[plug] [link] a lawyer Switches

[Peter J. Nicol]

>  > Well I can see reasoning in charging for a faster system if they
>  > actually replace items such as the CPU etc to upgrade your system.  But
>  > if all they are doing is removing some sort of inhibitor present in a
>  > system which you already own, then thats highly questionable conduct IMHO.
>
>  Well, its a better approach for /everybody/ concerned than making many
>  custom systems.

This is just so much marketdroid crap. It demonstrably better only for IBM, and
the inhibitors are there for IBM's bottom line, at the cost of the customers
bottom line.

If anything, it is more expensive for IBM to build these systems, but this is more
than made up for by the methods they have for extorting more money from their
clients.  It is inefficient, in that extra, useless, hardware has to be
manufactured, and installed.  How this saves anyone money is nothing but the
marketing departments wet dream, and has no bearing on anything actually happening
out here in reality.

> Instead, you're asking them to make up a custom system for each customer's
needs -
> something that'd be more expensive and less reliable than the current method.

What the ... ??

These machines are demonstrably fine for the customers needs, being general
purpose computers and all that.  IBM are creating the illusion of custom systems
in order to extract more money from their customers.

I find this similar to microsoft attempting to limit the bitrate of MP3's that you
can burn on your machine, in order to promote WMA.  Care to defend this practice
by claiming that it is a 'better approach for everybody concerned' ?

http://slashdot.org/articles/01/04/12/1159253.shtml

> Think about it this way. IBM doesn't sell you a physical computer, they
> sell you computing capacity.

"Think about it this way.  Microsoft doesn't sell you a physical computer, they
sell you computing capacity."

Actually, I am in the habit of installing whatever I like on computers that I own
and control in order to extract the maximum value I can from my investment.  That
is why I purchased the physicial computer the first place instead of a unit of
'computing capacity'.  If IBM or Microsoft, Intel, AMD or Sony or whoever try to
limit the value of that investment thru artificial means, no amount of marketing
apologetics will convince me that they are acting in my best interest.