They arrive from a parametric search with three tabs open and one question: does the performance hold at their operating point. Most electronics sites answer with a photograph of a component on a gradient.
Five reasons electronics and photonics websites underperform, even when the engineering behind them is excellent.
What a design engineer needs first, what procurement needs, and how the catalogue is navigated.
Package, module and thermal path, modelled from drawings and animated to explain rather than to impress.
Parametric tables and performance curves designed to be read and filtered on a phone.
A system applied page by page, not one template stretched across the site.
Webflow or static, built in-house, tuned for Core Web Vitals on a poor connection.
Structured, fast and quotable, so search engines rank it and answer engines cite your parameters correctly.
Weeks from kickoff to live. Fixed scope, fixed timeline, one price.
Stock component photography. If it is your part on the page, it is your part in the render.
Disciplines in one room: strategy, copy, design, 3D, build and collateral.
A fast, well-built site cannot rescue unclear positioning. If the category and the moat are not settled, start there.
Yes. For a component company it is usually the single highest value part of the site, and the part most often left until last.
Both. The datasheet stays authoritative, and the key curves belong on the page where the comparison is actually happening.
Either. Webflow when the team needs to edit without us, static when performance and control matter more.
Nine to sixteen weeks for design, 3D and build. Fixed scope, fixed timeline, one price.
Yes, and it is the normal starting point. Most of what makes a deep tech company defensible is unpublished.
Thirty minutes, no deck. We will tell you what your site is hiding, what it is loading badly, and what an answer engine currently thinks you do.
Book a 30-minute audit →(opens in a new tab)