Actually they did get subsidy, but only after they had started. The money was offered by a minister during the official start, and apparently came as a complete surprise to the founder. http://www.ttm.nl/nieuws/id25344-cargohopper-krijgt-160000-euro-subsidie.html (Dutch)

What's this device for? It's got a similar feature set as the Macbook at a significantly larger price, and a similar price to the Macbook Pro at the cost of lots of features. The only thing it's got going for it is that it's lighter (but not much) and slimmer (who cares?).

The guided tour at Apple.com mentions a few use cases: working on a plane and giving presentations. But if you're doing that, a "luggable" Macbook (Pro) will do just fine.

So, what's the target audience for this one?

Not to defend Atiz, but: A) similar devices start at USD 10,000 (that's ten thousands dollars), and B) a flatbed scanner is not useful when you're scanning rare books.

As for the person who can build one of these for 50 cent: I will gladly pay you 50 USD if you could make me one of these. That excludes the camera, but includes the cradle, the (full spectrum) lighting, the glass platter, the cabling and the software (not Atiz' Snapter, please). So, when can I expect delivery?

Heh. So true. From the time when in the USA you could freely go from state to state, and in the USSR you could not.

What your missing, Tintin, is that this an ultra-portable. And although all other ultra-portables are much more powerful than this one, the EEE has two things going for it: 1) it is much lighter than the rest, making it a true "lap"top, and 2) much cheaper. All other ultraportables start at thousands of dollars, this one at hundreds. So if you don't need the extra power, the EEE is the first ultra-portable you can buy this cheap.

In November another cheap ultra-portable will become available to the citizens of the USA and Canada, OLPC's XO.

A free market requires that both the buyer and seller understand the deal they're going to undertake. For the seller this is usually pretty straight-forward: they get money. You only have to agree upon the time and the amount, and sometimes not even that. If I walk out the store with a microwave oven under my jacket, and two months later I will claim that I was going to pay later, the court typically won't buy that.

But the buyer has a harder job; he will study the specifications, and sometimes the specifications turn out not to be enough. Or there is so much information to take in, that the buyer can do little else than take on good faith that the product will work as expected.

As expected is the key phrase in this. The sort of consumer protection laws we're discussing are typically the result of a grey area, where buyer expectations kept conflicting with what sellers were typically offering. So the state makes laws that formalize a certain expectation.

It's still not pretty, but the alternative is that every buyer takes Apple to small-claims court.

They did sell the old version for 50 USD, perhaps still do. Unfortunately it is part of a deal where you have to get a Sony credit card first. Search Mobileread or Teleread to find out about the deal, and if it's still valid.

As long as Microsoft does not incorporate GPL-ed code in its own code and then distributes its own code, it does not have to GPL its own code.

What Microsoft is afraid of? Who knows. It's not as if they will tell. But it's likely that it has to do with the patent clause in GPL3. There is a patent clause in GPL2, so I am not exactly sure what makes the GPL3 one so dangerous to Microsoft.

Because this is copyright law, and copyright law is the one law to rule them all, to find them, and in the darkness bind them.

Nobody insists on upgrading to GPL3, but the "owners" of packages will release upgrades under GPL3. Microsoft is free to keep distributing 2007 code for decades to come, as per the GPL2.