4 ms·
> " Somebody should be tarred and feathered for introducing the idea that features should be fused off for all but the highest paying customers. If the customer
by mrandish 2y ago
> " Somebody should be tarred and feathered for introducing the idea that features should be fused off for all but the highest paying customers. If the customer is not paying for the fused off functionality, the shareholders are."
This is very well put.
While I've always understood the economic motivation for margin optimization and the technical reality that CPU wafers aren't very granular, fundamentally, it's a long-term losing idea to intentionally fab gates that don't add end-user value. While it may work in the shorter-term, when it becomes the plan of record (as opposed to fixing a one-gen design or product mix error) it signals a shift to prioritizing value extraction over value creation.
- oivey 2y agoEven more simply, their goal stopped being making the best product at the best price. Features that were fused off could have made their products better for no extra manufacturing cost. Your business is broken when you view your products as being too featureful as a cost.
- paulmd 2y agothat’s silly. Everyone in this industry fuses off features, AMD included. Ryzen Pro APUs have disabled ecc support for example. Consumer RX 7000 gpus have crippled DisplayPort feature support/bandwidth. Consumer Hawaii had gimped FP64 to segment the pro cards. At a certain point these practices are just so broad and banal that it’s unremarkable.
- Sparkyte 2y agoCurrent investor strategy is immediate gains no long term investment because that is deemed risky. Because they want to buy in and bail when they've doubled their investment.