Twelve weeks from whiteboard to US production. Patent Pending.

Enterprise collaboration software had a control problem. The software could pull a video feed from external sources — a Teams or Zoom call, a ClickShare input, an HDMI camera — and display it on screen. What it could not do was control those sources from inside the software's own touch interface.

The consequence showed up in every meeting room: a separate dedicated touchscreen just to switch inputs and manage the VC session. Four sources in the room meant four control surfaces on the table. Or alternatively, you bought expensive certified room systems — Teams Room or Zoom Room hardware at three to five times the cost of a standard Neat Bar-type all-in-one.

The cheaper, simpler hardware that most organisations wanted to deploy could not support the collaboration software. There was no interface layer between them. The client could not sell into those rooms without either requiring expensive hardware upgrades or accepting a degraded control experience.

No product existed that bridged this gap.

SANDER presents as a USB HID device to the host — any standard low-cost VC all-in-one becomes a valid target. The collaboration software communicates with SANDER through standard USB input channels; SANDER translates those commands into hardware control signals for every source connected to the room.

The result: four simultaneous inputs — Teams, ClickShare, HDMI, camera — all displayed and controlled from a single touch interface inside the collaboration software. No additional control hardware on the table. No room system certification required. Remote participants connected via ClickShare or HDMI inputs appear as controllable windows in the software, managed from the same screen as the call itself.

The expensive infrastructure that was previously mandatory — either a separate control system or a certified room platform — becomes optional. Organisations that wanted to run enterprise collaboration software on Neat Bar-type hardware can now do that without compromise.

Hardware design, mechanical, electrical and firmware were all in-house. The constraint on timeline was not the design — it was two specific engineering problems that took most of the quarter to solve properly.

The first: making the embedded firmware behave reliably across the range of target hardware variants that the market actually uses. USB HID implementations vary more than the spec implies; a device that behaves perfectly on one host platform can behave unexpectedly on another. Every variant in the target range needed to be validated.

The second: fitting the client's existing patented software stack into a USB-stick form factor. The client had IP that needed to run on SANDER; that IP was not designed for a thermally-constrained, physically tiny package. Embedding it without thermal headroom and without a full compute module required careful allocation of what ran where.

Both constraints shipped on time. The product went to low-volume US production inside the quarter. Client is named under NDA on request.

Your product has a gap — a use case your software cannot serve because the hardware interface does not exist. Your competitors have the same gap and are treating it as a constraint rather than an opportunity.

You need a new physical product conceived, designed and put into production on a quarter-not-a-year timeline. You need the hardware, firmware and mechanical package handled in-house, not coordinated across three separate suppliers with three separate project managers.

You need it to ship.