| |||||||||||||
ColorHug drops remote disableColorHug drops remote disablePosted Apr 28, 2012 15:03 UTC (Sat) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: ColorHug drops remote disable by slashdot Parent article: ColorHug drops remote disable
What a lucid line of reasoning. I'm sure that would have convinced Richard's bank manager.
(Log in to post comments)
ColorHug drops remote disable Posted Apr 29, 2012 1:36 UTC (Sun) by slashdot (guest, #22014) [Link]
Well, this is a device primarily marketed to the open source community, who would buy a color meter from him rather than competitors mostly because of the bound they perceive with him due to being part of the same community.
In addition the device is cheap, is a niche product and is only really useful for Linux users, which are a tiny minority, while on the market there are more expensive, powerful and general purpose devices of the same kind, and thus a fraudster would be most likely to steal those instead.
In this scenario, the likelihood of any kind of fraud is drastically lower than the average and essentially zero.
It's possible that these things could become less true as his business expands, but then he'd be able to self-insure against the (non-)issue like he claimed he's doing now.
Furthermore, the inclusion of such an anti-feature would be strongly opposed by your target market, and considering that marketing mostly relies on goodwill from that target market, including it is sure to drastically reduce that goodwill and thus cause loss of sales.
Not to mention that it's even done wrong, because the correct way is to make the hardware not work unless a device-specific secret code obtained from the Internet is passed to the device driver, after proving they received the device by entering another device-specific secret code included within the product.
Hence, including such an anti-feature implemented like he did is clearly batshit insane.
ColorHug drops remote disable Posted Apr 29, 2012 1:44 UTC (Sun) by slashdot (guest, #22014) [Link]
Although, with further analysis, he did get extra advertisement from the whole affair, so there's a chance it was ultimately good for business in that way.
That's really uncertain though, since the publicity was negative and towards an audience that tends to be strongly opinionated and discriminating.
ColorHug drops remote disable Posted May 3, 2012 19:40 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
> is only really useful for Linux users
No it isn't. It only works with Linux, but it comes with a livecd bundled, so you can boot it, export the .icc file and use it on OSX or Windows or any other OS too.
ColorHug drops remote disable Posted May 4, 2012 10:04 UTC (Fri) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
... and it seems likely that some future firmware upgrade will make it possible to use the hardware directly under Windows or OS X if people take the time to write some application software. Richard didn't intend specifically to deny this capability, it just happens that something about the firmware tickles other USB stacks the wrong way.
|
|||||||||||||