Believe it or not, one of the biggest compliments we have ever heard is that
our product is “mature.” This is a bigger compliment than almost anything
we can think of. Since we build specialized 3D metrology systems for
specific applications, that stamp of approval from a customer means we’ve
crossed our “t’s” and dotted or “i’s” to produce something that not only a
customer can relate to as a success, but also provides the comfort and peace of
mind of a well-executed solution.
Every technology we develop serves a specific purpose, and often a
combination of technolgies come together to form an integrated solution.
One of the challenges of this type of business is that the difficult, advanced,
or high-tech aspects of the solution must fade invisibly into the
background so the end user doesn’t perceive them as difficult, high-tech,
or advanced. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, from GUI
(graphical user interface) design, to logic structures that intelligently
execute the commands seamlessly within the environment.
However, the nuances of the real world turn these human-machine inteface
designs and logic structures into the crux of the problem: how can our metrology
system perform, in a way that is completely intuitive to the end user, all of
the functions required, and as efficiently as possible? One
could argue that the underlying technology is what makes a product “mature,” but
we assert that the human-machine interface is just as important. This
includes obvious things like reduction of mouse clicks, adaptive settings
relative to the environment, hardware implementation, and a well-defined picture
of the psychology of the end user. But it actually goes much deeper than
this. What we really want to do is design the software to be an embodiment
of the end user’s trade knowledge.
After, all, the trade knowledge was there long before the software. It,
in fact, is what is mature. The software is simply an extension of what
has already existed.
So, we ask: is your 3D metrology solution “mature?” Does its language,
execution, and pace fit completely or near-completely within the cumulative
experience of each specific end user? It should.