Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!labrea!decwrl!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!tekgvs!tekirl!jackg
From: jackg@tekirl.LABS.TEK.COM (Jack Gjovaag;6160;50-321;LP=A)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Ethics of crippler circuitry
Message-ID: <4602@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 7 Feb 89 15:42:09 GMT
References: <7143@pyr.gatech.EDU> <11630010@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>
Sender: nobody@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM
Reply-To: jackg@tekirl.LABS.TEK.COM (Jack Gjovaag)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 23

In article <11630010@hpsmtc1.HP.COM> ham@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (Bob Hamilton) writes:

>"Pulling out the slow-down boards" is an old IBM marketing tactic.  When I
>worked at Memorex, I heard IBM did it when we upgraded one of the CPU's in
>the data center.  I leave it as an exercise for the reader to characterize
>the ethics of a company which would build slow-down boards into its
>products in the first place.

The ethics of adding "crippling" circuitry to an otherwise high
performance machine to fill a gap in a product line is not at all
clear to me.  It certainly seems absurd if we expect that the
price of a machine is directly related to its manufacturing cost
but if we assume that what a customer is purchasing is functionality
with no regard to how it is obtained, then cripplers make some
sense.

I am interested in others views of this practice, since I used
to work for a company that occasionally did it (not my present company
to the best of my knowledge.  If anyone thinks they know of
Tektronix doing it, make that another topic.)

  Jack Gjovaag
  Tek Labs