Remember that other tablet, which came out right around the same time the iPad was released? Yeah, the joojoo, by Fusion Garage. During its development, it was known as the CrunchPad, and emerged out of some form of collaboration between Michael Arrington's TechCrunch and Chandrasekhar Rathakrisnan's Fusion Garage. Things went sour between the two, and eventually, Fusion Garage released the joojoo on its own. Consequently, Arrington sued, and we've got the first major court decision.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-13
"At this point, does anybody even care, though?"
You mean aside from Arrington? No, not really. Had the product have taken off and been a sales success then sure. It's not a bad product, it just hasn't sold all that well. Either way, never get into any sort of agreement that makes to to the production stage without a written (and notarized where applicable) contract. Anyone who's ever gotten into a "he said, she said" style argument will tell you to do that first thing.
Member since:2006-07-14
Well, the product was always promoted as costing half as much as it actually did when released. Its not quite fair to judge it based on how fusion garage released it.
Combine high price with shady company, negative publicity and questionable software and you get few sales. I don't doubt that it could have been a success at half the price with tech crunch behind it.
It just blows my mind that Tech Crunch didn't sign a contract with fusion garage. Its like not buckling your seat belt and getting in a car with a guy that reeks of alcohol.
Member since:2006-01-26
Given your analogy - I'm not surprised at all... chances are, if you're willingly getting in a car with a drunk - you're probably loaded as well, and probably not coherent enough to realize the danger, let alone bother to buckle your seatbelt...
Perhaps that describes this situation more aptly than one thinks - there seemed to be some recklessness involved in this business venture, a sort of "rush to market" attitude with both parties without fully considering whether it made good business sense.
Edited 2010-08-30 18:22 UTC
Member since:2005-07-13
"Given your analogy - I'm not surprised at all... chances are, if you're willingly getting in a car with a drunk - you're probably loaded as well, and probably not coherent enough to realize the danger, let alone bother to buckle your seatbelt..."
haha, you beat me to it! Was going to make that same comment... 
Member since:2008-12-26
Member since:2006-07-14
The crunch pad was promoted as a $199 device. Which would be like 158 euros today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crunch_Pad#History
So, when everyone was expecting it to be half of the cost, it turned a lot of people off. The public feud with a respected Silicon valley journalist/ company incubator didn't help.
Member since:2005-07-06
You mean aside from Arrington? No, not really. Had the product have taken off and been a sales success then sure. It's not a bad product, it just hasn't sold all that well. Either way, never get into any sort of agreement that makes to to the production stage without a written (and notarized where applicable) contract. Anyone who's ever gotten into a "he said, she said" style argument will tell you to do that first thing.
I think the two biggest issues were the software itself wasn't quite ready for prime time, and the lousy battery life (2 hours). The iPad has about 10 hours of battery (and I've seen it in action) which makes a huge difference in its usability, especially for long flights.
Member since:
2008-10-28
Member since:2008-12-15
NOOOOOOOO.... I've got a better one!
Introducing on new Computing Tablet: Snew-Snew!
It even avoids the soon to be obvious Copyrights!
Imagine the headlines where someone is so engaged with it and walk off a cliff or into a road... broke his pelvic bones.
Death by Snew-Snew!
Member since:2005-07-13
Member since:2005-11-02
Member since:2005-07-13
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2006-05-26
But for business, the lowest he could lose would be to have the case entirely dismissed if he didn't pay for marketing (I didn't see it) or manufacturing: it was DOA when released, and undoubtedly has been only pure loss, and with its limited capability and horrid battery life has no chance against the far better engineering of the iPad for both software and hardware for usability. Sorry, even though it claims to support Flash (which it does badly) doesn't make up for all the other flaws.
Member since:
1997-10-01
It just goes to show that while having a good contract is very important when something goes wrong, US law is pretty clear that if you can provide some evidence that some terms were discussed about working together in any capacity, it's a perfectly valid (verbal) legal contract, and verbal contracts have legal weight.
A lot of people seem to think that if they don't have it in writing, they can't be held to what they agree to. But that's not strictly the case.
Member since:
2009-08-22
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
2010-04-27
Member since:
2006-05-10
My prior comments about the ridiculous naming and its chances of survival on the market aside, I was hoping Arrington would be acknowledged as a major participant in the development. They pulled an awfully dirty trick on him kicking him out right before the release of the device and pretending it was something else. I am surprised FG even thought they could get away with it while Arrington has always been the name and face associated with the CrunchPad.
Here's to hoping the higher courts have the same sense of justice...