Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!p.cs.uiuc.edu!gillies
From: gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Ethics of crippler circuitry
Message-ID: <79700020@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 14 Feb 89 06:47:00 GMT
References: <4602@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM:4602:p.cs.uiuc.edu:79700020:000:960
Nf-From: p.cs.uiuc.edu!gillies    Feb 14 00:47:00 1989


1.  What are the ethics of creating a service monopoly?

Apple seems to do this.  Apple's only repair is "replace the logic
card" ($300-$600).  Hence, for many simple problems (e.g. custom chip
burnout) it's $300-$600.

If a non apple-qualified technician repairs your machine (e.g.
replaces a 10 cent fuse), the next time you consult an Apple
Technician he has the right to charge $50 or more for "board
reinspection" before working on your machine.  This sucks.
Apple heavily pressures its customers into obtaining service from
Apple dealers.

2.  I think intentionally "crippled" machines are mostly a thing of
the past.  IBM probably did it to avoid competing with themselves ("we
can't sell this super-fast machine cheap, because we'll hurt our own
business").

3.  Have people considered the cost of swapping a 1960's mainframe for
a newer model?  It's like moving a TANK!  Long ago there were also
installation benefits in selling a crippled machine.