Bjorn wrote:
> Keep in mind though, that if people where not so anxious
> to upgrade and buy the latest hardware, you would not be
> able to find all the free parts you say you do <g>
Sure I grinned too.
But nevertheless I do not share the analysis:
There's a fundamentally destructive process involved here, and we
could much better benefit from technological innovation if it were not
market-manipulated the way it is. Just look at the very history of PC
production: there had been tremendous progress in rationalisation, and
without the forced, false "innovation" pushed into the market, many
more people could *use* functional and technically well developed
equipment at affordable initial outlay. And I would guess that even
the second hand market would be much larger then (which is the point
in connection with this thread here).
What happens at present, and with prevailing conditions of two-three
near-monopolies, is an artificial destruction of value of *use*,
by inhibiting that functionality, in order to sqeeze extra-profit out
of the pockets of - comparably - less many people and into very few
accounts. (And those comparably few have to get the "cost" forced upon
them for this accelerated thrashing from further up in the profit drain
strain in turn.) A profoundly anti-social, and highly wasteful process;
and with enourmous hidden and third-party costs.
Heimo Claasen / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> / Brussels 1999-03-08
HomePage of ReRead - and much to read ==> http://www.inti.be/hammer
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
