[willcanine]

Thanks! Through user research we learned that most labs dont have robots today because 1. they are too expensive and 2. they dont have space in their lab for the huge machines currently available. Thats why we focused on low-cost and compact; the OT-2 is designed to fit on 1/2 of a standard lab bench so biologists can work alongside their robot.

OT-One was deff for the DIY crowd and there are lots of great hacks folks have done on it with our open API and hardware like plasmotron.org or this Alexa integration: https://youtu.be/s4WgCs-tH3o

On the other hand, the OT-2 is designed for the mainstream biologist, the folks that dont want to have to write code or hack hardware, just want something plug-and-play to do their pipetting for them. So far in our usability tests and for beta users, its working! :)

[silly_giraffe]

If I could add a personal number three to your list: most robots are far from robust. Running a robot becomes a full time job and require a dedicated guru to maintain it. The activation energy to use the equipment means that you must be desperate enough to deal with the pain rather than do the job manually.

[willcanine]

totally agree. lowering that "activation energy" is one of the main focuses of our UX design team, and making sure that the machine doesn't break at the smallest bump is a core part of our hardware engineering philosophy. thanks for the input, very validating for us :)