
Update On The TechCrunch Tablet: Prototype A - blackswan
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/30/update-on-the-techcrunch-tablet-prototype-a/
======
gstar
Browsing the comments on TC, and I found this quite telling/interesting.

[http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/30/update-on-the-
techcrunc...](http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/30/update-on-the-techcrunch-
tablet-prototype-a/#comment-2451799)

In case it goes: "A couple of weeks ago I was asked to make a simple cad model
for the prototype hardware. <http://tctablet.altronix.se/#2.11>

I would like to finish the work but since last week I have not been able to to
get in touch with them on either irc or skype… :/" Refer

------
maxklein
The idea is not bad, but they are working on obselete technology. What they
should be working on are extension screens for even smaller computers - think
of a very flat panel with a slot for an iphone that immediately expands the
iphone screen into a 20 inch thing.

The computer itself should be expensive, but the screen part of things should
be cheap.

~~~
vlad
There were rumors Apple patented this a year or so ago.

~~~
maxklein
What do you mean "rumours"? Patents are open and available for all to see.

~~~
daniel-cussen
Yeah, but who actually goes to the patent office to look for ideas he can
license to build products?

------
fallentimes
Are any HN people helping out with this?

------
gstar
Classy. Do these guys really think you can brew up a $200 web tablet at an old
kitchen table?

I've been critical of this project before, but my advice on the matter would
be to refer techcrunch to the first facet of this effect:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect>

I don't understand how the commenters on TC think it's anywhere near an actual
prototype. Groupthink?

If they're serious about this project, TC should focus on the skills they have
(PR, contacts and reputation) and get this actually built by some pros rather
than by some barefooted web 2.0 nerds with bits of Arrington's old macbook
air.

Still willing to be proven wrong though.

~~~
mechanical_fish
_Do these guys really think you can brew up a $200 web tablet at an old
kitchen table?_

Actually, that's a very good sign. Every one of the smartest EEs I know works
like this: In apartments or labs filled with piles of random wires and
oscilloscopes and beat-up hard drives. You can tell which parts are the
important ones because they're the ones that are only _half_ -covered with
random junk.

The first danger, when this project was announced, was that it would be a
vanity project like so many others before it. It would consist of 85% talk,
and 10% fundraising, and the remaining 5% would be outsourced to some team of
professional ditherers with flashy Powerpoint presentations who would produce
lots of shiny plastic mockups and cost overruns and never quite manage to ship
anything. Or there would be a giant mob of 'contributors', each of whom is
invited to bring a single resistor to be soldered into the heap.

Instead, after the initial rush we seem to have seen very little loose talk,
which implies that there might just be a handful of people quietly plugging
away on the thing. And now we get a benchtop prototype. All promising signs.

Of course, I have no doubt that you can produce a single, working desktop
prototype of a web tablet. That's still a far cry from being able to mass-
produce a reliable version for $200. But, if they want to get there, they
appear to be on the right track. And, if they fail, at least they might learn
exactly why, because they will have gotten into the weeds.

~~~
gstar
And that is exactly my point. It's one thing to build a prototype, and another
thing entirely to be able to mass produce a web tablet for $200. And no matter
how good the EE, you can't do that stuff at a messy kitchen table - you need
serious resources.

~~~
mechanical_fish
Well, sure, but those serious manufacturing resources belong to OEMs in China.
As a US-based designer, building a factory is not your problem -- there's no
hope of doing _that_ profitably at this rock-bottom $200 price point. Your
problem is design -- figuring out which combinations of commodity parts will
do what you want. After which you'll take various iterations of your prototype
to meetings with OEMs like Foxconn, asking them to bid for the honor of
manufacturing the product in bulk and sticking your company's label on it.

Of course, there are lots of potential pitfalls in that process -- there are
several middlemen who can mark the price up, there are lots of suppliers to
coordinate and play against each other, and there's the constant risk that
your design is lousy, or unmanufacturable (when the factory is half a world
away, it's hard to establish a good design feedback loop), or that you'll cut
so many corners trying to meet your budget that your brilliant design _turns
out_ lousy. This is presumably why there are so few decent $200 web tablets.

Incidentally, though I used to be a product engineer in the cellular
components industry, I'm no expert on the overall design/manufacturing process
-- I was a tiny cog in the giant cellphone machine. For actual knowledge I
recommend something like Bunnie Huang's blog posts about hiring folks to build
the Chumby:

<http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?cat=6>

UPDATE: I just surfed through my own link, and I have to say that Bunnie is a
great blogger. His hints for getting quality designs out of Chinese factories
(my capsule summary: "live in China, watching the assembly line, for as much
time as you and your budget can stand") are in line with my own experience.

