Re: Thoughts about winmodems
At 05:01 PM 5/6/1999 -0400, Mitch Blevins wrote:
>In foo.debian-user, you wrote:
>> Somewhat off-topic, but perhaps applicable....
>>
>> If a modem is a device for MOdulating/DEModulation,
>> and a "winmodem" turns that job over to the software (Windows),
>> is that not grounds for a class-action fraud suit against winmodem
>> manufacturers for marketing them as modems (modulator/demodulators)?
>>
>> Or are winmodems really doing the mod/demod and Windows just does other
>> necessary processing?
>
>I bought a big, plastic, insulated box the other day. It was clearly
>marked as a "Cooler". Imagine my surprise when I found out that it
>needed ice to actually do the cooling.
>
>Perhaps we can expand your class-action suit to include these evil
>manufacturers.
>
>-Mitch
Aah, but "fraud" implies "intent to deceive".
Ask the average picnic-er if a "cooler" will work without ice, and he will
answer "No"; in other words, the average user of a cooler is not deceived
by the name "cooler". On the other hand, ask the average modem user if a
modem will work without Windows, and you'll get a significant number who
answer "Yes" (just ask the many converts to Linux who believe a modem
should work with their new OS); in other words, the modem user who knows
enough to know there ARE other OSes is deceived into thinking a modem is a
modem.
But I liked your response; made me think....
BTW, I don't plan on filing any lawsuits; it was just one of those
late-night thoughts. Now I'll quit wasting bandwidth.... :-)
Reply to: