional test jig should never have this kind of issue.
That critical portions of the product were not actually tested in the test jig, it sounds like they didn't test the serial interface at all, is a huge oversight as that's a critical interface that customers will notice if it fails.
Making a functional tester for a contract manufacturer to use in mid or high volume is not an easy problem to solve. It takes almost as much effort as making the actual product work correctly in the first place.
I'm glad they found out after only 2000 units went to customers and it sounds like they're fixing the problem for their customers in a very classy way. Kudos.
"they" had no problem, they contracted manufacturing and shipping to Sparkfun. It was sparkfun that had a huge problem and paid for it (shipping replacements for free).
It's a little disappointing that most PCs don't come with parallel ports these days - they're extremely versatile for when you need a few PC-controlled GPIO pins, like when flashing firmware on a microcontroller, or a bricked motherboard/tablet/smartphone/etc's BIOS, or reading some EEPROMs on hardware you want to hack, etc...
I am sad that serial ports are disappearing from PCs, but I am glad that parallel ports are gone. They were such a horrifying GPIO interface, and yet their presence meant that every open project used them by default, and if they didn't then they used high priced tools instead. Now that parallel ports are dead, we have an abundance of affordable USB GPIO devices to choose from, from Arduinos to FTDI devices (and many others of course). And best of all, numerous devices can be connected at once via a cheap USB hub, unlike parallel port devices.
Yeah, they just learned a valuable manufacturer lesson: YOU do the QA, not the manufacturer
"The test procedure correctly tested the Microview’s functionality (display graphics, toggled GPIOs, etc) but did not test the upload functionality (minor detail...)"
True, but they can test for the presence of the bootloader ;)
I'm not blaming them really, manufacturing something and shipping is hard
In larger cities like Shenzhen, there are companies that specialize in ensuring your components are properly sourced (i.e., not counterfeit[0]), assembly, programming, testing, boxing, and shipping logistics are all taken care of. You pay a premium for the services but it's not necessarily "you" who has to do it.
> Can I fix the bad unit once I get it?
> Yes you can, but it’s not easy.
Given that it's a fixable problem, I'm wondering why they don't ask users to return the product for a free repair/replacement. There could be a couple reasons I can think of for this. First, the headache and hassle of dealing with thousands of incoming packages they have to track, fix, and ship back... it quite possibly cheaper (parts, manpower, opportunity cost) just to send another out. Second, from a customer service perspective, immediately sending out new units is just the Right Thing to do.
1) It's a slick PR move and a gesture of goodwill to provide instructions for how to unbrick the device
2) For a $30 product, the cost of shipping a unit back would be approximately equal to the BOM so it's almost as cheap to just throw it away.
> SparkFun are going to make it right and will be shipping a replacement Microview for every defective unit that was shipped.
It sounds like Sparkfun is footing the bill for replacement anyways so it's much easier to just let them go through with that rather than setting up the equipment to quickly burn the bootloader into all the defective units. Setting up that equipment wouldn't be trivial either, if they're dealing with the full ~2k defective units they'd need something more durable than the breadboard setup the article showed. It's a lot of effort and another point of failure since they'd really need to test the units again after this process incase there were any issues with their repair process/equipment.
I wonder how much the attention to crowdfunding debacles will negatively impact it's long term future as a platform for innovation (e.g. We want to make this awesome thing but can't get funded, if you really want it we'll make it) vs just a pre-order / viral sales channel. It's a shame but it's also somewhat expected since the creators are figuring it out as they go. There is no need to cover successful on time deliveries on blogs / HN but plenty of dramatic reasons to cover the troubles.
SparkFun was born out of a class I took at CU Boulder, and the CEO came and spoke to our class mid-semester about growing SparkFun (at the time close to 100 employees) out of his college apartment & classroom experience.
Good to see they're doing right by their customers, I think they're a real standup company.
Looks like a good article, I read about 1/2 of it and skimmed the rest. Would have been better if in the opening couple of paragraphs you actually explained wtf a "microview" is. Cheers.
[+] [-] bradfa|11 years ago|reply
Using things like cap-sense buttons would be very much frowned upon by most contract manufacturers, you can't use cap-sense buttons with dirty hands, gloved hands, and there's no tactile feedback to show that you actually pushed the button. This is OK for a consumer end-user mode of operation, especially if you can have haptic feedback or the screen light up or something, but in manufacturing seconds count and the operator will be doing this same motion thousands of times, making it very clear that they pushed a button is critical.
That the unit would overheat if left in the test jig for too long is a huge oversight. The functional test jig should never have this kind of issue.
That critical portions of the product were not actually tested in the test jig, it sounds like they didn't test the serial interface at all, is a huge oversight as that's a critical interface that customers will notice if it fails.
Making a functional tester for a contract manufacturer to use in mid or high volume is not an easy problem to solve. It takes almost as much effort as making the actual product work correctly in the first place.
I'm glad they found out after only 2000 units went to customers and it sounds like they're fixing the problem for their customers in a very classy way. Kudos.
[+] [-] rasz_pl|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] userbinator|11 years ago|reply
http://www.arduino.cc/en/Hacking/ParallelProgrammer?from=Mai...
But I like that they give the instructions on how to flash the firmware on it - and are encouraging people to fix these themselves.
[+] [-] jdboyd|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] retroencabulato|11 years ago|reply
Despite their mistake, I particularly like testing jig with capsense buttons (although I wonder why?)
[+] [-] dang|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] karmicthreat|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raverbashing|11 years ago|reply
"The test procedure correctly tested the Microview’s functionality (display graphics, toggled GPIOs, etc) but did not test the upload functionality (minor detail...)"
True, but they can test for the presence of the bootloader ;)
I'm not blaming them really, manufacturing something and shipping is hard
[+] [-] iheartmemcache|11 years ago|reply
[0] http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?page_id=1022
[+] [-] biot|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shalmanese|11 years ago|reply
1) It's a slick PR move and a gesture of goodwill to provide instructions for how to unbrick the device 2) For a $30 product, the cost of shipping a unit back would be approximately equal to the BOM so it's almost as cheap to just throw it away.
[+] [-] joshcrowder|11 years ago|reply
Theres a few problems with this.
1. Time - Its not my fault you sent me a broken product. Send me a new one and i'll send you back the broken one.
2. Its a terrible customer experience.
[+] [-] rtkwe|11 years ago|reply
It sounds like Sparkfun is footing the bill for replacement anyways so it's much easier to just let them go through with that rather than setting up the equipment to quickly burn the bootloader into all the defective units. Setting up that equipment wouldn't be trivial either, if they're dealing with the full ~2k defective units they'd need something more durable than the breadboard setup the article showed. It's a lot of effort and another point of failure since they'd really need to test the units again after this process incase there were any issues with their repair process/equipment.
[+] [-] brentm|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jordanbaucke|11 years ago|reply
Good to see they're doing right by their customers, I think they're a real standup company.
[+] [-] adeptus|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leoc|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Joeboy|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitJericho|11 years ago|reply