4 ms·

Reminds me of subscription heated seats in bmw cars. The hardware is already there, you paid for it and you can’t use it unless you give the automaker a revenue

Reminds me of subscription heated seats in bmw cars. The hardware is already there, you paid for it and you can’t use it unless you give the automaker a revenue stream on top of the tens of thousands you already paid for the car.

blacklion 4mo ago
Same with some old IBM hardware: two CPUs were installed in each box, but if you bought only 1 CPU server other one is disabled via firmware.
- OGWhales 4mo ago
  Oh, they still do that with their new hardware. The machine comes with x amount of processor cores, but you can't use any of them without paying. How much you pay depends on the "MSUs" you agreed to, MSU being a proprietary measurement system by IBM. Other software you run is billed relative to your MSU tier. So, if you run z/OS then your cost will be higher if your machine has more MSUs. A weird quirk of this is that there is thing called "IFLs" (Integrated Facility for Linux) which, when I when I first heard of them, I thought was a separate processor designed for for linux. However, it is not. It is actually the same as the regular processors that run z/OS etc, the difference is that is is licensed exclusively for running Linux (or like z/VM to run linux counts too). The reason for this is to enable shops that want to run linux and needed extra horsepower to do so, but didn't want their z/OS bills to go up because they purchased more MSUs. So, despite buying more of the processor capacity within the mainframe, it doesn't count towards the "MSU" number that impacts the cost of various software because you are using with one type of software vs another type of software.
- iririririr 4mo ago
  intel/amd does that and nobody calls them out. ibm at least is upfront and less poluting as you can use the same device. Intel, after they burn the fuses, that cpu will always be an i3.
  - loloquwowndueo 4mo ago
    Not the same thing. The equivalent is: buy an i5 but unless you pay a monthly fee, it only runs at an i3 speed.
    - iririririr 4mo ago
      my point is that you buy an i3, it's an i5 with features artificially turned off because they have to sells i3 to justify the higher model prices. so I'm saying it's even WORSE than being able to pay to upgrade. as it's more wasteful
      - blacklion 4mo ago
        Or it is low-grade crystal which cannot run on i5 speeds. Who knows.
iknowstuff 4mo ago
Well you didn’t pay for it though did you. The subscription is foul but the manufacturer choosing to streamline manufacturing by only having one variant restricted with software if you don’t pay is not particularly bad or surprising. Plus, easy to hack it back in, so win win
- loloquwowndueo 4mo ago
  Or I can just not buy a bmw :)
- port11 4mo ago
  It’s a bit of double dipping then: the streamlined production makes the seat cheaper, and people who subscribe further increase the margin on the heated seat. I really don’t understand the subscription model applied to a physical piece of equipment that has no digital maintenance overhead.
  - kevincox 4mo ago
    But the streamlined manufacturing is still more expensive than no heated seats. So someone needs to pay for it. There are two reasonable options 1. charge everyone a bit more by including it as a standard feature 2. charge only some people significantly more so that only the people who find heated seats worth it pay the cost. It isn't double dipping, in no scenario does it make sense to physically make two models, it is more expensive for no gain. The question is just how you charge people for it. (Now subscription seems like an awful model, but a paid upgrade for some people makes sense to me)
    - loloquwowndueo 4mo ago
      A one-time unlock fee = sleazy but ok A subscription fee = Drake no, that’s totally ridiculous and unholy. I don’t know what the fee is but it’s have to be lower when aggregated over the car’s lifetime than what the one-time unlock would cost to make sense - and I’m fairly sure it’s not lower.
    - port11 4mo ago

blacklion 4mo ago

Same with some old IBM hardware: two CPUs were installed in each box, but if you bought only 1 CPU server other one is disabled via firmware.

OGWhales 4mo ago
Oh, they still do that with their new hardware. The machine comes with x amount of processor cores, but you can't use any of them without paying. How much you pay depends on the "MSUs" you agreed to, MSU being a proprietary measurement system by IBM. Other software you run is billed relative to your MSU tier. So, if you run z/OS then your cost will be higher if your machine has more MSUs. A weird quirk of this is that there is thing called "IFLs" (Integrated Facility for Linux) which, when I when I first heard of them, I thought was a separate processor designed for for linux. However, it is not. It is actually the same as the regular processors that run z/OS etc, the difference is that is is licensed exclusively for running Linux (or like z/VM to run linux counts too). The reason for this is to enable shops that want to run linux and needed extra horsepower to do so, but didn't want their z/OS bills to go up because they purchased more MSUs. So, despite buying more of the processor capacity within the mainframe, it doesn't count towards the "MSU" number that impacts the cost of various software because you are using with one type of software vs another type of software.
iririririr 4mo ago
intel/amd does that and nobody calls them out. ibm at least is upfront and less poluting as you can use the same device. Intel, after they burn the fuses, that cpu will always be an i3.
- loloquwowndueo 4mo ago
  Not the same thing. The equivalent is: buy an i5 but unless you pay a monthly fee, it only runs at an i3 speed.
  - iririririr 4mo ago
    my point is that you buy an i3, it's an i5 with features artificially turned off because they have to sells i3 to justify the higher model prices. so I'm saying it's even WORSE than being able to pay to upgrade. as it's more wasteful
    - blacklion 4mo ago
      Or it is low-grade crystal which cannot run on i5 speeds. Who knows.

iknowstuff 4mo ago

Well you didn’t pay for it though did you. The subscription is foul but the manufacturer choosing to streamline manufacturing by only having one variant restricted with software if you don’t pay is not particularly bad or surprising. Plus, easy to hack it back in, so win win

loloquwowndueo 4mo ago
Or I can just not buy a bmw :)
port11 4mo ago
It’s a bit of double dipping then: the streamlined production makes the seat cheaper, and people who subscribe further increase the margin on the heated seat. I really don’t understand the subscription model applied to a physical piece of equipment that has no digital maintenance overhead.
- kevincox 4mo ago
  But the streamlined manufacturing is still more expensive than no heated seats. So someone needs to pay for it. There are two reasonable options 1. charge everyone a bit more by including it as a standard feature 2. charge only some people significantly more so that only the people who find heated seats worth it pay the cost. It isn't double dipping, in no scenario does it make sense to physically make two models, it is more expensive for no gain. The question is just how you charge people for it. (Now subscription seems like an awful model, but a paid upgrade for some people makes sense to me)
  - loloquwowndueo 4mo ago
    A one-time unlock fee = sleazy but ok A subscription fee = Drake no, that’s totally ridiculous and unholy. I don’t know what the fee is but it’s have to be lower when aggregated over the car’s lifetime than what the one-time unlock would cost to make sense - and I’m fairly sure it’s not lower.
  - port11 4mo ago