Just my 0.02 bitcents, the keying/licensing requirement is absurd. According to the release announcement, the rig can be controlled via a web interface hosted on their servers, which means that they have complete control over it, just as much as the buyer does.

I certainly see value in the rack formfactor and the low power usage. Apparently up to 40 can be fit in per 42U rack, which means 4KW or a little less than 40 amps at 120VAC - almost all datacenters allow that much power for the basic rack price. For me locally, 42U with 40 amps and 1 mbps of ethernet would be $600/month

I hate to keep pulling out the Rig Box as a comparison, but let's assume for the moment that they are retaining their non-rackmountable design and pulling 2500 watts each - guessing from the picture, you could probably fit 2 side-by-side on a rack shelf, and perhaps within 4U each. So that means 20 Rig Boxes per 42U rack, for a total power usage of 50KW. This is lower power density than a set of blade servers, but far more than many datacenters can handle, so yes you may have issues putting them anywhere for a reasonable price. (400 amps per rack anyone?)

To gain acceptance from the hardcore miners, you must remove the idiotic keying/licensing model, and remove the requirement for the web interface to be hosted by you. The more ideal way to do this is as follows: Since you can apparently fit 40 in a rack, allow customers to also run their own control head server (1 more U) preferably based on an open-source platform. The final U remaining would be used by a network router with 42 ports.

It appears that the keying requirement is only to support the distribution of units without payment in full, but escrow removes this need completely. I echo the question earlier - what if something happens to make it quit working? That means unnecessary mining downtime for a stupid DRM equivalent, and we have seen in the past how DRM can break spectacularly when implemented poorly.