manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (02/13/87)
In article <907@ark.cs.vu.nl> Patrick@cs.vu.nl (Patrick van Kleef) writes: >>"Let me make one thing perfectly clear": and I hope I'm not the only >>one that says this: I'd love to buy new stuff from Atari such as the >>laser printer BUT I need to have "a warm, fuzzy feeling" that Atari >>will not treat us like dirt once we buy something - this means supporting >>and upgrading existing owners of your hardware. > >[Quote from Sam Tramiel] >"Upgrades? I just bought a new Ferrari last week. I only just found >out there's gonna be a new engine in these cars. And I'm not gonna >ask for an upgrade... People should be happy Atari is an active >company, making new machines, staying in the business." Look, folks, let's be reasonable. When IBM introduced the AT, they didn't turn around and provide 286 upgrades for their PC customers. When Apple introduced the 128K Mac, the upgrade price to 512K was exorbitant. Anyone with any brains knows that as you take a computer out of the store you've depreciated it by 50%. When I bought my 1040ST, I knew darn well that, since it had no expansion slot capabilities, there wasn't much of an upgrade path. The price of CAN$1599 more than made up for it. Over the past year, I've found the machine so enjoyable and productive that I regularly choose it over a PC or a Macintosh for text processing and programming. I figure I got my money's worth. Atari, like every other company, is in business to make money. They will make more money by ensuring some degree of backward compatibility (such as the apparent decision to ensure that the laser printer will coexist with a hard drive on a 1040ST). They did a reasonable job on the TOS ROM upgrade, and the imminent blitter/ROM upgrade (which my dealer quotes CAN$50.00 on). But I don't expect them to replace my machine every time it falls behind the current technology.
fouts@orville.UUCP (02/18/87)
The Tramiel quote is amusing because of its timing; Ferrari just recalled the 308GTS for two different major repairs according to Consumer Union's Consumer Reports. I bet Sam doesn't expect to pay anything at all for the fixes. (:-) Also, IBM didn't provide upgrades, but Apple did; I'm writing this on a Macintosh Plus that replaced a Lisa. . . I don't expect Atari to 'give' me anything, and I do understand they are in business to make money; I expect them to understand that: 1) The aftersale market is an important low overhead way to make money 2) Satisfied customers make for repeat business and for word of mouth advertising, both of which are low overhead ways to generate sales. Translated to direct action, this means I expect Atari to provide me with all of the technical documentation for my system at a reasonable price, without requiring me to buy something I don't want in order to get it. I expect Atari to fix ROM problem, and to sell me upgrade ROMS at a reasonable frequency (for me that's about every six months, but it depends on the severity of the bug) I expect Atari to fix other software and to release new versions, and to provide me with updates which are cheaper than new sales prices. (I expect the lower prices because all they have to ship me is a disk and a few pages of update notes, I don't need all of the packaging, the advertising overhead, or the full documentation.) I don't see any of these things happening. I buy a new PC every 18-30 months, and the next one isn't going to be an Atari, mostly as a result of the above. Also, some few other people aren't going to be buying Atari machines, at least in part because I've told them of my direct experience. The bottom line is that companies that intend to stay in business depend on their existing customer base. In article <835@ubc-cs.UUCP> manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (Vincent Manis) writes: >In article <907@ark.cs.vu.nl> Patrick@cs.vu.nl (Patrick van Kleef) writes: > >>>"Let me make one thing perfectly clear": and I hope I'm not the only >>>one that says this: I'd love to buy new stuff from Atari such as the >>>laser printer BUT I need to have "a warm, fuzzy feeling" that Atari >>>will not treat us like dirt once we buy something - this means supporting >>>and upgrading existing owners of your hardware. >> >>[Quote from Sam Tramiel] >>"Upgrades? I just bought a new Ferrari last week. I only just found >>out there's gonna be a new engine in these cars. And I'm not gonna >>ask for an upgrade... People should be happy Atari is an active >>company, making new machines, staying in the business." > >Look, folks, let's be reasonable. When IBM introduced the AT, they didn't >turn around and provide 286 upgrades for their PC customers. When Apple >introduced the 128K Mac, the upgrade price to 512K was exorbitant. Anyone >with any brains knows that as you take a computer out of the store you've >depreciated it by 50%. > >When I bought my 1040ST, I knew darn well that, since it had no expansion >slot capabilities, there wasn't much of an upgrade path. The price of >CAN$1599 more than made up for it. Over the past year, I've found the >machine so enjoyable and productive that I regularly choose it over a PC or >a Macintosh for text processing and programming. I figure I got my money's >worth. > >Atari, like every other company, is in business to make money. They will >make more money by ensuring some degree of backward compatibility (such as >the apparent decision to ensure that the laser printer will coexist with a >hard drive on a 1040ST). They did a reasonable job on the TOS ROM upgrade, >and the imminent blitter/ROM upgrade (which my dealer quotes CAN$50.00 on). >But I don't expect them to replace my machine every time it falls behind >the current technology.