Sure it looks nice on paper but that energy isn't created from nothing. Have any studies been done to determine the environmental impact of removing that energy from the ocean? I'm far from a tree hugger but when I see alternative energy sources mentioned, I never see any discussion of the impact. It's as if people think that anything that doesn't burn fossil fuels is automatically eco-friendly.
They had the same goal. Provide a cheap, simple way for technphobes to get on the net.
My point is that netpliance was run by idiots who couldn't plan their way out of a wet paper sack. The way they set up their business, it was destined to fail. I brought up Virgin to point out that even a company that makes all the right moves was unable to achieve the same goal as Netpliance.
One more time. Both companies had the same goal. If the company that did everything right failed, it's a pretty good indicator that a company that couldn't even manage to write a half-assed TOS didn't stand a chance.
I seriously doubt if they would have made it. After all, look at the Virgin unit. From what I could tell, they did everything perfectly from the start. They kept control of the distribution, had a strong but fair contract, spelled out all of the requirements in advance, etc. But they're floating wrong-side up.
Netpliance, OTOH, made every possible wrong move. They didn't control distribution. They didn't have any requirements attached to the sale. Then they added a 3-month requirement (as if that would pay for the hardware). Then they tried to bully people who'd placed their orders before the new contract was in place. The list goes on. Once I saw how inept they were, I didn't feel bad at all about hacking the one I picked up. Even if the concept had been sound, Netpliance would have screwed it up royally. Better to have a few of these units out there being put to good use than all of them residing in a landfill.
BTW, if anyone wants to sell me their unused i-opener (or other web appliance)...:)
"It is simply impossible for anybody to have carried out the checks necessary to verify that watermarking had indeed been removed without damage to the music between the time the Testing Management Committee received information and the publication of the Salon.com article."
Translation:
"A cat has been thrown off a 1000' cliff but, since a qualified veterinarian has not yet performed an autopsy, you cannot conclude that the cat is dead."
Slashdot Mirror
Jamie
My point is that netpliance was run by idiots who couldn't plan their way out of a wet paper sack. The way they set up their business, it was destined to fail. I brought up Virgin to point out that even a company that makes all the right moves was unable to achieve the same goal as Netpliance.
One more time. Both companies had the same goal. If the company that did everything right failed, it's a pretty good indicator that a company that couldn't even manage to write a half-assed TOS didn't stand a chance.
Netpliance, OTOH, made every possible wrong move. They didn't control distribution. They didn't have any requirements attached to the sale. Then they added a 3-month requirement (as if that would pay for the hardware). Then they tried to bully people who'd placed their orders before the new contract was in place. The list goes on. Once I saw how inept they were, I didn't feel bad at all about hacking the one I picked up. Even if the concept had been sound, Netpliance would have screwed it up royally. Better to have a few of these units out there being put to good use than all of them residing in a landfill.
BTW, if anyone wants to sell me their unused i-opener (or other web appliance)... :)
Translation:
"A cat has been thrown off a 1000' cliff but, since a qualified veterinarian has not yet performed an autopsy, you cannot conclude that the cat is dead."