Please cite these "attacks" you claim we're making. No such thing exists.
Message 12: "They use inferior hardware, inferior assembly and soldering, and inferior child labor. There is little to no quality control. They use stolen and hacked firmware running on stolen and hacked hardware designs."
Message 23: "It's a hacked and stolen piece of crap"
Message 55:"If you're buying from any of those places, you can assume the hardware is an inferior clone, the firmware is stolen and hacked, and any labels on it are fake frauds. That is what they do and always have. You don't actually know what you're buying when you buy these GPS units from them."
Message 58:"If you want to put known inferior and fraudulent parts on it and risk your..."
Message 102:"Nobody knows who made that GPS. Not even the seller. That is a risk you take purchasing cut rate random Chinese owned and manufactured devices. It was manufactured by someone, somewhere, at sometime, using unknown parts from unknown suppliers, with unknown (or no) quality standards, flashed with unknown and possibly hacked or stolen firmware that may or may not be consistent and reliable."
If these aren't attacks, what are they? The results of verifiable testing? The claims of inferior hardware and assembly have no body of verifiable evidence to back them up. Electronic modules and assemblies are almost always built from globally sourced parts - regardless of where they are built. Supply chains change constantly. And, as has already been pointed out, the Solo itself was built in Asia.
If you're an engineer and you hate hearsay so much, you should probably stop using your own hearsay and fiction to defend your point of view.
I'm putting little weight on my experiences alone. What does carry some weight is the increasing amount of positive data and experiences that have been posted in this thread. Lately there has been photographic evidence showing high sat counts and low HDOPS. Unless you believe those photos have been tampered with, I would call them facts - not fiction.
Risk is correlated to a history of performance and failures. I haven't really seen any data (other than the original 3DR units) that would lead me to to deduce that using any of the GPS units we are discussing incurrs a substantially higher level of risk than using any other one. With more data points, such a pattern may emerge. But I don't believe we've see it yet.
