4 ms·
It should be the device owner, not the device manufacture who decides what can and cannot be put into the system. If the owner, my employee in your example, de
by jimktrains2 11y ago
It should be the device owner, not the device manufacture who decides what can and cannot be put into the system. If the owner, my employee in your example, decides to lock down the device, that is their right. For the manufacture to tell me as the owner that I cannot use an otherwise compatible part is plainly and simply wrong.
- brudgers 11y agoIf a person who doesn't like liver and onions orders liver and onions off the menu, their complaints to the waiter that "I don't like the taste of this liver and onions" is not justified and sending it back to the kitchen for a different plate of liver and onions isn't going to please the diner's pallet. "Should" has nothing to do with it. Don't buy a ThinkPad if it doesn't meet your needs. Instead, buy something that does.
- jimktrains2 11y ago> Don't buy a ThinkPad if it doesn't meet your needs. Instead, buy something that does. I won't! However, this is not an advertised issue. Why would I assume I can't upgrade my own hardware?
- brudgers 11y agoIt's not an issue with ThinkPads. It is a feature.
- techdragon 11y agoAn unadvertised feature. Extending the metaphor, they ordered a burger that made no mention of liver and onions and got a burger that had liver and onions. We as consumers have every right to complain, such certified hardware should be optional and we can buy models without. Its software, this shouldn't be an issue we have to face.