This is another horrible analysis of the situation by Engadget.
You say that: "Of course, this doesn't explain how Fusion Garage was able to put its software on the CrunchPad prototypes at the outset, but that's the claim." If you read the lawsuit, it clearly says that Fusion Garage just used an "off the shelf browser" and HTML to demo at first, something that TC did not know at the time.
You also seem to be doubting that this was Arrington's idea - it's pretty clear that this was the case. He posted the exploratory ideas on his blog, and they created two prototypes before Fusion Garage came into the picture for "Prototype C."
And the thing about false advertising? One of the parts of that claim is that FG's actions significantly harm TC's reputation among consumers and in the tech/business community, and that is something that has obviously happened because of this mess.
It seems like a pretty clear-cut case to me, and I think the naive, uninformed way that you guys at engadget have been covering this drama damages your credibility. Is it jealousy? I don't know what it is, but trying to cast doubt on a situation which is pretty obviously not 50/50 (under the guise of being fair to both sides) is inexcusable.
This is a very poor analysis, and most of these lessons aren't lessons at all. They seem to be mostly just a translation of your personal dislike of the Crunchpad.
I don't understand the people who think that this is some sort of publicity stunt on TC's part. It's pretty clear from what we've seen so far that the project will not move forward - how can they promote something that they'll never sell? And why would TC put in all the work they have into the CrunchPad over the past several months and go through all this drama and incur all of these legal fees just for the sake of publicity? That wouldn't make any sense.
I think this phone is a cool idea. Yeah, the technology isn't there yet, but clear displays on mobile phones like this could be big in the future because of augmented reality.
Right now, you have apps on iPhone and android that overlay stuff onto the camera display. Instead why not have a clear display like this that you could look through, and the phone would add data on top of the real-world view? It would be like the displays that fighter pilots have.
Sugar is a usability disaster. If you are just playing around with the little programs one-by-one it's fine, but if you actually want to do any meaningful, educational work it's almost impossible to use and very user unfriendly.
Maybe it's just a brilliant marketing move - right now Amazon's entire front page is proclaiming how awesome their product is because the CEO has to apologize for not having enough.
Nintendo showed that they really understand gaming - it's not about the graphics, it's about the experience. In the end, you never evaluate a game on how good it looks - you only remember how fun it is. It was brilliantly presented as well - I thought Miyamoto with the orchestra at the beginning was a great visual, and a good way to get people excited. No one tried to fill our heads with business strategy and jargon - they really worked hard to spark our interest and wonderment about how fun the Wii can be. You can tell the difference in the audience reaction - all of Nintendo's applause was genuine - the other two had very little of that.
I thought Sony was doing good until the end where they talked about the controller and the price. The games looked really sweet (MGS4), but their ending really ruined it all. They should have unveiled the price FIRST and then showed the games to justify it.
Microsoft was just lame and boring - the guy had to keep clapping so the audience knew when to clap. Gears of War or whatever it is looked pretty sweet, but it was downhill from there.
In the end these things are meant to spark interest and get people excited about their consoles - obviously, anything anyone talking about now is the Wii, so imho Nintendo is the obvious winner.
TechCrunch sues Fusion Garage over the Joojoo -- we break it down
Dec 11th 2009 2:36PM (Engadget)You say that: "Of course, this doesn't explain how Fusion Garage was able to put its software on the CrunchPad prototypes at the outset, but that's the claim." If you read the lawsuit, it clearly says that Fusion Garage just used an "off the shelf browser" and HTML to demo at first, something that TC did not know at the time.
You also seem to be doubting that this was Arrington's idea - it's pretty clear that this was the case. He posted the exploratory ideas on his blog, and they created two prototypes before Fusion Garage came into the picture for "Prototype C."
And the thing about false advertising? One of the parts of that claim is that FG's actions significantly harm TC's reputation among consumers and in the tech/business community, and that is something that has obviously happened because of this mess.
It seems like a pretty clear-cut case to me, and I think the naive, uninformed way that you guys at engadget have been covering this drama damages your credibility. Is it jealousy? I don't know what it is, but trying to cast doubt on a situation which is pretty obviously not 50/50 (under the guise of being fair to both sides) is inexcusable.
Foxconn distracts all with TXM-355 bamboo desktop chassis, brews bamboo tablet rumor
Dec 11th 2009 12:02AM (Engadget)Entelligence: Lessons from the CrunchPad
Dec 10th 2009 7:50PM (Engadget)Michael Arrington says CrunchPad litigation is 'imminent,' provides more details -- but where's the contract?
Dec 6th 2009 12:00AM (Engadget)Sony Ericsson already working on second version of Xperia Pureness, possibly Xperia Pureness 2?
Nov 24th 2009 4:23PM (Engadget)Right now, you have apps on iPhone and android that overlay stuff onto the camera display. Instead why not have a clear display like this that you could look through, and the phone would add data on top of the real-world view? It would be like the displays that fighter pilots have.
Confirmed: Kids like Sugar better than XP
Oct 24th 2008 2:35PM (Engadget)Jeff Bezos posts Kindle apology on Amazon's front page
Mar 20th 2008 11:56AM (Engadget)The Onion spoofs game violence
Mar 18th 2008 6:14AM (Joystiq)Yesterday in Second Life: Second Life Daily News
Feb 14th 2008 4:49AM (Massively)E3: Overheard at Microsoft's after party
May 10th 2006 8:00AM (Joystiq)1: Nintendo
2: Sony
3: Microsoft
Nintendo showed that they really understand gaming - it's not about the graphics, it's about the experience. In the end, you never evaluate a game on how good it looks - you only remember how fun it is. It was brilliantly presented as well - I thought Miyamoto with the orchestra at the beginning was a great visual, and a good way to get people excited. No one tried to fill our heads with business strategy and jargon - they really worked hard to spark our interest and wonderment about how fun the Wii can be. You can tell the difference in the audience reaction - all of Nintendo's applause was genuine - the other two had very little of that.
I thought Sony was doing good until the end where they talked about the controller and the price. The games looked really sweet (MGS4), but their ending really ruined it all. They should have unveiled the price FIRST and then showed the games to justify it.
Microsoft was just lame and boring - the guy had to keep clapping so the audience knew when to clap. Gears of War or whatever it is looked pretty sweet, but it was downhill from there.
In the end these things are meant to spark interest and get people excited about their consoles - obviously, anything anyone talking about now is the Wii, so imho Nintendo is the obvious winner.