[ESHOP launched] Trezor: Bitcoin hardware wallet

[TwinWinNerD]

Jesus, gweedo. Come down.

The device is real and awesome (I have one of the developer units). If slush and stick don't post here, there's probably nothing important to say and they and the other people helping them are probably putting their energy into solving the remaining issues, which I prefer.

Have some confidence and patience... The device will not become less useful over time.

But you agree that it is bad practice to annouce a certain deadline (ETA~) and then without much info, prolonging that deadline for months? I think that is the issue here mostly.

[dnaleor]

Jesus, gweedo. Come down.

The device is real and awesome (I have one of the developer units). If slush and stick don't post here, there's probably nothing important to say and they and the other people helping them are probably putting their energy into solving the remaining issues, which I prefer.

Have some confidence and patience... The device will not become less useful over time.

But you agree that it is bad practice to annouce a certain deadline (ETA~) and then without much info, prolonging that deadline for months? I think that is the issue here mostly.

I agree that they could communicate a little more, but I udnerstand that they want it to be perfect before releasing...

[phantastisch]

Jesus, gweedo. Come down.

The device is real and awesome (I have one of the developer units). If slush and stick don't post here, there's probably nothing important to say and they and the other people helping them are probably putting their energy into solving the remaining issues, which I prefer.

Have some confidence and patience... The device will not become less useful over time.

But you agree that it is bad practice to annouce a certain deadline (ETA~) and then without much info, prolonging that deadline for months? I think that is the issue here mostly.

I agree that they could communicate a little more, but I understand that they want it to be perfect before releasing...

NO ! Freaking NO !

They will not come off this hook easily with anybody saying : "It needs to be perfectly secure , let them make it as good as possible , they don't have to give us details to every step."

This is not the issue and everybody should know this.

The fact that they are absolutely not communicating at all is simply astonishing and should everybody give a severe run around in their head.

These guys want to make a perfectly secure bitcoin hardware wallet. As it is at the moment they have to be very open about firmware, hardware , wallet software, so we the users have a reason to trust them and can feel safe.

But at the moment they are hiding facts from us, facts that are easy to communicate and probably most of us would understand.

Something Like "Sorry, manufacturing of the plastic cases is still iffy and will take some time."

But they are not doing it, they keep it secret and/or oversee this little detail.

This IS Important. I cannot trust them if they are operating like this. I simply cannot fathom it.

What if they find a "little" weakness in the trezor, that is small and probably not that exploitable but they possibly have to recall them. And they don't because it would cost money and time. And then somebody finds a way and BTC get lost ...

They are not open about anything with us and do not care about keeping us updated.

Most people say this is nitpicking and it probably is but this IS an Issue.

Sorry guys , you blew it , i cannot trust this device.

[molecular]

Jesus, gweedo. Come down.

The device is real and awesome (I have one of the developer units). If slush and stick don't post here, there's probably nothing important to say and they and the other people helping them are probably putting their energy into solving the remaining issues, which I prefer.

Have some confidence and patience... The device will not become less useful over time.

But you agree that it is bad practice to annouce a certain deadline (ETA~) and then without much info, prolonging that deadline for months? I think that is the issue here mostly.

yes, I agree that is bad practice.

I'm quite sure it wasn't intentional, though.

[yxt]

A small update, once a week! expenditure of time: ~5min

[stick]

That's right, they should give us a small update, and explain firmware and or security issues if they exist.

There will be an announcement next week. The only thing that is holding us back are the plastic cases. Firmware is ready for quite some time, but there will be a small change on myTREZOR wallet because of the newly accepted BIP44 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki)

[stereotype]

That's right, they should give us a small update, and explain firmware and or security issues if they exist.

There will be an announcement next week. The only thing that is holding us back are the plastic cases. Firmware is ready for quite some time, but there will be a small change on myTREZOR wallet because of the newly accepted BIP44 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki)

If the plastics cases are the only thing holding you back, then doesnt it make sense to replace the plastic orders with metals, so that you can at least start openly selling the metals, with the intent to produce the plastic version, as and when you feel? Is the cost disparity really an issue for those pre orders?

[dnaleor]

That's right, they should give us a small update, and explain firmware and or security issues if they exist.

There will be an announcement next week. The only thing that is holding us back are the plastic cases. Firmware is ready for quite some time, but there will be a small change on myTREZOR wallet because of the newly accepted BIP44 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki)

Thanks for the update.
I'm also waiting a reply from Alena regarding reseller topic. (But I understand she must be busy)
Do you have estimation on timeframe when you will know the volume pricing of Trezor for resellers ?

I am also waiting on this information...

[DiamondCardz]

Jesus, gweedo. Come down.

The device is real and awesome (I have one of the developer units). If slush and stick don't post here, there's probably nothing important to say and they and the other people helping them are probably putting their energy into solving the remaining issues, which I prefer.

Have some confidence and patience... The device will not become less useful over time.

But you agree that it is bad practice to annouce a certain deadline (ETA~) and then without much info, prolonging that deadline for months? I think that is the issue here mostly.

I agree that they could communicate a little more, but I understand that they want it to be perfect before releasing...

NO ! Freaking NO !

They will not come off this hook easily with anybody saying : "It needs to be perfectly secure , let them make it as good as possible , they don't have to give us details to every step."

This is not the issue and everybody should know this.

The fact that they are absolutely not communicating at all is simply astonishing and should everybody give a severe run around in their head.

These guys want to make a perfectly secure bitcoin hardware wallet. As it is at the moment they have to be very open about firmware, hardware , wallet software, so we the users have a reason to trust them and can feel safe.

But at the moment they are hiding facts from us, facts that are easy to communicate and probably most of us would understand.

Something Like "Sorry, manufacturing of the plastic cases is still iffy and will take some time."

But they are not doing it, they keep it secret and/or oversee this little detail.

This IS Important. I cannot trust them if they are operating like this. I simply cannot fathom it.

What if they find a "little" weakness in the trezor, that is small and probably not that exploitable but they possibly have to recall them. And they don't because it would cost money and time. And then somebody finds a way and BTC get lost ...

They are not open about anything with us and do not care about keeping us updated.

Most people say this is nitpicking and it probably is but this IS an Issue.

Sorry guys , you blew it , i cannot trust this device.

Phantastisch is completely correct here. When you're developing something like this (Trevor) you need to communicate as much as possible and stay transparent - if people are going to be trusting large sums of money with your hardware they need to know that the hardware is completely safe with no risks whatsoever.

I like what Trevor is doing but more communication needs to be given.

[xeroc]

So if plastic version is the source of a delay, why not send out the metallic to those that ordered metallic ones. If I recall correctly you offered metallic ones for an extra 2BTC?

//edit: anyway .. just read through BIP44 .. amazing!!!! cant wait to get once into my hands!
Let me quote this once:

Hierarchy proposed in this paper is quite comprehensive. It allows to handle multiple coins, multiple accounts, external and internal chains per account and millions of addresses per chain.

[FlappySocks]

Replace the plastic for metal, and for those that ordered metal, send them 2 Trezors.

Sound fair?

[molecular]

That's right, they should give us a small update, and explain firmware and or security issues if they exist.

There will be an announcement next week. The only thing that is holding us back are the plastic cases. Firmware is ready for quite some time, but there will be a small change on myTREZOR wallet because of the newly accepted BIP44 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki)

I like how many BIPs came out of your project. Thanks for sharing and developing in an open way!

[stick]

I like how many BIPs came out of your project.

Thanks! That is just the beginning.

[bitcats]

Is there any chance to get Dogecoin implemented?

[stick]

Is there any chance to get Dogecoin implemented?

That's the question for Dogecoin developers. Do they already have a block explorer server with stable API and BIP32 support? If this requirement is fulfilled it is just a matter of few minutes to add new coin to TREZOR as it is more-or-less coin agnostic.

[qwk]

Replace the plastic for metal, and for those that ordered metal, send them 2 Trezors.
Sound fair?

No. I ordered a metal one because I wanted to be the first kid on the block to have one

[fronti]

Replace the plastic for metal, and for those that ordered metal, send them 2 Trezors.
Sound fair?

No. I ordered a metal one because I wanted to be the first kid on the block to have one

even if all plastics are changed into metallic ones, it is possible that those who ordered the original metal will be delivered first..

[qukkM]

It is a shame that Trezor is going the way of BFL, delays, excuses and no updates for customers. I am looking forward to getting my Trezor but I cannot recommend other people buy one, even if they are shipping immediately. Perhaps buying from a reseller for fiat is the only way to buy one of these in the future.

[monkeynuts]

Replace the plastic for metal, and for those that ordered metal, send them 2 Trezors.
Sound fair?

No. I ordered a metal one because I wanted to be the first kid on the block to have one

even if all plastics are changed into metallic ones, it is possible that those who ordered the original metal will be delivered first..

Why not ship metal for all pre orders - ie swap all plastic pre orders for metal at no extra cost. Then refund the 2 BTC difference for those who did actually pre order the metal ones, so that they have then paid the same price as the plastic pre-orders (rather than providing 2 devices)

Lets face it, when these are released a metal unit is not gonna cost 3 BTC now, and still sell in volume, surely it will have to be priced lower. I know pricing hasnt been released, but Pre orders should not end up costing more than day 1 release, given the significant delays, and lack of info.

My thoughts are at the moment going towards a refund. I know refunds are only available through non delivery.... but how long after original ETA will that be judged, and by who. I ordered in July for an October / November delivery. 3 or 4 months leadtime. Its now almost May, currently close to running at 10 months. Isnt double / triple the stated leadtime as good as non delivery ?

Next weeks announcement needs to be good, needs to state a timeline that will absolutely be kept to, take account of the delays prior to release, and the support to this product provided by those that preordered ..... anything else wont be good enough

[grau]

Is there any chance to get Dogecoin implemented?

That's the question for Dogecoin developers. Do they already have a block explorer server with stable API and BIP32 support? If this requirement is fulfilled it is just a matter of few minutes to add new coin to TREZOR as it is more-or-less coin agnostic.

BOP can haz much technology. Does the pride feel generous?