[P]

This actually seems legit, absurd as it is at first glance, and it's certainly interesting. Intel apparently offers to enable more L3 cache and even Hyperthreading on certain Westmere CPUs for a fee. Since there is a similar CPU in MBPs these days, Apple might do so as well. What do you say - would you pay $50 to enable the last meg of cache on your MBP?

(Note: it's only a special OEM CPU that has this feature, so you no, you can't upgrade your current MBP this way.)

[mduell]

I feel meh about this. It's what they've been doing all along, you just don't have to decide at purchase time anymore. A lot of people get upset because they didn't previously know how the market segmentation worked. It also raises costs for Intel because they can't ship the parts where some cache or HT failed.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by P 

What do you say - would you pay $50 to enable the last meg of cache on your MBP?

No, I'll borrow someone else's copy because I already paid for those features.

[reader50]

So they sell you chips with features disabled. Then extract an extra fee to turn them back on. I wouldn't call this a feature so much as a shakedown.

[olePigeon]

I'll use the new features I enabled to run video ripped from a BluRay connected to a non-HDCP display.

Take that, ya bastards!

[Waragainstsleep]

Better yet, use a cracked HDCP display.

Apple have artificially limited features in the past. Optical drives spring to mind. The UJ-815 drives were limited to 1x re-writing which Apple later upped to 2x with a firmware update. Though they were beaten to the punch by legendary firmware hacker Cynikal. He kindly built me a customer firmware to make my 816 region free in my old PowerBook G3. Also upgraded it to 2x for me. Apple followed suit several months later.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by mduell 

It also raises costs for Intel because they can't ship the parts where some cache or HT failed.

Doesn't have to.

They could ship those as low-end chips w/o the option of upgrades.

Of course, the consumer would buy those chep computers, expecting he could upgrade, just to find out that he can't.

Ultimately, it's gonna make owning PCs even suckier.

-t

[mduell]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

No, I'll borrow someone else's copy because I already paid for those features.

Except you didn't. You agreed to buy your $400 laptop 2MB and no HT. Instead of stocking a $450 model with 3MB and HT now they just stock all one model and the upgrade cards.

Originally Posted by reader50 

So they sell you chips with features disabled. Then extract an extra fee to turn them back on. I wouldn't call this a feature so much as a shakedown.

I don't see the extortion. Or do you mean the alternate definition "initial adjustments to improve the functioning or the efficiency and to bring to a more satisfactory state" which actually sounds pretty accurage.

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Doesn't have to.

They could ship those as low-end chips w/o the option of upgrades.

Of course, the consumer would buy those cheap computers, expecting he could upgrade, just to find out that he can't.

Say they have three segments: i3, Pentium, Celeron. They used to be able to sell partially defective i3s as Pentiums, but now since the Pentiums can do an after-purchase software upgrade they can only sell the defective i3s as Celerons.

The consumer would only be surprised if they had reason to believe they could do an after purchase upgrade, which they shouldn't unless they bought a PC specifically with that feature.

[P]

Originally Posted by mduell 

I feel meh about this. It's what they've been doing all along, you just don't have to decide at purchase time anymore. A lot of people get upset because they didn't previously know how the market segmentation worked. It also raises costs for Intel because they can't ship the parts where some cache or HT failed.

I feel the same way, I have to say. Intel has to pay a metric ton of money in investments for each threadshrink, and they have to make that money back somehow. They do that by agressively segmenting the market to be able to keep selling cheap CPUs while also charging a lot at the high end.

I happen to know for a fact that a few months after the launch of each product, 95% of chips produced can be sold as top bin (all features enabled, top clockspeed). Disabling HT is also the silliest kind of segmentation - the chance for a failure in the tiny area of the chip dedicated to HT that still doesn't disable the core has to be miniscule.

[reader50]

Originally Posted by mduell 

I don't see the extortion. Or do you mean the alternate definition "initial adjustments to improve the functioning or the efficiency and to bring to a more satisfactory state" which actually sounds pretty accurage.

The way I see if, if you own something, you control it. They sold you a chip - you exchanged money, it is now your property. Asking for more money in order to sell you something you already own is a shakedown.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by reader50 

The way I see if, if you own something, you control it. They sold you a chip - you exchanged money, it is now your property. Asking for more money in order to sell you something you already own is a shakedown.

This isn't some iTMS situation where the doctrine of first sale doesn't apply. They're offering to modify the hardware they sold you (new microcode) in exchange for money. It's like a car dealership offering engine tuning services on your new car. You bought a 150hp sedan, but for $500 a few months after purchase they'll make it a 165hp sedan.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by reader50 

So they sell you chips with features disabled. Then extract an extra fee to turn them back on. I wouldn't call this a feature so much as a shakedown.

One day they'll charge a fee for your computer not breaking down.

It's a joke, but not as far fetched as it sounds.

There was a leading company of analog mixing stations (for music). Great equipment. But there was an intentionally built in weakness that lead to breakdowns after a certain amount of hours - and the repair was very expensive.

As they have to make money on the chips without unlocking, the unlocking is just a scam.

Imagine you buy a car with a six cylinder engine, but you have to pay a fee to unlock two.

[P]

No, it's more like buying a car with a turbo, but the turbo is programmed to not charge fully. Which happens, indeed is quite common, with cars on the market today.

The analog mixing station thing is not the same. Intel is very open with the features they have disabled, and they have disabled features unnecessarily for years now. That they now offer to enable some of them after the fact is the only new thing. It is of course a bad deal compared with buying the better CPU directly, but there's no rule against offering bad deals.