Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Netpliance Ban I-Opener Mods 402

Posted by Nik from the mods-the-mp3-of-its-day dept.
After we ran this story about running NetBSD on an i-opener (and this earlier story from a Linux perspective), MrPoopyPants writes "I was considering buying one of the Netpliance I-Openers with intent to modify it but when I followed the link I discovered this notice. It appears that they will no longer sell their products without the service and they have renderd the devices immune to modification." Netpliance have also issued a press release announcing the same thing. This is somewhat ironic, as their developer's corner page says "Netpliance believes in open source development. As part of our effort to support the community, we will be developing a site that will be the premier source of i-opener product information. Please watch this site for more details." Netpliance are soliciting ideas and feedback, to devcorner@netpliance.com.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Netpliance Ban I-Opener Mods More

Netpliance Ban I-Opener Mods

Comments Filter:

  • Re:Here's why! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I haven't received my 3 units yet but I've mentioned it to a dozen people and 2 of them are looking at buying them for the original purpose. I plan on using icecast on a PC server and feed MP3's around the house and my wife is working on a cookbook she will use on the I-Opener I'll put in the kitchen. Granted $99 is very inexpensive and $300 might be reasonable considering another $100 is needed to easily make this work. IMHO, Netpliance is getting a couple million dollars of free advertising and it is aimed at the people who could help make it work. The techies. We all have parents don't they know?

  • Good. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    They did the right thing for their company, really. They obviously couldn't afford to be selling these things at a loss if the customers weren't buying the service as well.

    There's no reason to be upset, just because the company is defending itself against the tree-hugging liberal linux fans that like to find a way around the system doesn't mean you should complain to the company.

    It's their product, and they can do with it what they like. In fact, I applaud their decision to not give into the Linux bandwagon. A less company probably would have embraced the Linux fans and advertised how much those crazy linux hackers love their hardware.

    I'm glad to see some companies still have their pride.

    -lb

  • Ooooo. So it's $119. They didn't change the agreement to add an x months service committment.
  • Ummm, if you don't want to buy one, that is your decision. But I don't really see any sort of moral or ethical decision to be made here. They put a product on the market, and I am consuming it. After I buy it, I have the right to use it as is, modify it, or grind it up and just throw the damn thing in the garbage. It is not might fault they have a faulty buisness model. I understand that they don't want to loose money, and they have a right to alter their busuiness model and/or the product to prevent this hack, but I am not in any way at fault for using the device to my own needs under the current obligations. But hey, if you didn't want to buy one, that is your business. Just don't go around accusing people of a lack of morals/ethics who did buy one. -Christian
  • They are selling on eBay in the $177-$290 range. Like the Apex DVD player, people are making money speculating on them. Not bad ... seems you can get a fast 100-200% profit on the secondary market, if you can get your hands on one. If I had purchased one in order to use it with their internet service, like they intended, I'd be awfully tempted to sell my "hackable" box on eBay and buy an "unhackable" box for myself at the original price.

  • Mini PC (Score:1)

    by whoop ( 194 )
    Though I've been much too lazy to pick up the phone and order one, the idea of a really small PC had me intrigued. I've had a few things flying through my head where something like this would fit the bill. So, has anyone seen something else that could fit the bill? I know I've come across some real small motherboards, but they often wanted more than what I paid for my Athlon motherboard. :) I'm just not that dedicated to it.

    On another note, are any of those webtop things available yet? I've seen a few mentioned (even before the Transmeta announcement), but can't see any sign of them actually being sold. I hate having to get off the couch to see what's new on Slashdot. :) A laptop is just even more expensive. A kiosk style thing with a TV out is really what I want. This IOpener would have been fun, let me spend several hours monkeying with it. But since it's now out, what's left?
  • Check out compgeeks [compgeeks.com].
  • They sell the box for a loss but make it up on the $21/mo service fee. This is exactly the same business model the video game manufacturers use. The super-advanced 3D graphics chips in the PlayStation are cost way more than the selling price, but Sony makes it up in license fees for the games. Hence why Sony is attacking Bleem so ferociously, and the same reason Netpliance is beating on their corresponding "open hardware" hackers: it destroys their business model.

    If this were true then Sony would actually be encouraging sales of Bleem because it means there is another person out there with reason to buy the overpriced games and Sony wouldn't have to sell a loss leader console in the first place.

    Bleem is effectively a free console for Sony, no loss, and still many money-making license fees from all the games the Bleem user purchases.

  • Please read the entire thread. I don't agree with the previous person's argument, which is why I began with the devil's advocate position "if this were true...". Not A -> Not B, B, therefore A.

    It was non-sensical of the previous person to say that Sony had sued Bleem because Bleem prevents Sony from losing money on each console sale. Sony would have to be stupid to do that.

    It's clear that Sony sued Bleem for other reasons than the one the previous person suggested. I'm not willing to delve into pet theories though: it is pure conjecture on the theorists part.
  • Well, to my knowledge, nobody has even seen the so-called 'fix' yet, anyways! For all we know, it is all a bluff. Even if it isn't, it should be possible to flash the sandisk with a minimal linux boot with usb support, and read everything else you want off a usb harddrive. Just a thought...
  • They weren't trying to "trick" anyone. You can go to Radioshack and buy a cellphone for a penny. You could probably do something rather creative with that cellphone if it wasn't for the contract you had to sign to use their service.

    The only difference here was that they didn't make people sign the contract. They didn't think that someone would come up with a way to use the machine without them.

  • Re:Selling at a loss... (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    They are selling at a HUGE loss. Like, around 300 bucks a pop. The plan is to make it back via the service, but even then they don't make much per user per month on the service, 'cause they subcontract out.
    I post anonymously because I'm not supposed to know this. *coughcough*
  • I was talking to the sysadmin at my high school and we thought about 30 of these suckers that would boot off a server would be sweet in the library, or all over campus.

    If one breaks, not as big a deal as a 2000 computer. Just replace it. All it would be used for is web surfing, etc.

    If netpliance was smart they would tap this market and go after it. By closing their hardware, they are screwing them.

    I just sold a 100 shares of them I had bought. Unless they turn around, I don't see a profit in their future. Everyone knows they won't make money on a subscription model.


    -Davidu

  • Yes, you're right, because inexperienced kids like myself certainly aren't going to purchase a low-profile 90 degree header and mount the header on the correct side of the board if that was their only change. (hey, it's easier to solder a header than it is to make a cable.)

    Just so you know sometimes even really good engineers (i work with brilliant amazing experienced people) can do things like that underestimating the amount of people who'll hack (if it hadn't made /. and other such news sites, they'd have been right too).
    ----------------------------
  • It's more like an older laptop LCD display - you have to be more-or-less directly in front of the screen to read it, and the video is blurry if you move the mouse around quickly, scroll quickly, etc. The display is definitely not as good as the display you would get if you bought a new laptop today, for example. I don't think the screen is any relative of the nice $1500 flat-panel displays That's pretty much what I expected, but that's really fine with me, for a kiosk application. Of course, this begs the question: what's the cheapest 800x600 VGA flat-screen one can buy? I'm ok with a narrow viewing angle and slow refresh, but I want to be able to plug it in to a standard cheapo video card. The only flatscreens I've ever seen for sale have been high-end ones. Is there somewhere to buy low-end ones for cheap?
  • I really don't see how they could be forcing anyone to pay the $21.95 for much beyond the first month.

    If you sell it under a contract, you can do so, in the same way all these $400 off computer if you sign up with MSN deals work. However, and while IANAL, I believe what they are currently doing is not legal. There's no statement of how long you must pay (forever?), termination conditions, etc. You can't agree to a hidden contract. They need a statement of terms and conditions available on the web site for it to be binding.
  • If I buy something, with a service agreement for a period of time, it is *NOT LEGAL* to require I then use the equipment as they dictate. I am not leasing, or getting at a discount. I *BOUGHT* the equipment, and paid for it strait out.

    How does this affect shareholders? What is the difference if I buy it, use their service for 3 months and cancel, or I buy it, pay for three months of service, and do something else with it? Notice that in both situations, the same amount of money has been changed.
  • But you *MUST* understand here. You paid for the service, correct. THAT is legal. However, now they are enforcing that purchase of the equipment dictates that you can use their, *AND ONLY THEIR* service with the device.

    In the case of your cell phone, you *own* it. After that year, you can go wherever the hell you please. If you want to take your phone, and hack a linux interface to it, you're on your own. They're certainly not going to cancel your phone service becouse you did something funky to your phone.

    Selling one product and locking that device into another service that you sell without any possibility of using it for something else is not legal. You CANNOT take one of these and goto another ISP. And now, according to your service agreement, if you make *any* changes to the hardware that *YOU OWN*, you violate the terms of the purchase you agreed to at purchase.
  • This is the cellular phone model: if you don't pay for your service contract, Netpliance will chase you in the courts, and you will lose.

    INCORRECT

    With the cellular contracts you SIGN a piece of paper saying you agree to pay according to the terms set out on the paper. When I ordered my iopener from Netpliance's web site there were no terms of service and no minimum contract. Netpliance's oversight does not give them the right to make me pay for something I did not agree to. I did agree to $99 for the box plus $40 for shipping. NOTHING MORE

    Your cellular model fails because there was no contract, no "I agree" button, nadda.

    If they try to get another $21 from me, they will not get it. They have no right to it.

  • One of the problems with using the cellular phone service contract has to do with the use of the phone itself. If you try to weasel your way out of the contract, they can always shut off the phone service, and usually do. And a cell phone that won't send or recieve phone calls is essentially an expensive plastic paperweight.

    To the average user, perhaps. The Netpliance is the exact same to the average user.

    If I fail to agree to the ToS of the cellphone contract, they take my phone or bill me for the amount left owing. If they didn't, I could just take the phone to another area and get service with someone else. Netpliance tried to get around this by locking the dialup account to one account. They figured "Nobody will not get service, because it'll just be an expensive plastic paperweight without the service."

    They didn't lock you down for a term, like all cellphone contracts with outrageously low prices for the unit. Their mistake, my gain.

    Do you not think they'd do the same if the tables were reversed? I do. I'm fighting UUNet over something similar right now.

  • You can ONLY buy parts for a Volvo from a Volvo dealer. What's the difference?
  • Look it's simple enough. It's normally the case that contracts are used to screw the little guy. In fact little guys are so used to getting screwed that marketing geniuses figure they don't even need a contract and the little guys will dutifully act as if they did. In this case (as in the case of MSN $400 rebate at Best Buy) there was no bulletproof contract, only an assumption that no consumer would be clever enough to get the better side of the deal. This despite the fact that the company had all the power in the deal. They had the lawyers and wrote (or could have written) the contract. All the consumer can do is buy the product under the terms of the contract (if any) or not buy it at all.

    While it's a moral question as to whether one takes advantage of such a deal, I have a hard time feeling sorry for companies who make a calculation expecting consumers to be more stupid then they turn out to be.
    --
  • Please.

    The device is unprofitable for a hundred bucks. Duh. So don't sell it for a hundred bucks.

    Sell it for five hundred bucks, and toss in a $400 rebate if we agree to sign up for a year or two. It's what the rest of the industry does, and you guys just made me realize that it's not only the most annoying ad campaign ever to us tech guys, but it *really is* a smart way to get computers in people's hands.

    It's that simple. Go in store rebate with signup, and let the geeks make ya rich.

    Yours Truly,

    Dan Kaminsky
    DoxPara Research
    http://www.doxpara.com
  • What I think they're doing is modifying the I-Opener to be difficult to modify, and working on making a $300 (or so, enough to make a profit I guess) Linux box, to prevent their I-Opener from competing with the more expensive, profit making, Linux computer.
  • Why those other two didn't catch that, I'll never know. But that's just what I was talking about; if they make the profit with the ISP service, then keep doing that. But let the hardware hackers mod it, because they will do it and moreover, they still have to pay Netpliance for that (since Netpliance sells the hardware). So people get their ultra-cheap Linux boxen, and Netpliance gets that many more sales.

    Heck; if Netpliance really wanted to make a buck, they'd sell do-it-yourself mod kits too.You may be able to get the parts yourself, but people will pay for the convenience (particularly with the heatsink and modified IDE cable).
  • This is idiotic on their part. Someone comes out with something which I'm willing to bet at boosted their sales by an order of magnitude, and they cut that revenue source off? That's just stupid.

    What you do is make clients that work with Linux, Win9X, and BeOS. Still make it clear that you have to use their ISP, but make it so the mods can do this also. You keep what's making you so much money, and you

    Come to think of it, why did they even include an IDE port in the first place? The machines don't even have hard drives, so there's no need for one. So it makes little sense to me that they'd put that port on there; that only adds the cost of an IDE controller that's never even used.

    But come to think of it, this proves that the i-opener is sold at a loss, with the profit made through the ISP. This makes the ISP a hidden cost of the i-opener, and frankly that's deceptive advertising. They should do something about that.
  • Make it a modifiable system. Make it reasonably priced, say $300 for a whole box and it'd be a win-win situation for everyone involved.
  • Netpliance is certainly going to be losing a lot on each machine at $99 and even $199 a pop. Exposure and attention is great. But the prospect of losing anywhere from $200 to $300 per unit is no way to run a business. Everybody likes something for nothing, and it would appear that Netpliance needs to rethink their business strategy just a little bit. Terms of Service is no way to do this, in my opinion, though.
  • So most of you are okay with hurting the company, whether or not you think it's technically stealing?

    I'm completely indifferent to whether I hurt or help their bottom line -- I'll let them mind their own business. Even if NPLI isn't smart enough to figure out how to profit from this incident, is that my fault?

    I'm sure they didn't expect someone would be able to take apart the box and add Linux to it.

    I'm sure the marketing geniuses that introduced the 3DO at $799 in the US didn't expect that practically nobody was willing to fork out that much. Should we have been accomodating enough to buy overpriced game systems so we didn't hurt their feelings?

    I applaud the company for being so consumer-friendly, unlike many others out there. Congratulations for showing all other like-minded companies out there that they shouldn't trust the consumer.

    You're exactly right. Never build a business on the kindness of strangers.

  • While they might be able to fill the inside of the i-Opener with epoxy to make it unmodifiable (without a whomping huge mess on your hands) I really don't see how they could be forcing anyone to pay the $21.95 for much beyond the first month.
    They don't have any proprietary patents on technology used here (like the MPAA would be able to wrangle with rogue DVD use) and the equipment is being *sold* (not leased or rented) to the customer, so once someone's bought one, it's theirs to do with as they wish. Trying to make someone stay subscribed to their internet service is very likely to result in some *ugly* lawsuits.



    I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has recieved one of the supposedly unmodifiable units to find out if they really did fill it with epoxy. I honestly can't think of any other modification that could have been made so quickly to prevent tampering...

  • No, you're not stealing. You're taking advantage of a company selling things below their cost, because they know that once the average user has one, they'll be forced to shell out more money to the company, rather than give the machine up.

    Buying the machine and not using their service is not stealing, because the machine is YOURS. You can drop it off a building, would that be stealing? If I buy a Sony CD Player, am I obligated to buy Sony CD's to play on it? No, I'm not.

    Now, if Netpliance is smart, they just make the device free with a 2 year commitment to their service, and if you terminate the service after the first month, you either have to return the device or pay a couple hundred bucks to cover the cost of the machine. That would be completely legal, and ethical.

    If you buy something, it is yours to do with as you wish. If you sign a contract, you must abide by the terms of the contract. Netpliance tried to avoid the contracts, which can scare off many users, but they got bitten in the arse by people who could blow a hundred bucks on one of their boxes, add another hundred bucks in parts, and have a machine without the need for their service. Now they're being forced to use contracts, which they probably should have used all along.
    ---
  • :)) Imagine HIM delivering a presentation proposing a new ecash network WAN router capital infrastructure to your major SE Banking executive board meeting.

    Back on topic - it's clear that consumers are quickly losing ground in the property battle - the i-appliances may be subsidized by the online content they are going to deliver (i.e., ads-to-eyeballs) but this is bound to rub the more do-it-yourself crowd the wrong way - like finding a great deal on a car and having to sign an agreement that "installing a bigger carb is an unauthorized upgrade" and that you can only use one brand of gasoline. I'd love to see some folks get thin, 0 maintenance web browsers but if it comes with these 'bargain with the devil' type restrictions forget it. If I buy something I want to own it outright and not get sucked into a web of 'service agreements' and other methodes of guarenteeing a cash flow. A fellow at work here mentioned what a great deal he got on a PC ($500), then mentioned it came with a 3 year MSN lock in, I guess if you try to install AOL an alarm goes of in Redmond - but that's one more warm body for the minions of targetable marketing to aim at.

    I swear, if these guys ran the public libraries, you'd go in and ask for a book on dental hygene, and get a sales pitch for a certain brand of toothpaste.
  • I got a kick out of their statement: "Modification of the i-opener in any way is in violation of our terms and conditions." Shows a total lack of understanding of the type of people who have been buying the i-Opener. Someon who hacks into it to convert it into a PC isn't interested in whether it voids the warranty.
    Unfortunately it's messier than that. Now, when you buy the i-opener, you're agreeing to a service. You sign a much more annoying contract that probably has a penalty clause, or even forced return of the hardware if you break the terms of service. This means you're effectively renting the i-opener, and it's not really yours to do with what you want.

    That's silly. They should have simply bundled the ISP service with the product and left it at that - "Use the service or don't, hack the machine or don't, but we need our money" is what they should have said, not this draconian crap.

  • No, you're still not catching it, dude.

    If you buy an iOpener and don't use their service, *THEY LOSE MONEY*.

    It's not in their best interest to do that, period.

    You're not "generating lots of sales", and they wouldn't "make a buck".

    It was not stupid for them to lock this down, it was absolutely the smartest thing for them to do.

    It sucks for us, because we can't get this $300 worth of hardware for $99 anymore, but we were robbing them blind when we did it so we have no right to bitch.
  • Wow, I love it when moderators screw up and give points to ignorant posts.

    If you had actually read the post you quoted, you would see that the author wanted to use the devices in a system of automatic teller machines and wanted to know how much the machine cost without the internet service. The easy sale of 3,000 units would be for his application. Amazingly there is a market for network computers now, even at $300.

    In my opinion Netpliance was just plain stupid for not making it a package deal in the first place. They tried to dupe people who didn't realize they would end up paying for the service also, and they got what they deserve.

  • why did they even include an IDE port in the first place

    They probably are planning to come out with an upgraded model that supports a hard disk. Either that or they are buying the boards off the shelf, and that is how they come.
    --
  • "Oh, and who has open source actually helped, I'm curious? Red Hat? VA Linux? Cobalt? Well, they were all open source companies to start with."

    RedHat is still an Open Source company.


    Bad Mojo
  • I don't know about you guys, but i'm not asking for free lunch. NetPliance's price is/was at the bottom of my list in terms of reason's to buy it. I would be very happy if Netpliance could be persuaded to sell the I-Opener to the Linux community, modified or unmodified, at cost or at reasonable profit. The fact of the matter is that NetPliance could accomodate a large swath of the Linux community without significant cost to themselves.

    Furthermore, I submit that making reasonable accomodation to the Linux community would benefit NetPliance:

    1. They would gain the good will of the community, the benefits should be not underestimated. Many of us have non-techie friends, family, coworkers, employers, and the like that listen to us to varying degrees. Although we may not be able to convince a newbie they should drop Windows95 for Linux (not that I would ever make such a recommendation), we can exert tremendous influences on people who're considering adopting such a device/service at that crucial point.

    2. When it comes to technology, we are early adopters. NetPliance can leverage their mindshare with the so-called "geek" community (although I would not call myself a geek), to introduce new products and software. Conversely, their
    competitors could use the small but highly receptive community to develop the economies of scale, the mindshare, and the credibility necessary to compete against NetPliance's bread and butter.

    3. The increased volume due to "geek" sales (or even profit)is far more likely, even at a mere 5% of sales, to reduce their overall costs than increase them.

    4. It would be advantageous for their cash flows, if they priced it in such a way that "geeks" pay cost + whatever profits they average in, say, a year's worth of service, up front (even if this is only a spike in the first month or two of sales). Also, remember that we Linux users could be sold these units
    AS IS, without the need for any technical support. Either for their software, or service.

    5. While Linux ain't the greatest thing since sliced bread, there is an off chance that Linux will continue to grow and eat into Wintel systems. Why not hedge their bets?


    There are many reasons to humor the "geek" community, these are just some of them. Yet I can think of no strong arguments against it. I would ask every "geek" who is interested in paying a reasonable price to email NetPliance, tell them you'd be willing to pay, and remind them that we are far from irrelevant.

  • I-Opener's model is based on selling the internet service no on selling hardware so I don't see what's so bad about making people take the hardware as is and not modifying it.

    The problem is... no matter what I pay for the hardware, I OWN IT, DAMNIT!

    They are selling me their hardware, not renting it to me, not leasing it to me. There is nothing that says I need to actually use their ISP, nothing that actually says I need to turn on the i-Opener and use it for it's intended purpose. I can buy one, canabalize it for parts, smash it with a hammer, or crack it open and turn it into something different entirely.

    Of cpourse, I-Opener doesn't agree with this. They think that even though I've given them $99 + whatever amount in ISP service fees, they still own the hardware, and I'm an eeeeevil, eeevil hacker d00d, and that they are justified in protecting "their" property from me.

    It would be a different story if they said "Hey, guys, we're loosing money hand over fist - the $99 version makes up the loss on hardware with the ISP sales. But look, here, we'll sell you a box, no strings attached, for $200, and you can hack it to your heart's content." They'd be happy, we'd be happy, and instead of worrying about how to close their hardware - an impossible job, ask anyone who's every hacked on a Macintosh how "secure" they were - they could worry about how to open it up to new uses and new markets. Hell, if they'd bother to read this thread, they'd probably find a good two dozen new money-making ideas that would more than make up for the whole $99-plus-ISP fiasco.

  • I think that this may be a violation of CA law. I remeber not to long ago Microsoft and Best buy tried to do the same things and it did not fly. Can they tie an ISP to a device even though you do not buy the two at the same time?

    send flames > /dev/null

  • The company that manufactures, and therefore OWNS the i-Openeners, is not offering a simple 'cash for goods' kind of sale contract. The terms (you pay $99 == you get iOpenener hardware) are NOT acceptable to them; since they do not agree to that contract, if you walk away with a box in your hand without agreeing to those terms, you are a thief, and have stolen property which the iOpener company did not agree to tranfer to you. The terms they ARE offering are (you pay $99 now, + $x/month for at least N months == you get iOpener hardware + you get N months of service that you can choose to use or ignore.) Take it or leave it, but don't think you get to re-write the entire human history of contract law because you don't want to think of yourself as a criminal.

    The terms "you pay $99 == you get iOpenener hardware" were perfectly agreeable to Circuit City last week. Perhaps Netpliance should get their resellers to enforce an agreement that they would be more happy with, but that's between CC and Netpliance (does this remind anyone of the Windows Refund Day MS vs. OEMs situation?). I don't see how a contract can be legal if it is not known and agreed to by both parties, and I've never signed anything that mentioned any months of service, let alone a minimum N required months of service. I'm not arguing that that wouldn't have been a better deal for Circuit City/Netpliance to make with me (from their perspective, at least), but for whatever reason they didn't make such a contract with me and I don't feel obligated to hold myself to the terms of any agreement they are coming up with now or in the future. The only even remotely contractual language on my sales receipt is:

    The cardholder agrees to the credit card amount shown hereon and agrees to perform the obligations set forth in the cardholders agreement with the issuer.

    which is the standard credit card receipt language. So, to sum up:

    • Netpliance/CC are not required to sell me an i-opener
    • CC offered terms of "$99 for one i-opener piece of hardware"
    • I accepted those terms and provided CC with $99
    • I expect one i-opener hardware from CC sometime soon
    • No, I am not stealing anything.

    As far as I understand contract law, I can't be required to abide by a contract which I did not agree to even if the other parties assumed that I would, especially since I have given no indication by word or by deed that I would do so. It would be a rewriting of contract law for CC/Netpliance to change the terms now; my actions in buying and owning an i-opener are perfectly legal under contract law.

  • They did have to do it, according to an article in Wired News today [wired.com]. It wasn't that they were P.O.'d people might be modifying it--earlier press releases suggest that they didn't really object because their target audience is the sort of person who would think a Phillips Screwdriver is what you get when you combine vodka with Milk of Magnesia. :)

    However, the stock market didn't see it that way, and their stock had fallen way way down. This is an IPO--a crucial timeframe for them. It's make or break time, and they have to do everything they can to guarantee success and look good to the stockholders and the potential investors (ie, People Who Would Be Prone To Throw Money At Them). After the IPO is over, they'll probably relax a bit. For all we know, it might be some easily-bypassable hack that they just throw in for the sake of being able to say they could.

  • I just wrote them an email saying: You either sell the thing for $99 or you don't! Now what's your price WITHOUT your crappy internet service? Are they really dumb enough to throw away the easy sale of 3,000 units?

    If the thing is sold at a loss to get people to use their "crappy internet service," then, yeah, telling you to piss off is good business. What do you think, they sell each unit for a loss, but they'll make it up in volume?

    Repeat after me: positive times negative equals negative...

    -jon

  • > I think we should be supportive of companies who are seeking alternatives to Microsoft products in light weight appliances. We need more companies like this to enhance competition so that we see more innovation.

    Very good point. Nice as it is to get a $99 PC now and then, perhaps is would be nicer to live in a world where everything wasn't up to the whims of a 900 pound gorilla.

    Most /.ers leap for joy at every announcement that some new company has adopted Linux, but in this case the leaps were followed quickly by attempts to exploit a mistake and now, sadly, a lot of whining about the loophole being pinched shut.

    Yes, it was a stupid mistake on their part. No, the early purchasers didn't have to buy the service. But now they're changing the offer, and it's a bit unseemly to get all worked up over the fact that you weren't fast enough to exploit someone else's mistake.

    All the more so if you're a Linux advocate. What's going to happen when a techie at the next startup suggests using Linux? The VCs' eyes will roll in their heads, and their response will be, "No, it's WinCE for us all the way."

    So think of the bigger picture. Contrary to popular rumor, it isn't by dying with the most toys that you win the game you've found yourself in, so don't worry overmuch about letting a $99 PC slip through your hands.

    --
  • > The bottom line is all powerful in a public held company. Netpliance literally *had* to do something about this situation or else the stock holders would likely have filed suit against them.

    That's why some of us thing the whole stock market thing is evil (even apart from being a pyramid scam). Companies sell their souls^H^H^H^H^Hstocks to get a very useful cash infusion, but thereafter find themselves beholden to absentee landlords with the power to yank their chains this way and that in order to maximize the all-important quarterly earnings report. If the company had bigger plans, or (heavens forfend!) long-term plans, well, tough shit. We're only interested in the upcoming quarterly report.

    --
  • > Do some research on internet companies and you find that they are the opposite of what you think that is evil about the stock market.

    I suppose for Exhibit A I could refer you back to the post I was replying to; that was far less than 10 years ago.

    You do have an interesting data point with Amazon, but I don't buy your interpretation of it. Amazon's stocks are doing well because of the e-stock craze, which is nothing more than a manifestation of the pyramid scheme I refered to.

    No one cares about Amazon's bottom line so long as there are more suckers willing to join in at the bottom of the pyramid. But what happens when Amazon's stock falls? Mind you, no one is asking whether the e-stock craze will collapse; what everyone wants to know is when it will collapse. Will Amazon then be plagued by people like the guy I was replying to, all eager to sue because Amazon failed to protect their investments?

    Amazon in fact is a more more pointed condemnation of what's wrong with the stock market than even the sellout to absentee landlords.

    > they take pride that they are following a long-term plan in building a name/goodwill

    Is that a long-term business strategy? How many companies are getting away with that kind of strategy outside the world of e-commerce? At some point they need to generate some cash to go along with that name and goodwill, or else there are going to be a lot of burned investors when the e-craze collapses.

    I don't know what Amazon's plan really is, though I could easily offer some cynical guesses. But whatever it is, it's being done at the expense of those poor suckers who bought high and will, sooner or later, have to sell low.

    That's not the kind of long term plan I care to support, even if I thought I could avoid being the one left holding the empty bag.

    > Actions speak louder than words.

    And indeed they do. That's why I'm earning a comfortable living by working for wages rather than trying to strike it rich by joining in a destructive scam.

    --
  • As far as it goes, they cannot prevent you from modifying the i-opener. If they lease you the hardware, or rent-to-own the hardware, they retain ownership of it, and can dictate what you do with it. If they sell it to you, as in, transfer ownership, you can do what you want with it.

    This is similar to a cellphone contract. Once you sign up, you OWN The phone, but you are obligated to pay for your 2 years service or a cancellation fee if you quit. They cannot prevent you from smashing the phone to bits or modifying it, though, they simply prevent you from squirming out of your contract.
  • Actually, the reason people could get away with this in the Microsoft fiasco was because the MS contract explicitly allowed it. IT did *NOT* have to, it turned out.
    The issue revolved around whether a cash rebate was a 'loan' or not. ie: we'll give you $200 if you sign up, but you have to sign up for a year. This could have been considered a loan.
    It turns out it was NOT, and that the law MS thought it was protecting itself from had to do with businesses forcing you to get loans from them in order to do business with them, or some such thing.

    Penalty contracts are enforcable, completely. If you sign a service contract, it *IS* enforcable.
  • IN short, no, there is nothing illegal about this. At least, not in North America. In the UK, and from what I hear, much of europe, there are strong anti-tying laws.
    There are none here, however.
  • How do you figure? If they changed the machine's spec from what you ordered, then sure, absolutely. But if you bought the machine based on what somebody on the net told you, and then you get it and find out that's not true, well, it's not Netpliance's problem. They never said anything about providing you with a hackable machine.
  • The trick here is that the company is probably selling this hardware at a stiff loss, and they figure that since it is proprietary and (they thought) it would only work with their service, they would make it up on the service. If a bunch of geeks go and buy them to make spiffy, cheap, X terminals out of them, they lose a lot of money.
    It's like if the game console manufacturers were suddenly undercut by some large unlicenced game producer that didn't pay them any royalties.
    On the other hand, i'd pay a little more for a version of this just to use as an actual X terminal. It still looks very cool =:-)

  • Dogma (Score:2)

    by homunq ( 30657 )
    Nice philosophy. Good point: in the long run, hobbyists are good for you. However, metaphor will get you only so far. If they're losing money on every box, the long run isn't going to matter very much.

    It's more as if you got your car free from the gas company, and then converted to solar.

    Complain all you want if you think that trapping the consumer into your service is sneaky or unfair. But don't claim they should just suck it up and sell the thing for 99 bucks. Without the expectation of future ISP income, that price is just impossible.

    On a more general level - I don't think the above is a horrible comment, but I don't think it deserves a 4. It's really easy to say "but I have a right to do that", much harder to work out the implications. <controversy intent="thought-provoking"> Everyone has a right to have as many kids as they can support. That gives the human race the right to reproduce itself down to pathetic subsistence. </controversy>
  • How about adding a license statement to the BIOS message? A "boot-through" license?
  • "If this were true then Sony would actually be encouraging sales of Bleem because it means there is another person out there with reason to buy the overpriced games and Sony wouldn't have to sell a loss leader console in the first place."

    Sony's concerns over Bleem are not the lost funds due to lost playstation sales, but that Bleem will become ubiquitous. Then, Software producers can say their product is Bleem compatible. The playstation owners would know that it meant playstation compatibility as well, thus no need to get a license from Sony and Sony's marketing model evaporates.

    LetterRip
  • It wasn't obvious here at /., because the story was posted after the change, but Netpliance has changed the wording of their disclaimer since this morning:

    This morning it read:
    "Modification of the i-opener in any way is no longer physically possible and is in violation of our terms and conditions and may be in violation of federal law."

    Now it reads:
    "i-opener Internet appliances shipped after March 20, 2000 can no longer be reconfigured in the manner described in recent reports. Modification of the i-opener in any way is in violation of our terms and conditions."

    The brash claim that all modifications are impossible is gone, and presumably, their lawyers weighed in that there was no possibility of federal law violations. And the Ts&Cs are still seemingly missing from their site even now, which begs the question of how one could legally "Accept" them (the wording on the button) if they haven't disclosed them yet.

    At the very least, it seems they pulled the trigger on this well before they were ready. But then, I suppose after losing probably $400/unit on thier entire inventory, they're a bit punchy. The "developer support" page just makes the whole thing even more bizarre.
  • Looks like a few others had the same problem. [kenseglerdesigns.com]

    Now the question remains, why am I bothering to reply to lame ass AC's anyways, as usually when they post anonymously, they don't know shit.
  • You can't really blame them for this move (although you can probably blame them for the misleading statements made previously saying they had no real intentions to change the device).

    When you have a multi-million dollar IPO, all that matters is profits and you MUST answer to shareholders when you take a big loss. Since Netpliance is selling the i-opener WELL below cost, they were setting themselves up for a HUGE loss. They stopped the bleeding as best they could, you can't really blame 'em.

    Did you notice that http://www.linux-hacker/i-opener/ no longer exists? No more $35 hack kits even if you *can* get your hands on an old i-opener.
  • Well I had it bookmarked and it DID NOT work this morning and the root URL redirected to www.he.net and it's now the same as the /iopener/ directory so obviously it has been changed ... dumbass.
  • Signal 11 wrote: "It's a nice idea.. and having them use linux was a neat hack.. I would pressure them to come out with a "linux-ready" version at a higher price.. as you must recognize that they can't support their revenue model with us eating into it - $99 probably does not even cover wholesale costs of the device"

    Granted, $99 was a come-on price designed to encourage the 1-choice ISP. But since home networks are becoming ever more common (outside of slashdot demographic, they're still sort of novel, really, though), and since Networks Need Nodes :) a cheap, integrated X-terminal (or maybe better yet, Qt/Embedded terminal) would be a hot seller, even at the original price of the iOpener, $300.

    So if anyone from iOpener is reading, please consider making your company (which is already building something Close Enough) the one to take advantage of this opportunity to fill the need for nodes.

    timothy
  • If they were/are selling it, while thinking that it is worthless without their service, why is that? Why don't they just say, "Sure, it's $99 initially, and $xx/month to use"? I suspect that the reason for the "sale" is to take advantage of some naive customer's assumptions.

    If that's not the case, perhaps they have just made an honest mistake in their marketing (heh!). Do you also turn down "loss leaders" in other areas when you know that the company will be losing money on your purchase?
  • $150/hr? $312 grand a year for installing hardware and software? Perhaps you should talk to my employer...
  • ...to get a 486 with a 1 Gig hardrive and a built in cheapo LCD screen from a company called Monorail [monorail.com]. I know because I've got one. It has a pretty small footprint and made a good dorm computer. The old version of RedHat I had tried to install on it about two years ago seemed to have problems with the hardware configuration (mostly because X11 didn't seem to like the LCD). I tried to install a more recent version of Caldera on it, but it was too much for it. I'm thinking of trying my copy of Mandrake next, or looking around for a more stripped down *nix. Of course, I'll need an external modem to make it useful after I do it, I think. I think it has a WinModem inside it... bleah. None of this is a priority, just a project I have lined up for when I have some free time... provided Mom doesn't destroy it first since I left it at her house. Anyway, it seems Monorail stopped selling the things and went for more ordinary computers (no more built in LCDs) but you might be able to find one used.
  • What would it take to _really_ lock this thing down?

    Superglue in the IDE port.
  • Pardon the obvious question, but WTF?

    Unless surrounded by a steel case, anyone with tools can modify this oh-so-cool appliance.

    The announcement is only so much useless verbage -- given a design, the Geeks of the World will find a way to change it.
  • One of the problems with using the cellular phone service contract has to do with the use of the phone itself. If you try to weasel your way out of the contract, they can always shut off the phone service, and usually do. And a cell phone that won't send or recieve phone calls is essentially an expensive plastic paperweight.


    The problem with this Netpliance system is that it can continue to be used even after it has had the ISP turned off, provided you are able to hack into the thing. So yes, there are some problems with model.


    The next thing to consider is more the practicality of a company trying to chase you down legally in court. They will probabally spend far more for the lawyers (case prep work, legal filing fees, ect.) than they could possibly get from you. Some states allow you to sue for court costs as well, but not always. Some prominent people might be sued, or a couple of FUD cases to try and scare people into submission, but probabally not everybody, nor a large group of independent people who each fail to pay for the service agreement, not to mention that Netpliance may not even succeed in every venue anyway, or even set a precidence against the terms of the service contract.

  • Netpliance purchased 30,000 of the machines for $106.67 each.
  • They tried that in the beginning - didn't work. That's when they started doing the "loss leader" thing.
    It's not a loss leader, it's an installment payment scheme combined with service. Agreeing up front to another $500 in payments over the next 2 years should tell you something.
    Oh, and for those who are having fits because "people are stealing from the company", bullshit. I'm not responsible for someone else's business model
    So you'd feel free to slap down $3000 for a new car and default on the loan payments, because "you're not responsible for someone else's business model"? A contract is a contract, and if you sign up for something and decide you don't want it (perhaps because it doesn't meet the advertised specs) the least you should do is "return the unused portion". In this case, it would be the hardware.
    --
  • Dear Netpliance,

    I respectfully announce to you that I will, in protest of your actions concerning the modification of your Netpliance hardware and software, not only fail to purchase one of the systems in question but I will also, in a negative connotation, inform any contacts I have in the Information Technology field concerning the truth of the issue and that they should not purchase your product. I will also inform such contacts that they should inform others of the true state of affairs concerning your product.

    Your actions to forbid users to alter, in reality upgrade, the item purchased from you goes against the spirit in which computer systems and the Internet are used. Time and time again user friendly systems have been produced that are stagnant and inflexible with regards to hardware and software upgrades. Time and time again such systems have failed. They have failed because the manufacturer failed to take into account the desire for flexibility that new users develop when they become proficient at utilizing the system in the basic configuration. They also failed by forcing the user to purchase a completely different product in addition to the item he/she originally purchased. These actions have consistently spelled death for any product marketed in such a fashion. Repeatedly.

    This inflexibility, it seems, also extends to your choice to bind a Netpliance purchaser to your Internet provider service. This action is analogous to a buyer of an automobile being required to drive only on a particular set of roads "sanctioned" by the manufacturer of the automobile or to use a tollbooth to leave his driveway. Just from casual observation this relationship is openly hostile to the purchaser in that their choices are being removed from them. In effect your policy is stating that the user need only know or use what you tell them to and that by purchasing their product they have no free will of their own nor deserve any respect for such. A company so openly disrespectful of it's customers would normally be closed down by consumer advocacy groups. Whether you change your policy enough to avoid that remains to be seen.

    I suggest you alter your policies to reflect several different ideas:

    1) Respect for the user and his/her intelligence and spirit. Without this you will fail to achieve ANY good sales and your products will be returned to you eventually - either through your return department or through, in the worst case, a court of law.

    2) User upgradability of hardware and software. Without this you will fail to keep customers for any real amount of time and eventually, through word of mouth and other forms of communication, you will have none. See point 1 again.

    3) Advanced user compatibility:

    a) Without this your product will only be bought by new users who will eventually move on to a more powerful product and hand your product to another new user. This is a losing game. There will be a point at which current new users cease to purchase your product because an advanced user has given them an existing unit of your manufacture. The sales of even your new models will slow down because of your failure to allow for use by advanced users.

    b) Advanced users will not purchase your product for themselves and will be more likely to fail to recommend your product to others because of the idea that "Well, new users should really get something 'real' that they will use to become better users." New users, in most cases, only stay new users for a very short period of time before they become more advanced and increase the number/range of their abilities. Failing to take that into account will kill you every time.

    c) Advanced users are often of a mind to learn more and more - as are most people. To this end they will often purchase a product "just to see what we can do with it". It is this mentality, and mainly this mentality, that is the reason your company exists in the first place. Without this mentality and the ability to act on it NOT ONE PIECE of the computer industry, including your company, would exist. Indeed probably nothing more than simple machines would probably be in existence and we would probably be living in an agrarian dark age with no major means of support. In preventing this you are setting the example to others of a path that will cut our own throats technologically and stagnate the very lifeblood of your company and others.

    I suggest the following changes:

    1) Offer a Netpliance device that perhaps costs a small amount more but can be easily used with any Internet service without modification but offer your service as an option. This will cover purchases to new users who already have an Internet Service Provider but would like to use your product.

    2) Offer a bundled Netpliance device that has a "discount" for using your Internet Service Provider. This will be attractive to new users who want a simple "plug and go" system. Perhaps make a deal with AOL for "bring your own access" connections to their services.

    3) Offer a plain Netpliance device that has no warranty and is a little more expensive than the version purchased for use with the customer's own Internet Service Provider but also has no restrictions on what can be done with it. This device will appeal to the advanced user who wishes to purchase your product for use in some capacity that you have not yet foreseen.

    Making these three changes will cover all users regardless of type and experience level and also allow you to charge different prices for your product thus making more money on it.

    The choice is yours - stagnate and die or expand and live.


    The Tick - "Spoon!"
  • "A contract is a contract,"

    And the contract says (when I ordered mine 3/17) that for $99 +shipping hey would sell me an i-opener. There was no obligation to use their ISP. Ever. For any period.

    So I don't have any payments to default on. Our exchange has concluded - the contract satisfied.
  • the i-opener is obviously sold as a loss-leader for the service, the LCD alone is worth more than $99. I put together a test network of low end pentiums and 486's using the QNX demo disk and a linux server while investigating options for a cyber cafe. Even a used 14" monitor cost more than the remaining hardware.

    But the issue isn't about the price of the hardware. The number of slashdotters who will actually purchase and successfully modify an i-opener is negligible compared to their true potential customer base.

    The backers of Netpliace aren't hoping to sell hardware, or even dial-up service. The real goal is in having control to users' access to information. That's where smart money is nowadays. Why do you think Microsoft and Compuserve were offering those huge rebates?

    In Oregon and California, courts have ruled that such penalty contracts are unenforceable. You should have seen the lines at Office Depot before Microsoft cancelled their deal. In actuality, they would still be making a profit, and quickly, from the honest (or ignorant) dial-up subscribers. The problem was that they realized that ANYONE could cancel their service and go through another portal.

    The reason all the money is going into the internet isn't because people think that online pet stores are going to sell more gritty kitty to point and click shoppers, but because the real stake in the internet is the control of information flow.

  • I should think that not many companies would support the selling of "older" technology. I dislike how many companies sell the latest and greatest without supporting any "older" models. Heck, all i want is a 2.5G hard drive and a NEW one is very difficult to find anywhere :(

  • I looked up the specs [netpliance.com] of the i-opener and compared the component prices with my wholesaler. While I can't reveal the breakdown, the total cost for the components is around $160-200 (assuming 1000 lots).

    They sell the box for a loss but make it up on the $21/mo service fee. This is exactly the same business model the video game manufacturers use. The super-advanced 3D graphics chips in the PlayStation are cost way more than the selling price, but Sony makes it up in license fees for the games.

    Hence why Sony is attacking Bleem so ferociously, and the same reason Netpliance is beating on their corresponding "open hardware" hackers: it destroys their business model.

    TANASTAAFL indeed.

  • If you avoid the contract of using the freaking 'internet dialup' ......then...you ARE stealing..... there is NO other way to look at it. I *would* buy the box, 99$ and then buy the service for 3 months (~65$) ....then THIS would be legal, but all you people can justify it ...it is still stealing.... I had to resist going out and buying this box [would look soo cool next to the jon], I did not buy it...and I put the money in a good place......paintball gun.
  • See this link [www.netbsd.org] on the NetBSD [www.netbsd.org] website.
  • When I did electronic repair for airline equipment, some circuit boards would be covered with a plastic substance that would not come of unless you hit it with a hammer, which did wonders for the circuit board;). if they used that substance it would be impossible to screw with the mother board at all.
  • Superglue would eat away all the traces it could -- and not just the IDE ones. What you'd have left would be an I-paperweight.

    --

  • Is the machine a loss leader? (Score:3)

    by smartin ( 942 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @08:57AM (#1179054)
    I guess this makes sense if they are only selling the machines at a loss to get people on their service. On the other hand, i thought that they were happy that all of the sudden there were thousands of slashdotters interested in buying their equipment.

    Oh well, what states are these sort of agreements invalid in again?
  • Ok, I may be *way* off base here, but..

    Isn't bundling one product with the requirment of a use of another against the law? According to what they are requiring, it's not a refund, discount, etc, for using their service. One requires the other, and if you buy it, you *MUST* use their service, according to their supposed 'Terms of Service', which seems very vacant from their site for some reason..

    I understand what and why they are doing this, but they are making it seem like something it's not, which is not legal. They are selling a cheap internet device, at a loss, without telling you you *MUST ALWAYS* use their internet service with it..

    It's like buying a Toyoto, and being told you must now buy Toyoto brand gas, imported direct from Japan, for 20$ a gallon.

  • If you buy a car... (Score:3)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak AT yahoo DOT com> on Thursday March 23, 2000 @11:42AM (#1179056) Homepage Journal
    The car is yours to do with as you will. Plenty of people know enough about mechanics to soup up their 4-wheel toys, and plenty of people do. I don't see the car industry on the point of collapse.

    Plenty of people can get hold of a PC case, fit the motherboard of their choice, etc. Plenty of small mail-order firms started exactly this way. I don't see Dell or Compaq going under, any time soon, from them. (You could even buy Dell computers, and re-use any higher-end components in your own computers. Nothing to stop you.)

    If you buy Red Hat, you're free to tweak it as you will, and re-sell the finished product, openly stating it as a derivative, if you wish. Who's going to raise a stink?

    Fact is, the "bottom line" is nowhere near as impacted by the hobbyist arena as accountants would have you believe. Rather, the hobbyist market has a proven track record of dragging in additional users in excess of the hobbyists' ability to supply. (The effects of the Apple I/II and the ZX 80/81 on public perception massively outweighed the market share either of these ever took.)

    The =REAL= "bottom line" is that if you deny the hobbyists, they'll go elsewhere and help in developing your competitor's market and product.

    We've seen it all before. Games drove graphics cards design, and graphics cards drove CPU design. If those hobbyists hadn't started with trying to get Spacewar and Pong going on affordable machines, you wouldn't have the high-end CAD market today. Nobody would have thought of it. And without lots of number-crunching apps (such as graphics packages) around, who would have bothered with developing fast FPU's?

    The only company that blocks 3rd-party development is one that's just killed itself.

  • Give me a break! (Score:3)

    by CWCarlson ( 2884 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:19AM (#1179057)
    Oh, that's ridiculous. They may be selling these as 'loss leaders' and they may want you to use their service after you purchase one, but if you pay what they're asking to purchase an i-Opener then you OWN it.

    It's not a lease. It's not rental. It's a purchase. Opening it up and modifying it to make it do something else is no more stealing than buying a Playstation and letting it sit in a closet. Both are situations that result in a monetary loss for the manufacturer, but that's one of the risks they take by relying on their business model.

    Theft, indeed!

  • Re:ATM machine... (Score:3)

    by otis wildflower ( 4889 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @12:34PM (#1179058) Homepage
    What do you think, they sell each unit for a loss, but they'll make it up in volume?

    Hey, works for Amazon.com...

    Your Working Boy,

  • What can they do? (Score:3)

    by Booker ( 6173 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:00AM (#1179059) Homepage
    It seems like they're fairly limited in their options to lock this thing down. Removing the header wouldn't help, since soldering is straightforward. Re-spinning the board to remove the header traces completely would take a fair amount of time. A BIOS change to disallow more than 1 IDE device might do it, but someone would probably distribute the original BIOS image, or a trace could probably be cut to disable the SanDisk flash and allow another IDE device...

    What would it take to _really_ lock this thing down?

    Disclaimer - I think NetPliance is a pretty cool company, and I'd hate to see them fail as a result of this attention. They've certainly gotten a lot of press lately, which can't hurt, and hopefully offsets the monetary losses to the hardware-hacking geeks...

    ---

  • Re:What can they do? (Score:3)

    by imp ( 7585 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @10:11AM (#1179060) Homepage
    Superglue in the IDE port.

    Thinking about it, they could do any of the following things:

    • Modify the BIOS to only boot off the SanDisk and remove the ability to break into qnx.
    • Not stick the ide connector on the board. This is the easiest to do.
    • Pump goo into the ide connector on the board.
    • Use high secuirty bolts rather than regular phillips head screws.
    • Hotglue the case closed.
    • Lock out all access to the keyboard during the BIOS boot.
    • Nothing. Make it a legal matter and harrass those publishing information about it.

    If they do #1, then one could easily get around that by cutting traces on the board that enables the SanDisk chips and put an IDE drive into the unit jumpered as slave.

    If they don't stick the ide connector onto the board, a quick trip to the local electronics parts store will fix this, plus a few minutes with a soldering iron. This will radically cut down the number of people who are able and willing to do the mod. This sort of change is the easiest to order in a mfg process.

    If they pump goo into the socket, one could unstick the connector one pin at a time and put your own back on. Of course both this and the previous paragraph assume that the iopener has pin through board mounting. With surface mount for the ide connector, it is much harder to do either of these.

    High security bits for my screw driver are available at the same local electronics store that I get my ide connectors from :-). Actually, I already own a complete set of all the weirdest ones that I've ever seen.

    Hot glue can be cut with a good knife or dremmel tool.

    The next to the last item is the same as the first.

    The last one kicks it into the socio-ethical realm since nothing has changed.

    One can also jumper the SanDisk from secondary to primary relatively easy. The IDE CD adapters can do this by shorting one of the pins to ground or Vcc (I don't have my docs handy).

  • This is idiotic on their part. Someone comes out with something which I'm willing to bet at boosted their sales by an order of magnitude, and
    they cut that revenue source off? That's just stupid.

    Yeah, how stupid. So what if they were losing money on every one they sold? They'd make it up in volume!

  • so use their service for a month (Score:3)

    by jms ( 11418 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:29AM (#1179062)
    Their web site says:

    By purchasing the i-opener you are agreeing to use the i-opener Internet service. The fee is $21.95 a month and will be billed approximately 2 days after the i-opener is shipped to you.

    Ok ... so pay for one month of service, then cancel.

    Modification of the i-opener in any way is in violation of our terms and conditions.

    I can't find their terms of service on their site. Anyone have the complete terms of service?

    I'm pretty sure that the doctrine of first sale applies here. Since they are selling the box to you, you have the right to do with it as you wish, whether that be replace the operating system, or use it as a pavement stone.

    Anyway, several states explicitly forbid the tying of a purchased item with a subscription service.

    If this is their business model, then they have shot themselves in the foot. The package they are selling (hardware plus service) has a higher salvage value (the hardware is the salvage item) then the initial purchase cost. They should have known better.

  • Re:Can't be a good move for them (Score:3)

    by um... Lucas ( 13147 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:26AM (#1179063) Journal
    Ummm... They sold their units at a LOSS. They expected to make up for it by the fees for the online service. A bunch of hackers opened up the boxes, installed NetBSD, and didn't use their service. So, they stood to lose tons of money on their loss leaders with no way to make it up... It's not exactly shooting themselves in the feet when they try to stop the on coming flood of future losses.

    Oh, and who has open source actually helped, I'm curious? Red Hat? VA Linux? Cobalt? Well, they were all open source companies to start with.

    Corel, maybe?
    Netscape? No... they got bought by AOL just as they were vowing to make Linux a "tier 1 platform".
    How about Apple? No... Apple's opened their kernel, but make their money on hardware sales... Plus their new OS isn't even on the market yet, so it's hard to gauge the effects of their new OS.
    SGI? Okay, SGI might be rebounding... In the past few weeks their price range has gone from the low 9's and low 10's to around the 12 dollar mark.

    Who else has open source helped? Please tell me!

    Another point here is when companies execute according to their business plan, they're more likely to succeed. When their customers tear up their business plan and and starts taking their product from them, it's just not a good business strategy.

  • We've heard this before (Score:3)

    by JamesKPolk ( 13313 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:27AM (#1179064) Homepage
    Remember the great deals one could get in California, with the MSDN bundling with a computer? Microsoft didn't bother trying to make the internet service legally bound to the computer, because they knew it was so blatantly against California law, that they with their DOJ-fighting legal department, was certain to lose.

    Netpliance should try keeping up with industry news. Watch for the price of the I Opener to rise soon, as they find that the loss leader strategy will still fail.

    Also watch for a failing IPO. :-)

    Oh, and as far as making it tamper-proof: Keep in mind that the original hacker was able to see through their reversed IDE port. Unless they switch to an unflashable BIOS, that doesn't support hard drives, Netpliance's attempts at that will also fail, I believe.

  • I don't think this could be true (yet) (Score:3)

    by ethereal ( 13958 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:12AM (#1179065) Journal

    I don't see how they could have modified the hardware so quickly to do this. Some discussion on i-opener-linux.net [i-opener-linux.net] (where I saw this story last night) considered whether this was possible or not, and the upshot was that maybe the BIOS could have been modified, but there hasn't been time for a hardware modification. And BIOS that has been changed once can certainly be changed again (although this might be difficult w/o a floppy drive). The terms-of-service argument doesn't bother me at all, since I didn't agree to any at Circuit City, and I don't plan to even boot the thing until after adding a Linux drive and so forth. You only see the warning linked from the story above if you buy an i-opener from Netpliance's site.

    I ordered my i-opener on 3/16, so I'm not sure if this announcement will apply to it or not. I haven't received it yet, but on the other hand it may have been shipped from Netpliance before 3/20, and just not received by Circuit City yet. If the worst case is true and it's unhackable, my CC receipt allows for 14-day returns (with 15% restocking fee).

    It is strange how Netpliance has bounced back and forth on the mod issue - sometimes they seem to be really cool about it, but then they go and do something like this. I hope the open, "friendly" personality eventually comes through, because I'd be happy to recommend one of these to a relative who wanted a simple web browsing appliance, and I'd even consider buying a more-expensive i-opener-type device which was specifically designed for modification. Meaning more and more accessible serial/parallel/USB ports, VGA output, a slightly larger case to allow more room for onboard drives, etc., official developer's information such as pinouts, etc.

  • Re:kiosk ideas (Score:3)

    by ssheth ( 92678 ) <{slashdot} {at} ... eth.fastmail.fm}> on Thursday March 23, 2000 @01:44PM (#1179066) Homepage
    I went looking around the net for cheap lcd's and came across this [73.com]. They sell surplus laptop parts including 10.4" LCD screens for as low as $90/each.

    From their site:
    HITACHI 10.4" LCD SCREENS
    300 pcs Hitachi 10.4" Dual Scan LCD screen model LMG9300XUCC, new pulls. As low as $90.00each for the lot! DA408

    So the screens by themselves are available for fairly cheap prices if someone is willing to just go out and hack together a system. Mainly you would need to find an embedded PC system which has an onboard LCD driver (available quite commonly in industry), wire together, add a hard drive, enet if necessary, and that would be all.

    Several embedded versions of Linux floating around (look at http://www.linuxdevices.com [linuxdevices.com]) that would work great.

  • They have a business model to protect. (Score:3)

    by Jeff- ( 95113 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:03AM (#1179067) Homepage
    If you read the articles about this you will realize that the hardware is so cheap because they are anticipating sales of the service. They actually loose money when they sell the hardware w/o the service. So this company that uses some really neat technology (QNX) is going to go under if they keep selling cheap toys to linux geeks without selling their service.
    Think about that before you get terribly upset at them for forcing you to buy the service, or changing the machine so that it can't be moded. These people are struggling to make a buck just like the rest of us. Also I think we should be supportive of companies who are seeking alternatives to Microsoft products in light weight appliances. We need more companies like this to enhance competition so that we see more innovation.

    Jeff

  • i-opener pricing model (Score:3)

    by peteshaw ( 99766 ) <slashdot@peteshaw.fastmail.fm> on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:18AM (#1179068) Homepage
    What's the big deal! This is _NOT_ complicated. The pricing is analogous to a cell phone. If you agree to a two year contract, the phone is *FREE*. a.k.a. Sign up for i-opener service and the box is $99. --or-- If you pay $199 fro this neat phone, we won't lock you into any long commitments. a.k.a. You can buy this no-strings-attachedf i-opener for (what's a fair price?) 300? 400? 500? Then you can pay for i-opener service month-to-month or not at all. Think about how little cell phone companies care what you actually do with the phones as long as you fulfill your contractual obligation. As long as you have a rational pricing model, all of these "oh my gods the nerd are opening them up" worries vanish. I just don;'t get it.

  • Re:circuit city (Score:3)

    by b_pretender ( 105284 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @11:46AM (#1179069)
    With Regards to pressuring them for a 'linux-ready,' 'easier to modify' model, this is there nice reply to a letter I sent them. I also asked for a copy of the QNX license, and the root password:

    =-==-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Dear XXXXX

    We appreciate your interest in our product and our company.

    We understand that a group of individuals recently developed a way to run
    the Linux operating system on the i-opener by making modifications to the
    hardware and removing our software. The modifications allow these highly
    technical users to bypass the i-opener service network. These modifications
    are isolated to the i-openers purchased by those individuals and have no
    impact whatsoever on the Netpliance service network or its customers.

    It's worth noting that the work-around these individuals developed does not
    provide them with free Internet service. While it has opened up a complex
    route to other Internet Service Providers, virtually all of our i-opener
    customers have no interest nor the technical skills in manipulating the
    complex inner workings of the device to achieve that goal. i-opener
    customers are looking for one thing: simple, inexpensive Internet access
    without a computer. As this is our primary audience, we do not provide
    documentation regarding the QNX operating system.

    That said, the small community of users who developed this work-around
    actually offer a complement to the core technology behind the i-opener -
    that it's robust enough to run an operating system like Linux. Netpliance
    does not endorse the modification of the i-opener device to possibly support
    alternative operating systems or other uses. However, these developments
    have uncovered an additional opportunity that Netpliance had not been
    focusing on, but will now consider. We'll keep you updated as to how
    Netpliance plans to work with the growing community of Linux developers.

    Regards,

    Kristi Copeland
    Director - Sales and Support

  • What about backlog orders? (Score:3)

    by olof_j ( 129000 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @12:42PM (#1179070)
    I just called, my unit shipped yesterday. When I asked if I would still be subject to the new terms and conditions, I got the answer (from the customer service person) that I was.

    However... This would mean that I would not receive the same product that I ordered, and that I never agreed upon these new terms and conditions upon ordering the product. Right?

    I guess they might have wrapped the unit the same way lots of software is distrubuted -- by breaking the shipping package you agree upon the terms...

  • kiosk ideas (Score:4)

    by Jamie Zawinski ( 775 ) <jwz@jwz.org> on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:08AM (#1179071) Homepage


    I need some small, cheap, durable Linux machines to use as web kiosks. It sounded like these I-Opener things might do the job nicely, once fitted with some manner of ethernet. But I guess not any more.

    The thing that's killing me here is that I'd really like to have flat-screens, since real monitors are just too damned big. But you can't get a flat-screen for less than around $1500, which is way too expensive.

    Is it possible to re-use just the flat-screen from these I-Opener devices? Can you just plug them in to another computer, or are they specialized hardware? Because an 800x600 flat-screen for $99 still sounds like a good deal to me.

    Any other suggestions for how to do kiosks cheaply?

    In particular, I want something that you stand in front of, and that doesn't take up a lot of floor space.

  • They had to do this (Score:4)

    by twdorris ( 29395 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:04AM (#1179072)
    The bottom line is all powerful in a public held company. Netpliance literally *had* to do something about this situation or else the stock holders would likely have filed suit against them. They probably had no choice. I like Netpliance, I bought their stock when it tanked because I liked the way they responded. As a stock holder, I'm glad they took action to keep the other stock holders happy and hopefully to force the stock value in the positive direction again. As an open source advocate, I'm hopeful that they'll follow this short term action with some moves more like what they claim they wanna do (which is to work with the open source guys and the Linux guys in particular to get more applications ported to their tiny footprint machine). Personally, I believe they will. They just had to do what they did to keep the shareholders off their back for a while.

  • I asked about it. (Score:5)

    by davidu ( 18 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:04AM (#1179073) Homepage Journal
    I just called to check my order. When I asked if I would get the new one, the rep asked why. When I explained I wanted to be able to have full control of it he cancelled my order because I expressed interest in violating the terms of service. :(
    -Davidu
  • I think anyone else who has an order open for one of these and intends to modify should cancel their order, too.

    Look, the manufacturer was stupid to not have an air-tight contract required you to use their service. That should have been in place the day they shipped their first unit. But to modify the unit and avoid using their service still feels to me like you would be running a rip-off on the manufacturer.

    No way are they able to manufacture the device for $99. It should be really clear to all of you that they were intending to amortize the cost through their online service.

    Us Open Source folks are supposed to be more ethical than the rest of the software crowd. This whole deal puts a really bad taste in my mouth.

    If anyone else has a pending order and intended to modify the device, please cancel your order.

    Thanks

    Bruce

  • Oh well... It was a good idea at the time. (Score:5)

    by jht ( 5006 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:08AM (#1179075) Homepage Journal
    And I had one on order from Circuit City, too. This'll be interesting - a whole lot of people have ordered them from Circuit City and put deposits down - and now when/if they arrive theoretically they are no longer modifiable.

    Well, if we all cancel our orders then suddenly there will be a huge inventory of these things piled up in Circuit City's stores, and Netpliance'll have some issues to deal with there...

    I think I'll look and see what happens when the order arrives - maybe the box has a production date. If that's the case and it's a new, supposedly unmodifiable one then I'll just refuse it, given that it's not the unit I ordered. This whole thing has serious amusement potential.

    What Netpliance should have done is considered moving upscale a little bit. Imagine almost that exact same unit shipped with a small hard drive, an Ethernet jack instead of a modem, and a P233MMX for $200-$250 or so as an Internet terminal for business. To heck with PC's, I'd buy a coupe of dozen for my company at that price. If $50-$75 more could get a TFT screen instead (remember, it's only a 10.4" screen and those are relatively cheap) it would still be a no-brainer. The ISP service is fine, but it's brilliant hardware packaging and design.

    - -Josh Turiel

  • circuit city (Score:5)

    by Signal 11 ( 7608 ) on Thursday March 23, 2000 @08:58AM (#1179076)
    I spoke with Circuit City and they said they would be selling them as soon as they are restocked (in two weeks) up here in Minnesota. I have verified this with several of the stores in my area.

    I suspect this affects only web-based purchases. I will also point out they are cutting off a revenue stream - these are perfect birthday presents for people who are maybe not as computer-literate as you or I (like our parents). Increasing the price and/or forcing this kind of TOS makes that kind of purchase impossible... which is very unfortunate.

    It's a nice idea.. and having them use linux was a neat hack.. I would pressure them to come out with a "linux-ready" version at a higher price.. as you must recognize that they can't support their revenue model with us eating into it - $99 probably does not even cover wholesale costs of the device.

  • TANSTAAFL (Score:5)

    by dmorin ( 25609 ) <dmorin @ g m ail.com> on Thursday March 23, 2000 @09:30AM (#1179077) Homepage Journal
    I'm surprised more of the geeks around these parts, likely being Heinlein readers, don't think of "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" as soon as they hear something like this. Instead they go out and order dozens, and when the loophole is shut down they get all indignant.

    This device sounds exactly like what FreePC tried. Remember them? Hey, get a free PC, all you have to do is agree to look at our ads. Every geek I know said "Dude, I'll hack the system! I'll fix it so i never have to look at ads, *and* I'll get a free computer! I'll set up fake accounts and get a dozen!" There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. The PC was free because it was a loss leader. At least they were smart enough to put you into a contract right from the beginning. To get around that deal by simply failing to hold up your end of the contract, well, that's not a hack, that's just plain illegal and doesn't take a great deal of intelligence.

    I used to have a boss in my first job who liked to say (being a lifelong salesman), "Give away the razor. Sell the blades." During meetings when a good idea came up, he would ask "What's the razor? What's the blade?" The razor is the PC. The blade is the monthly service.

    Netpliance's problem seems to have been that they forgot to lock in the contract up front. Somebody in there must have figured that only people who want the service would get the machine, since after all that's all the machine was good for. That was their mistake, underestimating the power of geeks who smell a free lunch. Yes, to hack their device was very cool indeed. But to set up a small business whose purpose was solely to buy them by the dozen, hack them, and then resell them? I'm glad netpliance closed the loophole. (Note, I don't know for a fact that anybody did that -- but almost everybody I heard did say that they were buying them in plurals, so I can quite logically assume that the most rabid free lunchers would be buying them by the dozen).

    And how many people actually did the math? Ok, $100 box. Personally for me, not being a hardware hacker, I figure it's going to take me several hours to do the necessary soldering and such. The first time (since I'd only buy one), it might take what, 4? If somebody wanted me to work on installing software and hard drives for a living, what would I ask for pay? $150/hr? Ok, so now it's a $700 device. I have to put a hard drive in the thing, right? How big do I want to go? Plus what do the other parts cost? So maybe I throw another $200 or so into it? Now it's a $900 device. Throw in the shipping most people paid, the throw-away first month of ISP service, etc etc... and you're up over $1000 very likely. For those that primarily wanted the flat screen, ok, this is still a good deal. But it's one hell of an expensive MP3 player, if that was your plan.

    Lastly, I love the logic of people that say "This is actually good for Netpliance, because most of the hardware hackers that buy them will never hack them, and just end up giving them away as gifts or something." How pray tell does that make Netpliance any more money? It doesn't, unless you count the slashdot effect as a marketing technique.

    So, to sum up. Some clever hacker found a loophole, and benefited from it. Many followed. But there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, it was never Netpliance's intention to give away $100 machines for no return, and now it's closed. Don't whine about it. Go be a clever hacker and find the next loophole to exploit, and act a little quicker next time.

    d

Slashdot Top Deals

"In my opinion, Richard Stallman wouldn't recognise terrorism if it came up and bit him on his Internet." -- Ross M. Greenberg

Close