4 ms·

infinitely more believable than Arrington's Well, no doubt many people are happy to assume that the person holding the soldering iron is automatically the one

infinitely more believable than Arrington's Well, no doubt many people are happy to assume that the person holding the soldering iron is automatically the one who is right. I will make no such assumption; "infinitely" is more than a little strong. ;) All I will say is: What a lose-lose situation.

tptacek 17y ago
He has two really compelling pieces of (alleged) evidence: a new working piece of hardware and the fact that there were no written contracts. That doesn't get them out of the woods legally, but if all TC has is incriminating snippets of email, it does make them more credible than TC.
- ryanwaggoner 17y ago
  The existence of the device is hardly evidence of who was responsible for creating it. The claim in question is that Arrington and crew contributed nothing to the piece of hardware in question. Michael Arrington could have built the entire thing by himself in his basement and the situation from our perspective would be the same as long as FG could get ahold of one of the devices.
  - tptacek 17y ago
    I got the impression from Arrington's own writing that Fusion Garage was primarily responsible for the nuts-and-bolts tech.
jeromec 17y ago
> Well, no doubt many people are happy to assume that the person holding the soldering iron is automatically the one who is right. I can't believe how many are making that assumption. I had been reading TechCrunch for years before the day I saw Arrington post the original hypothesis for the CrunchPad. In fact, I can probably look up my comments on Google encouraging his going forward, and suggesting features. I'm blown away at how off track this has turned out. Unfortunately, if he didn't handle the legal stuff he has to take the turmoil I guess.
rbanffy 17y ago
"many people are happy to assume that the person holding the soldering iron is automatically the one who is right" Well... If it were a chainsaw, then there would be no question whatsoever. As it is, it's the team who has the soldering iron, who wrote the code, who designed and built the prototype, who figured out production against the other guy who is known for having occasionally hidden ties to companies he talks about on his blog, who has thus doubtful journalistic standards and who posted a couple pictures, promoted the device and published stories about how it would change the world, painting himself as an internet visionary turned hardware mogul. I stay with the guy with the soldering iron on this one. Interestingly, I also can't see US$ 299 as such a ludicrous price. I doubt an e-paper display is much less expensive than a LCD twice its size and there are devices in this space that cost $299.
- cmos 17y ago
  They have reoccurring revenue - this does not.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    That could be with the Barnes & Noble and the Nook, but I doubt the Sony's generate much revenue beyond the unit purchase.

tptacek 17y ago

He has two really compelling pieces of (alleged) evidence: a new working piece of hardware and the fact that there were no written contracts. That doesn't get them out of the woods legally, but if all TC has is incriminating snippets of email, it does make them more credible than TC.

ryanwaggoner 17y ago
The existence of the device is hardly evidence of who was responsible for creating it. The claim in question is that Arrington and crew contributed nothing to the piece of hardware in question. Michael Arrington could have built the entire thing by himself in his basement and the situation from our perspective would be the same as long as FG could get ahold of one of the devices.
- tptacek 17y ago
  I got the impression from Arrington's own writing that Fusion Garage was primarily responsible for the nuts-and-bolts tech.

jeromec 17y ago

> Well, no doubt many people are happy to assume that the person holding the soldering iron is automatically the one who is right. I can't believe how many are making that assumption. I had been reading TechCrunch for years before the day I saw Arrington post the original hypothesis for the CrunchPad. In fact, I can probably look up my comments on Google encouraging his going forward, and suggesting features. I'm blown away at how off track this has turned out. Unfortunately, if he didn't handle the legal stuff he has to take the turmoil I guess.

rbanffy 17y ago

"many people are happy to assume that the person holding the soldering iron is automatically the one who is right" Well... If it were a chainsaw, then there would be no question whatsoever. As it is, it's the team who has the soldering iron, who wrote the code, who designed and built the prototype, who figured out production against the other guy who is known for having occasionally hidden ties to companies he talks about on his blog, who has thus doubtful journalistic standards and who posted a couple pictures, promoted the device and published stories about how it would change the world, painting himself as an internet visionary turned hardware mogul. I stay with the guy with the soldering iron on this one. Interestingly, I also can't see US$ 299 as such a ludicrous price. I doubt an e-paper display is much less expensive than a LCD twice its size and there are devices in this space that cost $299.

cmos 17y ago
They have reoccurring revenue - this does not.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  That could be with the Barnes & Noble and the Nook, but I doubt the Sony's generate much revenue beyond the unit purchase.