View Single Post
Old 08-30-2012, 10:18 AM   #13
mexmike
Junior Member
mexmike began at the beginning.
 
Posts: 7
Karma: 10
Join Date: Feb 2012
Device: Jetbook Color
Ectaco claim there are security issues regarding the web browser. This can easily be avoided by providing the firmware and web browser only to clients requesting this facility like sumeiwang, myself and many others, much the same way ectaco provide different language firmware for download. If required, ectaco could provide a login that would only give access to specific users.
The institutions concerned about security do not have to upgrade their jetbooks. Security issues can easily be checked by institutions simply verifying firware/software revision level installed on their jetbooks.
Basically I’m saying that there is no excuse for advertising a product under false pretenses, or making lame excuses for not providing the product as advertised on the propaganda. If you advertise sugar for sale, provide sugar not salt, otherwise you are breaking the law. This is what ectaco have done. Under normal circumstances the office of fair trading or call it what you will depending on country would have found against ectaco in every case and a full refund would have been awarded to the plaintiff, along with a heavy fine for the offending company.
Ectaco are obviously content with losing many future sales with returning clients and settling for the once off purchase.
mexmike is offline   Reply With Quote