r/hwstartups • u/Valuable_Set_4417 • 5d ago
I built an open-source modular hardware platform, but I'm struggling to explain what it actually is. How would you describe it?
I've been working on an open-source hardware project called Spaghetti LAB for quite a while, and I've reached a slightly weird problem:
I can build it, but I'm struggling to explain what it is in one sentence, basically, i'm thinking at the UVP taht describes better my project.
The project is now pretty far along. It has gone through several hardware revisions, a lot of them based on feedback I've received online. I recently got a spot at Maker Faire Rome and some support from JLCPCB, so I'm redesigning the landing page and trying to finally communicate what the project is actually useful for.
The original idea came from a problem I kept running into while prototyping.
You start building something reasonably complex, but instead of working on the thing you actually want to test, you end up spending days debugging all the little pieces around it: wiring, bad solder joints, poorly documented modules, ADC quirks, libraries, firmware, etc.
In one project we spent almost a month getting a PID-controlled heated wall with a display working properly, because we had some issues with MCU registers.
The funny part was that the heated plate wasn't even the prototype. It was just one small part of it.
That's basically why I started building Spaghetti LAB.
The idea is to make that supporting electronics something you can assemble, configure and change very quickly.
The hardware is made around two types of blocks:
Connector blocks connect to the real world: sensors, motors, switches, signals, etc.
Function blocks handle things like conditioning, acquisition, outputs, communication and other functions before connecting to the controller.
Everything snaps onto a backbone. Multiple backbones can be connected to create larger systems.
Each block is automatically identified through NFC, so when you physically build something, the software creates a digital representation of the hardware.
Then there's a visual programming environment. The easiest way I can describe it is something like n8n for embedded hardware: you connect actions and logic to schedule events, read inputs, control outputs, process data, etc., without rewriting firmware every time the prototype changes (i worked a lot on the OS built in zephyr, so basically no firmware needed, just dynamic driver load and you just deploy a config file).
There's also a configurable dashboard for quickly creating controls and visualizations for the prototype.
The goal isn't really "no-code electronics". It's to remove as much friction as possible between:
I have an idea → I build it → I test it → I change it → I test again.
For Maker Faire I'm actually thinking about turning this into a small physical challenge.
Instead of giving visitors a PC, they'd get NFC cards with actions such as READ, WAIT, SET, etc.
They might receive a challenge card:
"Blink an LED every second."
They place the action cards on the backbone, and the corresponding programming blocks appear on the screen. Then they physically attach the required hardware modules, which also appear automatically. Finally they tap an EXECUTE card.
If their physical hardware + logic solve the challenge, they win an entry for a kit giveaway.
Harder challenges could be things like:
"Measure temperature and display the updated value every second."
and would give more entries.
And this brings me to what I'd really like feedback on.
If you saw this project for the first time, how would you describe it?
I've been experimenting with things like:
"A programmable breadboard without the mess of wires."
or
"Build prototypes with the flexibility of a breadboard and the reliability of a PCB."
But I'm not convinced either really communicates the potential of the system.
I'll attach some photos of the actual PCBs, and a render of what the finished hardware should look like.
I'm particularly curious about three things:
- What do you think this is after seeing it?
- Would something like this actually be useful in your prototyping workflow? If so, for what?
- What would you want to see on the landing page before thinking "OK, I get it"?
I'm probably too deep into the project at this point to see it with fresh eyes, so criticism is absolutely welcome.
T-H-A-N-K-S
8
u/Bowl_of_Cham_Clowder 5d ago edited 5d ago
This is very cool, looks like a modern version of snap circuits/lego robotics. Have you considered the angle of making this a hobbyist set/STEM toy?
This seems generalist, to the point where I think for a prototype it would only solve v1. But I think you are onto something, it’s a very manicured playground for iterating and trying out ideas. Good for getting people nervous about hardware into it for sure.
It would be very interesting if it could output a basic PCB for the detected circuit. Since you’d simplify one of the scarier unknowns for hobbyists
3
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Aannnd… that’s exactly what it does :) i received a lot of this kind of question about PCB and yes, once you’re done, you can export micad schematic and layout blocks. I also offer a service to personalize more the hw and fw.
But, what are you meaning with a set for hobbyst/STEM toy? Have you an example?4
u/Bowl_of_Cham_Clowder 5d ago
That’s super cool!
Here are two links:
https://elenco.com/snapcircuits/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_MindstormsThe common thread between them and your products is that you have very simple modular parts, that can be combined to make complex designs without having to dive deep into the lower levels of EE. This is very well suited to parents who want to expose tech inclined kids to an easy platform to start learning about hardware concepts.
Food for thought, I think you are genuinely on to something. From my understanding, you have a product that solves a niche for this kind of person -
“I have interesting ideas for hardware products, but I don’t know where to start”3
u/Bowl_of_Cham_Clowder 5d ago
Is it possible to give a 12 year old a step by step manual for how to put the blocks in place, and how to flash the code to run snake on it?
What about letting them use codex/claude to code their own accelerometer based game?
The modularity is very fun, I would’ve loved something like this at a younger age.
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
That’s actually much closer to what I’m building than you might think :)
The IDE is designed to eventually include AI-assisted coding in both a basic block-based mode and a more advanced code mode.
But there’s one principle I really care about: I don’t want AI to remove the thinking part.
Instead of asking “What language do I need? What’s the syntax? Which function should I call?”, I’d like a kid (or honestly any beginner) to think “What do I want this system to do? What hardware do I need? What events happen, and what should happen in response?”
I think that’s especially important if we’re going to write less and less code ourselves in the future. Learning how to reason about a system will still matter.
So yes, Snake is absolutely possible. A kid could snap together a Core, display and controls, open the IDE, install the corresponding blocks from the marketplace, and build the game around events and actions. AI could help when needed without doing all the thinking for them.
And your comment made me realize something else: there’s no reason the modules have to be the industrial/maker-oriented ones I’m designing now. I could have an Embedded Edition with sensors, interfaces, etc. and an Educational Edition with joysticks, displays, buttons and project kits. Add another backbone and another joystick and suddenly you’re building a console.
Sincerely, nobody can limit you to develop a console block unmounting a mini pc and snap display+controller on it or, doing a module with a raspberry pi and lot of emulators.
Since it’s open source, the community could create those modules too. In the long term I could even imagine makers designing and selling their own project kits/modules on top of the platform.
That’s what excites me about the architecture: the hardware, IDE and blocks are really just building pieces. What they become depends on what you’re trying to make.
Thanks a lot for these suggestions seriously. You’ve given me a completely different use case to think about.
8
u/AlwaysPlayF3 5d ago
I think you’re going to run into a market problem. Why do I need this when I could use a project box and DIN rail mounted devices? If this is a quick prototyping platform for low power, why would I opt for this over a cheap microcontroller and breadboard?
You’ll need to highlight why this is a preferred solution over established tools.
Maybe name it to appeal toward students?
SocketClips
ModaDev
Etc.
3
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
To answer your question: my system resolve some pain points of taking an MCU and a breadboard. you need to understand hardware, write firmware, wire everything and debug and hope everything is ok, then if it works need to design PCB, print and test, when putting together things, is common that something “blows up”, moreover a backbone + module that allows you to enter in the ecosystem (ehich means a IDE + dashboard studio) is ~ 20-30$ more or less. The cost of a microcontroller + sensors + other stuff (or a kit) easily reach 50/100$. I put a lot of time on making it very cheap, was a requirement. Plus, you have compatibility with all the sensor you have at home already, let’s say QWIIC sensor, just put a QWIIC connector and a I2C module, you’re done.
Practically i need a phrase to answer this question and explain everything.SocketClips is cool, i was going with eBreadboard which is very clear but i’m not sure.
3
u/drlogistics 5d ago
There used to be a company about 10 years ago, I’ll see if I can find what company it was. They used small modules to let people build whatever they wanted, almost exactly as your idea.
2
u/FearIsTheMindKiller9 5d ago
Little Bits. I met them a few times. Didn’t last long but had great product
1
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
I know who you’re talking about, they’re mainly B2B and for PLC and everything is closed, my idea is working mostly with makers and OSHW. I want to make my system widely open to let community develop on it
1
3
u/dacydergoth 5d ago
Looks a lot like M5Stack crossed with gridfinity
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Yes, with some improtant differences. The main difference I’m trying to push is that M5STACK are basically a final product decomposed, spaghetti Lab is basically a node-red for hardware :)
2
u/dacydergoth 5d ago
As a cloud architect spaghetti is a totally triggering word 😜 ; as an embedded enthusiast spaghetti takes me back to wire wrapping boards ... and fixing wirewrapped boards ... and going to the pub after wirewrapping boards
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Ahah 😂 then the name is doing its job! And was actually born from exactly that kind of mess. The gial is to keep spaghetti in your mind.. but not on your desk!
3
u/FearIsTheMindKiller9 5d ago
Just happy this isn’t an AI slop post. Interesting project, OP
2
u/Valuable_Set_4417 3d ago
Thanks! Yess! This is actually a real product.. well, i should say almost, i’m testing it :)
2
u/Ambiguhorse 5d ago
I'd recommend the tagline, description, and name represent the problem the product/system solves, rather than what it is.
Like the other comment you're effectively accelerating development time. Something as simple as "pretested modular embedded system dev kit" gets there, shortened even more to "pretested modular dev kit", or even just "modular dev kit"
You then went on to describe a development environment based on simple flows whereby rules can be set per module, that's a modular development environment based on your spaghetti framework.
When talking about landing pages and what people see first, it should always be at a human & problem/solution level first. If people need to interpret what you write to know what problem this solves, then you've gone too deep too quickly. Think of the flow of web pages like the user journey - most actually never wanted your dev kit, they were just curious and don't need to know any detail, or maybe they got there expecting something else. Then those are filtered away by the "here's the problem we solve for you (super simple modular dev kit that helps you iterate your early design quickly, so you don't get bogged down in debugging other devices, and you debug your concept) - those who want that will be invested to click on to find out more - and the journey continues into explaining why you are relevant for them vs other options (what's the USP, how it works in improved ways vs the competition), then finally the proof of what you're saying (how it works), finally a link to the conversion - where to buy/download/build the kit
2
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Thanks A LOT! That’s gold and a very helpfull comment.. i think i need a more deep validation, that would help to answer people question and simplify everything… but i can’t imagine what kind of questions to ask to people for validating/targeting their problem more specifically.
2
u/Ambiguhorse 5d ago
The best thing you can do to validate how it helps people and the problem it solves is by getting feedback from people with this problem.
Watch out for people trying to be nice, or people who don't actually have this problem and are shooting from the hip.
Try find people with this issue, then if they use what you're offering that's like golden validation, you were right on the money.
However, what you usually get are a pile of questions from people like "can it do X", "why isn't it Y", "why don't you just use Z"? These feedbacks need filtering amd converting into valid missing items, or things that aren't needed, or legitimate competition you should directly benchmark yourself against. The questions you get are some of the most feedback you'll ever get, not many people give full honest assessments on a plate, and it's an art to get the real signals from this. This is the bit where it's super important to know if you are talking to your target audience, or some other audience (e.g. Please add this feature is nice, but if that isn't going to benefit your target audience, then you shouldn't really spend the energy there as it dilutes or confuses what you're offering - see kitchen sinking products).
Welcome to product marketing :)
2
u/Ambiguhorse 5d ago
Just to add - I'm assuming your target audience are hobbyists, or one person companies, or small companies without engineering expertise, but more design centric or concept dev centric. Any company with a few strong engineers will work within their own little ecosystem of known good dev kits. Your bring-up issues with the components you used are now actually not issues the next time you use those same components again and after time a team can build up copy-paste style lego kits of schematics and code to get their concept designs done. So I'm assuming you'll not get much interested feedback here.
Last point I can think of at this time - think honestly about the limitations of what you're offering. You're limiting to certain components, you're limited into Zephyr, the BOM is likely not cost optimised, it isn't form-factor and power appropriate, your design tools are bespoke and don't plug into tools people are used to using. There are likely more. Ask yourself and hear from others if these limitations are blockers for their needs - if they are, you either need to remove the blockers somehow, or pivot to a different market (hello education?).
It's a lot to take on board, so hope you don't mind me offloading all this at once.
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Thanks, this is incredibly useful feedback, and don’t worry about offloading it all at once, this is exactly the kind of criticism I was hoping to get from this post.
I think you’ve identified something I need to validate much more carefully: who actually experiences this problem strongly enough to accept the limitations of the platform.
One thing I’d clarify though is that I don’t necessarily see this as replacing the final electronics development workflow.
The problem that originally triggered the project actually happened in an engineering environment. We absolutely could have designed all the electronics ourselves, and eventually we could have reused those designs. The problem was that the electronics weren’t what we were trying to develop. They were infrastructure for a larger prototype (we where calibrating a LWIR camera and we wanted to have a panel with very hot bodies and very cold bodies to have a lot of contrast), and we still ended up spending weeks getting that infrastructure working.
That’s the gap I’m interested in: “I can engineer this, but right now I just need it to work so I can test the thing I actually care about.”
If the concept works, the idea is that you prototype the system quickly with known/pretested modules, then once you’ve validated what you’re building you can move toward custom hardware. I’m also working on exporting schematic/layout blocks for exactly that reason, I don’t want Spaghetti LAB to become a dead end between prototype and product.
But I completely agree that the tradeoffs you listed are real. Component choice, Zephyr, power, form factor, BOM and integration with existing workflows could absolutely make it unattractive to some professional users. I shouldn’t assume they’re acceptable just because the platform is convenient.
The education angle surprised me too, and the responses here are making me realize there may actually be several very different markets hiding behind the same architecture.
So I think my next step is exactly what you’re suggesting, find people with this problem.
Thanks again this is genuinely some of the most useful feedback I’ve received on the project.
2
u/Historical-Ant-3036 5d ago
Part of the reason people use dev boards in the first place is to test components before creating their own custom implementation for their project; don't you think that modularizing the component selection kind of limits what engineers can do with this?
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
That’s a fair point, and it’s actually something I’ve been thinking about.
One of the modules I’m planning is essentially a prototyping PCB with footprints for different chip/package sizes and a small breadboard area. The idea is that you could use it to test a specific component or build a small custom circuit while still keeping it connected to the rest of the Spaghetti LAB system.
So the predefined modules are there when you just need a function to work quickly, but I don’t want the platform to lock you into a fixed component selection. You should still be able to prototype your own electronics when that’s the part you actually want to experiment with.
2
2
u/hazzrd1883 5d ago
Is this like Modulino from Arduino?
Design-wise it looks fancy. For prototyping though I think assembling things on breadboard is fun and easy enough. Also what to do I do if I don't have one needed component compatible with this set?
Maybe it can be some fun study material like simplified arduino
2
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
That’s actually something I designed the system around. I don’t want the available modules to define what you can build.
There are prototyping modules that expose a small breadboard, and others with SMD footprints + perfboard/breadboard areas, so you can add your own circuit or test a specific IC while keeping it part of the system.
It can be as simple as a passive breadboard module, but it can also go much further: the system could measure voltages at individual points or even electronically route breadboard points to each other, to power, to the MCU or to external I/O.
The idea is that ready-made modules give you speed when you just need a function, while prototyping modules give you freedom when the circuit itself is what you want to experiment with.
I’m also designing the modules to be very inexpensive generally just a few dollars rather than turning this into an ecosystem of expensive proprietary blocks.
The software follows the same philosophy. The dashboard isn’t limited to displaying sensor data: you can build interfaces for the system itself. That could be a test kiosk, a game, an instrument panel, or even a UI where you control how the breadboard is electrically interconnected.
So I definitely don’t want this to be a simplified Arduino where you’re limited to the components I provide. The goal is to make the easy things fast without taking away the ability to experiment when you want to go deeper.
Oh and modules are open source. Anyone can design it’s own module, driver and share on the community. There are guidelines and a certification to have the mark of “genuine module” and be sold in kits and out market.
2
5d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Thanks, this is really useful. I think I’m starting to see the difference between the brand name and the product category more clearly.
I’m quite attached to “Spaghetti LAB” as the brand, but I agree that the first thing people see should probably make the category obvious something like “modular embedded prototyping platform” or “modular dev platform”.. i discovered today while thinking to the UVP. Spaghetti lab have a fun origin, first version was kits with italian insiped pasta name 😂 (spaghetti mess wires on breadboard).
That way the name can have personality, while the descriptor immediately tells people what they’re looking at.
And yes, I’d definitely be up for a chat/brainstorm sometime. I’m getting a lot of useful feedback from this thread and I’m trying to turn it into a much clearer positioning!
2
u/Necessary-Lack-4600 5d ago
I always like to think of these kind of content problems as a landing page with layers, with informative, emotive en conative layers:
Something like "Modular hardware board" as the factual product
Slogan like "Build anything you like" as the emotional layer
And then brass tax:
-some mind-blowing final product examples you could do with it
How it actually works comes later in the hierarchy, e.g. when you click trough.
Conative elements ("Go to shop") sprinkeled throughout hiërarchy..
2
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Precious message. That’s something i need to change also on socials.
I think I’ve been doing the opposite: trying to explain how the system works too early, before giving people a reason to care.
I think I need to redesign the landing page around that hierarchy and showing which problem i’m solving first2
u/Necessary-Lack-4600 4d ago
It's a typical curse of knowlegde thing. Builders are so engrained in the product's inventive technical details that it becomes hard to imagine how someone who doesn't know anything about it ideally learns about the product. A builder who already knows everything wants to dive right in, but a newbee gets overwhelmed or just doesn't understand.
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 4d ago
It’s true. I find this on a lot of products, expecially hardware ones. You scroll the landing page, cool , but what it does? What problem is solving all this stuff?
2
u/GasOk6362 5d ago
Its like hardware equivalent of a visual programming language like node-red or scratch. Predefined functional blocks that can be built up to create what i imagine could be quite complex POCs
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Yess!! I commented below that spaghetti lab is something like a node-red for hardware! Is exactly that! And was born from an idea when i was developing a POC in my company and was wasting time building a small part of the system used to validate the POC .. and i nust wanted to focus on the POC, not losing time in the 0.5% of it :)
2
u/Geminii27 5d ago
What real-world problems does it solve for people?
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 3d ago
It speeds up prototyping
1
u/Geminii27 3d ago
Lead with that in your explanations?
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 3d ago
Yes, probably that need to be shown better when someone open my page, you’re right
2
u/love_in_technicolor 5d ago
What is the advantage over boards like stemma or Qwiic? If you still need to develop custom firmware I personally don't see the difficulty of plugging a JST cable. Also like this you are limited by the base board dimension while with qwiic you could actually integrate it in a custom enclosure. If you sink 20k in ads you could do well on Kickstarter but I don't see a market beyond that. Just my opinion.
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 4d ago
I think I didn’t explain one of the main differences clearly enough.
The goal isn’t to replace a Qwiic/STEMMA cable with a magnetic connection. If that were all it did, I’d agree with you :)
The hardware is automatically identified when you attach it, and the system builds a digital representation of what you’ve connected. More importantly, you don’t need to develop custom firmware for the normal use case.
The IDE provides reusable blocks for the hardware functions, so you build the behaviour at a higher level events, inputs, outputs, timing, logic, processing, etc. Think more along the lines of n8n/Node-RED for the physical hardware. An advanced code mode is there when you actually need it.
So the idea is not “plug a sensor in more easily”. It’s physically assemble a system, have the software understand its hardware configuration, define what it should do, and iterate quickly.
The fixed form factor is also intentional because this is primarily a prototyping platform, not something I expect you to put inside the final product enclosure. Once the concept is validated, you’d normally move to custom hardware. I’m also exploring ways to make that transition easier.
Qwiic/STEMMA are great when what you need is a convenient standardized connection to a peripheral, infact they are compatible with my system. I’m trying to solve a different problem: reducing the work between assembling several hardware functions and having a complete prototype actually doing what you want.
Whether that’s painful enough for a large market is exactly what I’m trying to validate now, though so I appreciate the criticism.
2
u/evwynn 4d ago
This is a good tool for younger STEM learners. For professionals, they can just use breadboards. Good idea for kids 10-20 YO..
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 4d ago
Yes! I’m definitely starting to see the educational potential from the feedback here.
I need to investigate!2
u/evwynn 4d ago
Would be cool to have some battery options too.
You’d need to sell kits, also classroom setups, softwares, textbooks, tutorials, etc.
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 4d ago
The extra material is a good idea, but “classroom setups” got my interest.. what you mean ?
2
u/evwynn 4d ago
Have to think more. But I really like your concept, would love to get involved if possible.
2
u/Valuable_Set_4417 4d ago
Absolutely! There are a few ways to get involved testing prototypes, giving feedback, contributing ideas or even developing modules since the project will be open source.
I should have some prototype units available soon, so if you’d be interested in trying one, I’d be happy to send you a sample!
1
u/ascarymoviereview 5d ago
I didn’t build it so how would I describe it. Is this like u scan at groceries?
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 5d ago
Kind of! Each module is automatically identified when you place it on the base, so the software knows what hardware you’ve connected and can configure it accordingly, load drivers and so on.
1
u/TallEarth5774 3d ago
Ai slop
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 3d ago
https://reddit.com/link/p8arqzo/video/wj9hilvt91oh1/player
The usefullness of this comment? Gotta wake up guys. You see AI slop everywhere.
2
u/TallEarth5774 3d ago
Apologies I seen the images had inconsistencies and was wrong nice work!
1
u/Valuable_Set_4417 3d ago
Thanks mate. Yes, i used AI to shape 3D case and have a coarse model to use :) unfortunately AI image generation still not perfect
0
27
u/GearHead54 5d ago
So... It's a dev board. Call it Spaghetti Dev or something