It's still not a direct consideration for the "am I getting the right value from the equipment I purchased vs what I paid" question.
It can be a consideration for other reasons, but not for the one which comprises our main discussion point. For example, I have recently purchased a broadband router (Netgear WNR3500L) and a major consideration for me was not the inherent feature set, but it's compatibility with DD-WRT. Whether or not the licensing model that Intel has selected is easily hackable might have some bearing on how many people purchase cheaper CPUs and "overclock" them, but it won't inherently mean that the feature/cost ratio as presented originally by Intel is unfair. *ASB *(My XeeSM Profile) <http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker> *Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...* * * On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Ben Scott <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Andrew S. Baker <[email protected]> > wrote: > > How easy or difficult to get > > subsequent functionality *is* a consideration, but beyond that, there is > no > > fundamental difference from a value standpoint between them locking the > > hardware logically or physically. > > Ah, but there is a fundamental difference: I may be able to > "upgrade" my "performance" without actually spending any money, if the > system is discovered to be easily "hackable". And *that's* where > things get interesting. > > The concept of theft of material goods is, as has been pointed out, > at least thousands of years old. It makes sense: If Alice had an > apple, and Bob steals the apple, Alice no longer has an apple. This > concept may even predate humanity: Even animals exhibit behaviors > which seem to imply some concept of "ownership" of physical goods. > That makes it hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years old. > > But "intellectual property" is a recent invention -- a few hundred > years at best. It used to be that books, music, and the like were so > hard to copy that there wasn't any need for the concept. It was > almost as hard to copy something as it was to create it in the first > place. If Alice made up an entertaining song, Alice didn't have any > control over the song. If Bob sand the same song around his own > campfire, that was just the way things were. You couldn't "own" a > song Alice could say Bob was unoriginal (and rightly so), but that > was it. > > With the invention of the printing press, that began to change. > With modern digital media, the transformation is complete. Cost of > duplication is now insignificant compared to the cost of creation. > Society is still dealing with the implications. It remains unclear > how it will shake out. > > -- Ben > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
