In hardware automation, a "go slow to go fast" approach is essential. Iterations are too slow and costly once hardware is built. Front-loading validation through drawings and simulations avoids major architectural issues that often get buried later due to project momentum or "go fever."

Counterintuitively, the "move fast and break things" mantra fails in hardware. Mock Industries achieved a 71-day aircraft development cycle not by rushing tests, but by investing heavily in software and hardware-in-the-loop simulation to run thousands of virtual cases before the first physical flight.

While software development champions agile methods, chip design is necessarily a "waterfall" process. The massive, irreversible cost of fabrication means the architecture must be finalized before implementation (writing Verilog). This elevates the importance of the initial, pre-code architecture and simulation phase.

Unlike software’s iterative nature, hardware decisions are "one-way doors." Choosing a component is a multi-million dollar commitment. The risk is amplified because giants like Apple can absorb the entire global supply of a single part, forcing smaller companies into costly redesigns overnight.

Software companies struggle to build their own chips because their agile, sprint-based culture clashes with hardware development's demands. Chip design requires a "measure twice, cut once" mentality, as mistakes cost months and millions. This cultural mismatch is a primary reason for failure, even with immense resources.

Unlike software, hardware iteration is slow and costly. A better approach is to resist building immediately and instead spend the majority of time on deep problem discovery. This allows you to "one-shot" a much better first version, minimizing wasted cycles on flawed prototypes.

In aerospace and defense, the classic Silicon Valley motto is dangerous. Hardware failures can lead to physical harm and mission failure, unlike software bugs. This necessitates a rigorous testing and evaluation stack to prevent edge cases before deployment, making speed secondary to safety and reliability.

Unlike pure software, building software for a physical product imposes immovable deadlines dictated by hardware manufacturing and shipping lead times. This forces software teams to abandon flexible, continuous iteration in favor of a highly-focused, delivery-oriented mindset to ensure the software is ready when the hardware is.

Returning founder Jamie Siminoff cut an 18-month hardware development cycle to under 7 months. He did this by challenging the "why" behind every process step and eliminating generous time buffers, arguing that excess time guarantees that delays will fill it.