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