I am reminded of a failed business model that was somewhat akin to this "unlocking some hardware that you purchased".
Divx. Phillip Partipilo Parametric Solutions Inc. Jupiter, Florida (561) 747-6107 From: Jeff Steward [mailto:jstew...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 2:01 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Intel wants to charge to unlock features already on your CPU I am not an independent contractor/consultant and this makes sense to me. Of course, I also have 20+ years of manufacturing experience so that may color my attitude. You are given a choice of buying X performance now with the OPTION to buy Y performance increase for an incremental cost IF you so desire. How this is perceived as being a Bad Thing (tm) is beyond me. There is a value for performance and you get to decide where you want to play on the price/performance curve. If you want to hack the chip/mobo and turn on the extra performance and perhaps risk some nebulous legal consequence or the very real "We (the manufacturer) won't support that system" consequence, then go for it. As others have already stated, setting up and operating a single fabrication run makes a great deal of sense from a manufacturing standpoint and this is where the bulk of the cost (after R&D) lies. Intel and/or AMD will need to recoup those costs and you know that high performance will always cost more. Overall, reduced manufacturing costs will lead to lower consumer costs provided we have competition in the market. Furthermore, as I noted in an earlier message, for some use cases being able to add performance by writing a check and flipping a proverbial switch without popping a box out of the rack has a great deal of appeal. Convincing *my* CFO to write a check for X dollars is much easier than getting him to write a check for 10X dollars, and I'll bet I'm not alone there. Of course, none of you have ever bought a server that was massively overkill for your current needs "just in case" you needed more performance down the road, right? Imagine a world where you could buy computing resources on demand and pay as we go? Oh wait.... -Jeff Steward On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Phillip Partipilo <p...@psnet.com<mailto:p...@psnet.com>> wrote: Call me out on this one if I am totally off my rocker, but why does it seem that all the folks in this particular "debate" who are pro this concept of artificial limitations seem to be independent contractors/consultants? Phillip Partipilo Parametric Solutions Inc. Jupiter, Florida (561) 747-6107 -----Original Message----- From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com<mailto:scaes...@caesare.com>] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 10:10 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Intel wants to charge to unlock features already on your CPU It seems that's an advertising issue as opposed to a technical or "am I being robbed" issue. Given Intel's prowess in the market, I suspect if there's money to be made with this model, they'll ensure it's effectively marketed. Do you know the "Intel Inside" campaign? Can you see the logo in your mind? Can you recognize the "Intel chimes" even if you don't see the commercial? I should think "Intel Inside PLUS!" shouldn't be too difficult. -sc > -----Original Message----- > From: John Aldrich > [mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com<mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 8:52 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Intel wants to charge to unlock features already on your CPU > > Here's something I thought of... Sure you'll be able to buy an "unlock" > code, but will the end-user realize that they are getting the same physical > hardware as someone who pays more and know that they can unlock better > performance? Thinking about the folks who go into Best Buy or WalMart to > buy a new computer (this appears to be the market that this new "feature" is > aimed at.) My thought is that they're going to buy whatever is on the shelf > and not realize that they just need to buy an "upgrade"/unlock code to > enable better performance. > > How is that going to help the end-user? > > > > From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com<mailto:asbz...@gmail.com>] > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:12 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Intel wants to charge to unlock features already on your CPU > > I disagree that the costs are being subsidized at the low end. It costs less > overall to manage the product as a single unit with unlockable features than > a two separate products with hard coded features. > And since the primary competitor has still not embraced that model, it is > still > possible for someone to compare the value of both the low end processor > and the high one independently. I'll very that both levels of consumer well > get better pricing than before, even as Intel bags more profits. > -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker > Sent from my Motorola Droid > On Sep 21, 2010 6:00 PM, "Ben Scott" > <mailvor...@gmail.com<mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com>> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Andrew S. Baker > <asbz...@gmail.com<mailto:asbz...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > >>> But another way to l... > That works as long as no one can offer a comparable but lower-priced > product. If your price is high because your costs are high (living, > education, > experience, etc.), chances are good you'll have continued work -- potential > competitors will likely have similar costs. If your price is high while your > costs > are low, that's another matter. If competition moves in, your customer base > is likely to defect en masse. > Even if you lower your prices to compete, you now have a reputation as > having a high price/cost ratio. Customers often dislike that, and express > their > dislike with their wallets. > > Since legislative action is part of the big picture (with the hardware > thing), > popular opinion can matter for that reason, too. > > >> High price/cost ratios tend to yield unstable long-term economic > >>relationships, unless presti... > They're only better for the customers who buy the product with the lower > price and get the lower intended performance. The customers who pay for > more performance get a worse deal. Both parties get the same physical > material. Both benefit from the same NRE. But the high-end guys pay > more. They end up subsidizing the low-end guys. Sometimes the high-end > people don't mind, but sometimes they do. When people propose taxing > the rich to give to the poor, the rich tend to put up a pretty big stink, for > example. > > > Frankly, I think that the hardware side of the house has suffered with > > low margins as compared ... > I agree completely. But weren't you just making a point about the scope of > this discussion? ;-) > > >>> I think you're arguing a narrower scope of issues than some other > >>>people are. > > > > Yes, I am... > Well, your choice, but don't be surprised when you get persistent > confusion/disagreement. One can "win" any argument by carefully defining > terms. If mutual understanding is the goal, you need to change minds. :) > > -- Ben > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsof... > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to > listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt- > software.com/read/my_forums/<http://software.com/read/my_forums/> > or send an email to > listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
