rwa@auvax.UUCP (Ross Alexander) (01/03/88)
> In article <9100@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: > Apparently, making one model of something is cheaper than making > many models of something. Then, simply charge extra for bringing these > options to the surface. I was told (by to-me reliable sources) that the memories for the HIS6050 installed at the MFCF @ the UofWaterloo were the special killer 1-microsecond version (this was looong ago ;-) strapped down to a slower speed to avoid paying duties at the border (declare it as slow memory of lesser value & thus pay less tax); Honeywell's expectation was that we (the MFCF) would pay for the upgrade from slow to fast memory eventually, at which point they would come and take out the slow-down strap, or whatever. This may all be completely apocryphal, so apply a dose of NaCl as appropriate. BTW, I also heard somewhere that IBM used to charge something outrageous for a printer upgrade which involved shifting a belt from a large pulley to a small pulley, thereby increasing speed of the driven shaft. Or maybe they actually replaced the pulley ;-). See previous paragraph. -- Ross Alexander @ Athabasca University alberta!auvax!rwa
pete@octopus.UUCP (Pete Holzmann) (01/05/88)
In article <480@auvax.UUCP> rwa@auvax.UUCP (Ross Alexander) writes: >> In article <9100@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >> Apparently, making one model of something is cheaper than making >> many models of something. Then, simply charge extra for bringing these >> options to the surface. >[more examples, probably apocryphal] Well, here's one that many people *today* can take advantage of. The Maxtor 1140 and 2190 disk drives are *identical* in all respects other than: - the 1140 is advertised at 918 cylinders, the 2190 at 1224 cyls - the 1140 bad track printout is missing any bad tracks found on the inner cylinders (but it is still fully tested there) - the 2190 has a different label - the 2190 guarantee covers those extra inner tracks. In other words, all you get for your extra money is a better guarantee. Go ahead and try it! Its fun! (It's Kenner! Awwwk!!! :-) (old ad joke)) Take a Maxtor 1140. Format for 1224 cylinders (assuming your controller can handle > 1024). Do the best test you can to find any bad spots on inner cylinders (usually none found anyway). Use and enjoy! If you are a PC user, you can really have fun: take an OMTI RLL controller, and buy a Maxtor 1140 drive (1500 to 1800 bucks). You get almost 250 MB of usable disk space for a pretty nice price! According to a Maxtor engineer I spoke with a while back, the main reason for the differential is that they figure they have to spend more $$ on warranty service for the inner tracks on the 2190. Riiiiight. -- OOO __| ___ Peter Holzmann, Octopus Enterprises OOOOOOO___/ _______ USPS: 19611 La Mar Court, Cupertino, CA 95014 OOOOO \___/ UUCP: {hpda,pyramid}!octopus!pete ___| \_____ Phone: 408/996-7746
lou@bearcat.rutgers.edu (Lou Steinberg) (01/08/88)
In article <480@auvax.UUCP> rwa@auvax.UUCP (Ross Alexander) writes: > > In article <9100@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: > > Apparently, making one model of something is cheaper than making > > many models of something. Then, simply charge extra for bringing these > > options to the surface. > > BTW, I also heard somewhere that IBM used to charge something > outrageous for a printer upgrade which involved shifting a belt from > a large pulley to a small pulley, thereby increasing speed of the > driven shaft. Or maybe they actually replaced the pulley ;-). See > previous paragraph. Then there was the CDC 6400 (I think) where the float multiply was standard but integer multiply was an extra cost option. (No, I'm not kidding.) When we purchased an upgrade, a service engineer came out, opened the back of the machine, turned key in a lock that was back there, and voila! Instant upgrade. -- Lou Steinberg uucp: {pretty much any major site}!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!lou arpa: lou@aramis.rutgers.edu
woolsey@nsc.nsc.com (Jeff Woolsey) (01/10/88)
In article <564@bearcat.rutgers.edu> lou@bearcat.rutgers.edu (Lou Steinberg) writes: >Then there was the CDC 6400 (I think) where the float multiply was >standard but integer multiply was an extra cost option. (No, I'm not >kidding.) When we purchased an upgrade, a service engineer came out, >opened the back of the machine, turned key in a lock that was back >there, and voila! Instant upgrade. It just so happens that I have my copy of the blue book ("Assembly Language Programming for the Control Data 6000 Series and the Cyber 70 Series" by Ralph Grishman, Algorithmics Press, 1974 (yes, that's really the title)) open to page 115, where it is written: "3.15 INTEGER MULTIPLICATION AND DIVISION " As we mentioned earlier, the original 6000 and 7000 series machines had no single instructions for integer multiplication and division. These operations were performed by converting the operands to floating point, executing a floating multiply or divide, respectively, and then converting the result back to an integer. Control Data subsequently realized that by making a fairly simple change in the floating multiply instruction it would be possible to perform integer multiplies without the conversions. This modified instruction is included in all recent 6000 and Cyber 70 series, and has been installed as a "field change" in most earlier machines." -- -- I wish people would stop running in to my car! Jeff Woolsey National Semiconductor woolsey@nsc.UUCP woolsey@umn-cs.EDU
spam@c3pe.UUCP (John "Spam" Rehwinkel) (01/21/88)
In article <564@bearcat.rutgers.edu>, lou@bearcat.rutgers.edu (Lou Steinberg) writes: > In article <480@auvax.UUCP> rwa@auvax.UUCP (Ross Alexander) writes: >> In article <9100@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >>> Apparently, making one model of something is cheaper than making >>> many models of something. Then, simply charge extra for bringing these >>> options to the surface. I aquired an old CompuCorp calculator a while ago with a plasma (gas-discharge) display. When I took this beastie apart to fix it, I noticed several keyswitches on the top board that didn't correspond to real keys. Looking at the top cover, I saw cutouts in the frame for the missing keys, just the adhesive top sheet covered them. I sliced holes in the top sheet for the new-found switches, and started playing. It develops that this was a *programmable* calculator! Probably an extremely expensive "option" back when plasma displays were popular. However, it was still cheaper to make 'em all programmable and just sell some of 'em (with the "run" and "program" switches concealed) for a lower price. I was impressed. -- Spam ..!decuac!c3pe!spam