Text 4953, 364 rader
Skriven 2005-06-13 18:28:22 av Rich (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 4952 av Mike '/m' (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Everyone should take a pay cut
==========================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_03FE_01C57045.AE84CBC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
   Of course you do.  You wouldn't admit it anyway?
   So Mike, in the years during which manufacturing costs have decreased =
so that a 40 GB disk drive or 4GB or RAM today is less expensive (and = smaller
and faster) than a 40 MB disk drive or 4MB of RAM was in the = past have you
taken a 1000x pay cut to match?  If not then maybe you = should limit your
spinning.
Rich
  "Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:25csa15ia541n4ri2kk2a0ti6124f4rd1n@4ax.com...
  I remain unconvinced that I am the one who is spinning in this
  discussion.
  How's your rotator cuffs doing there, Rich?
    /m
  On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:01:29 -0700, "Rich" <@> wrote:
  >   Typical selective editing.  Are you behind on your spin quote.  =
The portion of the article you elided to jump ahead is
  >
  >  There are noteworthy exceptions to this trend of falling prices. =
One of them is ink, at least the heavily branded sort. A year ago, it = cost
$65 to buy the two cartridges needed for my H-P 960c ink-jet = printer, and
that's precisely what they cost today. Ink prices are such = that
Hewlett-Packard now sells an entry-level printer -- the 3740 -- = that, at
$34.99, costs the same amount as some ink cartridges. Can a = disposable
printer be far behind?
  >
  >   The comparison you are insinuating is apples to oranges.  Hardware =
decreases in cost because technology allows producing the same or = similar
products at lower manufacturing cost.  Software doesn't have the = same cost
structure and gets little to none of this benefit.  The costs = for software
increase.  This is why DVD players are far cheaper than a = few years ago but
DVDs are not.  Televisions are cheaper but cable, = satelite, and other premium
TV is not.  If anything software development = costs have increased with
inflation plus you get more in today's = products then old ones (both computer
software and movies).  The movie = folks just raised prices as anyone that goes
to the theater has seen.
  >
  >   Do you pay the software developers, testers, UE folks, and others =
involved in software development less than you did a year ago?  How much = of a
pay cut have you offered to take to reduce non-manufacturing costs = for your
employer?  There may be lots of factors in pricing but unless = your
manufacturing costs are decreasing like they are for Dell I don't = expect your
employer is lowering its prices to half of what they were = last year because
Dell can do so with its products.
  >
  >Rich
  >
  >
  >  "Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:739sa1d75ffa17ngusrhvpp9637q3cigtc@4ax.com...
  >
  >  =
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB111861285110257383-7l7a53nARtxd=
FA5SfRng_iu4dTc_20060612,00.html?mod=3Dblogs
  >
  >  =3D=3D=3D
  >  How low can they go? Over the past few weeks, personal computers =
reached
  >  a significant milestone: The price for an entry-level but fully =
loaded
  >  system fell below $300.
  >
  >  Dell -- which wasn't even the first PC maker to take the step -- =
last
  >  week was offering for $299 a Windows computer that had most of what =
a
  >  beginning user would want. That list includes a 17-inch monitor, a =
2.4
  >  gigahertz Celeron processor, 256 megabytes of RAM and a 40-gigabyte =
hard
  >  drive.
  >
  >  A nearly identical system a year ago cost $499, and while it had =
only
  >  half as much RAM, it did provide speakers. The newer, cheaper model
  >  doesn't have any, but you can add a pair for $20.
  >
  >  Besides reflecting a remarkable price decline of 40% in 12 months, =
the
  >  fact that computers can now be had for less than $300 means they =
have
  >  officially entered into the territory of "consumer electronics," at
  >  least under one set of industry rules.
  >
  >  Ten or so years ago, when PCs cost five or even 10 times what they =
do
  >  now, it was common for analysts to say that they would never become =
a
  >  staple in homes until they were priced the way consumer electronics
  >  were, usually defined as costing less than $300. In the days when =
PCs
  >  were $2,000 and even more, that target seemed to be something of a
  >  fantasy.
  >
  >  Now, PCs cost less than some telephones -- and less than a lot of =
TV
  >  sets -- and can be found in roughly three-quarters of U.S. homes. =
But
  >  while they are priced like consumer electronics, the machines still
  >  aren't even remotely as easy to use, and the trend lines there =
aren't
  >  particularly encouraging. In fact, with price no longer as =
significant
  >  an issue, the continuing complexity of computers may become the =
biggest
  >  contributor to any "digital divide" between digital haves and =
have-nots,
  >  especially involving access to the Internet.
  >
  >  Declining PC prices have become the poster child for the free-lunch
  >  economics of the modern technology industry, where manufacturing
  >  efficiencies, especially in semiconductors, allow companies to
  >  continually sell more for less. This is most noticeable in =
hardware, but
  >  it is occurring as well in technology-related services -- at least =
when
  >  there is something resembling effective competition....
  >
  >  There are noteworthy exceptions to this trend of falling prices....
  >
  >  Microsoft, for one, seems to be in no particular hurry to cut the =
price
  >  of Windows. Ten years ago, an upgrade version of Windows 95, then =
fresh
  >  from the labs in Redmond, Wash., was being sold in most stores for
  >  $89.95. If you shop online for Windows XP Home, the =
third-generation
  >  successor to Windows 95, you'll find it in the same ballpark.
  >
  >  Ditto with Microsoft Office, which includes Word, Excel and the =
like.
  >  The high-end version of Office 97, which was introduced eight years =
ago,
  >  went for $499; the most recent Office had the same price when it =
came
  >  out in 2003....
  >  =3D=3D=3D
  >
  >
  >  While having a monopoly is legal, its effect upon prices is usually
  >  beneficial only for the holder of the monopoly.
  >
  >   /m
------=_NextPart_000_03FE_01C57045.AE84CBC0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>   Of course you do.  =
You wouldn't=20
admit it anyway?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>   So Mike, in the years =
during which=20
manufacturing costs have decreased so that a 40 GB disk drive or 4GB or =
RAM=20
today is less expensive (and smaller and faster) than a 40 MB disk drive = or
4MB=20
of RAM was in the past have you taken a 1000x pay cut to match?  If =
not=20
then maybe you should limit your spinning.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>"Mike '/m'" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>>=20
  wrote in message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:25csa15ia541n4ri2kk2a0ti6124f4rd1n@4ax.com">news:25csa15ia54=
1n4ri2kk2a0ti6124f4rd1n@4ax.com</A>...</DIV><BR>I=20
  remain unconvinced that I am the one who is spinning in=20
  this<BR>discussion.<BR><BR>How's your rotator cuffs doing there,=20
  Rich?<BR><BR>  /m<BR><BR><BR>On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:01:29 -0700, =
"Rich"=20
  <@> wrote:<BR><BR>>   Typical selective =
editing.  Are=20
  you behind on your spin quote.  The portion of the article you =
elided to=20
  jump ahead is<BR>><BR>>  There are noteworthy exceptions to =
this=20
  trend of falling prices. One of them is ink, at least the heavily =
branded=20
  sort. A year ago, it cost $65 to buy the two cartridges needed for my =
H-P 960c=20
  ink-jet printer, and that's precisely what they cost today. Ink prices =
are=20
  such that Hewlett-Packard now sells an entry-level printer -- the 3740 =
--=20
  that, at $34.99, costs the same amount as some ink cartridges. Can a=20
  disposable printer be far behind?<BR>><BR>>   The =
comparison=20
  you are insinuating is apples to oranges.  Hardware decreases in =
cost=20
  because technology allows producing the same or similar products at =
lower=20
  manufacturing cost.  Software doesn't have the same cost =
structure and=20
  gets little to none of this benefit.  The costs for software=20
  increase.  This is why DVD players are far cheaper than a few =
years ago=20
  but DVDs are not.  Televisions are cheaper but cable, satelite, =
and other=20
  premium TV is not.  If anything software development costs have =
increased=20
  with inflation plus you get more in today's products then old ones =
(both=20
  computer software and movies).  The movie folks just raised =
prices as=20
  anyone that goes to the theater has seen.<BR>><BR>>   =
Do you=20
  pay the software developers, testers, UE folks, and others involved in =
  software development less than you did a year ago?  How much of a =
pay cut=20
  have you offered to take to reduce non-manufacturing costs for your=20
  employer?  There may be lots of factors in pricing but unless =
your=20
  manufacturing costs are decreasing like they are for Dell I don't =
expect your=20
  employer is lowering its prices to half of what they were last year =
because=20
  Dell can do so with its=20
  products.<BR>><BR>>Rich<BR>><BR>><BR>>  "Mike =
'/m'" <<A=20
  href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>> wrote in =
message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:739sa1d75ffa17ngusrhvpp9637q3cigtc@4ax.com">news:739sa1d75ff=
a17ngusrhvpp9637q3cigtc@4ax.com</A>...<BR>><BR>> =20
  <A=20
  =
href=3D"http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB111861285110257383-7l7a=
53nARtxdFA5SfRng_iu4dTc_20060612,00.html?mod=3Dblogs">http://online.wsj.c=
om/public/article/0,,SB111861285110257383-7l7a53nARtxdFA5SfRng_iu4dTc_200=
60612,00.html?mod=3Dblogs</A><BR>><BR>> =20
  =3D=3D=3D<BR>>  How low can they go? Over the past few weeks, =
personal=20
  computers reached<BR>>  a significant milestone: The price for =
an=20
  entry-level but fully loaded<BR>>  system fell below=20
  $300.<BR>><BR>>  Dell -- which wasn't even the first PC =
maker to=20
  take the step -- last<BR>>  week was offering for $299 a =
Windows=20
  computer that had most of what a<BR>>  beginning user would =
want. That=20
  list includes a 17-inch monitor, a 2.4<BR>>  gigahertz Celeron =
  processor, 256 megabytes of RAM and a 40-gigabyte hard<BR>> =20
  drive.<BR>><BR>>  A nearly identical system a year ago cost =
$499,=20
  and while it had only<BR>>  half as much RAM, it did provide =
speakers.=20
  The newer, cheaper model<BR>>  doesn't have any, but you can =
add a=20
  pair for $20.<BR>><BR>>  Besides reflecting a remarkable =
price=20
  decline of 40% in 12 months, the<BR>>  fact that computers can =
now be=20
  had for less than $300 means they have<BR>>  officially =
entered into=20
  the territory of "consumer electronics," at<BR>>  least under =
one set=20
  of industry rules.<BR>><BR>>  Ten or so years ago, when PCs =
cost=20
  five or even 10 times what they do<BR>>  now, it was common =
for=20
  analysts to say that they would never become a<BR>>  staple in =
homes=20
  until they were priced the way consumer electronics<BR>>  =
were,=20
  usually defined as costing less than $300. In the days when =
PCs<BR>> =20
  were $2,000 and even more, that target seemed to be something of=20
  a<BR>>  fantasy.<BR>><BR>>  Now, PCs cost less than =
some=20
  telephones -- and less than a lot of TV<BR>>  sets -- and can =
be found=20
  in roughly three-quarters of U.S. homes. But<BR>>  while they =
are=20
  priced like consumer electronics, the machines still<BR>>  =
aren't even=20
  remotely as easy to use, and the trend lines there =
aren't<BR>> =20
  particularly encouraging. In fact, with price no longer as=20
  significant<BR>>  an issue, the continuing complexity of =
computers may=20
  become the biggest<BR>>  contributor to any "digital divide" =
between=20
  digital haves and have-nots,<BR>>  especially involving access =
to the=20
  Internet.<BR>><BR>>  Declining PC prices have become the =
poster=20
  child for the free-lunch<BR>>  economics of the modern =
technology=20
  industry, where manufacturing<BR>>  efficiencies, especially =
in=20
  semiconductors, allow companies to<BR>>  continually sell more =
for=20
  less. This is most noticeable in hardware, but<BR>>  it is =
occurring=20
  as well in technology-related services -- at least when<BR>>  =
there is=20
  something resembling effective competition....<BR>><BR>>  =
There are=20
  noteworthy exceptions to this trend of falling=20
  prices....<BR>><BR>>  Microsoft, for one, seems to be in no =
  particular hurry to cut the price<BR>>  of Windows. Ten years =
ago, an=20
  upgrade version of Windows 95, then fresh<BR>>  from the labs =
in=20
  Redmond, Wash., was being sold in most stores for<BR>>  =
$89.95. If you=20
  shop online for Windows XP Home, the third-generation<BR>>  =
successor=20
  to Windows 95, you'll find it in the same =
ballpark.<BR>><BR>> =20
  Ditto with Microsoft Office, which includes Word, Excel and the=20
  like.<BR>>  The high-end version of Office 97, which was =
introduced=20
  eight years ago,<BR>>  went for $499; the most recent Office =
had the=20
  same price when it came<BR>>  out in 2003....<BR>> =20
  =3D=3D=3D<BR>><BR>><BR>>  While having a monopoly is =
legal, its effect=20
  upon prices is usually<BR>>  beneficial only for the holder of =
the=20
  monopoly.<BR>><BR>>   =
/m<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_03FE_01C57045.AE84CBC0--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
 |