Topic: Chumby-Brief mention in Economist article … d=11482589

Ugh. All the Chumby gushing I did and it ends up as:
And even if open-source enthusiasts like your product, are they representative of the wider public? Open devices “tend to be geared more toward technology-oriented people, with products you might not see at Best Buy,” notes Lance Lavery, a systems administrator and self-proclaimed “uber-geek” who owns a Chumby.


When someone annoys me, it takes 42 muscles in my face to frown...but it takes only 4 muscles to extend my arm and b**ch-slap you! * new blog location

Re: Chumby-Brief mention in Economist article


Don't feel bad - that's the way it works.  When you've done this a couple of times, you begin to wonder about all of the other quotes in all of the other articles too.

Most tech journalists lately take a "it's too good to be true" attitude about pretty much anything new, and pick the data that reinforce that viewpoint.  I don't think that's too surprising - these guys are afraid of being labeled a shill or get caught being absolutely wrong as many were back before the Dot Com crash.  It's safer to be skeptical.

The ultimate irony of this article will become apparent at some point.

Re: Chumby-Brief mention in Economist article

I spent about an hour, hour and a half on the phone with the lady.  The questions she was asking, it was pretty clear the angle she was working from was "but really, you're all a bunch of dorks, right?"  I spent a great deal of time giving variations of "actually, no" and pointed out, amongst other things, that the automotive industry would have been SOL without "open source" and that without it, we wouldn't have had auto racing, the Jeep, or a whole bunch of other things.  If US Army GIs hadn't "open sourced" the Sherman Tank during WWII, we would have been "out-competed" by the German 88mm.  By the time we were done talking, she had started to ask more open-ended questions.

I really think that she basically went with a bunch of interviews and let them guide her.  The article was a lot broader and researched than I was expecting.  I'd call it a win (not the least of which I've had at least eight friends ask me "Ooo!  Where can I get a Chumby?" this morning).

-slave2thelight, Seth Talley's secret identity

Slave to the Light, Inc.
Los Angeles & Seattle USA

Re: Chumby-Brief mention in Economist article

FWIW, I thought it was a pretty good article about the state of and rationale for the open hardware industry, though nowhere near as deep as the thoughtful piece in Issue 2.0.6 of Release 2.0: .  Jeanette was a big contributor to that issue and knows what she's talking about -- she grasps this stuff a whole lot better than the average "tech reporter/'gadget guy or gal'".  The Economist is, IMO, the best of the bunch of the news weeklies but reaches a pretty general audience and Jeanette no doubt had to speak to this audience in a different way than she did in the Release 2.0 coverage.  Chumby press coverage, as many of you know, has been mostly extremely positive, and we're grateful for that.  Occasionally some reporter doesn't really grasp what we're doing, or makes some unfriendly and inappropriate comparison between a chumby and some other very different device, or maybe just has a uniquely bad experience for some reason (like a wacky home wi-fi configuration or doesn't like the particular widgets he has taken 5 minutes to look at) and gripes about it.  Sometimes words are put into my mouth, or I'm misquoted or my comments misconstrued.  I live with it.  All Press (well, almost all Press), is good for Chumby Industries as we battle our biggest enemy: lack of awareness.

So, guys, thanks for taking the time to speak with Jeanette -- it really was worth it and we appreciate it.  Like I said, I think Jeanette's article was well done for what it was and Chumby's portrayal in it was reasonable and positive.  But if you want the better/deeper story more tuned to you, check out the Release 2.0 piece.

Re: Chumby-Brief mention in Economist article

Okay, the press will always have a negative look towards anything innovative and new.

No "uber-geeks" own Chumby's. We're just people who want an easier way to wake up in the morning. Soon everybody will own one.