Searching \ for '[OT]:HP 6000 scopes with crippleware....' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=6000+scopes+with
Search entire site for: 'HP 6000 scopes with crippleware....'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]:HP 6000 scopes with crippleware....'
2005\06\13@145204 by Steven W

flavicon
face
My dad used to work for Honeywell...

One of their customers bought a computer that was about the size of 4 chest
freezers.

Long story short: they eventually paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for
a "memory upgrade" and were fuming pissed when the tech that came in to
install their upgrade opened a panel on the side of the computer and cut a
wire.

IP law is here to stay - and I don't know about you, but it's paying my
bills - and it's often enforced with a "stupid cable".

{Original Message removed}

2005\06\13@150521 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
Sorry, but I don't get it.  You pay for a computer with 1 meg of memory, you get one.  You pay for 2 meg you get that.  What difference does it make how the company chooses to implement this?  Perhaps the customer should have been happy that their huge computer didn't have to be completely replaced.  

{Original Message removed}

2005\06\13@152028 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 02:04 PM 6/13/2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>Sorry, but I don't get it.  You pay for a computer with 1 meg of
>memory, you get one.  You pay for 2 meg you get that.  What
>difference does it make how the company chooses to implement
>this?  Perhaps the customer should have been happy that their huge
>computer didn't have to be completely replaced.

OTOH, maybe some enterprising tech will come up with a hack.

2005\06\13@154257 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
Like a hack saw to cut through the lock on my neighbors bicycle so I can steal it? (-: Ok, not quite the same thing, but according to the licensing agreements for use of the computer, I would bet it is very similar.  

{Original Message removed}

2005\06\13@155053 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 02:41 PM 6/13/2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>Like a hack saw to cut through the lock on my neighbors bicycle so I
>can steal it? (-: Ok, not quite the same thing, but according to the
>licensing agreements for use of the computer, I would bet it is very similar.

Like a hacksaw to cut the lock on the back tire of the bicycle you
own, where the maker only allows you to use the front tire.

2005\06\14@095915 by alan smith

picon face
My .02 worth on this

Put yourself in thier shoes.

You spend millions to develop a product, where it can do amazing things.  Is anyone going to buy it for what it cost to design, debug, build, and market?

Nope

So you sell it for what the market bears.  And you hope that you can sell it for enough, and also sell enough of them,  to eventually recoup the investment that was made.

However, alot of customers don't need the extra features that the enterprising engineers built into the product, enabled by a new flash of software or reload....

So, you say.....customer...you want that feature, its going to cost you this much more and you dump a new load down.  The few thousand it costs, offsets the overall product costs so they can develop the scope that runs at 1G-GHz next time....

I'm quite sure that most of us that do development have in the past, taken hardware and did an upgrade for a feature set that a customer wanted and charged a premium for it.  How else do we stay in business if we don't?

Oh...and someone commented on a black market for the license keys? I doubt it.  The market isnt that big, and most companies now would rather pay the few thousand in license fee than the multithousands in legal fees if ever found it was using an illegal copy.


oh.....we dont use agilent equipment.....but the 30,000 Tek scopes are rather nice...

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

2005\06\14@122938 by phil B

picon face
--- alan smith <spam_OUTmicro_eng2TakeThisOuTspamyahoo.com> wrote:
...
>  
> Oh...and someone commented on a black market for the
> license keys? I doubt it.  The market isnt that big,
> and most companies now would rather pay the few
> thousand in license fee than the multithousands in
> legal fees if ever found it was using an illegal
> copy.

more like not wanting to void the warrantee or
maintenance contract (void avoidance?) - few companies
are going risk their investment with blackmarket
stuff.    If it really is just a cable, the legality
issue is highly debatable, imo.


               
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html

2005\06\14@134856 by Peter

picon face


On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:

> Sorry, but I don't get it.  You pay for a computer with 1 meg of
> memory, you get one.  You pay for 2 meg you get that.  What difference
> does it make how the company chooses to implement this?  Perhaps the
> customer should have been happy that their huge computer didn't have
> to be completely replaced.

You sound like you have a MBA ? ;-) There are lots of engineers and
techies on this list who will strongly disagree.

Peter

2005\06\14@135021 by Peter

picon face


On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Dave VanHorn wrote:

> At 02:04 PM 6/13/2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>> Sorry, but I don't get it.  You pay for a computer with 1 meg of memory,
>> you get one.  You pay for 2 meg you get that.  What difference does it make
>> how the company chooses to implement this?  Perhaps the customer should
>> have been happy that their huge computer didn't have to be completely
>> replaced.
>
> OTOH, maybe some enterprising tech will come up with a hack.

Not in america. Remember dmca ? The wire will be presented as an
'security' mechanism in court.

Peter

2005\06\14@135447 by Peter

picon face


On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:

> Like a hack saw to cut through the lock on my neighbors bicycle so I
> can steal it? (-: Ok, not quite the same thing, but according to the
> licensing agreements for use of the computer, I would bet it is very
> similar.

You could always lease the bike from your neighbor for $10 a day. Then
for $20 a day he would adjust the brakes so they don't drag on the
wheels all the time, an stop slowing you down. You would never do it
yourself since it's forbidden in the contract. Everyone knows that
tampering with brakes is dangerous. Who knows what could happen.

Peter

2005\06\14@140455 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
Actually, my only degree is in music theory. (-:

I was just playing devils advocate.  But my profession is IBM mainframes, and I think as a business if you pay for 100 mips you get that and if you want 200 mips you pay for that.  Who cares how you get it, no?  You also pay software licenses based on the number of mips your machine has, so all this is tied together.  

Am I wrong, or is the argument this:  "Oh, I could have just clipped that diode myself and saved myself a hundred grand."

Please don't misunderstand me.  I don't have a problem copying software personally (I grew up in that age) but as a business you do things by the book, no?  Especially a business that can afford the large computers and software licenses that runs on them.



{Original Message removed}

2005\06\14@140615 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> > Sorry, but I don't get it.  You pay for a computer with 1 meg of
> > memory, you get one.  You pay for 2 meg you get that.  What
> difference
> > does it make how the company chooses to implement this?  
> Perhaps the
> > customer should have been happy that their huge computer
> didn't have
> > to be completely replaced.
>
> You sound like you have a MBA ? ;-) There are lots of engineers and
> techies on this list who will strongly disagree.

I stick to speaking strictly for myself, so: there is at least one
techie who disagrees with *you*.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\06\14@140929 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
Ok, I'll bite.  I agree.  If you signed an agreement with the bike lessee that you accepted the brakes as is, and that if you wanted to go faster you'd purchase a brake fix upgrade.

How is this different from cracking serial numbers for software licenses?  

I can't believe I'm on this side of this argument! (-:

{Original Message removed}

2005\06\14@142040 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 01:08 PM 6/14/2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>Ok, I'll bite.  I agree.  If you signed an agreement with the bike
>lessee that you accepted the brakes as is, and that if you wanted to
>go faster you'd purchase a brake fix upgrade.
>
>How is this different from cracking serial numbers for software licenses?
>
>I can't believe I'm on this side of this argument! (-:


I can't really put it into words very well, but I feel there is a
fundamental difference when I buy a "thing", even when it contains
embedded firmware.

When I buy a hammer, I don't have to get anyone's permission to use
it to pound larger nails, or to pound nails faster, or to poke holes
in drywall.  I don't have to get permission to modify the hammer to
better suit my needs, and it dosen't come with a cover over the nail
puller requesting an additional fee for that.

How would we feel with the vertical sensitivity locked off below
100mV/div without entering a credit card number, or timebase below
100uS/div similarly locked out?

A friend recently rented a u-haul truck.  Inside the truck, we
discovered a dolly and blankets, " secured" with zip-ties.
IMHO, he rented an EMPTY truck, and U-haul had no business putting
this stuff in there, taking up space, and being in the way.
They didn't say anything about this when the rental was agreed to.
A similar, but different abuse of the relationship.


When you put the hardware in the box I'm buying, and then tell me I
can't use it, that's annoying, and insulting.
You're telling me also that the cost of the hardware, which the
probable vast majority that won't activate, is folded into my fee, so
I'm paying for that as well, in the "upgrade".


2005\06\14@143653 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
That's easy and you don't have to be insulted. Just don't sign the agreement and buy another product.

{Original Message removed}

2005\06\14@144223 by Peter

picon face

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, alan smith wrote:

> You spend millions to develop a product, where it can do amazing
> things.  Is anyone going to buy it for what it cost to design, debug,
> build, and market?
>
> Nope

Assuming it cost $X to develop and they expect to sell $N pieces at what
the market can bear the gain is computable. The only problem is the MBA
who decides the 'price structure' of the product (and what to cripple).

Even he is not at fault, since market survey shows that there should be
at least two (and preferrably three) types of each thing, since buyers
have a birdie about 'relative value' and other things that are difficult
to explain outside the walls of a loony bin. (Any chrome on that scope
?)

The real question is, why does the loony bin parameter apply for objects
that have no use beyond pure engineering and research, where the
purchasers and the bean counters (both the seller's and the buyer's)
both know about the loony bin parameter (do they ?).

Peter

2005\06\14@145927 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> When I buy a hammer, I don't have to get anyone's permission to use
> it to pound larger nails, or to pound nails faster, or to poke holes
> in drywall.  I don't have to get permission to modify the hammer to
> better suit my needs, and it dosen't come with a cover over the nail
> puller requesting an additional fee for that.

If hammers were last years invention what you describe and dispise would
be a legitimate business case. That's how research is payed for.

> When you put the hardware in the box I'm buying, and then tell me I
> can't use it, that's annoying, and insulting.
> You're telling me also that the cost of the hardware, which the
> probable vast majority that won't activate, is folded into my fee, so
> I'm paying for that as well, in the "upgrade".

You would probably pay more if the seller had to maintain two product
lines.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\06\14@150101 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 01:35 PM 6/14/2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>That's easy and you don't have to be insulted. Just don't sign the
>agreement and buy another product.

If you see any HP scopes in my shop, let me know.

I'm actually thinking about buying another one now, and buying an HP
hadn't even come up.


2005\06\14@151445 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face

I do wish they would resurrect the 7000 series approach to the problem. :)

In the Tek 7000, which came out about the time I was in high school,
you bought a mainframe with or without storage, rack or portable, and
variable number of slots. Then you added the appropriate vertical
amplifier, timebase, spectrum analyzer, etc etc etc, and made the
instrument that you wanted.

I frequently use mine with a spectrum analyzer, tracking generator,
and vertical amplifier all at the same time.
And I greatly prefer the analog spectrum analyzer, which is a swept
receiver,  to the DSP versions.
30 years old, and still a nice piece of gear.

2005\06\14@175321 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
> Ok, I'll bite.  I agree.  If you signed an agreement with the
> bike lessee that you accepted the brakes as is, and that if
> you wanted to go faster you'd purchase a brake fix upgrade.
>
> How is this different from cracking serial numbers for
> software licenses?  

There are two different arguments going on here and I think people are
getting the two separate issues confused:

1. Should a mfgr sell a device with crippled hardware and upgrade via jumper
/ license / etc... or should they sell only the hardware that is actually
used and upgrade via a full hardware install?

2. Should a consumer who has purchased a crippled device UN-cripple the
device without paying for the upgrade?

I think a lot of people (not all) object to #1 as being just... Inelegant?
Misleading? Wasteful?

Most people (not all) also object to #2 and would pay the upgrade fee as
required. A few will attempt to hack it and if they succeed, will publish
the details which then makes #1 even stupider.

I personally can see the advantages of doing #1 as it makes the hardware
upgrade much easier and less likely to result in a service call. The thing I
don't understand is why HP charges so much for an upgrade that obviously
didn't cost them (HP) much at all; if it had cost that much, they would
never have put the hardware in the base model in the first place. And I
think this is really another issue:

3. Should a mfgr rip off it's existing customer base by charging many times
cost for an upgrade?

There is a fine line between knowing that the customer will pay more since
they have already invested in the base equipment and not pissing off your
existing customers to the point that they tell everyone not to buy from you.

I personally think HP has crossed that line with this scope upgrade and
threads like this one will drive potential customers away.

Which brings up the question: Who should you buy a scope from?

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
.....jamesnewtonKILLspamspam@spam@piclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\06\14@183828 by Richard Prosser

picon face
Aren't we forgetting the basics here.
Agilent is in business
They are in business to make money.

To make money you
a) charge as much for your product as customers will pay for it -
provided you can make a profit overall. Or you don't sell that
product.
b) minimise you ongoing costs (Parts, product lines, servicing etc.)
c) Keep your customers happy. - or at least keep your customers.

If Agilent has come up with a strategy that appears to make this work,
then all well & good for them. However I do have misgivings with
respect to calibration and routine maintainance issues.
I have heard of equipment (not, I think, Agilent) that fails to
operate (or becomes crippled)  once the calibration period is
exceeded. This then required the kit to be sent back to a service
centre for recalibration - at highish cost. Shades of the printer
senario again. This would seem to be fairly blatent abuse of the
software rights issue. Planned obsolecence with a vengence.
But then, particularly if the calibration requirement is a safety issue why not?

If I purchase equipment, what have I purchased? If it is just the
hardware then what is my responsibility wrt the (embedded) software?
Can I legally change the software / modify it or unlock it? If I
can't, then the functionality of the equipment still "belongs" to the
software owner.
If I own the whole item then surely I can do what I like with it. - or can I?

Presumably the same applies to my TV, Microwave, Washing machine &
toaster? I can accept that maybe a Sky decoder should not be modified
(generally the box is rented anyway), but how about a DVD player to,
say, remove macrovision? Things could get tricky, especially if the
purpose of the modification is to allow me to watch a program on a TV
that is upset by the macrovision component. Or should I modify the
TV?. The DVD mod could be a software patch or switch, the TV mod may
require hardware changes. (As I understand it, it is now illegal in
Europe to sell macrovision removal boxes and presumably to disable it
as well).

It's becoming a real can of worms.
I guess you really do need to look at the small print when you buy
stuff these days.

Richard P



On 15/06/05, James Newton, Host <jamesnewtonspamKILLspampiclist.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

snip...

2005\06\14@190034 by Mike Harrison

flavicon
face
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:53:16 -0700, you wrote:

{Quote hidden}

There is another aspect to this.
The cost of the upgrades is scaled to the cost of the scope. "Upgrades" for the 500MHz scope cost
(from memory) about twice as much as the corresponding upgrades to the 300MHz one.
If I was wavering between the 300 and 500Mhz ones, the fact that the licence to use the hardware I
already own is even more expensive would quite possibly deter me from going for the higher-spec
model.





2005\06\14@190515 by Mike Harrison

flavicon
face
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:01:21 -0500, you wrote:

>At 01:35 PM 6/14/2005, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>>That's easy and you don't have to be insulted. Just don't sign the
>>agreement and buy another product.
>
>If you see any HP scopes in my shop, let me know.
>
>I'm actually thinking about buying another one now, and buying an HP
>hadn't even come up.

The 6000 product  is VERY nice, and way better than any similar spec Tek I've used. Although I
haven't used many of the more recent TEKs, those I have used always had a very sluggish and
clumsy-feeling user interface.  There is no way anyone could complain about the speed and
user-responsiveness of the 6000.

This is also something I really liked about my HP 54645D - at the time it came out, user-interface
speed and memory depth blew the Teks clean out of the water. I heard from a member of the devteam
that they had spent significant time  hand-coding some of the critical loops to get the speed as
good as they could.


2005\06\14@193627 by Mike Harrison

flavicon
face

>>There is a fine line between knowing that the customer will pay more since
>>they have already invested in the base equipment and not pissing off your
>>existing customers to the point that they tell everyone not to buy from you.
>>
>>I personally think HP has crossed that line with this scope upgrade and
>>threads like this one will drive potential customers away.

I think that another issue is that unlike many products, almost every user of these products will
know and understand the technical issues involved, and therefore have that 'bad feeling' of owning
something but not being 'allowed' to use it fully.
Some are also the type of people that will want to try to circumvent it for the satisfaction
alone...!

2005\06\14@194428 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
In message <.....20050614215518626.AAA401KILLspamspam.....nt2.massmind.orgKILLspamspam.....SONYGRT270PB>>          "James Newton, Host" <EraseMEjamesnewtonspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTpiclist.com> wrote:

> Which brings up the question: Who should you buy a scope from?

Why buy when you can build? A few high speed RAMs, a couple of Analog Devices
high-speed ADCs, an amplifier, an oscillator and a bit of logic. Simple
enough.

Then again, oscilloscope amps do seem to land on the boundary between
"design" and "black magic"...

Later.
--
Phil.                              | Acorn Risc PC600 Mk3, SA202, 64MB, 6GB,
philpemspamspam_OUTphilpem.me.uk              | ViewFinder, 10BaseT Ethernet, 2-slice,
http://www.philpem.me.uk/          | 48xCD, ARCINv6c IDE, SCSI
... Can I stop typing in taglines now please?

2005\06\14@195227 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face

>
>Then again, oscilloscope amps do seem to land on the boundary between
>"design" and "black magic"...

Worth studying.  

2005\06\15@031523 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
In message <6.2.3.0.2.20050614185231.054183e0@http://www.dvanhorn.org>
         Dave VanHorn <@spam@dvanhornKILLspamspamdvanhorn.org> wrote:

> >Then again, oscilloscope amps do seem to land on the boundary between
> >"design" and "black magic"...
>
> Worth studying.  

Care to suggest any good books on the subject?

Thanks.
--
Phil.                              | Acorn Risc PC600 Mk3, SA202, 64MB, 6GB,
KILLspamphilpemKILLspamspamphilpem.me.uk              | ViewFinder, 10BaseT Ethernet, 2-slice,
http://www.philpem.me.uk/          | 48xCD, ARCINv6c IDE, SCSI
... Could you continue your petty bickering? I find it most interesting

2005\06\15@143712 by Peter

picon face

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, James Newton, Host wrote:

> 1. Should a mfgr sell a device with crippled hardware and upgrade via jumper
> / license / etc... or should they sell only the hardware that is actually
> used and upgrade via a full hardware install?
>
> 2. Should a consumer who has purchased a crippled device UN-cripple the
> device without paying for the upgrade?
>
> I think a lot of people (not all) object to #1 as being just... Inelegant?
> Misleading? Wasteful?

More to the point: A price difference of 20% for an upgrade on a
hardware device should be accompanied by an upgrade procedure (parts,
labor, gifts, etc) that matches the user's expectations for that price.

(Maybe they should ship the wire cutter in a gold plated box ? ;-)

Anyway *not* doing that shows unbelievable contempt to the intellect of
the clients imho.

The same business and marketing principles that cause a price structure
to be developed in a product line should also apply *after* the
purchase, as in service, and upgrades. Failing to even try to do that
shows their contempt of the client.

$0.002
Peter

2005\06\15@150005 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 01:37 PM 6/15/2005, Peter wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, James Newton, Host wrote:
>
>>1. Should a mfgr sell a device with crippled hardware and upgrade via jumper
>>/ license / etc... or should they sell only the hardware that is actually
>>used and upgrade via a full hardware install?

If you don't, then you're telling me that I am not only paying for my
upgrade, but the N others that didn't upgrade, since you're folding
that cost into the cost of my upgrade.

If 1/10 upgrade, then I'm paying for 10 sets of hardware and
software, aren't I?

Your cost of the upgrade has to include the hardware that didn't get
used, and if every copy of the software is worth as much money as
they would like us to think, then you have to fold that in as well,
and still make a profit from the 10% of us that make the jump.



2005\06\15@153534 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> If you don't, then you're telling me that I am not only paying for my
> upgrade, but the N others that didn't upgrade, since you're folding
> that cost into the cost of my upgrade.

Is it so hard to understand that the reality of mass production can make
including less hardware *more* expensive?

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\06\15@155031 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 02:37 PM 6/15/2005, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > If you don't, then you're telling me that I am not only paying for my
> > upgrade, but the N others that didn't upgrade, since you're folding
> > that cost into the cost of my upgrade.
>
>Is it so hard to understand that the reality of mass production can make
>including less hardware *more* expensive?


No, but that's not the perception that I have as a customer.
If the hardware is that $@#! cheap, and the software is $100 per copy
really (assuming reasonable man/years dev time and number of units
sold), then why is the upgrade $2000?

Yes, I know the answer...   High Prices. --> HP, now renamed to
protect the innocent.

2005\06\15@160608 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 21:37 +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > If you don't, then you're telling me that I am not only paying for my
> > upgrade, but the N others that didn't upgrade, since you're folding
> > that cost into the cost of my upgrade.
>
> Is it so hard to understand that the reality of mass production can make
> including less hardware *more* expensive?

Which I think is exactly the point, and makes the whole "I'm getting
ripped off" stance a little unrealistic to me.

Different hardware can mean different sets of specs, BOMs, PCBs, testing
jigs, testing procedures, packaging, user manuals, software, technical
training, etc. All of this duplication makes the final products MORE
expensive. Never mind the bugs that will appear since one product line
discovered a problem, fixed it, and that problem never made it to the
other product line.

In many products these days the actual cost of the hardware is pretty
small, it's "the rest" where all the costs come from.

While it may SEEM unfair, in the end you are saving money because of the
practise.

On top of this is the fact that this isn't a new concept. Almost ALL
software is like this (alot of software out there changes it's feature
set based purely on the license key you enter!?).

Cars are like this too. For example, often the only difference between
models with differing engine power is the firmware in the computer (and
a few cosmetic things like faux spoilers).

Cell phones are the same. A classic example is the Nokia 5190/6190. Both
phones were identical in hardware (except for the volume switch which
wasn't populated on the 5190), the only difference was the software.

In the end, it doesn't matter. If a person pays for something expecting
a certain amount of functionality, and gets that functionality, no
matter what is under the hood, they have NO right to complain IMHO.

TTYL

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\06\15@160853 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 14:51 -0500, Dave VanHorn wrote:
> At 02:37 PM 6/15/2005, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > > If you don't, then you're telling me that I am not only paying for my
> > > upgrade, but the N others that didn't upgrade, since you're folding
> > > that cost into the cost of my upgrade.
> >
> >Is it so hard to understand that the reality of mass production can make
> >including less hardware *more* expensive?
>
>
> No, but that's not the perception that I have as a customer.
> If the hardware is that $@#! cheap, and the software is $100 per copy
> really (assuming reasonable man/years dev time and number of units
> sold), then why is the upgrade $2000?

Because that is what the market will bear.

HP, along with every company out there, is out there to make money. It's
called a free market. If HP can charge $2000, and customers are willing
to pay the price, then the price is correct.

Look at it this way, if HP HAD made two different products, it's very
likely the cheaper one WOULD have cost that additional $2000...


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\06\15@161315 by Steven W

flavicon
face
> Is it so hard to understand
> that the reality of mass production
> can make including less hardware
> *more* expensive?

> Wouter van Ooijen

Apparently, Yes.

Steven E Wright


'[OT]:HP 6000 scopes with crippleware....'
2005\07\31@211616 by Robert Rolf
picon face
James Newton, Host wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Whatever happened to 'one size fits all'?
Surely it doesn't matter to an end user who 'needs' 1 Mpts buffer,
if the scope has 7 Mpts more he 'need'.

If it is already in the scope, what advantage does the manufacturer
get by artificially creating unneeded variations of the product?

There is such a thing as 'too much choice' Just look at digital
cameras or cell phones and try to pick the 'best' one for your
needs. It isn't easy with the plethora of choices out there,
all with similar price points but widely differing features.
Why can I NOT find a camera with all the features I find in many
separate cameras/brands, in ONE unit. e.g. long exposure time
(astophotography), but also with histogram and 'fine focus'
zoom in box.

> 3. Should a mfgr rip off it's existing customer base by charging many times
> cost for an upgrade?

That seems to be the core of the irritation.
As engineers we know what certain types of upgrades -should- cost,
and seeing a 10x factor is enraging.

> There is a fine line between knowing that the customer will pay more since
> they have already invested in the base equipment and not pissing off your
> existing customers to the point that they tell everyone not to buy from you.
>
> I personally think HP has crossed that line with this scope upgrade and

I certainly agree.

> threads like this one will drive potential customers away.

Unfortunately they seem to have the better product, but I am loath
to reward them for their artificial stratification of their product line.

> Which brings up the question: Who should you buy a scope from?

Those who give full value for money spent?

Has anyone bothered to purchase an 'upgrade' for an existing
6000 series Agilent scope? Why did you not buy it initially?
How did you feel about keying in a number that cost you $1800
to get access to something you already had?
(Or was it a firmware upload that you needed?)

How long before the automotive industry starts selling cars
with horsepower limiting build into the engine controller,
and selling you an 'upgrade' for 'high performance' version
of the IDENTICAL engine?
In fact, don't they do that already with 'power chips'
ECM EPROM changes from 3rd parties?

It's a slippery slope when the only thing between a user
and 'features' is configuration bits. How long before someone
posts the 'fix' in a newsgroup or website?
Does a digital scope now come with a 'shrink wrap'
software license agreement to stop you from 'diddling' the
config?

The development work has already been done. Why not reduce the overall
cost by amortizing it over more sold units?

Robert


'[OT]:HP 6000 scopes with crippleware....'
2005\08\01@042711 by Alan B. Pearce
face picon face
>How long before the automotive industry starts selling cars
>with horsepower limiting build into the engine controller,

Well the Europeans already do that with their high powered cars. They have a
gentlemans agreement to limit them to 250kph (155mph).

>and selling you an 'upgrade' for 'high performance' version
>of the IDENTICAL engine?

Well that is where the "chipping" of ECU's comes in ...

2005\08\01@050427 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>>and selling you an 'upgrade' for 'high performance' version
>>of the IDENTICAL engine?

I can add 30+ HP to my MR2 MK1SC solely by changing a single pulley
:-)
(I'll think about it if it and I survive a year together).


       RM

2005\08\01@143344 by Gus Salavatore Calabrese

face picon face
Sorry if I am plowing well fertilized ground.

--- HP's morality --
HP may have reasoned that they wanted $XX per scope to get
the ROI they wanted.  They may have also felt that there was a
sweet spot for selling a basic scope  and a sweet spot for selling
an advanced scope.  These prices might be ( $XX * .75 ) and
( $XX * 1.3 ).  I made those prices up.

HP could sell the lower priced scope and require you to send it back
for an upgrade or send you a fake module that enables the additional
features.  I find it refreshing that HP simply admits that they are  
turning
on more hardware.  I have NO problem with HP doing that.  None
whatsoever.  It is not  a rip.off , HP did not lie to their  
customers.  A customer
got what they ordered and they knew the price beforehand.

The people who find this unwholesome must really freak out when they
have to deal with virtual servers on one piece of hardware.  Driving  
down
the highway must be maddening since the highway will support speeds in
excess of the speed limit.  ( Kill the drivers who observe the speed  
limit )


--- Morality of cracking the code and doing an unauthorized upgrade --
If some cracks the code and upgrades, I have no objection to them  
doing the upgrade.
If they publish the crack, I would notify them that their behaviour  
was crass.
Since I support personal freedom, I would not support laws  
interfering with the cracking
or publishing, even if there was a contract to that effect.  I  
support contracts as long
as they are made between two consenting parties.  I find it hard to  
accept EULAs and
other boiler-plate as actual consent.  In the  same way, I do not  
accept contracts signed
during an emergency room visit.

If HP were to find a way to change their firmware and block self.help  
upgrades, I would
rule that HP cannot block the upgrade unless the user agrees. They  
can offer new and improved
software that blocks unauthorized upgrades.  And I would expect the  
screams of the users
would put a stop to that .


AGSC

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...