Whilst you might recommend it, I'd point out the sizeable price difference between an i1 version with decent patch count targets and the SpyderPrint.
Anyone getting email replies from this discussion can see what Edmund first said then edited in the last post. I'll point out for that he's as yet provided no firm evidence that anyone should wait 6 months (to pull a length of time out of his rear-end) before purchasing this product. Its not prefect! I have some beef's with the software. But the bloody product works and pretty darn well! In fact, on the 3-4 printers I tested (Epson), the output profile quality with 100 patches was as good and in some cases BETTER than what I got reading 1700 patches on an iSis using ProfileMaker Pro! Now X-Rite and perhaps someone in the business of building custom profiles for others may not like such a report. That we're talking a differences of way more than 10X in price between the two above products, one can see how this new technology may be frightening.
IF Edmund has empirical evidence to suggest that the ColorMunki is flawed, isn't a good buy, or that such issues will be cleared up in 6 months, I'm all ears. But lately, his ideas about color management seem to be generated more by religion than science. Either that or there's a political slant, neither of which serves him well!
If you think you want to try the ColorMunki, of course purchase from a good supplier, understand that there's a warranty and that a good company like B&H or Calumet, or Chromix would be happy to take back the product and return your money if you don't care for the product. One day of testing and you can make such a decision on your own.
Or you can wait 6 months and pay for someone else to build your profiles or buy a more expensive solution. Neither option is a poor one, but its one only YOU can make!
At least here in the US, we're tired of scare tactics. If Edmund has GOOD intelligence of WMD's, lets see it. Otherwise, dismiss it.