Talk:TippingPoint

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas - Austin (assessed as Low-importance).

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Shbang! reference needed

If no references for the company initially being called 'shbang!' can be found, I shall have to remove this statement. I can find details on the founding of netpliance, which seems to indicate that at the time, it had no trading history. With so little to say about Shbang! and the lack of sources, the article would benifit from the removal of this statement. LinaMishima 20:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Wee Bit Madison Avenue Slick For My Taste.

This is advertising copy, not an encyclopedia entry.

Feh!

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 11:15, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

no mention of why net-pliance got fined?

it doesn't mention that the company was fined because they didn't notify existing customers about some changes forcing payments for the internet service. Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 08:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pwnz0rServer2009: Do you have a reliable source for that information which you can provide as a reference? If you do, then you can add the information to the article. JBW (talk) 08:37, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

not exactly easy to find sources on a topic in 2001, this will take a while. Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 08:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"The FTC also challenged some of the company's billing practices as deceptive and unfair. First, the company billed some consumers for Internet service based upon the date they received their i-openers. These consumers, however, did not owe the company money because, when they ordered their i-openers, the company had promised them that they would not be billed until they actually used the service."

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2001/07/netpliance-settles-ftc-charges Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 08:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Netpliance was also fined for somewhat false advertising.

"According to the FTC's complaint, advertisements for the i-opener also claimed that it provided access to all of the Internet's entertainment and information and that it was equivalent to a personal computer with respect to its ability to access Internet content. For example, i-opener ads included statements such as "Complete access to the World Wide Web" and "Even the most expensive home computer system can't bring you i-opener's simplicity, compact size, and convenient features." The FTC complaint alleges that these advertising claims are deceptive. In fact, i-opener users are unable to access all of the content on the Internet. Some of the content that is unavailable to i-opener users includes files created using popular data formats or programming languages, such as popular Internet technologies for Web site audio, video, interactivity, and multimedia used for online entertainment and information communication." Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 08:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i see the article does mention this but goes past it so fast you can't understand the exact reason why Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 08:51, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to me to be a pretty good source, and adding further detail from it to the Wikipedia article seems like a good idea. Would you like to go ahead with doing that? JBW (talk) 10:11, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i will do that (albeit i'm new and do not know how to cite sources) Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 11:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the edit is done (if the uppercasing was done wrong i allow you to fix it) Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 12:03, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]