4 ms·

Until you get RSI from your crappy keyboard. Which is why people will pay $100+ for a keyboard. I've bought 3 Microsoft Natural 4000s (about a $60 keyboard) ov

Until you get RSI from your crappy keyboard. Which is why people will pay $100+ for a keyboard. I've bought 3 Microsoft Natural 4000s (about a $60 keyboard) over the past 3 years simply because I was away from my office for an extended period of time and my wrists started hurting.

jlgreco 14y ago
No see, you are including more sensible factors in your calculation of utility. The issue is just justifying price with "how much have you used it for work related activities", which is silly for just about everything except maybe soothing buyers remorse. I have an old Model M at home that I value at a hell of a lot more than $10; I am not here to argue the merits of expensive keyboards. My point though is that the cheap keyboards I have around that have gotten a lot of use are not worth more because I have gotten a lot of use from them. No matter how much work I have gotten paid for while working on a $10 keyboard, it is still a $10 keyboard.
- 89a 14y ago
  what a strange world you live in
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    So you think if I use a shitty keyboard for a long time, that would justify paying more money for it in the first place? Sounds almost like a sunken cost fallacy to me. You should not feel obligated to continue using something because you regret paying so much for it. Had I paid too much for my keyboard, I would not attempt to comfort myself by using it more. Similarly, I would not find comfort in looking back at how much I used it. The intrinsic values that the keyboard itself has should set its worth, not the value you extracted from it in the past. It is a keyboard, not an heirloom.
- Legion 14y ago
  I downvoted your original response, but your point became better articulated as you went. The value is in replaceability. It comes down to the question, "if I take this away from you, what will you do then?". Textmate was valuable because it was a piece of software that its users could not easily replace to their satisfaction. If I take your $10 keyboard away, your next move would be to pick up some other $10 keyboard. Hence why the value is $10. Some pieces of software are valuable even if you barely ever use them. It may be something you use once a year to complete a project, but if it's not easily swapped out for some other replacement, and completing that project is something of high value to you, then that piece of software is valuable - much more so than the small amount of time you spend using it would indicate.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    I will readily agree that Textmate has value. Great value to some users. My only issue is with what I saw as a suggestion that if you are dissatisfied with a purchase then you can offset that by using that purchase a lot. Presumably owenjones thinks he paid too much for textmate/textmate2, and presumably was not planning on using textmate/textmate2 for less than two years when he thought it was a good deal. Pointing out that he should be satisfied because he used his purchase for two years so far seems very silly to me. If you use something for longer than its expected lifespan, then I can see it. If you buy a car expecting it to last 100k miles but it lasts 200k miles instead, then yes you should feel satisfied with your purchase even if you feel you were being ripped off at the time by the dealer. -- Now, if you were planning on 100k miles, and got 100k miles, then simply getting the usage you were planning on getting at purchase time really shouldn't make you feel better about being overcharged.

jlgreco 14y ago

No see, you are including more sensible factors in your calculation of utility. The issue is just justifying price with "how much have you used it for work related activities", which is silly for just about everything except maybe soothing buyers remorse. I have an old Model M at home that I value at a hell of a lot more than $10; I am not here to argue the merits of expensive keyboards. My point though is that the cheap keyboards I have around that have gotten a lot of use are not worth more because I have gotten a lot of use from them. No matter how much work I have gotten paid for while working on a $10 keyboard, it is still a $10 keyboard.

89a 14y ago
what a strange world you live in
- jlgreco 14y ago
  So you think if I use a shitty keyboard for a long time, that would justify paying more money for it in the first place? Sounds almost like a sunken cost fallacy to me. You should not feel obligated to continue using something because you regret paying so much for it. Had I paid too much for my keyboard, I would not attempt to comfort myself by using it more. Similarly, I would not find comfort in looking back at how much I used it. The intrinsic values that the keyboard itself has should set its worth, not the value you extracted from it in the past. It is a keyboard, not an heirloom.
Legion 14y ago
I downvoted your original response, but your point became better articulated as you went. The value is in replaceability. It comes down to the question, "if I take this away from you, what will you do then?". Textmate was valuable because it was a piece of software that its users could not easily replace to their satisfaction. If I take your $10 keyboard away, your next move would be to pick up some other $10 keyboard. Hence why the value is $10. Some pieces of software are valuable even if you barely ever use them. It may be something you use once a year to complete a project, but if it's not easily swapped out for some other replacement, and completing that project is something of high value to you, then that piece of software is valuable - much more so than the small amount of time you spend using it would indicate.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  I will readily agree that Textmate has value. Great value to some users. My only issue is with what I saw as a suggestion that if you are dissatisfied with a purchase then you can offset that by using that purchase a lot. Presumably owenjones thinks he paid too much for textmate/textmate2, and presumably was not planning on using textmate/textmate2 for less than two years when he thought it was a good deal. Pointing out that he should be satisfied because he used his purchase for two years so far seems very silly to me. If you use something for longer than its expected lifespan, then I can see it. If you buy a car expecting it to last 100k miles but it lasts 200k miles instead, then yes you should feel satisfied with your purchase even if you feel you were being ripped off at the time by the dealer. -- Now, if you were planning on 100k miles, and got 100k miles, then simply getting the usage you were planning on getting at purchase time really shouldn't make you feel better about being overcharged.