ByteSnap Design vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
ByteSnap Design (4.3/5) edges ahead of Very (3.8/5) overall. ByteSnap Design is the better choice for UK companies needing electronics and firmware from one team. Very is the stronger option for US companies building a first connected product. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
ByteSnap Design vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | ByteSnap Design | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2008 | 2011 |
| HQ | Birmingham, UK | USA (fully distributed) |
| Team size | 11–50 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Small UK team covering PCB design, Linux and Android bring-up, and MCU firmware | Product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, time & materials | Time & materials, fixed project |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Embedded Linux | C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Energy & EV charging, Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
ByteSnap Design vs Very: overview
ByteSnap Design
Graeme Wintle and Dunstan Power founded ByteSnap Design in Birmingham in 2008, and both still run it from Park Point in Longbridge. With about 40 people, it is small by the standards of this list but covers a wide technical spread: schematic and PCB design, embedded Linux and Android board bring-up, RTOS firmware and touch interfaces. It is a Silicon Labs certified design partner and an Analog Devices partner. Trade press has linked recent growth to medical device work, alongside EV charging and industrial clients.
Very
Very is a US IoT engineering firm that grew out of a design and development agency founded in 2011 and now works as a distributed team, with its earlier base in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Directory listings put its size at 51 to 200 people. It builds IoT products across hardware engineering, firmware, mobile apps and data, and it hired a co-author of the Nerves project, which runs Elixir on embedded Linux. Reviews mention hardware, firmware, React Native and AI feature work, so firmware is one part of a broader product offer.
Services and capabilities: ByteSnap Design vs Very
| Capability | ByteSnap Design | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Bare-metal & RTOS firmware | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded Linux & BSP | ✓ | ✓ |
| Electronics & PCB design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Wireless & IoT connectivity | ✓ | ✓ |
| Secure boot & OTA | ✗ | ✗ |
| FPGA development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Firmware testing & HIL | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: ByteSnap Design vs Very
| Framework / platform | ByteSnap Design | Very |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | ✓ |
| Yocto | ✓ | N/A |
| AUTOSAR | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | N/A | N/A |
| Nordic | N/A | ✓ |
| NXP | ✓ | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: ByteSnap Design vs Very
| Criterion | ByteSnap Design | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Time & materials | Fixed project, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: ByteSnap Design vs Very
| Dimension | ByteSnap Design | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Energy & EV charging, Industrial IoT | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
| Best use cases | Designing a Linux-based EV charger controller board and its software, Building a Silicon Labs Zigbee smart-home device | Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot, Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
ByteSnap Design vs Very: pros and cons
| ByteSnap Design | |
|---|---|
| + | Founder-led team where senior engineers stay involved in delivery |
| + | Covers both MCU firmware and Linux or Android on application processors |
| + | Silicon Labs certified design partner, useful for Zigbee, Thread and BLE products |
| + | Offers free design clinics, which lowers the cost of an initial technical review |
| - | Around 40 people limits capacity for multiple large programmes at once |
| - | UK pricing is higher than offshore alternatives |
| - | Less visible experience in automotive functional safety than larger engineering firms |
| Very | |
|---|---|
| + | Combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware |
| + | Nerves experience is rare and useful for Elixir-based device software |
| + | Delivers the device, app and data platform together |
| - | Firmware is one part of a product agency offer |
| - | US rates without a lower-cost offshore option |
| - | Office location and headcount details vary between sources |
Who should choose ByteSnap Design?
A typical fit: designing a Linux-based EV charger controller board and its software.
Small UK team covering PCB design, Linux and Android bring-up, and MCU firmware. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Energy & EV charging, Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics.
Who should choose Very?
A typical fit: taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot.
Product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging.
Decision matrix: ByteSnap Design vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | ByteSnap Design |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: ByteSnap Design (Not disclosed) vs Very (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | ByteSnap Design |
| You need engineers to extend your own firmware team | Neither lists a dedicated-team model |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: ByteSnap Design vs Very
| Use case | ByteSnap Design fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Designing a Linux-based EV charger controller board and its software | Strong | Limited | ByteSnap Design |
| Building a Silicon Labs Zigbee smart-home device | Strong | Limited | ByteSnap Design |
| Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot | Limited | Strong | Very |
| Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux | Limited | Strong | Very |
| Fixed-price firmware build | Strong | Strong | Both |
| Extending an in-house firmware team | Strong | Strong | Both |
Verdict: ByteSnap Design vs Very
ByteSnap Design (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Small UK team covering PCB design, Linux and Android bring-up, and MCU firmware.
Very (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux. If your situation matches that, Very is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
ByteSnap Design vs Very FAQ
Is ByteSnap Design better than Very?
ByteSnap Design (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. ByteSnap Design's strongest advantage: founder-led team where senior engineers stay involved in delivery. Very's strongest advantage: combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware.
How do ByteSnap Design and Very differ in pricing?
ByteSnap Design uses fixed project, time & materials pricing. Very uses time & materials, fixed project pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: ByteSnap Design or Very?
Very is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each service provider before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between ByteSnap Design and Very?
ByteSnap Design's primary differentiator is: small UK team covering PCB design, Linux and Android bring-up, and MCU firmware. Very's primary differentiator is: product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience. They also differ in team size (11–50 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Energy & EV charging vs Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.