4 ms·

Why Michael Arrington Is The Real Winner In The CrunchPad Ordeal

26 points by kloncks 17y ago

j2d2 17y ago
I agree. $499 is a deal-breaker for me. I will happily wait for Apple's device now.
- netcan 17y ago
  I also think the price isn't right and that I can't imagine many sales at that price. But you must admit that presenting "let's make it for $199" as a valuable idea is annoying. It's like those 'think outside the box' speakers that present Apple's "idea" as "Let's make a computer that isn't as big as a fridge and is cheap enough to be bought by normal people." There's an Ali G presents to Donald Trump aspect to it.
- teej 17y ago
  $499 is a dealbreaker? How much do you expect the (imaginary) Apple Tablet to cost?
  - Devilboy 17y ago
    It will be $599 and only come in white, but it won't matter. Everyone will buy it anyway.
    - Andys 17y ago
      Why would it be cheaper than an iphone?
      - Devilboy 17y ago
        It won't make phonecalls so you still have to buy the improved 2010 iPhone too of course.
  - allenbrunson 17y ago
    Apple can make a tablet for $499 and people will seriously consider it. Heck, I'd go down to the nearest Apple store and ogle the thing myself. I was one of the early adopters who paid 600 bucks for an iPhone, so I don't consider that terribly overpriced. But $499.00 for a product from an unknown entity like Fusion Garage? eh. from what I've seen of them so far, they don't have Apple's flair for design. So now it's more of a stretch. They'll get some sales from gadget-happy early adopters, but it's going to take a whole lot of feel-good word-of-mouth reporting in the blogosphere before it will hit the mainstream.
- dgallagher 17y ago
  I'm trying to imagine what the Apple Tablet is going to be. What "breakthrough" feature does the Apple Tablet have to have to be game changing? How will it be any different than something like the Joo Joo? Besides a shiny case and slick UI of course. Why do we even need a tablet computer? What will it do better than laptops/netbooks currently on the market? Microsoft's Courier looks game changing, especially compared to their current Tablet PC offerings. Very slick looking, albeit vaporware at the moment. I'd imagine Apple would have to be just as amazing, though possibly in a different direction than the student/business note-taking market Microsoft is targeting. Microsoft seems to be in a very niched market here.
  - jsz0 17y ago
    Most likely good third party app support. A tablet that is only a web browser is a bit boring. People really like convergence. An Apple tablet that is a media player, browser, and runs games and apps is something special. No one has actually tried producing a tablet with native third party apps that fit the screen perfectly and are designed to interact with a multi-touch input system. Additionally if they have these rumored agreements in place with publishers they're going to be able to offer a much more visually appealing experience. As usual with Apple it's not any one thing it's just a bunch of small things that all come together in a nice package.
alaskamiller 17y ago
My vision for the future involves ending world hunger, a Mars base, and an alternative energy source to power everything in the world. To accomplish these things I will set a budget of $5 dollars. Because I see it's the right amount of money to charge for all that. I'm going to call my plan "The Future." Since I just wrote about it online, in a comment, any time any one reference The Future, or even mention the future, and it includes some aspect of my plan I demand you credit me and attribute me as being involved. Because I wrote about the idea first. Also, the blogosphere agrees with me about ending world hunger, having a Mars base, and the need for an alternative fuel source so I'm right. Because we all know if it's popular then it's more important than the truth and popular people are always the best judges of plausibilities in an intellectual property legal dispute where there are no legal documents. This is why Michael Arrington won.
- Ixiaus 17y ago
  "The Psi Corps is your friend. Trust the Corps."
- jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
  Now I'm reminded why we are friends- well said.
- nikcub 17y ago
  your analogy would be really cool and interesting if it applied in this case, but it doesn't. I was involved in the Crunchpad from day 1 and we actually built a lot of things - long before anybody else came along. You might have a different viewpoint if you have ever had anything you built or were involved with stolen from you. It sucks. Not just from an IP perspective, but from a 'lets ride this wave while it suits us' perspective as well.
  - alaskamiller 17y ago
    I recently got screwed over a project, too, and it does suck. And if anyone from TC contributed code, designs, and energy, then, of course, you deserve your take. This is a legal dispute between two parties and I hope a fair conclusion can come out of that. But I don't have any more information on the matter than the author of this blog post--unless you guys sent him all the legal papers or he's the arbitrator in the dispute, then by all means I'll eat my hat--and I find his use of flawed logic, piling on to the drama, and a mention of an unannounced and unseen Apple tablet is just... lame. Especially the part about wanting a tablet for $200. I want a pony that poops ice cream.
jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
if it was more than a toy, 499 would be fine with me. the atom processor (if its the dual core) is okay. the hard drive space, memory, and overall os just aren't appealing. at 499 I want a real computer, not a toy. that's my problem with things like chromeos- they're gravitating us towards a lower common denominator of computing. were conditioning people to go for cheap toys, that don't really do much. i'd rather go for things that don't cost a ton, but cost something and act like a real computer.
- stcredzero 17y ago
  The thing would be vastly more powerful than an Apple II. The Apple II wasn't a "real computer?" Maybe we need to clarification on definitions? My point: what's most salient for how useful a processor or any piece of hardware, is to what purpose that hardware is going to be put. If the thing is just for browsing then it probably has enough. Whether just browsing fits a lot of people's use of the web is another matter. (If it's just an adjunct to another machine, why not have it map the user's Downloads directory?)
- bmj 17y ago
  I agree. For that price (or a bit more), I can get a netbook that actually acts like computer. If I have to carry something that isn't going to fit in my pocket, I'd rather it be more practical.
Ixiaus 17y ago
The CrunchPad was a cool idea, what would make it a real winner for hackers is if the hardware and software were open sourced. I know hardware is a bit more difficult to open source, especially if you are purchasing necessary components from other vendors, but it's still a fun idea. esp. for something like the CrunchPad :)
gojomo 17y ago
A working, shipping $499 tablet is a more important step on the path to a $199 tablet than just wishing for a $199 tablet.
- smoody 17y ago
  couldn't have said it better myself.
- jrockway 17y ago
  But Arrington's competitors beat him to this. And the competition are full computers running Windows 7, not just glorified web browsers.
SamAtt 17y ago
I agree that Arrington got kicked off what is essentially a sinking ship and that he should count his blessings. But he doesn't seem to know that. He admits he was willing to go ahead with supporting this product until a week ago. Also there's no doubt he got played and on his own blog to boot. The fact that anyone even covered "The JooJoo" shows that. Always Innovating Touch Book is a cheaper product that appears superior in just about every way and it never made it to the top of Techmeme. Arrington got strung along and then cut loose after he'd outlived his usefulness and that's got to p*ss him off
yumraj 17y ago
I'm sorry but I really don't get the logic of how Arrington won? He may not have lost, but nowhere do I see him "winning". If the logic is that he "won" because otherwise he would have lost bigger, relatively speaking, maybe, but that is some twisted logic and seems like sour grapes.
mrtron 17y ago
If the device succeeds Arrington can brag about how it was his vision and was ripped out from under him. Also how it succeeded despite not being something as good or as cheap as he imagined. If the device fails he will claim it was a result of price point and not falling in line with what he originally envisioned. There we have a win-win situation, kudos for Arrington getting to it so publicly.
wglb 17y ago
So Arrington's contribution is the price point and because Garage is selling it at a higher price point and cutting Arrington out leads to the conclusion that Arrington won? Not quite following that logic.
jsz0 17y ago
"If you look at the blogosphere, there’s wide support for Mike. No one believes Chandra’s story nor does it sound very plausible" I don't really see any evidence to support this statement. At best it's 50/50 and at worst Mr. Arrington's reputation is possibly tipping it in FG's favor. Personally I think it's pretty obvious that a blogger/business man had little or nothing to do with the actual nuts & bolts development of the product. Entirely possible his money was involved but we don't know yet. "If I were @arrington I’d be breathing a big sigh of relief. A $500 tablet is NOT what he envisioned." He started at $300, then it was $400. Now it's $500. It doesn't seem while he was involved pricing was working out exactly as he had envisioned. Perhaps this disparity alone explains the true situation. FG doesn't seem to be equipped to puke out millions of CrunchPads selling for a tiny margin. They can however sell a product with a higher margin to a smaller tablet loving audience. It's a much more realistic business model for FG. Once you hit $400 another $100 really doesn't really matter that much. As Apple said the iPod Touch and iPhone took off at $199. That's the price point a mainstream audience will pay. Arrington's business model for the CrunchPad was probably a little too pie-in-the-sky for FG.
- seldo 17y ago
  Yeah, this guy is apparently not reading the same blogosphere as I am.
rjurney 17y ago
I guess it doesn't occur to the author that one typically introduces new electronic devices at a higher price so that early adopters buy them at high margins to cover R&D? At least that is how Apple does it, right? If they have a $500 tablet now, and are first to market... they can probably have a $300, and then $200 tablet sooner than anyone.
jonknee 17y ago
I chuckle at people who scoff at the price and in the next breath say Apple will own the tablet market. If Apple makes a tablet it will almost certainly be the most expensive product in its category. It will be killer, but priced accordingly. They charge $179 for a WiFi router for goodness sake--there is no way they're coming to market with a 12" tablet for $200.
lo_fye 17y ago
"Who's the big winner here tonight? Mikey! Mikey's the big winnerrr!" -- I tried to find the clip from Swingers, but Youtube has eradicated it :(

26 points by kloncks 17y ago

j2d2 17y ago

I agree. $499 is a deal-breaker for me. I will happily wait for Apple's device now.

netcan 17y ago
I also think the price isn't right and that I can't imagine many sales at that price. But you must admit that presenting "let's make it for $199" as a valuable idea is annoying. It's like those 'think outside the box' speakers that present Apple's "idea" as "Let's make a computer that isn't as big as a fridge and is cheap enough to be bought by normal people." There's an Ali G presents to Donald Trump aspect to it.
teej 17y ago
$499 is a dealbreaker? How much do you expect the (imaginary) Apple Tablet to cost?
- Devilboy 17y ago
  It will be $599 and only come in white, but it won't matter. Everyone will buy it anyway.
  - Andys 17y ago
    Why would it be cheaper than an iphone?
    - Devilboy 17y ago
      It won't make phonecalls so you still have to buy the improved 2010 iPhone too of course.
- allenbrunson 17y ago
  Apple can make a tablet for $499 and people will seriously consider it. Heck, I'd go down to the nearest Apple store and ogle the thing myself. I was one of the early adopters who paid 600 bucks for an iPhone, so I don't consider that terribly overpriced. But $499.00 for a product from an unknown entity like Fusion Garage? eh. from what I've seen of them so far, they don't have Apple's flair for design. So now it's more of a stretch. They'll get some sales from gadget-happy early adopters, but it's going to take a whole lot of feel-good word-of-mouth reporting in the blogosphere before it will hit the mainstream.
dgallagher 17y ago
I'm trying to imagine what the Apple Tablet is going to be. What "breakthrough" feature does the Apple Tablet have to have to be game changing? How will it be any different than something like the Joo Joo? Besides a shiny case and slick UI of course. Why do we even need a tablet computer? What will it do better than laptops/netbooks currently on the market? Microsoft's Courier looks game changing, especially compared to their current Tablet PC offerings. Very slick looking, albeit vaporware at the moment. I'd imagine Apple would have to be just as amazing, though possibly in a different direction than the student/business note-taking market Microsoft is targeting. Microsoft seems to be in a very niched market here.
- jsz0 17y ago
  Most likely good third party app support. A tablet that is only a web browser is a bit boring. People really like convergence. An Apple tablet that is a media player, browser, and runs games and apps is something special. No one has actually tried producing a tablet with native third party apps that fit the screen perfectly and are designed to interact with a multi-touch input system. Additionally if they have these rumored agreements in place with publishers they're going to be able to offer a much more visually appealing experience. As usual with Apple it's not any one thing it's just a bunch of small things that all come together in a nice package.

alaskamiller 17y ago

My vision for the future involves ending world hunger, a Mars base, and an alternative energy source to power everything in the world. To accomplish these things I will set a budget of $5 dollars. Because I see it's the right amount of money to charge for all that. I'm going to call my plan "The Future." Since I just wrote about it online, in a comment, any time any one reference The Future, or even mention the future, and it includes some aspect of my plan I demand you credit me and attribute me as being involved. Because I wrote about the idea first. Also, the blogosphere agrees with me about ending world hunger, having a Mars base, and the need for an alternative fuel source so I'm right. Because we all know if it's popular then it's more important than the truth and popular people are always the best judges of plausibilities in an intellectual property legal dispute where there are no legal documents. This is why Michael Arrington won.

Ixiaus 17y ago
"The Psi Corps is your friend. Trust the Corps."
jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
Now I'm reminded why we are friends- well said.
nikcub 17y ago
your analogy would be really cool and interesting if it applied in this case, but it doesn't. I was involved in the Crunchpad from day 1 and we actually built a lot of things - long before anybody else came along. You might have a different viewpoint if you have ever had anything you built or were involved with stolen from you. It sucks. Not just from an IP perspective, but from a 'lets ride this wave while it suits us' perspective as well.
- alaskamiller 17y ago
  I recently got screwed over a project, too, and it does suck. And if anyone from TC contributed code, designs, and energy, then, of course, you deserve your take. This is a legal dispute between two parties and I hope a fair conclusion can come out of that. But I don't have any more information on the matter than the author of this blog post--unless you guys sent him all the legal papers or he's the arbitrator in the dispute, then by all means I'll eat my hat--and I find his use of flawed logic, piling on to the drama, and a mention of an unannounced and unseen Apple tablet is just... lame. Especially the part about wanting a tablet for $200. I want a pony that poops ice cream.

jasonlbaptiste 17y ago

if it was more than a toy, 499 would be fine with me. the atom processor (if its the dual core) is okay. the hard drive space, memory, and overall os just aren't appealing. at 499 I want a real computer, not a toy. that's my problem with things like chromeos- they're gravitating us towards a lower common denominator of computing. were conditioning people to go for cheap toys, that don't really do much. i'd rather go for things that don't cost a ton, but cost something and act like a real computer.

stcredzero 17y ago
The thing would be vastly more powerful than an Apple II. The Apple II wasn't a "real computer?" Maybe we need to clarification on definitions? My point: what's most salient for how useful a processor or any piece of hardware, is to what purpose that hardware is going to be put. If the thing is just for browsing then it probably has enough. Whether just browsing fits a lot of people's use of the web is another matter. (If it's just an adjunct to another machine, why not have it map the user's Downloads directory?)
bmj 17y ago
I agree. For that price (or a bit more), I can get a netbook that actually acts like computer. If I have to carry something that isn't going to fit in my pocket, I'd rather it be more practical.

Ixiaus 17y ago

The CrunchPad was a cool idea, what would make it a real winner for hackers is if the hardware and software were open sourced. I know hardware is a bit more difficult to open source, especially if you are purchasing necessary components from other vendors, but it's still a fun idea. esp. for something like the CrunchPad :)

gojomo 17y ago

A working, shipping $499 tablet is a more important step on the path to a $199 tablet than just wishing for a $199 tablet.

smoody 17y ago
couldn't have said it better myself.
jrockway 17y ago
But Arrington's competitors beat him to this. And the competition are full computers running Windows 7, not just glorified web browsers.

SamAtt 17y ago

I agree that Arrington got kicked off what is essentially a sinking ship and that he should count his blessings. But he doesn't seem to know that. He admits he was willing to go ahead with supporting this product until a week ago. Also there's no doubt he got played and on his own blog to boot. The fact that anyone even covered "The JooJoo" shows that. Always Innovating Touch Book is a cheaper product that appears superior in just about every way and it never made it to the top of Techmeme. Arrington got strung along and then cut loose after he'd outlived his usefulness and that's got to p*ss him off

yumraj 17y ago

I'm sorry but I really don't get the logic of how Arrington won? He may not have lost, but nowhere do I see him "winning". If the logic is that he "won" because otherwise he would have lost bigger, relatively speaking, maybe, but that is some twisted logic and seems like sour grapes.

mrtron 17y ago

If the device succeeds Arrington can brag about how it was his vision and was ripped out from under him. Also how it succeeded despite not being something as good or as cheap as he imagined. If the device fails he will claim it was a result of price point and not falling in line with what he originally envisioned. There we have a win-win situation, kudos for Arrington getting to it so publicly.

wglb 17y ago

So Arrington's contribution is the price point and because Garage is selling it at a higher price point and cutting Arrington out leads to the conclusion that Arrington won? Not quite following that logic.

jsz0 17y ago

"If you look at the blogosphere, there’s wide support for Mike. No one believes Chandra’s story nor does it sound very plausible" I don't really see any evidence to support this statement. At best it's 50/50 and at worst Mr. Arrington's reputation is possibly tipping it in FG's favor. Personally I think it's pretty obvious that a blogger/business man had little or nothing to do with the actual nuts & bolts development of the product. Entirely possible his money was involved but we don't know yet. "If I were @arrington I’d be breathing a big sigh of relief. A $500 tablet is NOT what he envisioned." He started at $300, then it was $400. Now it's $500. It doesn't seem while he was involved pricing was working out exactly as he had envisioned. Perhaps this disparity alone explains the true situation. FG doesn't seem to be equipped to puke out millions of CrunchPads selling for a tiny margin. They can however sell a product with a higher margin to a smaller tablet loving audience. It's a much more realistic business model for FG. Once you hit $400 another $100 really doesn't really matter that much. As Apple said the iPod Touch and iPhone took off at $199. That's the price point a mainstream audience will pay. Arrington's business model for the CrunchPad was probably a little too pie-in-the-sky for FG.

seldo 17y ago
Yeah, this guy is apparently not reading the same blogosphere as I am.

rjurney 17y ago

I guess it doesn't occur to the author that one typically introduces new electronic devices at a higher price so that early adopters buy them at high margins to cover R&D? At least that is how Apple does it, right? If they have a $500 tablet now, and are first to market... they can probably have a $300, and then $200 tablet sooner than anyone.

jonknee 17y ago

I chuckle at people who scoff at the price and in the next breath say Apple will own the tablet market. If Apple makes a tablet it will almost certainly be the most expensive product in its category. It will be killer, but priced accordingly. They charge $179 for a WiFi router for goodness sake--there is no way they're coming to market with a 12" tablet for $200.

lo_fye 17y ago

"Who's the big winner here tonight? Mikey! Mikey's the big winnerrr!" -- I tried to find the clip from Swingers, but Youtube has eradicated it :(