iPad

[mkomarinski-GqRSzq0LZOzYtjvyW6yDsg at public.gmane.org (Mark Komarinski)]

Derek Martin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:04:07AM -0400, Mark Komarinski wrote:
>   
>> Derek Martin wrote:
>>     
>>> [An example that's similar, which I think illustrates how this is
>>> sleazy, is when a vendor sells, say, two different models of the same
>>> stereo receiver which are identical in every way, but one has its
>>> remote control sensor (present but) physically disabled, and sells the
>>> disabled one at a lower price than the enabled one.  It's dishonest.]
>>>       
>>    
>> I'm not sure why it's dishonest - you weren't lied to, and you received 
>> a discount for purchasing a product with lower capabilities.
>>     
>
> If they are the same exact hardware, then clearly the company can
> afford to sell the thing at the lower price, and simply skip the
> cheaper version... if they were available at the same price, people
> would naturally choose the one with the extra feature.
You could look at it the other way - the engineering costs were factored 
into the higher cost item and aren't as high for the lower cost item.  
Without that, the lower cost item may still have the same limited 
functionality but cost much more (or, more likely, won't exist).
>    It's not a
> discount that the purchasers of the disabled device are receiving,
> it's that the folks who want the extra feature are getting soaked.
>
> This practice is dishonest because the typical consumer will naturally
> assume that one is more expensive than the other because the two
> models require a different manufacturing process and/or different
> materials (and often this is true, but as we have seen, sometimes it
> is not).  The manufacturers do nothing to discurage this assumption.
> It is a lie of omission, aimed at bilking the public.  It's dishonest.
>   
No, the one that's more expensive has more features, features that the 
customer is willing to pay for.  Supply and demand in action.  You're 
always free to purchase from another vendor.

Motherboard manufacturers do this too with their PCBs.  You can clearly 
see spots where chips belong but they aren't there.  Manufacturers 
probably have the volume to have separate SMT lines and skip some 
parts.  Is that dishonest as well?

-Mark