Intel wants to charge $50 to unlock stuff your CPU can already do
http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/18/intel-wants-to-charge-50-to-unlock-stuff-your-cpu-can-already-d/
I saw this on 6502.org and the topic is:
Intel wants to charge $50 to unlock stuff your CPU can already do
Aren't you glad Parallax doesn't charge you $50 to unlock the different cogs on their Propeller chip?
I saw this on 6502.org and the topic is:
Intel wants to charge $50 to unlock stuff your CPU can already do
Aren't you glad Parallax doesn't charge you $50 to unlock the different cogs on their Propeller chip?
Comments
A few years back I purchased a 160Gbyte Seagate USB hard disk for backup. It seemed like a simple enough purchase.
But somehow their legal department and marketing department got together and got the bright idea to 'license' the hard disk with bundled proprietary backup up software for only Windows. So after I opened the box and plugged in the hard disk I find the software telling me that all I own is rights and that Seagate remains owner of the hard disk. It this anyway to make a contract?
Seagate is welcome to come and get it, but I reformatted it to operate as a generic hard disk and am quite offended that they presume ownership of the hardware.
Recently Windows 7 Starter came installed on a new Toshiba netbook NB250 I purchased. Once again, the whole presentation is about what you have to buy next to make your system complete. Too much assertive marketing for me. I deleted all the adware, got Clonezilla for free backup, free anti-virus, free Open Office in lieu of M$ Office. It is really absurd to presume that people are going to buy $1000 in software upgrades for a $300 netbook - especially in this economy.
and the Whole Win-tel market in general..they hose the avarge consumer
""Oh lets give the Poor folks "Home basic Stunted OS" and if you want a a real Computer ya need more ram and OH yea Now you need 64Bit to read that ram . opps that's$260 sir ..""
Mind I am not the kind of consumer who would buy a low end computer anyways ...
Last week I was doing some "professional shopping " for a friend who needed a new "PC" ... all we have here is wally world . only 1 out of 12 Laptops there had Bluetooth .I was SHOCKED .. it was stock on all my Macs from 05-06 onward . this is 2010 cmon DELL HP Gateway , grow up . yet for some odd reason the 56k modem is in all of them ......
BT chips are cheap . there is no excuse ...
bluetooth and DVD burners should be more stock then a airbag By now ....IMHO so should baclit Keyboards . [/ rant]
The folks who thinks PS2 is a game console not a IBM OLD systme Mouse port is not going to care about this Intel scam . but the folks like US here who are "computer intelligent " will see right thugh this gimmik .
for years in the G4 AKA ( XPC7447 7474 7400 PPC series) ( no not TTL LOLs ) were stamped at less then there max speed . Moto IBM and Freescale would test them and bached them after relilbility tests .
EG the 866 G4 was a 900 but only a few chips made it that High .
this was OK as It was Clock speed .. but this is NUTS .
Yes it WILL cut costs but it is a Very bad way to treat consumers .
the Clock speed thing was behind doors . and it was done for relibility not sheer cash . or in this article, cache ...
Not to line the pockets of Intel .
to me AMD was the underdog of the x86 world .
this is going to give AMD a HUGE leg up in the informed market .
Loopy I ust to like seagate but I have one of there dieing HDs in my laptop right now . it the famed ST9120821A
I feel this thing going . I have a new drive on its way ..
I avoid WD/ maxtor at all costs
In cali there was a law on the books where you could refuse the EULA M$ winblows on a PC and get $100+ back . but keep the PC . lots of linux guys do this .
EULAs Drive me nuts .
But I think they would get a better response from consumers if they spelled it out up front and gave the consumer choices...
Choice 1: Buy a PC with a chip which does not have the optional functionality. To upgrade you need to replace the chip and cost will be $500.
Choice 2: Buy the PC for the same price as choice 1 with an optional chip. To upgrade you would need to pay $50 for the secret code.
Choice 3: Buy the PC with full functionality and pay $50 more now.
Mainframes and minis did this. IBM could speedup their mainframes by an engineer attending the premises and removing nops in their microcode for a pot of $.
The mini I worked on had an upgrade for the printer - 300 LPM to 400 LPM (lines per minute). The upgrade - snip a capacitor off one of the pcbs. Want to double your hard disk - remove a pcb.
How do you justify it... Well the manufacturers saved on designing & building a lower cost printer or hard disc or cpu, and took less profit as a result. They only had to support basically one machine instead of two different designs. The customer paid for engineering support and it was expensive.
So, I guess I can see both sides of the fence. But of course, back then the customer did not know about how it was done.
One ocean for lawyers and another for marketing departments if necessary.
Re: "Intel wants to charge $50 to unlock stuff your CPU can already do"
Really poor idea though I am sure the AMD marketing department appreciates the help.
The cars continue to sell and a rather large fraction of them continue to become total wrecks in spite of all this.
I wonder is it about getting more money from those that have no need and don't know what they are buying or is it about educating the customer to consider their needs.
These days, I won't buy a leading edge computer as they never seem to perform well or be fully supported. There is more value and better performance in getting 2/3 the speed and 100% of the support.
So who is the fool? The marketing department or the customer?
My uncle bought two Rolls-Royces because he believed the promotional material that you would never have to own another car. After neither of them ran right, he went back to driving Cadallacs.
As to the $50 charge, I look at that as a way to pay the engineering costs for that *specific* portion of the chip.
The people who need it will pay for it. Those who don't need it will not be saddled with the expense.
And if they just need to manufacture one chip which has everything, then the manufacturer's costs will go down. And they can offer that chip at a lower price.
And the PC manufacturer will have reduced costs as they only need to manufacture one model.
But someone needs to pay for new extra features. They have to pay the engineers who design these things and engineers do not work for free.
I imagine it would cost about the same to include the extra section in a chip. Like software on a disk, it would cost the same to mail someone a smaller program as it would to mail someone a larger program. The manufacturing cost is in paying the programmer the extra time it took to program the larger program. Someone needs to pay for that.
When I started reading this, I thought you were going to say he bought two Rolls-Royces because there would always be one in the shop! :smilewinkgrin: