Lily wins CES 2016 Innovation Award

My gob is truly smacked.

Lily have won an award! That’s an award for a system that has yet to demonstrate its claimed abilities in the real world. There are plenty of small business that are working hard and building platforms that are making money for their owners. They don’t have crowd sourced or VC funds to burn down attending big shows. Lets see, Event38, Aeromao, Mavinci are three that immediately spring to mind.

If the drone world is to grow up in the USA the sizzle needs to be ignored a little more and the beef thoroughly tasted before honours are handed out. Lily did not fly at the Drone Rodeo, an event arranged at the start of CES in a field just outside of the main venue. Nor did it fly inside the venue, the Lily crowd have a suite but will not be flying due to technical difficulties.

Here is how they were selected from the CES website http://cesweb.org/innovation.aspx

Each product category has a three-member judging team comprised of an independent industrial designer, an independent engineer and a member of the trade press. 

The three-member judging team gives a numerical value to each of the below criteria. The scores are combined, resulting in a cumulative score for each product. A baseline value is derived from the cumulative scores in a category. All scores above the baseline are designated as Honorees.

The Best of Innovation Award will be awarded to the highest-rated product in each category, as long as that product surpasses a previously-determined minimum score. If the highest-rated product in a category does not surpass the minimum score, there will be no Best of Innovation Award for that category. All award designations by our judges are final.

Entries are evaluated on the following criteria:

General Entries

1. Engineering qualities
2. Aesthetic and design qualities
3. The product’s intended use/function and user value
4. Why the product deserves the Innovation Award, including specifics regarding its unique/novel features and features that consumers would find attractive
5. How the design and innovation of this product directly compare to other products in the market place

Software and Mobile Apps Entries

1. Intended use, function, and user value
2. Aesthetic and visual qualities
3. Perceived ease of use/user-friendliness
4. Why the software deserves the Innovation Award, including specifics regarding its unique/novel features and features that consumers would find attractive
5. How the design and innovation of this software directly compare to other products in the market place

Tech For A Better World Entries

1. Engineering qualities
2. Aesthetic and design qualities
3. The product’s intended use/function and user value, specifically in regard to how it can make a positive impact to the quality of life for its users, or those affected by its use
4. Why the product deserves the Innovation Award, including specifics regarding its unique/novel features and features that consumers would find attractive
5. How the design and innovation of this product directly compare to other products in the market place

—-

There was plainly nobody from the RPA community involved in the judging.