Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!btb
From: btb@hogpc.UUCP (B.BURGER)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: AT&T and the 3B2 (in defense of partitioning)
Message-ID: <428@hogpc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Jun-84 02:55:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: hogpc.428
Posted: Sun Jun  3 02:55:51 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Jun-84 08:31:36 EDT
Lines: 24

>  The obvious reason for vendors spliting up UNIX when they sell it is
>  it's a good marketing trick to increase how much bucks they get.  It's
>  the same type of thing that's done in sell cars or anything else,
>  make the entry price low and get them on the "options".  From a business
>  standpoint it clearly makes sense and from a consumers point of view
>  it sucks.

Ah yes, consumers would be better off if they *had* to take a car with
every possible option, whether they wanted it or not.  As a matter of
fact, they'd be better off if all the auto manufacturers stopped making
so many different cars and just made fully loaded Cadillacs.

THE ONLY PRICE THAT COUNTS IS THE PRICE OF THE CONFIGURATION *YOU* WANT!
It shouldn't worry you that there may be other configurations at other
prices.  Partitioning increases flexibility, which minimizes the
price for each configuration.  (The only caveat is that giving
people choice creates a cost for keeping track of who ordered what
and making what they ordered.)  Prices can, of course, be
reasonable or unreasonable with or without partitioning.  But
partitioning *in itself* reduces the price for a most configurations.
This applies to cars, computers, and everything else.

--Bruce Burger     AT&T-Information Systems     Lincroft, NJ
{...ihnp4!}hogpc!btb